Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit PL10-018 - BOEING - PLANT 2 DEMOLITION AND DEVELOPMENTBOEING PLANT 2 DEMO & DEVELOPMENT PL1O-018 E10-010 BOEING PLANT 2 DEMOLITION SEPA FINAL DETERMINATION PL_10 -01S E10-010 BOEING PLANT 2 DEMOLITION SEPA DETERMINATION 7755 E. MARGINAL WAY S. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS (EIS) City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF DECISION JUNE 28, 2010 TO: Mark D. Clement, The Boeing Company Diana J. Painter Thomas F. King Washington Trust for Historic Preservation King County Historic Preservation Program WA State Dept. of Ecology, SEPA Division WA State Dept. of Ecology, Shoreland Div. US Corps of Engineers US Dept of Fish & Wildlife US EPA WA State Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation WA State Dept of Natural Resources WA State Dept of Fish & Wildlife WA State Office of Attorney General King County Assessor's Office Port of Seattle King County Dept of Natural Resources Seattle Public Utilities City of Seattle Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Indian Tribe Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition Washington Environmental Council People for Puget Sound Tukwila Historical Society PROJECT: FILE NUMBERS: ASSOCIATED FILES: APPLICANT: REQUEST: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project E10-010 (SEPA) N/A The Boeing Company The applicant is proposing to demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, undergo a partial tenant improvement of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and construct a new stormwater system. The project will be completed in three phases. LOCATION: 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA 98188, south of the 16th Avenue Bridge. Tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non -significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, environmental documents, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: LM Page 1 of 2 06/23/2010 W:\Users\LYNNM\SEPA 2010\Boeing\NOD Boeingl.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206- 431-3665 Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Lynn Miranda, who may be contacted at (206) 431-3670 or via email at Lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Initials Page 2 of 2 06/23/2010 W:\Users\LYNNM\SEPA 2010\Boeing\NOD_Boeingl.doc City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite # 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://wwwci.tukwila.wa.us DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number: E10-010 Applied: 04/09/2010 Issue Date: 06/28/2010 Status: ISSUED Applicant: MARK CLEMENT WITH THE BOEING COMPANY Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition of buildings 2-49, 2-44, 2-40, 2-48 & 2-51, and a partial demolition of 2-31 building. The tunnels under the buildings will also be removed. Included in the demo will be removal of old storm lines, sanitary sewer lines, water lines & power feeds. Project will also construct a new boiler house and the installation of new boilers for the South Yard at plant 2. Project will install a new exterior non-structural wall around part of the rmaining portions for the 2-31 building that were adjacent to demolished structures, and upgrade existing walls to increase building strength. Will add new stormwater system south of 16th ave bridge, including new storm lines, catch basins and treatment system. Grading & paving, adding parking & landscaping. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township/Range: 7755 EAST MARGINAL WY S TUKW 3324049002 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. In This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by Ilk ti I j / L tt . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Jack Pac4,'tespor dole Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670 Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) .+,..• nnie_Aim c1 n_n•In Dri,,te,1• na_�z_?nln FINAL STAFF EVALUATION FOR Boeing Plant 2 Demolition Project File No: E10-010 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION This project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 buildings, and remove old stormwater, sanitary sewer, and power lines. Also included in this project is the construction of a new boiler house serving Plant 2's South Yard, and a partial tenant improvement to 2-31 building. A new stormwater system, parking and landscaping will also be added to the site. II. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Name: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project Applicant: Location: Mark Clement/Boeing Company PO Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle, WA Project is located at 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA. The parcel is located south of the 16th Ave South bridge and adjacent to the Duwamish River, on tax lots 3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. See attached map. Zoning/Comp Plan The current zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation for the adjacent properties in the vicinity of the project is Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy Industrial (MIC/H). The following information was received as part of review of this application: 1. SEPA Checklist dated April 2010 2. ESA Screening Checklist dated March 23, 2010 3. Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Plant 2/Boiler House Project, dated Nov. 21, 2008 4. Attachment A: Historic Preservation Materials, including DAHP correspondence and a Historic American Buildings Survey for Boeing Plant 2 Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 dated October 114, 2009 5. Plant 2 Site Redevelopment Plans, dated March 22, 2010 6. Plant 2 Demolition of 2-4X Buildings — Stormdrainage 95% Design Review dated February 16, 2009 7. Comment letters from : • Diana Painter, Ph.D., AICP • Thomas F. King, Ph.D. • Washington Trust for Historic Preservation • King County Historic Preservation Program • Muckleshoot Tribe (voicemail) NOTE: Technical reports and attachments referenced above may not be attached to all copies of this decision. Copies of exhibits, reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed and/or obtained by contacting Lynn Miranda, Senior Planner, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, 98188, Phone: (206.433.7172), or email: Lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us Notice: Notice of Application was mailed on May 5, 2010. III. REVIEW PROCESS The proposed action is, subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 RCW, requires governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. The proposed project does not meet the SEPA exemptions listed under WAC 197-11-800. The project proposes demolition of a structure with recognized historical significance, which is not exempt as established by WAC 197-11-800(0. IV. BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL The proposal consists of demolition of Boeing's ageing buildings 2-49, 2-44, 2-40, 2-48 and 2-51. Plant 2 is historically significant at a local and national level for its role the World War II defense industry in producing the B-17 Flying Fortress airplane, and as an intact example of industrial design by The Austin Company. The tunnels under the buildings, as well as the utility lines, will be removed. New construction will include the construction of a new boiler house and installation of new boilers for the South Yard at Plant 2, a new exterior non-structural wall around the part of the remaining portions of the 2-31 building adjacent to the demolished structures, an upgraded interior brick wall to increase the strength of the building, and tenant improvements to make the building more efficient to use. Site development improvements include adding a new stormwater system south of the 16th Avenue Bridge, new stormwater lines, catch basins and an extensive water quality treatment system. Also, adding employee parking to the 2-25 building and parking lot landscaping. The central area will be paved and fenced off from the south and north part of the site until a future plan is developed. 2 The extreme northeast corner of building 2-40 is located within the City of Seattle. The remaining portion of the project is located within the City of Tukwila. The work is anticipated to be completed by September 2012. V. REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following lists the elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for the proposed project. The numbers in the staff evaluation correspond to the numbers in the Environmental Checklist. If staff concurs with the applicant's response, this is so stated. If the response to a particular item in the checklist is found to be inadequate or clarification is needed, there is additional staff comment and evaluation. A. BACKGROUND: 1- 8. Concur with checklist. 9. Shoreline Substantial Development permit for any work other than demolition within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of the Duwamish River; PSCAA permit for asbestos abatement and a demo permit; City of Tukwila Hauling permit (Type E) for hauling of contaminated dirt. The project must also comply with all applicable City of Seattle permits, regulations and standards for that portion of the project that lies within City of Seattle, including obtaining a STF 1 demolition permit for the extreme northeast corner of Building 2-40, and a building permit for the upgrade of that portion of the Building 2-31 within Seattle's jurisdiction. 10. Concur with checklist. 11. Project is located at 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA, although the extreme northeast corner of Building 2-40 is located within the City of Seattle. The parcel is located south of the 16th Ave South bridge, east of the Duwamish River, west of East Marginal Way South, and north of the Jorgensen property, on tax lots 3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. 12. The project lies partially within the 200 foot buffer of the Duwamish River, which corresponds to the Shoreline Overlay District as established by Chapter 18.44 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. Earth: a — d. Concur with checklist. 3 e. Crushed concrete from site must be free of contaminants. f. The project could have a temporary effect on the geologic environment because of ground disturbance from grading and construction. This work could cause erosion and possible sedimentation. The applicant will submit a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan with demolition permit materials to manage any impacts related to the proposed work g. Concur with checklist h. The temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan required with demolition permits will determine the measures for implementation to reduce or control erosion and other impacts to the earth. The project will comply with best management practices, and the City of Tukwila and other governing agencies' applicable standards for temporary and permanent erosion control measures. 2. Air: a. Applicant is required to obtain all relevant permits from Puget Sound Clean Air Agency and the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency to address any emission to the air associated with this project, including the demolition of structures containing asbestos. b. Concur with checklist c. Applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and follow all state and federal laws related to reducing/controlling emissions to the air. 3. Water: a (1) Concur with the checklist a (2). Landscaping and electrical work will also occur within 200 feet of the shoreline. a (3&4) Concur with the checklist a (5). No, the property lies outside of the 100 -year floodplain. a (6). Concur with checklist. b(1&2) Concur with checklist. c (1). The project shall meet all 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual drainage requirements. c (2). Best Management Practices will be followed to ensure that no construction debris enters the storm drainage system or the Duwamish River. All impacts related to construction debris will be mitigated as part of the demolition permit. Implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, following permit guidelines, and applying best management practices will minimize and avoid effects on water quality during construction. d. The project will need to meet all drainage, erosion and sedimentation control requirements of King County Surface Water Design Manual. Hazardous 4 Materials Control Systems and Best Management Practices will prevent contaminants from entering the surface or ground water. 4. Plants: a -c. Concur with checklist d. Parking lot landscaping will need to comply with the applicable standards of TMC Chapter 18.52. 5. Animals: a — c. Concur with checklist. d. Future Duwamish Enhancement project (to be designed and constructed by Boeing) will also improve water quality. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: a -c. Concur with checklist. 7. Environmental Health: a, a (1)In addition to the metals and contaminants listed in the checklist, the 2-40 series buildings contain substantial asbestos in the buildings, calking around utility systems, fitting around piping, siding and roofing material, and in vinyl floors. a (2) Project must also comply with Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) regulations for the clean up of contaminated sites. Boeing will apply for a project specific asbestos abatement permit with the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 2 weeks before abatement. City of Tukwila Public Works Department must be notified if any contaminated soil is encountered — a hauling permit will be required for transportation of contaminated dirt. Boeing considered recycling the building materials during demolition, but since the materials are contaminated they will be disposed of per applicable laws. b (1-2) Concur with checklist. b (3) Project must meet City of Tukwila standards regarding noise contained in TMC 8.22. Compliance with applicable local, state and federal noise regulations will mitigate any potential adverse noise impacts associated with the project. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a—e. Concur with checklist. f. MIC/H g. The current shoreline master program designation for the site is Urban Environment. 5 h. A portion of the site adjacent to the Duwamish River is classified as a Class 2 area ofpotential geologic instability. The geotechnical analysis for the Boeing Plant 2 boiler house portion of the project states that the site is designated as seismic Soil Profile Type D per the 2006 IBC. The liquefaction analysis contained in the geotechnical report states that there is a potential for liquefaction of the loose and medium dense sands below the groundwater table (depths of 12-45 feet below the ground surface) during the design earthquake, potentially resulting in up to 8 — 10 inches of settlement at the ground surface. Boeing will design the boiler house per earthquake zone codes. i —1. Concur with checklist. 9. Housing: a -c Concur with checklist. 10. Aesthetics: a -c Concur with checklist. 11. Light and Glare: a. New parking lot lighting will be added as part of the project where there was none before. Lighting would be visible after dark. b —d. Concur with checklist. 12. Recreation: a. There is also a boat marina with live-aboards west of the site on the opposite bank of the Duwamish River. b — c. Concur with checklist. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a. According to the WA State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) Office's Historic Property Inventory Report, Building 2-41 is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. b. Plant 2 is significant for its association with the defense industry in the United States during World. War II. Building 2-41 is significant as a fine surviving example of WW II assembly plants. The significant design elements of the plant include the layout, the saw tooth roof, trusses, circulation below the buildings, and mezzanine illustrate the patterns of airplane manufacture between 1936 and the early 1950s. Plant 2 also contributed to the tremendous transformation of the Seattle metro area: 6 • Critical part of the influx of immigrants to the area as defense workers, including many African-Americans. • Adding women to the workforce — Rosie the Riveter was a name given to the women in the Boeing workforce. • Vast tracts of public and private housing were constructed for this influx of defense workers, along with necessary institutions and infrastructure. Congress passed the Lanham Act in the 1940's which allowed housing authorities to build and manage housing to meet defense worker's needs. Holly Park, Rainier Vista, and High Point were built using these funds. Plant 2's technological and production innovations expanded Boeing's capacity to pursue and dominate production of commercial aircraft in the post-war period. Military aircraft production largely succeeded in shifting from the job shop, where parts were built in small groups, to an assembly line type of production. Machining on site and 24 hour shifts help facilitate this type of production. c. Historical significance: Since the proposed action is to demolish the structure, Boeing cannot reduce impacts by avoiding demolition. Therefore, Boeing has committed to the following measures which will document the historical significance of Plant 2 and adequately mitigate project impacts: • Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010. As a part of the 75th Anniversary of the B-17 bomber. The celebration will recognize and address the important legacy of the Plant 2 campus and the history and legacy of innovation of the products that were built there. Retirees, historical representatives, veterans, "Rosies", and special community guests will be in attendance. • MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower Boeing donated $500,000 towards the new Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) that will open in 2011. The new facility will have a "Boeing Tower of Industry" highlighting and reflecting the Company's role in Washington state history. This permanent exhibit will include educational pieces, renderings and models related to Plant 2. • Boeing is also working with MOHAI to celebrate Plant 2 historical significance through a Boeing Company/Plant 2 and MOHAI Partnership. The following are a representative part of the plan: o Living History/Interactive Memory Books (May 2010 - December 2010) ■ MOHAI to collect stories through its website. This will add to the extensive collection of live interviews reflecting the working experience at Plant 2 currently held by MOHAI and The Boeing Company Archives. o World War II/Boeing Display (July/August 2010) • Enhancements to MOHAI's Home front exhibit section • Artifacts from MOHAI collection; quotes from its Rosie Oral Histories, photographs o Plant 2/Boeing History Week (July 2010) • King County Heritage Association members will promote Plant 2/Boeing History Week • Boeing will add a historical marker and/or plaque as part of the redevelopment project near the 2-40 building. • Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. • Boeing will submit the HABS/HAER documentation to the Library of Congress. Boeing will also make this report available to History Link (HistoryLink.org) an online encyclopedia of Washington State and local history, for use as educational materials and research. • The historical significance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants, if possible. However, testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws. If some of the materials are found to be environmentally clean, Boeing will remove a small portion of the 2- 40 series buildings for use in a historical marker or display. Archaeological artifacts: Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360- 586-3065), the County/City planning office, the affected Tribe(s) and the county coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is required. 14. Transportation: a -b. Concur with checklist. c. The site plan shows, when the project is completed, a total of 2,197 new 8 parking spaces are provided, 37 of which are handicap spaces and 2,162 are standard spaces. 30 new bicycle parking spaces are also provided. d. In the future, as part of the Duwamish restoration project, a new maintenance road will be provided on the west side of the project within the 200' shoreline buffer, located east of the Duwamish River and west of the bioswales. e. Concur with checklist. f. Vehicular and bicycle parking will replace the demolished buildings. However, there will not be an increase in vehicular trips because once the new lot is constructed, Boeing will be limiting parking in the lot on the east side of E. Marginal Way South that currently serves the site. Commuters will instead park in the new lot. g. Boeing must notify King County Metro Construction Information Center (CIC) if the project will disrupt bus service. CIC provides timely construction information to the various transit departments within Metro to lessen the impact on scheduled bus service, to keep transit customers informed, and to maintain operations continuity. Phone: 206.684.2732. Email: construction.coord@metrokc.gov. • 15. Public Services: a -b. Concur with checklist. 16. Utilities: a -b. Concur with checklist. VI. COMMENTS In response to the Notice of Application, comments were received from Diana Painter, a private citizen with an interest in this project; Thomas F. King, Ph.D.; Washington Trust for Historic Preservation; King County Historic Preservation Program; and the Muckleshoot Tribe. Their concerns were considered and addressed as part of this SEPA determination. VII. CONCLUSION The proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment and, pursuant to WAC 197-11-340, a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued for this project This DNS is based on impacts and proposed mitigation identified within the environmental checklist, and attachments prepared for the project, and the above "Final Staff Evaluation for Application No. E10-010", and is supported by plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by city of Tukwila for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, 9 condition, or deny proposed actions. Prepared by: Lynn Miranda Date: June 23, 2010 10 Citi 4 J u&wiha Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing x Determination of Non -Significance Notice of Public Meeting Project Number: E10-010 Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Mailing requested by: Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice /17 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Packet Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ — FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this _28 day of _June in the year 2010 W:\USERS\TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Project Name: Boeing Plant 2 Demo/Mark Clement Project Number: E10-010 Mailing requested by: Ms. Lynn Miranda Mailer's signature: g /17 O/'/i'. A _.2 W:\USERS\TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC l5c t/t C:10 -V10 AGENCY LABELS \I (`y) US Corps of Engineers ( ) Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 ( Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1QF.EDERAL AGENCIES US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) ( ) US Dept of HUD ( ) National Marine Fisheries Service NI 06 Office of Archaeology ( )Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) N( Dept of Natural Resources ( ) Office of the Governor N_(_)) WA State Community Development WA Fisheries & Wildlife Section 2 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Dept of Social & Health Services Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Division Q� Dept of Ecology, SEPA C O Office of Attorney General,sA13 -w' � r�• s -t ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner �� 1,��r &' ,tr r Kofi c+ ( ) KC Boundary Review Board ( ) Fire District # 11 ( ) Fire District # 2 ( ) KC Wastewater Treatment Div ( ) KC Dept of Parks & Recreation (\Q KC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) Health Department (X) Port of Seattle ( ) KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center ( ) KC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning KC Dept of Natural Resources ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque ( ) Tukwila School District ( ) Tukwila Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( ) Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Foster Library ( ) KC Public Library System ( ) Highline School District ( ) Seattle School District ( ) Renton School District ( ) Westfield Mall Library ( ) QWEST Communications ( ) Seattle City Light ( ) Puget Sound Energy ( ) Highline Water District ( ) Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept ( ) Comcast Section 5 UTILITIES ( ) BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val-Vue Sewer District ( ) Water District # 20 ( ) Water District # 125 ( ) City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist r it Seattle Public Utilities ( ) Allied Waste Services ( ) Tukwila City Depar.,nents ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor ( ) City Clerk Section 6 CITY AGENCIES ( ) Kent Planning Dept ( ) Renton Planning Dept ( ) City of SeaTac ( ) City of Burien NO 00 City of Seattle ( ) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects ( ) Puget Sound Regional Council ( ) SW KC Chamber of Commerce Muckleshoot Indian Tribe ( Cultural Resources (`l() Fisheries Program \ (0 Wildlife Program (�)1 uwamish Indian Tribe Section 7 OTH R LOCAL AGENCIES N (i.,) Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ( ) Sound Transit/SEPA V () Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition (4 Washington Environmental Council ()4 People for Puget Sound ( ) Futurewise * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwamish River ( ) Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA ( ) Highline Times ( ) City of Tukwila Webs& P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist �- PPPItta Maiuk Cf- oeir)G C� bo '610 1 .0�©G 'I Public Notice Mailings For Permits SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment per`od starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross-sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forrns\Agency Checklist Teri Svedahl - Boeing Plant 2 NOD mailings (E10-010) Page 1 of 1 I From: Lynn Miranda To: Teri Svedahl Date: 06/23/2010 3:57 PM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 NOD mailings (E10-010) Hi Teri, In addition to the checked agency label listing, the following get the FULL Package of materials: rDNS Notice Notice of Decision Staff report \SEPA checklist N Mr. Chris Moore WA Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Ave Seattle, WA 98101 Mr. Charlie Sundberg King County Historic Preservation Program 400 Yesler Way, Suite 510 Seattle, WA 98104 Diana J. Painter Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Mr. Thomas F. King PO Box 14515 Silver Spring, MD 20911 The following person and everyone else on the Agency Label checklist get only the DNS notice: Pat Brodin, President Tukwila Historical Society 14475 59th Ave S Tukwila, WA 98168 THESE NEED TO BE MAILED June 28. tHANKS, Lynn file://C:\Documents and Settings\Teri-S\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C222ED7tuk-... 06/24/2010 eitg at J uI> wi&a Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non -Significance Notice of Public Meeting Project Number: E10-010 Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance LyM' Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Mailer's signature: ( Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Notice of Action Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Planning Commission Agenda Packet Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda x Notice of Application for SEPA determination Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this _5th day of May in the year 2010 W:\USERS\TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Project Name: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project Project Number: E10-010 Mailing requested by: LyM' Mailer's signature: ( /1177 (1,Nid i .(' W:\USERS\TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC ��I I LA p \Z City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor J �� Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director 190a NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR SEPA DETERMLNATION For Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project DATED May 5, 2010 The following applications have been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: The Boeing Company LOCATION: 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila,WA 98188, south of the 16`h Avenue bridge. tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. Location map is attached to this notice. FILE NUMBERS: E10-010 (SEPA) PROPOSAL: This project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, include a partial tenant improvement of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and create a new stormwater system. This project will be completed in three phases. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: DOE Construction Stormwater Permit, PSCAA Air permit for new boilers, and a Soil Excavation Plan and Well Management Plan from EPA. The SEPA documents, geotechnical report, and a Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation evaluation can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431-3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on the SEPA application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on May 19, 2010. If you have questions about this proposal contact Lynn Miranda, Planner -in -charge of this file at 206-433-7162. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department of Community Development at 206-431-3670. The Department will provide you with information on appeal if you are interested. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 5 Webster.St s q su King County Airport S Southern Rr.Lse St s E1� t-,ullivun St 5 -Cloverdale -St Crn_oid t.l v S_Donovan St u1 5 Henderson St Boeing Plant 2 Site N 7418 CityGIS Copyright O 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. AGENCY LABELS ( ) US Corps of Engineers ( ) Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 (X) Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1 FEDERAL AGENCIES ,US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) "US Dept of HUD ( ) National Marine Fisheries Service Section 2 (y4Office of Archaeology ( ) Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) 91j.Dept of Natural Resources ( ) Office of the Governor ( ) WA State Community Development (4$ WA Fisheries & Wildlife ( ) KC Boundary Review Board ( ) Fire District # 11 ( ) Fire District # 2 ( ) KC Wastewater Treatment Div ( ) KC Dept of Parks & Recreation Cod KC Assessor's Office ( ) Tukwila School District ( ) Tukwila Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( ) Seattle Library ( ) QWEST Communications ( ) Seattle City Light ( ) Puget Sound Energy ( ) Highline Water District ( ) Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept ( ) Comcast WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Dept of Social & Health Services citk Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Division Dept of Ecology, SEPAL (Office of Attorney General (• ) Office of Hearing Examiner 6440 Off f nvi'cQ,QY 1"� Section 3 KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) Health Department Port of Seattle ( ) KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center KC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning KC Dept of Natural Resources ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Foster Library ( ) KC Public Library System ( ) Highline School District ( ) Seattle School District ( ) Renton School District Section 5 UTILITIES ( ) BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val-Vue Sewer District ( ) Water District # 20 ( ) Water District # 125 ( ) City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist ( ) Westfield Mall Library j Seattle Public Utilities ( ) Allied Waste Services ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor ( ) City Clerk Section 6 CITY AGENCIES ( ) Kent Planning Dept ( ) Renton Planning Dept ( ) City of SeaTac (. ) City of Burien City of Seattle Strategic Planning *Notice of all S=:ttle Related Projects ( ) Puget Sound Regional Council ( ) SW KC Chamber of Commerce (( Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * ( Cultural Resources (4 Fisheries Program (4 Wildlife Program Duwamish Indian Tribe * Section 7 OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES b(J Puget Sound Clean Air Agen (�) Sound Transit/SEPA Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition * Washington Environmental Council r) People for Puget Sound * ) Futurewise * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwamish River ( ) Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA ( ) Highline Times ( ) City of Tukwila Website P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Public Notice Mailings For Permits SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINIGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive nctification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice' must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross-sections of site with structures & shoreline — Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled Put by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist City of Tukwila Notice of Application Boeing Plant 2 Demolition & Site Development SEPA Determination Location: 7755 E Marginal Way S, tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020 File #'s: E010-010 King Co. Airport ti Applicant: Mark Clement Property Owners: The Boeing Company Project Planner: Lynn Miranda, 206-433-7162 Project Description: This project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, include a partial tenant improve- ment of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and create a new stormwater system. This pro- ject will be completed in three phases. A geotechnical report and a Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation evaluation are included as part of the application. Comments and Appeals: The application is available for review at the City of Tukwila, Departrnent of Community Devel- opment (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100. Your written comments on the project are requested and can be delivered to DCD, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100. Com- ments must be received by 5:OOpm on May 19, 2010. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206.433.7162. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 500ft of this project. City of Tukwila Notice of Application Boeing Plant 2 Demolition & Site Development SEPA Determination 2824049009 & 0001600020 Location: 7755 E Marginal Way S, tax parcels #3324049002, King Co. Airport • File #'s: E010-010 Applicant: Mark Clement Property Owners: The Boeing Company Project Planner: Lynn Miranda, 206-433-7162 Project Description: This project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, include a partial tenant improve- ment of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and create a new stormwater system. This pro- ject will be completed in three phases. A geotechnical report and a Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation evaluation are included as part of the application. Comments and Appeals: The application is available for review at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Devel- opment (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100. Your written comments on the project are requested and can be delivered to DCD, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100. Com- ments must be received by 5:OOpm on May 19, 2010. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206.433.7162. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 500ft of this project. City of Tukwila Notice of Application Boeing Plant 2 Demolition & Site Development SEPA Determination ' Location: 7755 E Marginal Way S, tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020 King Co. Airport File #'s: E010-010 Applicant: Mark Clement Property Owners: The Boeing Company Project Planner: Lynn Miranda, 206-433-7162 Project Description: This project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, include a partial tenant improve- ment of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and create a new stormwater system. This pro- ject will be completed in three phases. A geotechnical report and a Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation evaluation are included as part of the application. Comments and Appeals: The application is available for review at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Devel- opment (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100. Your written comments on the project are requested and can be delivered to DCD, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100. Com- ments must be received by 5:OOpm on May 19, 2010. R You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206.433.7162. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 500ft of this project. s City of Tukwila Notice of Application Boeing Plant 2 Demolition & Site Development SEPA Determination Location: 7755 E Marginal Way S, tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020 File #'s: E010-010 Applicant: Mark Clement Property Owners: The Boeing Company Project Planner: Lynn Miranda, 206-433-7162 Project Description: This project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, include a partial tenant improve- ment of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and create a new stormwater system. This pro- ject will be completed in three phases. A geotechnical report and a Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation evaluation are included as part of the application. Comments and Appeals: The application is available for \ review at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Devel- opment (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd # 100. ' Your written comments on the project are requested and can be delivered to DCD, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100. Com- + menu must be received byon May19, 2010. Lfil 5:00 m P You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206.433.7162. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 500ft of this project. City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100 Tukwila, WA. 98188 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100 Tukwila, WA. 98188 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100 Tukwila, WA. 98188 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste 100 Tukwila, WA. 98188 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 1135 S WEBSTER ST SEATTLE WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 1400 S THISTLE ST SEATTLE WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 1239 S ROSE ST SEATTLE WA 98108 BOEING COMPANY PO BOX 3707 SEATTLE WA 98124 JRD KING LLC 605 1ST AVE 600 SEATTLE WA 98104 SMITH,JULIAN K 1240 S ROSE ST SEATTLE WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 7755 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 8700 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 8510 DALLAS AVE S SEATTLE WA 98108 GRE AIRPORT LLC 6505 Perimeter Road S. SEATTLE WA 98108 KING COUNTY 500 King County ADMIN BLDG SEATTLE WA 98104 SOUTH PARK MARINE LTD PARTN 8604 DALLAS AVE S SEATTLE WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 7775 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 8700 DALLAS AVE S SEATTLE WA 98108 TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER 1415 S THISTLE ST SEATTLE WA 98108 JORGENSEN FORGE CORP 8531 E MARGINAL WAY S SEATTLE WA 98108 PORT OF SEATTLE PO BOX 1209 SEATTLE WA 98111 Mark Clement The Boeing Company PO Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle, WA 98124 c CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. TUKWILA, WA 98188-2599 (206) 433-1800 -.3 MOVED, LEFT NO ADDRESS o FORWARDING ORDER EXPIRED GUI._ATTEMPTED -NOT KNOWN o UNCLAIMED ['REFUSED 4NOIED To SENDER 0 NO SUCH STREET o NO SUCH NUMBER 71:INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS TO: WA Environmental Council 615 2nd Ave. Seattle, WA 98104-2-264— ._.) ( CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. TUKWILA, WA 98188-2599 (206) 433-1800 ❑ MOVED, LEFT NO ADDRESS FORWARDING ORDER EXPIRED ❑ ATTEMPTED -NOT KNOWN aF ❑UNCLAIMED ❑REFUSED 't'aNEO TO SENDER 0 NO SUCH STREET 0 NO SUCH NUMBER ❑ INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS MINA/ RV E - WA Environmental Council 615 2nd AVE, Ste# 380 Seattle, WA 98104-2245 at (1 epartipr-lat of C November 22, 2010 Mr. Arthur Skolnik, FAIA The Skolnik Company 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 1c% Jim Haggerton, Mayor me.snity Devvlo fti meati Jack Pace, Director RE: Demolition Permit — Boeing Plant 2 (File #D10-118) Dear Mr. Skolnik, We received your email regarding the Demolition Permit for Boeing Plant 2, dated Nov. 3, 2010 identifying several issues of concern to you and requesting the City to issue a stay for the demolition. The demolition permit for Boeing's Plant 2 project (File #D10-118) was issued on September 7, 2010. As noted by Washington Trust, environmental review pursuant to SEPA was conducted in advance of permit issuance. The appeal period for the demolition permit ended on September 28, 2010. If you had concerns regarding the demolition permit, you could have appealed the permit within the prescribed appeal period, but elected not to do so. You suggest that the SEPA review conducted for the Plant 2 project (File #E10-010) failed in some way to adequately disclose potential archaeological impacts. We feel that this is not the case. Based on information contained in the Washington State Archaeological and Historic Site Inventories, the SEPA Checklist prepared for the Plant 2 project disclosed that there are no known archaeological sites in the Plant 2 project area, but recommends protocols in the event that archaeological resources are encountered during project activity: "[i]f artifacts are uncovered during the Plant 2 project, work in that area will be halted pending notification and response from appropriate agencies." In addition, the Final Staff Report for Application No. E10-010, dated June 23, 2010, addresses the required protocols in greater detail: Archaeological artifacts: Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), the County/City planning office, the affected Tribe(s) and the county coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is required. W:\ Users \LYNNM\SEPA_2(11 )\Boeing\letter_ Skolnik_11.2010.I)( )C 1 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 o Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206-431-3670 ® Fax: 206-431-3665 Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this issue during the SEPA review process. In short, the SEPA review conducted for the Plant 2 project appropriately discloses potential archaeological impacts. Based on that disclosure, the City established conditions to mitigate archaeological impacts in the event that archaeological resources are encountered during project activities. The City followed all appropriate procedures in issuing the Plant 2 demolition permit and the appeal period has expired. The City has no basis, under SEPA or otherwise, to stay the permit, or request other agencies to do so. Sincerely, ck Pace DCD Director Cc: Mark Clement, The Boeing Corp. cov WASHINGTON TRUSTFOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION November 3, 2010 API 240 Mr. Jack Pace, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Demolition Permit - Boeing Plant 2 (File # E010-010) Dear Mr. Pace, Earlier this year, the City of Tukwila issued a demolition permit for Boeing Plant 2. The SEPA process for this action elicited comment letters raising several concerns about the project, including whether or not Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) should have been triggered, the appropriateness' of issuing a Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance for the project, and whether enough consideration had been given to alternatives to demolition. Despite these concerns, the demolition proposal received a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) from the city. At present, it appears that certain issues surrounding the project remain unresolved. Specifically, the question remains as to whether or not sufficient,archaeological investigation was conducted prior to issuance of the demolition permit. Demolition of Plant 2 should not commence until all questions surrounding potential archaeological resources present at the project site have been sufficiently answered. In addition, questions remain regarding the Section 106 review process. In correspondence from the Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) dated September 23, 2010, the ACHP found that approval of the consent decree related to clean-up of the Lower Duwamish Waterway by the Federal District Court for Western Washington would not trigger Section 106 review, as the courts are not federal agencies as defined by the NHPA. Yet, federal agencies (such as the Environmental Protection Agency and others) were directly involved in negotiating the consent decree, and therefore had direct costs related to• the undertaking. These concerns have been brought forth to the ACHP. Given the questions that remain related to Plant 2, the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation respectfully requests that the City of Tukwila issue a stay for the demolition permit until such time that all outstanding issues are sufficiently resolved. Boeing Plant 2 has been identified as eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and may potentially be eligible as a National Historic Landmark. Given 1204 Minor Avenue • Seattle, WA 98101 • tel 206.624.9449 fax 206.624.2410 • wa-trust.org • Mr. Jack Pace November 3, 2010 Page 2 the significance of this resource, is it imperative that all necessary measures be taken to eniture due process/consideration for the building and the history contained therein. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chris Moore Field Director • City of Tukwila • Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director November 15, 2010 Mr. Chris Moore WA Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 RE: Demolition Permit — Boeing Plant 2 (File #D10-118) Dear Mr. Moore, We received your letter regarding the Demolition Permit for Boeing Plant 2, dated Nov. 3, 2010 identifying several issues of concern to you and requesting the City to issue a stay for the demolition. The demolition permit for Boeing's Plant 2 project (File #D10-118) was issued on September 7, 2010. As noted by Washington Trust, environmental review pursuant to SEPA was conducted in advance of permit issuance. The appeal period for the demolition permit ended on September 28, 2010. If Washington Trust had concerns regarding the demolition permit, it could have appealed the permit within the prescribed appeal period, but elected not to do so. Washington Trust suggests that the SEPA review conducted for the Plant 2 project (File #E10- 010) failed in some way to adequately disclose potential archaeological impacts. We feel that this is not the case. Based on information contained in the Washington State Archaeological and Historic Site Inventories, the SEPA Checklist prepared for the Plant 2 project disclosed that there are no known archaeological sites in the Plant 2 project area, but recommends protocols in the event that archaeological resources are encountered during project activity: "[i]f artifacts are uncovered during the Plant 2 project, work in that area will be halted pending notification and response from appropriate agencies." In addition, the Final Staff Report for Application No. E10-010, dated June 23, 2010, addresses the required protocols in greater detail: Archaeological artifacts: Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), the County/City planning office, the affected Tribe(s) and the county coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is required. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this issue during the SEPA review process. In short, the SEPA review conducted for the Plant 2 project appropriately discloses potential archaeological impacts. Based on that disclosure, the City established conditions to mitigate archaeological impacts in the event that archaeological resources are encountered during project activities. The City followed all appropriate procedures in issuing the Plant 2 demolition permit and the appeal period has expired. The City has no basis, under SEPA or otherwise, to stay the permit. Sincerely, Jack Pace DCD Director Cc: Mark Clement, The Boeing Corp. 2 • Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 Demo (E10-010) • Page 1 of 2 From: Lynn Miranda To: Diana Painter Date: 06/21/2010 2:35 PM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Demo (E10-010) CC: Jack Pace; Minnie Dhaliwal; Nora Gierloff Diana, This letter is in response to your letters & emails regarding the SEPA checklist for the Boeing Plant 2 Demolition project (File #E10-010). Thank you for taking the time to comment on the project. Your correspondence has become part of the public record. Here are our responses to your letter dated May 14, 2010: Inadequate time frame: We complied with the required 14 -day comment period for public comment. Incomplete historical evaluation: Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. Incomplete mitigation plan: Please see the mitigation plan Boeing has agreed to (below) Inadequate notice: The notice of application contents and distribution followed that which is required by law. Throughout your correspondence you've raised several issues regarding the historic importance of the building that we considered as part of our SEPA review, discussed with Boeing, and incorporated into our staff report: In response to your comments, we more fully referenced the building's historical significance, as well as the significant role it played in the transformation of the Seattle area. The historical significance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants, if possible. However, testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws. If some of the materials are found to be environmentally clean, Boeing will remove a small portion of the 2-40 series buildings for use in a historical marker or display. Boeing also considered adaptive reuse of the building and/or reuse of demolition/building materials, but could not do this because of contamination issues. We can encourage but not mandate historic preservation. Given that, Boeing has committed to the following measures which will document the historical significance of Plant 2. We feel these measures are reasonable and appropriate: • Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010.As a part of the 75th Anniversary of the B-17 bomber. The celebration will recognize and address the important legacy of the Plant 2 campus and the history and legacy of innovation of the products that were built there. Retirees, historical representatives, veterans, "Rosies", and special community guests will be in attendance. • MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower. Boeing donated $500,000 towards the new file://C:\temp \XPGrpWise\4C1 F78B8tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B 1 DC 1\GW} 00001... 06/21/2010 • Page 2 of 2 Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) that will open in 2011. The new facility will have a "Boeing Tower of Industry" highlighting and reflecting the Company's role in Washington state history. This permanent exhibit will include educational pieces, renderings and models related to Plant 2. • Boeing is also working with MOHAI to celebrate Plant 2 historical significance through a Boeing Company/Plant 2 and MOHAI Partnership. The following are a representative part of the plan: o Living History/Interactive Memory Books (May 2010 -December 2010). MOHAI to collect stories through its website. This will add to the extensive collection of live interviews reflecting the working experience at Plant 2 currently held by MOHAI and The Boeing Company Archives. o World War IIBoeing Display (July/August 2010), including enhancements to MOHAI's Home front exhibit section, and artifacts from MOHAI collection; quotes from its Rosie Oral Histories, photographs o Plant 2/Boeing History Week (July 2010) • Boeing will add a historical marker and/or plaque as part of the redevelopment project near the 2-40 building. • Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. • Boeing will submit the HABS/HAER documentation to the Library of Congress. Boeing will also make this report available to History Link (HistoryLink.org) an online encyclopedia of Washington State and local history, for use as educational materials and research. I want to thank you for making your concerns known and taking the time to raise them with the City. We will send you a copy of our staff report and Notice of Decision once they are finalized. Should you have further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm `p Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail file://C :\temp\XPGrpWise\4C 1 F78B 8tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 B 1 DC 1 \GW} 00001... 06/21/2010 • Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 Demolition (E10-010) From: Lynn Miranda To: tfking106@aol.com Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition (E10-010) Mr. King, This letter is in response to your letter dated May 12, 2010 regarding the SEPA checklist for the Boeing Plant 2 Demolition project (File #E10-010). Thank you for taking the time to comment on the project. Your correspondence has become part of the public record. You have raised several issues regarding the historic importance of the building that we considered as part of our SEPA review, discussed with Boeing, and incorporated into our staff report: In response to your comments, we more fully referenced the building's historical significance, as well as the significant role it played in the transformation of the Seattle area. You suggested the possibility of using the extensive roof area for energy generation using solar collectors. Boeing has indicated that this is not practical because many areas of the roof are failing, and the ageing buildings no longer have the structural integrity that would support additional loads on the roof of the structure. You were asking if the energy impacts of the proposed demolition were evaluated. Boeing has indicated that expensive electrical costs for lighting and power will be eliminated with the demolition of the building. The historical significance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants, if possible. However, testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws. If some of the materials are found to be environmentally clean, Boeing will remove a small portion of the 2-40 series buildings for use in a historical marker or display. Boeing also considered adaptive reuse of the building and/or reuse of demolition/building materials, but could not do this because of contamination issues. As you noted in your letter, there are no federal funds associated with the project, therefore review under Section 106 is not required. We can encourage but not mandate historic preservation. Given that, Boeing has committed to the following measures which will document the historical significance of Plant 2. We feel these measures are reasonable and appropriate: • Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010. As a part of the 75th Anniversary of the B-17 bomber. The celebration will recognize and address the important legacy of the Plant 2 campus and the history and legacy of innovation of the products that were built there. Retirees, historical representatives, veterans, "Rosies", and special community guests will be in attendance. • MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower. Boeing donated $500,000 towards the new Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) that will open in 2011. The new facility will have a "Boeing Tower of Industry" highlighting and reflecting the Company's role in Washington state about:blank 06/21/2010 • Page 2 of 2 history. This permanent exhibit will include educational pieces, renderings and models related to Plant 2. • Boeing is also working with MOHAI to celebrate Plant 2 historical significance through a Boeing Company/Plant 2 and MOHAI Partnership. The following are a representative part of the plan: o Living History/Interactive Memory Books (May 2010 -December 2010). MOHAI to collect stories through its website. This will add to the extensive collection of live interviews reflecting the working experience at Plant 2 currently held by MOHAI and The Boeing Company Archives. o World War II/Boeing Display (July/August 2010), including enhancements to MOHAI's Home front exhibit section, and artifacts from MOHAI collection; quotes from its Rosie Oral Histories, photographs o Plant 2/Boeing History Week (July 2010) • Boeing will add a historical marker and/or plaque as part of the redevelopment project near the 2-40 building. • Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. • Boeing will submit the HABS/HAER documentation to the Library of Congress. Boeing will also make this report available to History Link (HistoryLink.org) an online encyclopedia of Washington State and local history, for use as educational materials and research. I want to thank you for making your concerns known and taking the time to raise them with the City. We will send you a copy of our staff report and Notice of Decision once they are finalized. Should you have further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. about:blank 06/21/2010 • • Page 1 of 3 Lynn Miranda - Re: SEPA comments - Boeing Plant 2 From: Lynn Miranda To: Chris Moore Subject: Re: SEPA comments - Boeing Plant 2 Chris, This letter is in response to your letter, dated May 19, 2010 regarding the SEPA checklist for the Boeing Plant 2 Demolition project (File E10-010). Thank you for taking the time to comment on the project. Your letter has become part of the public record. You've raised several issues regarding the historic importance of the building that we considered as part of our SEPA review, discussed with Boeing, and incorporated into our staff report: In response to your comments, we more fully referenced the building's historical significance in our staff report, as well as the significant role it played in the transformation of the Seattle area. The historicalsignificance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants, if possible. However, testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws. If some of the materials are found to be environmentally clean, Boeing will remove a small portion of the 2-40 series buildings for use in a historical marker or display. Boeing also considered adaptive reuse of the building and/or reuse of demolition/building materials, but could not do this because of contamination issues. We can encourage but not mandate historic preservation. Given that, Boeing has committed to the following measures which will document the historical significance of Plant 2. We feel these measures are reasonable and appropriate: • Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010.As a part of the 75th Anniversary of the B-17 bomber. The celebration will recognize and address the important legacy of the Plant 2 campus and the history and legacy of innovation of the products that were built there. Retirees, historical representatives, veterans, "Rosies", and special community guests will be in attendance. • MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower. Boeing donated $500,000 towards the new Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) that will open in 2011. The new facility will have a "Boeing Tower of Industry" highlighting and reflecting the Company's role in Washington state history. This permanent exhibit will include educational pieces, renderings and models related to Plant 2. • Boeing is also working with MOHAI to celebrate Plant 2 historical significance through a Boeing Company/Plant 2 and MOHAI Partnership. The following are a representative part of the plan: o Living History/Interactive Memory Books (May 2010 -December 2010). MOHAI to collect stories through its website. This will add to the extensive collection of live interviews reflecting the working experience at Plant 2 currently held by MOHAI and The Boeing Company Archives. o World War II/Boeing Display (July/August 2010), including enhancements to about:blank 06/21/2010 • Page 2 of 3 MOHAI's Home front exhibit section, and artifacts from MOHAI collection; quotes from its Rosie Oral Histories, photographs o Plant 2/Boeing History Week (July 2010) • Boeing will add a historical marker and/or plaque as part of the redevelopment project near the 2-40 building. • Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. • Boeing will submit the HABS/HAER documentation to the Library of Congress. Boeing will also make this report available to History Link (HistoryLink.org) an online encyclopedia of Washington State and local history, for use as educational materials and research. I want to thank you for making your concerns known and taking the time to raise them with the City. We will send you a copy of our staff report and Notice of Decision once they are finalized. Should you have further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> 05/24/2010 12:07 PM »> Dear Lynn, Please find attached comments from the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation regarding the demolition application for Boeing Plant 2 — File #E010-010. I was just able to track down your email this morning — please include these comments into the file and into the public record. If you require a hard copy of the comments to be sent as well, please let me know and I will gladly send them along. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation about:blank 06/21/2010 • • Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 demolition (E10-010) From: Lynn Miranda To: Charlie Sundberg Subject: Boeing Plant 2 demolition (E10-010) Charlie, This letter is in response to your email dated May 27, 2010 regarding the SEPA checklist for the Boeing Plant 2 Demolition project (File E10-010). Thank you for taking the time to comment on the project. Your correspondence has become part of the public record. You've raised several issues regarding the historic importance of the building that we considered as part of our SEPA review, discussed with Boeing, and incorporated into our staff report: In response to your comments, we more fully referenced the building's historical significance in our staff report, as well as the significant role it played in the transformation of the Seattle area. The historical significance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants, if possible. However, testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws. If some of the materials are found to be environmentally clean, Boeing will remove a small portion of the 2-40 series buildings for use in a historical marker or display. Boeing also considered adaptive reuse of the building and/or reuse of demolition/building materials, but could not do this because of contamination issues. We can encourage but not mandate historic preservation. Given that, Boeing has committed to the following measures which will document many aspects of the historical significance of Plant 2. We feel these measures are reasonable and appropriate: • Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010.As a part of the 75th Anniversary of the B-17 bomber. The celebration will recognize and address the important legacy of the Plant 2 campus and the history and legacy of innovation of the products that were built there. Retirees, historical representatives, veterans, "Rosies", and special community guests will be in attendance. • MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower. Boeing donated $500,000 towards the new Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) that will open in 2011. The new facility will have a "Boeing Tower of Industry" highlighting and reflecting the Company's role in Washington state history. This permanent exhibit will include educational pieces, renderings and models related to Plant 2. • Boeing is also working with MOHAI to celebrate Plant 2 historical significance through a Boeing Company/Plant 2 and MOHAI Partnership. The following are a representative part of the plan: o Living History/Interactive Memory Books (May 2010 -December 2010). MOHAI to collect stories through its website. This will add to the extensive collection of live interviews reflecting the working experience at Plant 2 currently held by MOHAI and The Boeing Company Archives. o World War IIBoeing Display (July/August 2010), including enhancements to about:blank 06/21/2010 • • • Page 2 of 2 MOHAI's Home front exhibit section, and artifacts from MOHAI collection; quotes from its Rosie Oral Histories, photographs o Plant 2/Boeing History Week (July 2010) • Boeing will add a historical marker and/or plaque as part of the redevelopment project near the 2-40 building. • Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. • Boeing will submit the HABS/HAER documentation to the Library of Congress. Boeing will also make this report available to History Link (HistoryLink.org) an online encyclopedia of Washington State and local history, for use as educational materials and research. I want to thank you for making your concerns known and taking the time to raise them with the City. We will send you a copy of our staff report and Notice of Decision once they are finalized. Should you have further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. about:blank 06/21/2010 • Lynn Miranda - DNS for Boeing Plant 2 demolition Page 1 of 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us Date: 06/08/2010 1:43 PM Subject: DNS for Boeing Plant 2 demolition Hi Laura I wanted to let you know that, if you plan on submitting any written comments on the City of Tukwila's SEPA checklist for the Boeing Plant 2 demolition project (E10-010) that I will need them by tomorrow afternoon, Wed June 9 at 5pm. I did receive your voicemail on this project, but would also like a written copy if possible. The comment period ended on May 19. Also, I don't know if you are the planner working on reviewing the SEPA checklist for the Carrossino Farmstead demolition (E09-016) I will need them by the end of this week at the latest. The comment period ended on May 27. Thanks! Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm APlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C0E48FBtuk-mail63 00-po l 00172667711 AFDF 1 \G W } 00001... 06/08/2010 • • pirICFEZAW 6/15/2010 Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project E10-010 Lynn, Thanks for allowing Boeing to respond to the letters. I would like to respond to the comments in a blue font, below your own bullets. As of today, four letters were received providing comments on the SEPA checklist for the planned Boeing Plant 2 demolition, the majority of which were regarding the historical significance of the buildings and the adequacy of the proposed mitigation. In order to respond to the public, determine if the project is adequately mitigated, and move forward with finalizing the SEPA documents, we are asking Boeing to consider the comments — can these be carried out or incorporated as part of the mitigation package? Please submit your response to these comments/ideas to the City. I believe I already forwarded you copies of the four comment letters. The following summarizes their comments: 1. Mitigation measures narrowly focus on the buildings. Need more comprehensive documentation & interpretation on the following: o Plant 2 contributed to tremendous transformation of the Seattle metro area: • Critical part of the influx of immigrants to area, including many African-Americans and the mass entry of women into the workforce On December 7, 1941 when war came to America, Boeing was ready. The new modern factory had gone through three expansions and now added up to 1,776,000 square feet of the most modern airplane assembly know-how in the world. To protect the factory from aerial attack the Army Corps of Engineers built a massive camouflage covering designed to make Plant 2 and Boeing Field appear to as a residential area. Underneath the camouflage, Boeing employees, working in 2 shifts and on multiple moving assembly lines, built an average of 12 B -17s each day with a single day production record of 16 B -17s. • • Rosie the Riveter made a great impact at Boeing as well. In 1942 women made up about 15% of the workforce, by 1944 the percentage of women working at Boeing had risen to over 40%, but it was not easy. In 1943 Boeing employment was in crisis and schedules were not being met. Boeing turned to the untapped pool of women workers to take up the jobs left behind as men were called off to war. The company worked with local government and media to address issues that helped women ease into the factory. These issue included transportation, daycare, and the concerns that many women had over performing a non- traditional role. Boeing addressed the issue of transportation by creating a transportation department that organized ride sharing and busing. The company assisted working moms in locating daycare and provided work shifts that would allow mothers to be at home during the day. Boeing also added more breaks and more access to nutritional meals by building a brand new cafeteria. There was also an extensive recreation program that helped both men and women cope with the stress of work and the war. The media assured women that going to work in the factories was socially acceptable - for example Life magazine declared female war workers "Glamour Girl of 1942." Another issue was dress, Boeing worked with a major fashion designer, Muriel King as well as local department stores to develop and sell Boeing fashions. The efforts to attract woman workers were very successful — so successful in fact that after the war a majority of the Rosie's chose to stay at Boeing. Along with greatly increasing the numbers of women at Boeing, the war time production work also attracted large numbers of African Americans who came to Seattle from Southern states, these workers established Seattle's African American community. • • • Vast tracts of public and private housing were constructed for this influx, along with necessary institutions and infrastructure the threat of World War II creates nationwide demand for defense worker housing. Congress passed the Lanham Act in the 1940's, which allows housing authorities to build and manage housing to meet defense workers' needs. Holly Park, Rainier Vista and High Point were built using these funds. o Plant 2's technological and production innovations expanded Boeing's capacity to pursue and dominate production of commercial aircraft in post- war period. Military Aircraft production largely succeeded in shifting from the job shop, where parts were built in small groups, to an assembly line type of production. Machining on site and 24 hrs shifts help facilitate this type of production. 2. Proposals for disseminating interpretive info are vague & non -committal. o Proposals need to be made more specific and detailed, and committed to not just being investigated. Plant 2 Celebration • Boeing will be hosting a celebration of Plant 2 in July 2010. The celebration will recognize and address the important legacy of the Plant 2 campus and our history and legacy of innovation of our products that were built there. In addition to senior company representatives speaking at the ceremony retirees, historical representatives, veterans, Rosies and special community guests will be in attendance. The Celebration will also create commemorative materials from the historical vaults for ceremony guests, employees and the community to receive. Ceremony is expected to draw more than 2,000 guests. Gid I -I "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower • The Boeing Company donated $500,000 to the MOHAI in support of their new museum that will open in 2011 down at Lake Union. The facility will have a "Boeing Tower of Industry" highlighting and reflecting the Company's role in WA State history. This "permanent tower" and exhibit will include educational pieces, renderings and models related to Plant 2. Boeing is working with MOHAI to celebrate Plant 2 historical significance through a Boeing Company/Plant 2 and Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) Partnership The bullets below are a "representative part" of the plan • Living History / Interactive Memory Books (May 2010 -December 2010) • MOHAI to collect stories through its web site • There will be quick links to MOHAI web site to increase participation in Living History / Interactive Memory Books • World War II / Boeing Display (July/August 2010) • Enhancements to MOHAI's Home front exhibition section • • Artifacts from MOHAI collection, pull quotes from its Rosie Oral Histories, photographs ® Plant 2 / Boeing History Week (July 2010) King County Heritage Association members will promote Plant 2 / Boeing History Week MOHAI Boeing Appreciation Day for Boeing employees and retirees MOHAI's Capital Campaign In 2009, The Boeing Company made a $500,000 capital gift to MOHAI's Armory Building at South Lake Union Park. The new museum will include a Boeing Tower that covers the history of aviation in the region, including Plant 2's rich legacy in our communities 4. Much more should be done to document the societal impacts of the work at Plant 2 (see above).See answer above • Mechanics, machinists, engineers & assembly line workers who filled the plan should be interviewed about their experiences and how working at the Plant affected their lives and communities. MOHAI & The Boeing Company Archives has an extensive collection of live interviews with the constituencies above reflecting their experience working at the facility. o Video selections of interviews and historic film footage could be included in web -served information. MOHAI to collect stories through its web site • An animated 3-d representation of the plant and production process would depict the manufacturing innovations designed into the building. Boeing will study a production of a short film. • Boeing's efforts should engage a wide range of stakeholders in a meaningful process to determine the most effective way to interpret and present the story of Plant 2. Boeing is working with both MOHAI and the Museum of flight to present this amazing story. See plan above • Additional City Recommendations: Boeing's future plans for the site include a restoration project along the Duwamish River. As additional mitigation, Boeing should consider including a plaque or display noting the historical significance of the site as part of the restoration project. Boeing will add a historical marker and /or plaque as part of it redevelopment project near the 2- 40- building 3. Absence of any consideration of adapting the building for other uses or saving publicly visible parts of it. o Significance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants. Boeing will remove a small portion of the 2-40 series buildings as part of a historical marker if building material is found environmentally clean. o An assessment should be undertaken to determine if a portion of the structure is able to be retained that is most closely associated with the manufacture of the B-17. The 2-40 buildings have contaminates and will be sent to a disposal sites per applicable laws o Demolition of the building should consider sustainability — the building materials be reused? See answer above o Have the energy impacts of the proposed demolition been evaluated? (comment letter references the following document: Thousands of dollars in monthly electrical energy costs (lighting and power will be eliminated with the demolition of the buildings • http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/docs/ACHP embodied -energy 1979.pdf) o Has Boeing considered using the roof to collect solar energy? This is not a practical idea because many areas of the roof are failing; the ageing buildings no longer have the structural integrity that would support additional loads on the roof of the structure. 4. Incomplete historical evaluation (HABS/HAER) o Boeing response: The Revised HABS/HAER report will be completed by Bola Engineering by 7/1/2010. • • o Additional City Recommendations: Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. In addition, because of Plant 2's historic importance on a national level, Boeing must record the HABS/HAER documentation in the Library of Congress. Boeing through the Bola Arch firm has agreed to a final HAER report with DAHP. This voluntary report will submitted to the City of Tukwila around July 1st Boeing's intent has always been to submit historic Plant 2 documentation to the Library of congress, and will do so, at a later date This voluntary documentation submittal will be in the future and not part of the SEPA process. Boeing will also make this report available to History Link for use of educations materials and background support for community research. 5. The Muckleshoot Tribe has expressed concerns regarding archaeological artifacts and the presence of hazardous materials. o Additional City Recommendations: If artifacts are found on site during the Plant 2 project, Boeing must utilize an archaeologist who is hazardous material certified to do the archaeological work, coordinating with DAHP on how to proceed. Boeing will stop work in the area and will follow all applicable laws regarding archaeological artifacts found and the presence of hazardous materials. Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Alad'Clemevct • Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - Plant 2 Demo SEPA comments From: Lynn Miranda To: mark.d.clement@boeing.com Subject: Plant 2 Demo SEPA comments Hi Mark, As of today, four letters were received providing comments on the SEPA checklist for the planned Boeing Plant 2 demolition, the majority of which were regarding the historical significance of the buildings and the adequacy of the proposed mitigation. In order to respond to the public, determine if the project is adequately mitigated, and move forward with finalizing the SEPA documents, we are asking Boeing to consider the comments — can these be carried out or incorporated as part of the mitigation package? Please submit your response to these comments/ideas to the City. I believe I already forwarded you copies of the four comment letters. The following summarizes their comments: 1. Mitigation measures narrowly focus on the buildings. Need more comprehensive documentation & interpretation on the following: o Plant 2 contributed to tremendous transformation of the Seattle metro area: • Critical part of the influx of immigrants to area, including many African- Americans and the mass entry of women into the workforce • Vast tracts of public and private housing were constructed for this influx, along with necessary institutions and infrastructure o Plant 2's technological and production innovations expanded Boeing's capacity to pursue and dominate production of commercial aircraft in post-war period. 2. Proposals for disseminating interpretive info are vague & non -committal. o Proposals need to be made more specific and detailed, and committed to not just being investigated. o Much more should be done to document the societal impacts of the work at Plant 2 (see above). o Mechanics, machinists, engineers & assembly line workers who filled the plan should be interviewed about their experiences and how working at the Plant affected their lives and communities. o Video selections of interviews and historic film footage could be included in web -served information. o An animated 3-d representation of the plant and production process would depict the manufacturing innovations designed into the building. o Boeing's efforts should engage a wide range of stakeholders in a meaningful process to determine the most effective way to interpret and present the story of Plant 2. o Additional City Recommendations: Boeing's future plans for the site include a restoration project along the Duwamish River. As additional mitigation, Boeing should consider including a plaque or display noting the historical significance of the site as part of the restoration project. 3. Absence of any consideration of adapting the building for other uses or saving publicly about:blank 06/01/2010 • Page 2 of 2 visible parts of it. o Significance of the building warrants preservation of some physical remnants. o An assessment should be undertaken to determine if a portion of the structure is able to be retained that is most closely associated with the manufacture of the B-17. o Demolition of the building should consider sustainability — the building materials be reused? o Have the energy impacts of the proposed demolition been evaluated? (comment letter references the following document: http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/docs/ACHP embodied - energy 1979.pdf) o Has Boeing considered using the roof to collect solar energy? 4. Incomplete historical evaluation (HABS/HAER) o Boeing response: The Revised HABS/HAER report will be completed by Bola Engineering by 7/1/2010. o Additional City Recommendations: Prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the Plant 2 buildings, the Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) documentation must be finalized to the satisfaction of DAHP, using DAHP's March 30, 2010 letter as a basis for the revisions. In addition, because of Plant 2's historic importance on a national level, Boeing must record the HABS/HAER documentation in the Library of Congress. 5. The Muckleshoot Tribe has expressed concerns regarding archaeological artifacts and the presence of hazardous materials. o Additional City Recommendations: If artifacts are found on site during the Plant 2 project, Boeing must utilize an archaeologist who is hazardous material certified to do the archaeological work, coordinating with DAHP on how to proceed. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks! about:blank 06/01/2010 L • Page l of l Lynn Miranda - Comments on Boeing Plant 2 Demolition Proposal From: "Sundberg, Charlie" To: "Lynn Miranda" Date: 05/27/2010 11:14 AM Subject: Comments on Boeing Plant 2 Demolition Proposal CC: "Koler, Julie" Ms. Miranda - Thank you for sending the SEPA materials on Plant 2. I realize that these comments come after the comment period has ended, so they're informal. Let us know if you extend the comment period, as some respondents have requested. In reviewing the proposed mitigation measures and Michael Houser's comments, I was struck by 1) how narrowly the mitigation measures tend to focus on the buildings, 2) the vagueness of the proposals for disseminating interpretive information more broadly and the lack of comprehensive interpretation, and 3) the absence of any consideration of adapting the building for other uses or saving publicly visible parts of it. The significance of the Plant 2 complex reaches far beyond the specific machines produced for the war effort. While the work at Plant 2 alone did not account for the tremendous transformation of the Seattle metro area during the first half of the 1940s, it was a critical part of the influx of immigrants to the area, including many African-Americans, and the mass entry of women into the workforce. Vast tracts of public and private housing were constructed for this influx, along with other necessary institutions and infrastructure. In addition, the technological and production innovations embodied in Plant 2 vastly expanded Boeing's capacity to pursue and dominate production of commercial aircraft in the post-war period and subsequent decades. It would be difficult to overstate the significance of Plant 2; it needs comprehensive documentation and interpretation. Although the documentation provided in the HABS/HAER materials can be improved, as Michael Houser notes in his comments, the significance of the complex is such that much wider and more comprehensive interpretation is merited. The proposals to consider web articles at HistoryLink, develop school curricula, and work with museums are all appropriate — but they need to be made specific and detailed, not just investigated. In addition, much more should be done to document the societal impacts of the work at Plant 2. Some of the mechanics, machinists, engineers and assembly line workers who filled the Plant must still be alive; they should be interviewed about their experiences and how working at the Plant affected their lives and communities. Video selections of both interviews and historic film footage could be included in web -served information, among other materials. An animated three-dimensional representation of the plant and production process would elucidate the manufacturing innovations designed into the building. The significance of the Plant 2 complex is such that preservation of some physical remnants seems reasonable and merited, but none is proposed and none appears to have been considered. Why not? There are a number of ways that this could be accomplished, from retrofitting entire buildings to essentially rebuilding everything but facades. In sum, a DNS seems singularly inappropriate in this case, given the ambiguous and limited mitigation proposed. Again, please let us know if the comment period is being extended and there will be more opportunity to submit formal comments. Charlie Sundberg Preservation Planner King County Historic Preservation Program file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BFE5420tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 AE321\GW} 00001.... 06/01/2010 • Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA Documents Online? Page l of l From: "Sundberg, Charlie" To: "Lynn Miranda" Date: 05/17/2010 2:08 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA Documents Online? That's fine — thanks very much. The mitigation proposals and existing documentation are of greatest interest. Charlie From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 2:04 PM To: Sundberg, Charlie Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA Documents Online? Hi Charlie, They are not online, but I can send you the documents. Because of the large size of the files, I've attached the SEPA checklist attached to this email, and I will send a second one with Attachment A (the historical documentation) for your review. Unless you want it, I am not sending you the detailed site redevelopment plans which show future utilites, landscape, mechanical and electrical work. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Best regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "Sundberg, Charlie" <Charlie.Sundberg@kingcounty.gov> 05/17/2010 12:38 PM »> HI. I'm wondering if the documents associated with the proposed demolition of the Boeing 2-40 buildings are on line for viewing (and if so, where)? Thanks. Charlie Sundberg Preservation Planner King County Historic Preservation Program MS: YES -EX -510 400 Yesler Way., Suite 510 Seattle, WA 98104 v: 206.296.8673 fax: 206.705.0719 churl ie.sundberg@kinecounty.gov file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BF 14DCEtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 AC2F 1\GW }0000... 05/17/2010 • Page l of l Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA Documents Online? From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Lynn Miranda Charlie Sundberg 05/17/2010 1:53 PM Re: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA Documents Online? Hi Charlie, They are not online, but I've attached the SEPA checklist and Attachment A (the historical documentation) for your review. Unless you want it, I am not sending you the detailed site redevelopment plans which show future utilites, landscape, mechanical and electrical work. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Best regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm APlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "Sundberg, Charlie" <Charlie.Sundberg@kingcounty.gov> 05/17/2010 12:38 PM »> HI. I'm wondering if the documents associated with the proposed demolition of the Boeing 2-40 buildings are on line for viewing (and if so, where)? Thanks. Charlie Sundberg Preservation Planner King County Historic Preservation Program MS: YES -EX -510 400 Yesler Way., Suite 510 Seattle, WA 98104 v: 206.296.8673 fax: 206.705.0719 charlie.sundberg c(�kingcountv.gov file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BF 14A40tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 AC2A1 \GW } 00001... 05/17/2010 • Page l of l / Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 demolition - status of environmental work From: "Diana Painter" To: Date: 06/18/2010 9:15 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 demolition - status of environmental work CC: Hi Lynn, What is the status of this work? I wrote a letter on May 14th after the Notice of Application came out, requesting an extension of the comment period, and haven't heard anything since. I assume that I will get noticed when the Determination is made, since I got a notice on the Application, but haven't seen anything yet. I'm also writing to let you know about my conversation with the state. I talked to Greg Griffith a couple of weeks ago. Allyson Brooks asked him to call me because she heard I had concerns about the building's demolition, and she thought I had not discussed it with the state before talking to folks at other agencies. Actually I had been talking to Greg since January about it. So anyway, Greg said that although the points in my letter were good, there was really nothing you could do about the building's demoliton because it's private property. And he said the next step would be to do a checklist. I told him the checklist had come out already - that my letter was in reaction to that. He had not seen or read the checklist. I'm following up to let you know what I have found out in terms of existing surveys of the plant. The SEPA checklist of course is a disclosure document. There have been two historic surveys of the building that I know of, neither of which were attached to the checklist. A historic survey is the appropriate document to attach as a technical report. The HABS survey (which was a draft) was informative, but that's actually a mitigation document. Also, the checklist notes that the buildings "may be considered historically significant for their association with the World War II defense industry, specifically aircraft production." As noted in the checklist, the buildings have been "determined eligible for listing." The state's inventory document says, "Determined Eligible - SHPO." What this usually means is that the buildings ARE historic resources, but that the owner has declined to list them. "Determined eligible" in the sense of whether the building is historic or not has the same standing as "listed." The survey report that was done for the property was written by D. Havey and J Flathman in 2007 I believe. Copies can be obtained from the state. The other survey was prepared by Flo Lentz (now with King County 4culture). She did that survey in 2000. It is entitled "Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance." I don't know if this is a public document or not. I asked Flo about it, and she didn't know if it had been released by the company or not. Both surveys should probably be referenced in the HABS documentation as well. There is additionally a student at the UW who is doing a research project on the plant. This is a resource as well. I am very concerned about the mitigation for this project. It is a highly significant building(s) on the regional, state and national level, and the mitigation should be commensurate with that importance. Ideally, altematives to full demolition should be looked at as well. I would be glad to assist with developing a mitigation plan, which is something I do professionally for historic resources, on a pro bono basis. As an architectural historian, I also specialize in mid-century buildings. Let me know if I can be of assistance. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Tel: (707) 763-6500 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C 1 B3940tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B 1831\GW} 00001.... 06/21/2010 • • 3518 N. C Street Spokane, Washington 99205 May 14, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda, Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re Notice of Application Comment Period - Demolition of Boeing Plant #2 Dear Ms. Miranda, As a private citizen with an interest in this project, I am requesting an extension of the comment period for the Notice of Application for the demolition of Boeing Plant #2 for the following reasons. zI‘dequate time frame for comment. I believe that a two-week comment period for the demolition of a building with this level of regional and national importance does not give interested parties or the public adequate time to comment on the proposed demolition and mitigation plan. Incomplete historical evaluation. The SEPA checklist states that Boeing Plant #2 has been "determined eligible for listing" (the application does not specify what registers it is eligible for listing on) and "may be considered historically significant." The attached documentation ("Attachment A") does not include this determination and also apparently includes only the draft Historic American Building Record (HAER), without revisions requested by the State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (see March 30, 2010 letter from Michael Houser, State Architectural Historian). As a result, it is not possible to respond to the documentation that has been prepared to date or understand and comment on the building's historical significance. Incomplete mitigation plan. The mitigation plan, which at this point is conceptual, does not 1. provide sufficient detail or a level of commitment to allow for meaningful input. While this mitigation may be voluntary, the historical significance of the building (s) and the sheer number of people it has directly and indirectly affected over time supports a more complete mitigation plan. Ipdequate notice. The Notice of Application states that comments maybe delivered to the City of Tukwila by May 19, 2010. A complete mailing address is not provided; electronic contact information is not provided; there is not even a fax number. The notice states that it has been forwarded to the property owner and owners within 500' of the property (note that the property is bounded by the Duwamish River and King County Airport, and as a result there are very few adjacent property owners). This level of public notice is not commensurate with the national importance of the building. Boeing Plant #2 (by which I mean the building complex colloquially known as Boeing Plant #2) has local, regional, state, and national significance for its role as the site where the B-17 Flying • • Fortress was manufactured, a plane that was critical to the Allied defense in World War II. The importance of the manufacturing plant continued as it supported the defense industry during the Cold War and Korean Wars and, by extension, the post-war economy of the Puget Sound region. The building itself is singular and its historic importance ensured by its sheer size and the level of production it supported. It is known for innovations in the development of camouflage. It is significant for its association with the social history of the Puget Sound region, as a site (along with other manufacturing sites) where unprecedented numbers of women and minority workers were employed during the war. It is significant for its association with the economic history of the Puget Sound area and the explosive growth it saw in the post-war era. It is also significant as an important example of an increasingly rare resource in the region, a large-scale development associated with the Pacific Northwest's role in World War II. Many manufacturing uses that supported the defense industry in the Puget Sound area were converted to commercial uses after the war. The size the land areas occupied by defense uses, from housing to manufacturing plants, make them attractive for redevelopment and ensure their demise as the Puget Sound area's economy evolves. The built environment associated with companies such as Boeing also evolves as these companies become global, rather than local, in their presence. I believe that the building is eligible for listing not only the National Register of Historic Places, but as a National Landmark, which is defined as a nationally significant historic place possessing `exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States.' It is unfortunate that there is no federal permitting or funding associated with the demolition of this building complex and subsequent development of a stormwater system, as this would have allowed an appropriate level of discussion through the Section 106 process. The explosive growth of the Puget Sound region (as well as the entire west coast) and the growth of local manufacturing (in contrast to the historically important extractive industries) during World War II provided the basis for post-war growth. The Boeing Company, because of its size, its importance, and its singular presence in the Puget Sound region, led and epitomized this trend. In a very real way, Boeing Plant #2 represents and embodies the history of the Puget Sound area during and after World War II. For all these reasons, Boeing must be encouraged to do more to document and commemorate the history of this important building. Sincerely, Diana J.. Painter, PhD, AICP cc Greg Griffith, Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Karen Gordon, City of Seattle Department of Neighborhoods Julie Koler, King County Office of Strategic Planning Eugenia Woo, Historic Seattle Devin Coleman, Recent Past Preservation Network Anthea Hartig, National Trust for Historic Preservation Western Region Office Nancy Brown, Advisory Council for Historic Preservation • Page l of l Lynn Miranda - Re: Letter on NOA for Boeing Plant #2 From: Lynn Miranda To: Diana Painter Date: 05/17/2010 11:33 AM Subject: Re: Letter on NOA for Boeing Plant #2 Thanks, I received it. Lynn »> Diana Painter <dianajpainter@gmail.com> 05/14/2010 11:34 AM »> Lynn, attached is my comment letter on the NOA for Boeing Plant #2. I also faxed a copy. Diana Painter file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BF 1296Ftuk-mail6300-po 100172667711AC 1 Al\GW} 00001... 05/17/2010 • Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Letter on NOA for Boeing Plant #2 From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Diana Painter Lynn Miranda 05/14/2010 11:35 AM Letter on NOA for Boeing Plant #2 Lynn, attached is my comment letter on the NOA for Boeing Plant #2. I also faxed a copy. Diana Painter file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BED3572tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 ABEE 1\GW} 0000... 05/17/2010 • Page l of l Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 demo From: Diana Painter To: Lynn Miranda Date: 05/10/2010 1:16 PM Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 demo Pm ok if what I have with the PDF is everything. Thank you. Diana On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Lynn Miranda <lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> wrote: Do you still want the hard copy sent to you? »> Diana Painter <dianajpainterCa�gmail.com> 05/10/2010 11:47 AM »> Hi Lynn, I got this, thanks you Yes, that will help to have a little more time to review it. Diana On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 10:28 AM, Lynn Miranda <ImirandaCa�ci.tukwila.wa.us> wrote: Hi Diana, I received your phone message this morning and yes, I believe we did meet in the past, most likely re: the light rail system. Sounds like you're out of town, so I thought I'd send I've attached two pdfs for you: the SEPA checklist prepared by Boeing and Exhibit A, the historical documentation that was attached to the SEPA application. Maybe this would give you some extra review time, altho I'm not sure if you're checking your email. If I don't hear back from you today, I'II also snail mail these materials to the address you gave me in Spokane. Let me know if you need anything else. Best regards, nn Lynn Miranda, AICP. Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail file ://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BE80740tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711AB 1 E1\GW}00001.... 05/17/2010 • Page l of l Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 demo From: Diana Painter To: Lynn Miranda Date: 05/12/2010 2:43 PM Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 demo Hi Lynn, In the SEPA checklist for the Boeing Plant #2 demo it says that the buildings at Plant #2 have been "determined eligible" for listing [on historic registers]. How were they "determined eligible" and where is the paperwork for that? Usually that means something fairly specific ... . Also, fyi, p. 15 in the PDF of the HAER report got out of sequence - it's between p. 3 and 4. Thanks for your help. Diana On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 10:28 AM, Lynn Miranda <lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> wrote: Hi Diana, I received your phone message this morning and yes, I believe we did meet in the past, most likely re: the light rail system. Sounds like you're out of town, so I thought I'd send I've attached two pdfs for you: the SEPA checklist prepared by Boeing and Exhibit A, the historical documentation that was attached to the SEPA application. Maybe this would give you some extra review time, altho I'm not sure if you're checking your email. If I don't hear back from you today, I'll also snail mail these materials to the address you gave me in Spokane. Let me know if you need anything else. Best regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm `"'Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail file ://C:\ temp \XPGrpWise\4BEABE82tuk-mail6300-po100172667711ABAB 1\GW}0000... 05/17/2010 • Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Demolition of Boeing Plant #2 - Historic Property Inventory Report From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Attachments: "Diana Painter" "Diana Painter" 05/17/2010 8:26 AM Demolition of Boeing Plant #2 - Historic Property Inventory Report , "Lynn Miranda" , "Lynn Miranda" For those that I copied on my comment letter on the Notice Of Application for the demolition of Boeing Plant #2, here is a copy of the Historic Property Inventory Report that found the plant eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. This inventory, prepared in 2007, was not included in the documentation attached to the SEPA checklist for the property. It can be found on the State's WISSARD site. Also not included is a historical assessment of the plant prepared in 2000. I do not have a copy of that document. If anyone getting this email did not receive a copy of my letter or my colleague Tom King's letter and would like a copy, please let me know. FYI, I requested an extension of the comment period, given the significance of the property, and questioned the appropriateness of the mitigation plan. The comment period, which is two weeks, ends on Wed. May 19, 2010. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34. Petaluma, CA 94952 Tel: 707-763-6500 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BFOFDB3tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 AC001 \GW } 00001... 05/24/2010 Location • • Historic Property Inventory Report Field Site No. HR -25 Historic Name: Boeing Primary Building Common Name: B2-41 Property Address: 7775 E Marginal Way S, Tukwila, WA 98108 Comments: Tax No./Parcel No. 3324049002 Plat/Block/Lot East South Park Addition Acreage 28.65 Supplemental Map(s) DAHP No. Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/41/4 Sec County Quadrangle T24R04E 33 NW King SEATTLE SOUTH Coordinate Reference Easting: Northing: Zone: Spatial Type: Point Acquisition Code: Geocoded Sequence: 0 Monday, May 17, 2010 Page 1 of 6 Identification • • Historic Property Inventory Report Survey Name: South Park Bridge Date Recorded: 10/02/2007 Field Recorder: Harvey, D & Flathman, J Owner's Name: The Boeing Company Owner Address: PO Box 3707 M/C 20-00 City: Seattle State: Washington Zip: 98124 Classification: Buil ding Resource Status: Survey/Inventory Determined Eligible - SHPO Comments: Within a District? No Contributing? National Register Nomination: Local District: National Register District/Thematic Nomination Name: Description Historic Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Current Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Manufacturing Manufacturing Facility Facility Plan: Rectangle Stories: 2 Structural System: Mixed Changes to Plan: Intact Changes to Interior: Moderate Changes to Original Cladding: Intact Changes to Windows: Intact Changes to Other: Other (specify): Style: Other - Industrial Form/Type: Industrial Cladding: Brick Foundation: Roof Type: Sawtooth / Folded Plate Roof Material: Asphalt / Composition - Shingle Narrative Study Unit Other Community Planning/Development Date of Construction: 1941 Builder: Architect: Engineer: Property appears Ito meet criteria for the National Register of Historic Places:Yes Monday, May 17, 2010 Page 2 of 6 • • Historic Property Inventory Report Property is located in a potential historic district (National and/or local): No Property potentially contributes to a historic district (National and/or local): No Statement of Summary Significance: Constructed in 1941, Boeing Building 2-41, the Basic Primary Building, is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP) under criterion A for its association with the defense industry in the United States during the Second World War. The construction of Building 2-41 was a direct response to increased orders from the U. 5. government for military aircraft due to the expanding war in Europe. Under Criterion C, Building 2-41 is significant as a fine surviving example of Second World War assembly plants. The significant design elements of the plant including the layout, the saw tooth roof, trusses, circulation below the buildings, and mezzanine illustrate the patterns of airplane manufacture between 1936 and the early 1950s. The Boeing Company Plant 2 facilities were constructed between 1936 and 1958 (with later additions and modifications), and served as one of the company's primary Second World War airframe assembly plants. Plant 1, which included Boeing Field and much of the area to the northeast of East Marginal Way, had supported the nation's airplane production needs since World War I. In 1936, Boeing received orders for thirteen Model 299 four -engine bombers — the prototype of the B-17 Flying Fortress — from the Army Air Corps. The plant, essentially unchanged since the end of the First World War, was simply not large enough to keep the order on schedule. The company announced plans to build a new assembly facility directly across from Boeing Field, known as Plant 2, along the Duwamish Waterway. Plant 2 Development The initial construction of Plant 2 facilities occurred in five phases between 1936 and 1942 over more than 28 acres in South King County. The pace accelerated in 1940 due to a production boom funded through increasing military contracts because of the expanding war in Europe. Prior to its entry into the Second World War, the United States found a way to bolster the military capabilities of its European and Asian allies, especially Great Britain, through the Lend Lease Act of 1941. Under the Act the United States supplied vast amounts of war material in exchange for the use of Britain's military bases in Canada and the Caribbean. Military and transport aircraft comprised about 25% of wartime shipments to Great Britain, which increased airplane construction at Boeing's Seattle Plant 2 facilities. The Austin Company, who developed all of Boeing's major Puget Sound facilities, designed and constructed Boeing's Plant 2 buildings. The firm was noted for its development of the saw tooth roof configuration found in many of the Plant 2 facilities that was designed to improve interior lighting. The Plant 2 facilities added over 61,000 square feet to the Boeing Company's floor area. . The construction of the Plant 2 buildings marked the beginnings of the Boeing Company's remarkable wartime expansion program, highlighted by the introduction of streamlined work methods geared to an efficient flow of materials and workers that influenced the design of the large interior spaces of Plant 2 facilities. Boeing's Plant 2 facilities were initially constructed and/or expanded to meet the need for airplanes by the United States and its allies in Europe during the early years of the Second World War. One of Boeing's first important production buildings was Building 2-40, which served as the final assembly plant. As production of B-17 bombers and Boeing Model 307 transports increased, the bays of Building 2-40 were expanded to provide additional work space. Continued need for additional production space led to the construction of the adjacent Building 2-41, known as the Basic Primary Building. Physically and strategically connected with Building 2-40, Building 2-41 was an integral part of Boeing's second huge expansion program at Plant 2. The construction of Building 2-41 was a significant undertaking. The trusses, designed by the Austin Company, were among the largest of their type in the world at that time. The interior was spacious enough to accommodate a full-sized football field. The incorporation of a mezzanine level used for sub assembly processes accommodated expanded production. The placement of ducts for electricity and compressed air beneath the assembly floor allowed for increased ceiling height. To maximize the available floor space, circulation systems including employee entrances and exits were located in underground tunnels. Monday, May 17, 2010 Page 3 of 6 • • Historic Property Inventory Report Description of Constructed in two phases during 1940-41, building 2-41 occupies the southwest corner of Boeing Plant 2 Physical in Tukwila, Washington. The building stretches approximately 780 feet north to south before joining Appearance: Boeing Building 2-44. The building extends approximately 450 feet east of the Duwamish Waterway before joining Boeing building 2-40. The building's north elevation faces 16th Avenue South and at its northeast corner adjoins building 2-31. The majority of the rectangular building rests on a concrete foundation but its southwestern edge rests on wooden piers above the Duwamish Waterway. A sawtooth roof dad in asphalt shingles covers the Industrial -Style building. The building features a variety of cladding materials including a board formed concrete base, structural brick laid in an American bond pattern, and corrugated, cement -asbestos panels. Fenestration on the building consists of multi -pane, metal windows with an operable industrial -style sash. The building features an open floor plan defined by cylindrical columns approximately ten inches in diameter that support flat, steel trusses. The trusses are supported by wooden beams approximately sixteen inches deep that support the wood floor of the mezzanine. This mezzanine, used for small lot production, covers the eastern portion of the building (Richard White). The mezzanine features maple floors supported on tongue and groove decking (Lentz: 2000). The northeastern portions of the mezzanine feature dropped ceilings, fluorescent lighting, and carpeting. . A series of tunnels run below the building providing office space, an internal circulation corridor, and ducts for services including electricity and compressed air (Lentz 2000). Major Bibliographic References: Bagley, C. B. 1929. History of King County, Volume I. S. J. Clarke, Chicago, Illinois. Boeing News. 1936-1954, various articles: "Modern Assembly Plant to rise on New Boeing Site," April, 1936. "Contractors Rush Plant 2 Addition," June, 1940. "New Plant Mushrooms," July, 1940. "Expansion," June, 1941. "Building for a Bigger Job," January 1952. Denny, A. A. 1888. Pioneer Days on Puget Sound. Reprinted in Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Washington, 1965. Historical Research Associates. 2004. South Park Bridge Project, Draft EIS and Section 4 (f) Evaluation. Seattle, Washington. History Link. 2001a. Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park - Thumbnail History. In, 'www.historyl ink.org/essays/output'. History Link. 2001b. Straightening of Duwamish River Begins on October 14, 1913. In, 'www.historylink.org/essays/output'. History Link. 2001c. Boeing Field, Seattle: first municipal airport is dedicated o0n July 26, 1928. In, `www.h istoryl in k.org/essays/output. King County Assessor. Property Record Cards, Washington State Division of Archives, Puget Sound Regional Branch, Bellevue, WA. Kroll Map Company, Inc. 1912 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1930 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1946 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. Lentz, F. K. 2000. Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance. Cultural Resource Consultant, for The Boeing Company. Reinartz, K. F. 1991. Tukwila, Community at the Crossroads. The City of Tukwila, Washington. Monday, May 17, 2010 Page 4 of 6 • • Historic Property Inventory Report R.L. Polk and Co. 1888-1979 City of Seattle, Washington City Directory. Kansas City, Mo: R.L. Polk & Co. Sanborn Fire Insurance Co. 1904-05 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1917 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1929-1950 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. Zahler, A. A Marti, and G. Thomsen. 2006. Images of America: Seattle's South Park. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco, California. Monday, May 17, 2010 Page 5 of 6 Photos • Historic Property Inventory Report West Elevation 10/02/2007 Monday, May 17, 2010 Page 6 of 6 FROM :NEW 'FANA "NA • FAX NO. :1-707-938-3464 IM )14,1 til VoLdcc. COI --r-a-tuot(cLi 1 4, 2_01 o 69 2to& 14 2010 10:59AM P1 707 -T3 -3(16Y • Lynn Miranda - Demolition of Boeing Plant #2 - Historic Property Inventory Report Page 1 of 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Attachments: "Diana Painter" "Diana Painter" 05/17/2010 8:26 AM Demolition of Boeing Plant #2 - Historic Property Inventory Report , "Lynn Miranda" , "Lynn Miranda" For those that I copied on my comment letter on the Notice Of Application for the demolition of Boeing Plant #2, here is a copy of the Historic Property Inventory Report that found the plant eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. This inventory, prepared in 2007, was not included in the documentation attached to the SEPA checklist for the property. It can be found on the State's WISSARD site. Also not included is a historical assessment of the plant prepared in 2000. I do not have a copy of that document. If anyone getting this email did not receive a copy of my letter or my colleague Tom King's letter and would like a copy, please let me know. FYI, I requested an extension of the comment period, given the significance of the property, and questioned the appropriateness of the mitigation plan. The comment period, which is two weeks, ends on Wed. May 19, 2010. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Tel: 707-763-6500 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BFOFDB3tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 AC001 \GW } 00001... 05/17/2010 3518 N. C Street Spokane, Washington 99205 May 14, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda, Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re Notice of Application Comment Period - Demolition of Boeing Plant #2 Dear Ms. Miranda, As a private citizen with an interest in this project, I am requesting an extension of the comment period for the Notice of Application for the demolition of Boeing Plant #2 for the following reasons. Inadequate time frame for comment. I believe that a two-week comment period for the demolition of a building with this level of regional and national importance does not give interested parties or the public adequate time to comment on the proposed demolition and mitigation plan. Incomplete historical evaluation. The SEPA checklist states that Boeing Plant #2 has been "determined eligible for listing" (the application does not specify what registers it is eligible for listing on) and "may be considered historically significant." The attached documentation ("Attachment A") does not include this determination and also apparently includes only the draft Historic American Building Record (HAER), without revisions requested by the State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (see March 30, 2010 letter from Michael Houser, State Architectural Historian). As a result, it is not possible to respond to the documentation that has been prepared to date or understand and comment on the building's historical significance. Incomplete mitigation plan. The mitigation plan, which at this point is conceptual, does not provide sufficient detail or a level of commitment to allow for meaningful input. While this mitigation may be voluntary, the historical significance of the building (s) and the sheer number of people it has directly and indirectly affected over time supports a more complete mitigation plan. Inadequate notice. The Notice of Application states that comments maybe delivered to the City of Tukwila by May 19, 2010. A complete mailing address is not provided; electronic contact information is not provided; there is not even a fax number. The notice states that it has been forwarded to the property owner and owners within 500' of the property (note that the property is bounded by the Duwamish River and King County Airport, and as a result there are very few adjacent property owners). This level of public notice is not commensurate with the national importance of the building. Boeing Plant #2 (by which I mean the building complex colloquially known as Boeing Plant #2) has local, regional, state, and national significance for its role as the site where the B-17 Flying " Fortress was manufactured, a plane that was critical to the Allied defense in World War II. The importance of the manufacturing plant continued as it supported the defense industry during the Cold War and Korean Wars and, by extension, the post-war economy of the Puget Sound region. The building itself is singular and its historic importance ensured by its sheer size and the level of production it supported. It is known for innovations in the development of camouflage. It is significant for its association with the social history of the Puget Sound region, as a site (along with other manufacturing sites) where unprecedented numbers of women and minority workers were employed during the war. It is significant for its association with the economic history of the Puget Sound area and the explosive growth it saw in the post-war era. It is also significant as an important example of an increasingly rare resource in the region, a large-scale development associated with the Pacific Northwest's role in World War II. Many manufacturing uses that supported the defense industry in the Puget Sound area were converted to commercial uses after the war. The size the land areas occupied by defense uses, from housing to manufacturing plants, make them attractive for redevelopment and ensure their demise as the Puget Sound area's economy evolves. The built environment associated with companies such as Boeing also evolves as these companies become global, rather than local, in their presence. I believe that the building is eligible for listing not only the National Register of Historic Places, but as a National Landmark, which is defined as a nationally significant historic place possessing `exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States.' It is unfortunate that there is no federal permitting or funding associated with the demolition of this building complex and subsequent development of a stormwater system, as this would have allowed an appropriate level of discussion through the Section 106 process. The explosive growth of the Puget Sound region (as well as the entire west coast) and the growth of local manufacturing (in contrast to the historically important extractive industries) during World War II provided the basis for post-war growth. The Boeing Company, because of its size, its importance, and its singular presence in the Puget Sound region, led and epitomized this trend. In a very real way, Boeing Plant #2 represents and embodies the history of the Puget Sound area during and after World War II. For all these reasons, Boeing must be encouraged to do more to document and commemorate the history of this important building. Sincerely, Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP cc Greg Griffith, Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Karen Gordon, City of Seattle Department of Neighborhoods Julie Koler, King County Office of Strategic Planning Eugenia Woo, Historic Seattle Devin Coleman, Recent Past Preservation Network Anthea Hartig, National Trust for Historic Preservation Western Region Office Nancy Brown, Advisory Council for Historic Preservation Thomas F. King, PhD PO Box 14515, Silver Spring MD 20911, USA Telephone (240) 475-0595 Facsimile (240) 465-1179 tfking106@aol.com http://crmplus.blocispot.com/ May 12, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Training, uniting, consuftation anddupute resolution in cut -turd -resource management Subject: Proposed demolition of Boeing Plant 2; your file # E010-010 Dear Ms. Miranda: I am writing to express my concern about the planned demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a structure of obvious historical importance that is certainly eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Others will doubtless speak to the significance of this structure. Based on my 40 -plus years experience in historic preservation, I want to express concern about how thoroughly alternatives to its demolition have been explored, and about the adequacy of the plans proposed for "mitigating" the impact of its demolition. Given its scale, Boeing Plant 2 certainly presents challenges for adaptive use, but its scale can be an advantage, too. Large facilities of this kind have been efficiently re -used not only as industrial plants but as enclosed malls, shopping centers, research parks, and mixed-use commercial facilities. I wonder to what extent such alternatives have been considered in this case. A building of this scale embodies a great deal of energy (See for example http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/docs/ACHP_embodied-energy 1979.pdf). Its demolition will obviously consume more energy, and have a variety of direct and indirect impacts on the human environment. In the (admittedly limited) documents I have reviewed, I have seen no evidence that the energy impacts of the proposed demolition have been considered as part of the environmental impact review; clearly they should be. The very extensive roofed area of Plant 2 not only creates weather -protected usable space below the roof, but presents interesting possibilities for energy generation above it. In southern California, the Southern California Edison Company is carrying forward an aggressive program to cover the roofs of factories and warehouses with solar collectors, producing large amounts of electricity that can be fed very efficiently into the area's power grid. Granting that Tukwila gets less solar radiation than southern California, it still seems quite likely that a re -use program for Plant 2 that used its roofs to collect solar energy could • • yield considerable energy benefits. I'm aware of no indication that this kind of alternative has been considered, either. In fact, the only alternative whose consideration I have seen documented is that of knocking the structure down, and presumably carting its remains away to a landfill. The only discussion of "mitigating" the impact of this demolition on Tukwila's historic heritage that I have seen documented has taken demolition as a given and focused on preparing architectural documentation. Documentation may be a very good thing to do, but it is no substitute for a creative program of adaptive use that would keep Plant 2 standing and make good use of it. I understand that no federal funding is involved in the proposed demolition or in whatever proposed new uses ostensibly justify it, and that the demolition requires no federal permits. Should there in fact be any federal involvement in the action, of course, then review will be required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800). Such review would certainly focus on adaptive use alternatives before opting for "mitigation" only in the form of documentation. I suggest that the City of Tukwila would be well advised to consider such alternatives itself, regardless of any federal connection to the project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. • Lynn Miranda - RE: SEPA questions • Page 1 of 2 From: "Clement, Mark D" To: Lynn Miranda Date: 05/27/2010 9:40 AM Subject: RE: SEPA questions CC: "Prittie, Michael J" Lynn, Thanks for the e-mail Response to question 1 The Revised HAER report will completed by Bola engineering by 7/1/2010 I will submit the report to you shortly after that. Response to question 2 The 2-40 series buildings has substantial Asbestos in the buildings. Asbestos has been found in calking around utility systems, and fitting around piping. In Galbestos siding and roofing material, and also in vinyl floors. Boeing will apply for a project specific Asbestos abatement permit with the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency. 2 weeks before demolition. Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark/Clement From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 2:43 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: SEPA questions Hi Mark, Couple of questions for you as I begin drafting my staff report: 1.Comment period for the Boeing 2 Demo SEPA period is up and I received a handful of letters specifically related to the historic preservation aspect of the demo. I know we spoke last week or so about the HARE report. I was reviewing the correspondence file://C: \temp\XPGrpWise\4BFE3 E 10tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 AE261 \GW } 00001.... 06/01/2010 • • Page2of2—. submitted as part of ATtachment A, particularly the one from Michael Houser (DAHP) to Mr. Gabriel Rosenthal (Boeing) dated March 30, 2010, where Mr. Houser identifies further actions/info that should be taken as part of the HARE report. Can you give me a status of revisions based upon the requests made in this letter? 2. During our tour last week, I remember mention being made of asbestos in the building materials, but this is not identified in the SEPA checklist. Can you provide me with some further clarification on that? Thanks, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BFE3E l Otuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 AE261\GW } 00001.... 06/01/2010 • Lynn Miranda - RE: SEPA questions • Page 1 of 2 From: "Clement, Mark D" To: "Clement, Mark D" , Lynn Miranda Date: 05/27/2010 12:30 PM Subject: RE: SEPA questions CC: "Prittie, Michael J" Lynn one small change to make in Red below thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark/Clement From: Clement, Mark D Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:40 AM To: 'Lynn Miranda' Cc: Prittie, Michael J Subject: RE: SEPA questions Lynn, Thanks for the e-mail Response to question 1 The Revised HAER report will completed by Bola engineering by 7/1/2010 I will submit the report to you shortly after that. Response to question 2 The 2-40 series buildings has substantial Asbestos in the buildings. Asbestos has been found in calking around utility systems, and fitting around piping. In Galbestos siding and roofing material, and also in vinyl floors. Boeing will apply for a project specific Asbestos abatement permit with the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency. 2 weeks before Abatement Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. file://C:\temp\XPGrp Wise\4BFE65E2tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 AE3 E 1 \GW } 00001... 06/01/2010 Marl Clement From: Lynn Miranda[mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 2:43 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: SEPP, questions Hi Mark, Couple of questions for you as I begin drafting my staff report: • Page 2of2• 1.Comment period for the Boeing 2 Demo SEPA period is up and I received a handful of letters specifically related to the historic preservation aspect of the demo. I know we spoke last week or so about the HARE report. I was reviewing the correspondence submitted as part of ATtachment A, particularly the one from Michael Houser (DAHP) to Mr. Gabriel Rosenthal (Boeing) dated March 30, 2010, where Mr. Houser identifies further actions/info that should be taken as part of the HARE report. Can you give me a status of revisions based upon the requests made in this letter? 2. During our tour last week, I remember mention being made of asbestos in the building materials, but this is not identified in the SEPA checklist. Can you provide me with some further clarification on that? Thanks, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm GI Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail file ://C : \temp\XPGrp W ise\4BFE65 E2tuk-mai 163 00-po 100172667711 AE3 E 1 \G W } 00001... 06/01/2010 • Page l of l Lynn Miranda - SEPA comments - Boeing Plant 2 From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: "Chris Moore" 05/24/2010 12:08 PM SEPA comments - Boeing Plant 2 Dear Lynn, Please find attached comments from the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation regarding the demolition application for Boeing Plant 2 — File #E010-010. I was just able to track down your email this morning — please include these comments into the file and into the public record. If you require a hard copy of the comments to be sent as well, please let me know and I will gladly send them along. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation/ www.wa-trust.org file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BFA6C29tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 ADA01\GW } 0000... 05/24/2010 • • 7 WASHINGTON TRUSTFOR HISTOR PRESERVATION May 19, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda, Planner City of Tukwila 6300 SouthcenterBlvd. #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Notice of Application — Boeing Plant 2 Demolition (File # E010-010) Dear Ms. Miranda, On Behalf of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation, I am writing to raise several concerns regarding the proposed demolition of Boeing Plant 2. The Washington Trust is a nonprofit, 501(c)3 advocacy organization dedicated to safeguarding the historic and cultural resources of Washington. Please include this letter in the public record for the demolition application. Eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, Boeing Plant 2 stands as fully intact example of an industrial assembly plant associated with World War II and the United States defense industry. Specifically, Plant 2 is significant for its role as the manufacturing site of the B-17 Flying Fortress, an airplane that played a prominent role in the Allied wartime strategy. In addition, Plant 2 has important connections to both the social history and economic development of the Puget Sound region. A Historic Property Inventory Report filed with the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) more fully details the building's significance and should be referenced as SEPA considerations are undertaken. Due to the historical associations and importance of Boeing Plant 2, alternatives to demolition should be investigated and evaluated for feasibility and implementation prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Such large-scale industrial plants that retain a clear link to WWII and exhibit such a high level of integrity are increasingly rare in the Pacific Northwest. While undoubtedly a challenge given the size of the structure, the potential for adaptive use should be considered. Given that the plant was constructed in phases, an assessment should also be undertaken to determine if a portion of the structure is able to be retained that is most closely associated with the manufacture of the B-17. Efforts to retain a significant portion of the building would result in important educational opportunities and could serve future industrial functions as well. At present, the extent of documentation for Boeing Plant 2 has been the submittal of a draft Historic American Engineering Record (HAER). DAHP staff have requested revisions to this draft, although the final version is not yet available. Regardless of the 1204 Minor Avenue • Seattle, WA 98101 • tel 206.624.9449 fax 206.624.2410 • wa-trust.org Ms. Lynn Miranda May 19, 2010 Page 2 final content, HAER documentation alone is insufficient given the significance of the resource. If adaptive use and/or retention of a portion of the structure are deemed infeasible, a more compelling strategy/mechanism for depicting the role of Boeing Plant 2 in the Allied wartime effort is warranted. Such a strategy might include an interpretive program and should involve a wide range of stakeholders engaged in a meaningful process to determine the most effective way to interpret and present the story of Plant 2 to jj as broad an audience as possible. Finally, should demolition of any portion of the building occur, sustainability considerations should be fully incorporated into the plans for removal. Demolition debris of Boeing Plant 2 should not be relegated to a landfill. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chris Moore Field Director • Lynn Miranda - FW: April 8 Boeing/ DPD meeting • Page 1 of 2 From: "Clement, Mark D" To: "mdhaliwal@c i.tukwila.wa.us" , "dlarson@ci.tukwila.wa.us" , "bbenedicto@c i.tukwila.wa. us" Date: 05/04/2010 3:00 PM Subject: FW: April 8 Boeing/ DPD meeting CC: "Hyde, Shaunta R" , "jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us" , "Prittie, Michael J" Here is the e-mail I sent to Seattle DPD. and their response back so far. I am expecting a follow up e-mail from Andy or Jon on item number 3. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark/ Clement From: Higgins, Andy [mailto:Andy.Higgins@seattle.gov] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 9:48 AM To: Clement, Mark D Cc: Prittie, Michael 3; Hyde, Shaunta R; Siu, Jon Subject: RE: April 8 Boeing/ DPD meeting Sounds good. Thanks Mark. " Andy C. Andrew ("Andy") Higgins, MBA, CBO, LEED® AP Manager, Engineering Services Division Department of Planning & Development, City of Seattle 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000 P.O. Box 34019 Seattle, WA 98124-4019 Phone: 206-615-0568 Email: Andv.HiaoinseSeattle.Gov `' `Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Original Message From: Clement, Mark D [mailto:mark.d.cl'ement@boeing.com] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 3:16 PM To: Siu, Jon; Higgins, Andy Cc: Prittie, Michael J; Hyde, Shaunta R Subject: April 8 Boeing/ DPD meeting Jon, Andy, Thanks for meeting with the us on April 9th. file://C:\temp \XPGrpWise\4BE03 824tuk-mail6300-po20020000A6131731\GW } 00001.H... 05/05/2010 • Page 2 of 2 I wanted to -Follow up on the understanding that came out of the meeting. 1) Boeing will apply at Seattle DPD for a STFI demolition permit, for the extreme NE corner of the 2-40 bldg. 2) Boeing will also apply at DPD for a bldg. permit for the upgrade work in the 2-31 bldg. - Seattle jurisdiction . 3) Jon or Andy will send a follow up e-mail to Bob Benedicto (City of Tukwila building official) stating the outcome of the April 9th meeting. 4) Seattle DPD will work with Tukwila's Department of Community Development to resolve the Permit Jurisdiction issues at Boeing's Plant 2 site PS. I will be applying very shortly for demolition permits with the city of Tukwila, and with DPD. The 2-31 project permit and construction schedule is slated for 2011 Thanks again, Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BE03824tuk-mail6300-po20020000A6131731\GW} 00001.H... 05/05/2010 (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs Page 1 From: "Diana Painter" <d.painter15@att.net> To: "Jack Pace" <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/12/2010 6:03 AM Subject: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs CC: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, <d.painterl5@att.net> Hi Jack, I hope you are doing well. I have written to the Federal Preservation Officers that are a party to the agreement for restoration of the Lower Duwamish Waterway (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758) to ask them whether Section 106 review was ever done as a part of this agreement, which dates May 2010. The plan associated with the agreement calls for the demoliton of 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (1 bay). The agreement addresses archaeological resources, but not historic resources. The building has, as you know, been Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register. The comment period for this agreement and plan has been extended by the Department of Justice to August 9, 2010, due to public comment (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 1115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). The appeal period for the demolition of the entire building, 754,000 square feet, expires today, per the City of Tukwila's Notice of Decision and Determination of Non -Significance. Your office has stated that Section 106 review is not necessary, but according to Minnie Dhaliwal, she was not aware that Section 106 review was called for if there was any Federal permitting involved (EPA, Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife, etc), as well as actual Federal funding. If it were me, I would not issue a demolition permit for the project until this is sorted out, in order to avoid complications. I've copied DAHP on my letter. I will forward my comments on the Notice of Decision in a separate email. Cheers, Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 CeII: 707-364-0697 www. preservation plans. co m (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 DNS Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Lynn Miranda Date: 07/12/2010 3:15 PM Subject: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 DNS Attachments: 070810-06-KI_070810. pdf »> Jack Pace 07/12/2010 1:51 PM »> Should we send a copy to Diana? »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith(&DAHP.WA.GOV> 07/08/2010 4:55 PM »> «070810-06-KI_070810.pdf» Jack, attached, please find my comment letter regarding DNS E10-010 on the Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Feel free to give me a call or email if you have any questions, but fyi...1 will be out of the office until Tuesday July 13 as a result of the State's furlough day on Monday. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 grgg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov ( file://www.dahp.wa.gov/ ) Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR ReportPDF Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - BOEING RESPONSE TO PUBLIC LETTER Page 1 From: "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> To: Lynn Miranda <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/12/2010 3:47 PM Subject: BOEING RESPONSE TO PUBLIC LETTER CC: "mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us" <mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Lynn, Thanks for allowing Boeing to respond to the public e-mail below. As Boeing has stated in the SEPA checklist, the buildings are being demolished because they are structurally unsound, unsafe, and no longer necessary for Boeing operations. The demolition of the Plant 2 structures is a separate project from the upcoming work, in or near the river. Boeing will apply for the appropriate federal state and local permits, including SEPA, on the future Remediation and Restoration project For the Upland/Plant 2 demolition, no federal permit is being requested and no federal funding is being utilized. As such, a Section 106 review is not required. This was confirmed with DAHP when we met with them in Olympia several months ago. We believe that this is consistent with Tukwila's view of the Demolition project look forward to your DNS, sent to me electronically per our phone call. Thanks again Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 10:50 AM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: Fwd: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs FYI. 1 of 2 emails I received today. Lynn »> "Diana Painter" <d.painterl5@att.net> 07/12/2010 6:02 AM »> Hi Jack, I hope you are doing well. have written to the Federal Preservation Officers that are a party to the agreement for restoration of the Lower Duwamish Waterway (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758) to ask them whether Section 106 review was ever done as a part of this agreement, which dates May 2010. The plan associated with the agreement calls for the demoliton of 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (1 bay). The agreement addresses archaeological resources, but not historic resources. The building has, as you know, been Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register. The comment period for this agreement and plan has been extended by the Department of Justice to August 9, 2010, due to public comment (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 1115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). The appeal period for the demolition of the entire building, 754,000 square feet, expires today, per the City of Tukwila's Notice of Decision and Determination of Non -Significance. Your office has stated that Section 106 review is not necessary, but according to Minnie Dhaliwal, she was not aware that Section 106 review was called for if there was any Federal permitting involved (EPA, Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife, etc), as well as actual Federal funding. If it were me, I would not issue a demolition permit for the project until this is sorted out, in order to avoid complications. I've copied DAHP on my letter. I will forward my comments on the Notice of Decision in a separate email. Cheers, Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - BOEING RESPONSE TO PUBLIC LETTER Page 2 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www. preservationplans.com<http://www. preservationplans.com/> (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Comment letter on Boeing Plant 2 NOD Page 1 From: "Diana Painter" <d.painter15@att.net> To: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/12/2010 4:56 PM Subject: Comment letter on Boeing Plant 2 NOD Attachments: Comment letter - Boeing Plant 2 demolition - 7-12-2010.doc Hard copy to follow. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda DNS comment letter - Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> To: "'Lynn Miranda"' <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/12/2010 5:02 PM Subject: DNS comment letter - Boeing Plant 2 Attachments: WTHP DNS Itr - 7.12.10.pdf Dear Ms. Miranda & Mr. Pace, Please find attached a comment letter from the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation on the City of Tukwila's DNS for Boeing Plant 2 - File Number E10-010. Please include these comments in the public record. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Deadline for appeal for DNS for Boeing Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Hi Jack, "Diana Painter" <d.painterl5@att.net> "Jack Pace" <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us> 07/13/2010 6:56 AM Deadline for appeal for DNS for Boeing "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> I understand that the appeal period for the DNS for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2 is different than the comment period publicized for the DNS. Could you tell me what that date is? Thanks. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www. preservation plans. com (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Comment letter on Boeing demo Page 1 From: "Diana Painter" <d.painter15@att.net> To: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/13/2010 9:52 AM Subject: Comment letter on Boeing demo Attachments: Comment letter - Boeing Plant 2 demolition - 7-12-2010.pdf Hi Lynn, I've made a few small corrections to typos on this letter. If you wouldn't mind replacing the letter I sent last night, I'd appreciate it. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 CeII: 707-364-0697 www. preservationplans. com I (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - City Attorney Page 1 From: "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> To: Lynn Miranda <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/13/2010 11:25 AM Subject: City Attorney Lynn, Do you have City attorney's name and e-mail? Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Comment letter on Boeing demo Page 1 From: "Diana Painter" <d.painterl5@att.net> To: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/13/2010 12:49 PM Subject: Re: Comment letter on Boeing demo Hey Lynn, can you confirm what the final date is now for appeal of the decision? I did not realize that there was a different date for that than the comments. Chris Moore of the Washington Trust spoke to Jack yesterday, and he said 3 weeks from the date of issue. Is that July 19th? Diana Original Message From: Lynn Miranda To: Diana Painter Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:53 AM Subject: Re: Comment letter on Boeing demo Will do. »> "Diana Painter" <d.painterl5@att.net> 07/13/2010 9:52 AM »> Hi Lynn, I've made a few small corrections to typos on this letter. If you wouldn't mind replacing the letter I sent last night, I'd appreciate it. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 CeII: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 demo Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Shelley Kerslake Date: 07/13/2010 3:15 PM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 demo Attachments: comment letter 1.pdf; comment letter 2.pdf; comment letter 3.pdf; comment I etter 4.pdf CC: Shelley, Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda You will probably be getting a call from Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie who is representing Boeing and is preparing a response to the comment letters received in response to the DNS for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. We have a couple of procedural questions and want to confirm that we have the correct understanding of the judicial appeal procedures. 1.Per TMC 21.04.280 administrative appeals are allowed only in case the city issues a MDNS. Under RCW 36.70C.040(3) land use petition is considered timely if filed within 21 days of issuance of the land use decision. Also, per RCW 43.21C.075, SEPA appeals shall be of the underlying government action together with its accompanying environmental determination. TMC 21.04.280(C), states no appeals pursuant to "SEPA appeal section" shall be permitted for proposals that involve only Type I decision. Does that mean that SEPA appeal period starts from the date of the issuance of the SEPA determination and not the issuance of the demolition permit(Type 1)? We typically do not issue notice of decisions for building permits (Type 1), which are appealable to the hearing examiner. The folks who submitted comment letters are now asking when is the appeal deadline. In the notice of decision that they received it states "The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the judicial review of land use decision RCW 36.70C.' Should we state it back to them or can we tell them 21 days from the date of issuance of DNS? 2.The comment period on the DNS expired on July 12th and we received four comment letters. Our understanding is that the comment period just means that the agency cannot take any action on the proposal until the comment period is over. Based on our review of the comment letters we do not believe we need to change our decision. We are waiting to get Boeing's response and will make the final decision at that time. All comment letters suggest that the city should have issued a MDNS instead of a DNS. Since the proposal included mitigation related to historic preservation we considered it part of the proposal and decided to issue a DNS as opposed to MDNS. Thanks for your input. I will probably set up a meeting with you tomorrow to go over this issue. Also, I have attached the four comment letters. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 demo Page 1 From: "Shelley Kerslake" <smkkd@comcast.net> To: "'Minnie Dhaliwal"' <mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "'Shelley Kerslake"' <... Date: 07/14/2010 6:01 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 demo CC: "'Jack Pace' <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "'Lynn Miranda"' <Imiranda@ci.tu... Minnie - In order to answers your question, I will need to see the notice of decision and any other documents that were issued as part of the City's decision. Thanks! From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 3:16 PM To: Shelley Kerslake Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: Boeing Plant 2 demo Shelley, You will probably be getting a call from Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie who is representing Boeing and is preparing a response to the comment letters received in response to the DNS for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. We have a couple of procedural questions and want to confirm that we have the correct understanding of the judicial appeal procedures. 1.Per TMC 21.04.280 administrative appeals are allowed only in case the city issues a MDNS. Under RCW 36.70C.040(3) land use petition is considered timely if filed within 21 days of issuance of the land use decision. Also, per RCW 43.21C.075, SEPA appeals shall be of the underlying government action together with its accompanying environmental determination. TMC 21.04.280(C), states no appeals pursuant to "SEPA appeal section" shall be permitted for proposals that involve only Type I decision. Does that mean that SEPA appeal period starts from the date of the issuance of the SEPA determination and not the issuance of the demolition permit(Type 1)? We typically do not issue notice of decisions for building permits (Type 1), which are appealable to the hearing examiner. The folks who submitted comment letters are now asking when is the appeal deadline. In the notice of decision that they received it states "The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the judicial review of land use decision RCW 36.70C." Should we state it back to them or can we tell them 21 days from the date of issuance of DNS? 2.The comment period on the DNS expired on July 12th and we received four comment letters. Our understanding is that the comment period just means (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 demo Page 2 that the agency cannot take any action on the proposal until the comment period is over. Based on our review of the comment letters we do not believe we need to change our decision. We are waiting to get Boeing's response and will make the final decision at that time. All comment letters suggest that the city should have issued a MDNS instead of a DNS. Since the proposal included mitigation related to historic preservation we considered it part of the proposal and decided to issue a DNS as opposed to MDNS. Thanks for your input. I will probably set up a meeting with you tomorrow to go over this issue. Also, I have attached the four comment letters. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Minnie Dhaliwal d.painter15@comcast.net 07/14/2010 10:15 AM Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination cmoore@wa-trust.org; Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV; Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Diana, I am responding to your voice mail to Lynn regarding expiration of comment period. As the notice of decision and the SEPA determination that you received stated the comment period expired on July 12, 2010. The Notice of Decision also stated that the decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the judicial review of land use decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Since Lynn is on vacation the next couple of weeks feel free to contact me if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnic Dhaliwal rlanningSupervisor 1 City of Tukwila 206-4-31-3685 mcikaliwal@ci.tuicwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Crosscut article on planned Boeing demolition Page 1 From: "Diana Painter" <d.painter15@att.net> To: "Jack Pace" <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwil... Date: 07/17/2010 6:38 PM Subject: Crosscut article on planned Boeing demolition Hi Jack and Miranda, The attached article on the planned demolition of Boeing Plant 2 came out on Crosscut on Sat., fyi. Diana http://crosscut.com/2010/07/17/history/19981 /Seattle -s -history -at -risk -in -plans -for -Boeing -plant -demolition--- / Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 DNS Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Lynn Miranda; Mark D Clement Date: 07/19/2010 9:49 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 DNS Attachments: Fwd: Crosscut article on planned Boeing demolition CC: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Mark, Attached is another email from Diana referencing her article in Crosscut. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal rlanning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1206-1-31-36851 mcikaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement(alboeing.com> 07/13/2010 1:11 PM »> Lynn is there any more information or direction from your mtg today that you would like us at Boeing to respond too?. Laura Whitaker of Perkins Coie will be responding on behalf of the Boeing Co. shortly, and I wanted give her any late breaking information. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark. Cie-ment From: Lynn Miranda[mailto:ImirandaOci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 5:27 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: DNS Mark, we plan on getting together internally tomorrow to go over the concerns voiced in all 3 letters received today, which I've cc'd to you. Most likely well want Boeing to address all 3 letters in one response, but I'll get back to you tomorrow about that. Lynn (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Shelley Kerslake Date: 07/19/2010 11:23 AM Subject: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Attachments: Dhaliwal.PDF CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Shelley, Here is Boeing's response to comments received on the DNS for Plant 2 demolition. I can forward Boeing's response to all three parties who commented and let them know that there are no changes to the City's original decision. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks. Minnie »> "Allen, Joan D. (Perkins Coie)" <JAllenfterkinscoie.com> 07/19/2010 10:59 AM »> «Dhaliwal.PDF» Dear Ms. Dhaliwal, At Laura Whitaker's request, attached is a letter regarding the referenced matter. Please contact me if you have any problem opening or viewing the letter and I will resend. Thank you very much. Joan Allen I Perkins Coie LLP Legal Secretary 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 PHONE: 206.359.3267 FAX: 206.359.9000 E-MAIL: JAIIen@)oerkinscoie.com The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Dhaliwal.PDF Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we inform you that, unless expressly indicated otherwise, any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written by Perkins Coie LLP to be used, and cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein (or any attachments). * * * * * * * * * * NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Page 1 From: "Allen, Joan D. (Perkins Coie)" <JAllen@perkinscoie.com> To: <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/19/2010 11:27 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Attachments: Dhaliwal.PDF CC: "Whitaker, Laura (Perkins Coie)" <LWhitaker@perkinscoie.com> «Dhaliwal.PDF» At Laura Whitaker's request, attached is a letter sent today to Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal regarding the above matter. If you have any problem opening or viewing the document, please contact me and I'll resend. Thanks. Joan Allen 1 Perkins Coie LLP Legal Secretary 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 PHONE: 206.359.3267 FAX: 206.359.9000 E-MAIL: JAllen@perkinscoie.com The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Dhaliwal.PDF Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we inform you that, unless expressly indicated otherwise, any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written by Perkins Coie LLP to be used, and cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein (or any attachments). ********** NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 DNS Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Greg, Minnie Dhaliwal Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV 07/20/2010 4:19 PM Re: Boeing Plant 2 DNS Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1206-4.)I-36851 mdhaliwa�@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> 07/08/2010 4:55 PM »> «070810-06-KI_070810.pdf» Jack, attached, please find my comment letter regarding DNS E10-010 on the Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Feel free to give me a call or email if you have any questions, but fyi...1 will be out of the office until Tuesday July 13 as a result of the State's furlough day on Monday. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 1,1I., 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov ( file://www.dahp.wa.gov/ ) Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR ReportPDF Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Chris, Minnie Dhaliwal Chris Moore 07/20/2010 4:20 PM RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnic Dhaliwal Flanning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1206-1-51-56851 mcihaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re:DNS Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Diana, Minnie Dhaliwal Diana Painter 07/20/2010 4:23 PM Re:DNS Boeing Plant 2 Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie DJ,aliwal Planning5upervisor 1 City or Tukwila 1 zo6-451-5685 1 mciIaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Diana Painter" <d.oainterl5att.net> 07/14/2010 11:34 AM »> Hi Jack, I understand that Lynn is on vacation for two weeks. I am copying this comment letter to you. It contains a detailed discussion of mitigation for the proposed demolition of Plant 2, which I think is important to take into consideration in your refinement of the demolition plan, which at this time I believe is not adequate and has insufficient detail to mitigate for the loss of the building. I assume that Minnie has a copy of the letter, as she answered my recent email. Minnie, I made one correction in this letter. If you would replace the existing letter, I'd appreciate it. The correction is, I stated that I believe HABS/HAER documentation should be prepared to a Level Three. I think Level Two is appropriate and consistent with what the state has suggested. I am copying the letter to Greg Griffith and Michael Houser, as I understand they met with Boeing to craft early drafts of a mitigation plan. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com(htto://www.preservationplans.com/ ) (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> To: "'Minnie Dhaliwal"' <mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/20/2010 4:49 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination CC: "'Jack Pace" <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, 'Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tu... Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 2 Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning Supervisor I City of Tukwila 1 206-431-3685 1 mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Chris Moore Date: 07/21/2010 12:23 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Attachments: Boeing letter CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Chris, Attached is the letter you have requested. Let me know if you need anything else. Minnie Minnic Dhaliwal rlanningSupervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1206-431-56851 md&aliwaI@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> 07/20/2010 4:49 PM »> Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! www.wa-trust.org 1 http//www.wa-trust.org/ ) Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal jmailto:mdhaliwal(aci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 2 Minnie Minnie ()haiiwal rlanning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1 zo6-45 i-5685 1 mdhaliwalkkci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> To: 'Minnie Dhaliwal"' <mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/21/2010 12:30 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination CC: "'Jack Pace' <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "'Lynn Miranda"' <Imiranda@ci.tu... Minnie, Thank you for sending the letter. Unfortunately, I am unable to open the file in the format you sent. Is there a chance that you could email a pdf version of the letter? Alternatively, our fax number is 206-624-2410 if a fax is easier. Sorry for the difficulty. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 2 Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 12:23 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Attached is the letter you have requested. Let me know if you need anything else. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning Supervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-431-3685 mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> 07/20/2010 4:49 PM »> Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 3 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning Supervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-431-3685 I mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Chris Moore Date: 07/21/2010 12:42 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Attachments: Boeing letter.pdf CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Here it is in pdf format. »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore(awa-trust.orq> 07/21/2010 12:30 PM »> Minnie, Thank you for sending the letter. Unfortunately, I am unable to open the file in the format you sent. Is there a chance that you could email a pdf version of the letter? Alternatively, our fax number is 206-624-2410 if a fax is easier. Sorry for the difficulty. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation) www.wa-trust.org ( http://www.wa-trust.org/ ) Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal jmailto:mdhaliwal@aci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 12:23 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Attached is the letter you have requested. Let me know if you need anything else. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal rlanning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1206-1-51-56851 mdhaliwaaci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore(awa-trust.orq> 07/20/2010 4:49 PM »> (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 2 Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation) www.wa-trust.org http://www.wa-trust.org/ Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal jmailto:mdhaliwak ci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Tuesday; July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dlialiwal rlanning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1 zoo-+ i-3685 1 mdhaliwalk ci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Minnie, "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> "'Minnie Dhaliwal"' <mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us> 07/21/2010 1:01 PM RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination "'Jack Pace"' <jpace@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "'Lynn Miranda' <Imiranda@ci.tu... Thank you for sending. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 12:43 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination I. (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 2 Here it is in pdf format. »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> 07/21/2010 12:30 PM »> Minnie, Thank you for sending the letter. Unfortunately, I am unable to open the file in the format you sent. Is there a chance that you could email a pdf version of the letter? Alternatively, our fax number is 206-624-2410 if a fax is easier. Sorry for the difficulty. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA. 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboratio.i and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 12:23 PM To: Chris Moore (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 3 Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Attached is the letter you have requested. Let me know if you need anything else. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning Supervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-431-3685 I mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> 07/20/2010 4:49 PM »> Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell 1, (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Page 4 Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! <http://www.wa-trust.org/> www.wa-trust.org Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhal'wal Planning Supervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-431-3685 I mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Lynn Miranda; Mark D Clement Date: 08/19/2010 11:45 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Attachments: Boeing Plant two.pdf CC: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Mark, Attached is another letter from Diane Painter to US Department of Justice asking for Sec 106 review. Minnie Minnie ptialiwal rlanning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1 206-451-5685 l mdkaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> To: Minnie Dhaliwal <mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, Lynn Miranda <Imiranda@ci.... Date: 08/19/2010 3:09 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Hello, I was checking on the Demo permit D10-118, the permit tech said that it is in planning review. Could you give me a ECD when you would be complete?. Thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 11:46 AM To: Clement, Mark D; Lynn Miranda Cc: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Mark, Attached is another letter from Diane Painter to US Department of Justice asking for Sec 106 review. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning Supervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-431-3685 I mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us<mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us> (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - demo permit Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: mark.d.clement@boeing.com Date: 09/02/2010 11:12 AM Subject: demo permit Hi Mark Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier. I've been out of town. Wanted to let you know that everyone has signed off on the demo permit, and that the permit staff is coordinating with PW on issuance. Should be in the next few days. If you have a question on that timing, please give Jennifer Marshall a call @ 206.433.7165 Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Page 1 From: "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net> To: <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa. us> Date: 09/16/2010 2:27 PM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Hello Lynn, I was given your name by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia. I am trying to play catch-up ball on this proposed demolition and the information generated by it. To that end, do you have any documents that have been generated by the City and Owner that I could have access to? If possible, just e-mail them to me. That would be a good start. If needed, I could ciome by and pick them up. At your convenience, Best wishes and thank you in advance, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolnik@comcast.net (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: Teri Svedahl Date: 09/20/2010 9:24 AM Subject: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Hey there, does this guy need to fill out a request for public records? Lynn »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net> 09/16/2010 1:53 PM »> Hello Lynn, I was given your name by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia. I am trying to play catch-up ball on this proposed demolition and the information generated by it. To that end, do you have any documents that have been generated by the City and Owner that I could have access to? If possible, just e-mail them to me. That would be a good start. If needed, I could ciome by and pick them up. At your convenience, Best wishes and thank you in advance, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolnik@comcast.net (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov Date: 09/20/2010 9:40 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Attachments: E10-010- Boeing Plant 2 Demolition-SR.pdf Hi Greg, Got your voice mail. I believe you are looking for the Notice of Decision on the SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2? It contains the mitigation set forth by Boeing as a part of their application. Please find that document attached. If that's not what you were describing, please let me know. L9nn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Page 1 From: Teri Svedahl To: Lynn Miranda Date: 09/20/2010 10:00 AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Yes he does. I will contact him and send the form to him. Is this your project? I will probably just have him put in a request to review the file and flag what he needs copies of. Probably easiest.... »> Lynn Miranda 09/20/2010 9:24 AM »> Hey there, does this guy need to fill out a request for public records? Lynn »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik(comcast.net> 09/16/2010 1:53 PM »> Hello Lynn, I was given your name by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia. I am trying to play catch-up ball on this proposed demolition and the information generated by it. To that end, do you have any documents that have been generated by the City and Owner that I could have access to? If possible, just e-mail them to me. That would be a good start. If needed, I could ciome by and pick them up. At your convenience, Best wishes and thank you in advance, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 a rth u rm s ko l n i kCa1 co m ca st. n et (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition From: Lynn Miranda To: Teri Svedahl Date: 09/20/2010 10:01 AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition hold off on that for a bit - he is planning on calling me soon and I'll find out if he really needs it or what Thanks! »> Teri Svedahl 09/20/2010 10:00 AM »> Yes he does. I will contact him and send the form to him. Is this your project? I will probably just have him put in a request to review the file and flag what he needs copies of. Probably easiest.... »> Lynn Miranda 09/20/2010 9:24 AM »> Hey there, does this guy need to fill out a request for public records? Lynn »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net> 09/16/2010 1:53 PM »> Hello Lynn, I was given your name by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia. I am trying to play catch-up ball on this proposed demolition and the information generated by it. To that end, do you have any documents that have been generated by the City and Owner that I could have access to? If possible, just e-mail them to me. That would be a good start. If needed, I could ciome by and pick them up. At your convenience, Best wishes and thank you in advance, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolnik@comcast.net 1(11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> To: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 09/20/2010 10:11 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Yes, thank you Lynn for sending this. Yes, I believe this is what I was looking for... So, just to make sure I understand, this Notice of Decision is binding upon the company to provide the mitigation as identified in section 13 of the checklist? I know they have provided the documentation that is listed as part of the mitigation package. Does the City monitor the other provisions to make sure the mitigation is satisfied? How does that work. Thanks again! Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR_ReportPDF_Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 9:40 AM To: Griffith, Greg (DAHP) Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Hi Greg, Got your voice mail. I believe you are looking for the Notice of Decision on the SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2? It contains the mitigation set forth by Boeing as a part of their application. Please find that document attached. If that's not what you were describing, please let me know. Lynn (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page 2 Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 1, (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: Greg (DAHP) Griffith Date: 09/20/2010 3:45 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Hi Greg, Typically, the City will be using future permits sought by Boeing, such as clearing & grading, building permits, etc, as check in points to see what progress is being made towards the required mitigation measures. Lynn »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> 09/20/2010 10:11 AM »> Yes, thank you Lynn for sending this. Yes, I believe this is what I was looking for... So, just to make sure I understand, this Notice of Decision is binding upon the company to provide the mitigation as identified in section 13 of the checklist? I know they have provided the documentation that is listed as part of the mitigation package. Does the City monitor the other provisions to make sure the mitigation is satisfied? How does that work. Thanks again! Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.daho.wa.gov/documents/CR ReportPDF Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. From: Lynn Mirandajmailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.usj Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 9:40 AM To: Griffith, Greg (DAHP) Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Hi Greg, Got your voice mail. I believe you are looking for the Notice of Decision on the SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2? It contains the mitigation set forth by Boeing as a part of their application. Please find that document attached. If that's not what you were describing, please let me know. Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail (11/22/2010) LynnMiranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page1' From: "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> To: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 09/20/2010 3:48 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Thank you Lynn for answering my question. Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR_ReportPDF_Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 3:45 PM To: Griffith, Greg (DAHP) Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Hi Greg, Typically, the City will be using future permits sought by Boeing, such as clearing & grading, building permits, etc, as check in points to see what progress is being made towards the required mitigation measures. Lynn »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)' <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> 09/20/2010 10:11 AM »> Yes, thank you Lynn for sending this. Yes, I believe this is what I was looking for... So, just to make sure I understand, this Notice of Decision is binding upon the company to provide the mitigation as identified in section 13 of the checklist? I know they have provided the documentation that is listed as part of the mitigation package. Does the City monitor the other provisions to make sure the mitigation is satisfied? How does that work. Thanks again! (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Page 2 Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR_ReportPDF_Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 9:40 AM To: Griffith, Greg (DAHP) Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Hi Greg, Got your voice mail. I believe you are looking for the Notice of Decision on the SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2? It contains the mitigation set forth by Boeing as a part of their application. Please find that document attached. If that's not what you were describing, please let me know. Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: Arthur M. Skolnik Date: 09/20/2010 4:31 PM Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Attachments: NOD Demo permit FINAL.doc CC: Jack Pace; Shelley Kerslake Hi Arthur, Per our telephone conversation, I wanted to get back to you on the appeal process for the Boeing Plant 2 demolition permit. I've attached the Notice of Decision for the permit. In Section III: Your Appeal Rights, the applicable sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code are referenced. If you have any specific questions on the process I would encourage you to talk with your attorney. I also wanted to give you a heads up that there is a fee of $515 associated with the appeal of a Type 1 permit. Given the short duration of time left for the appeal, if you want to read any reports or materials associated with the project, you might consider coming in to review the file. If you call ahead of time I can have it ready for you. Lunn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik(acomcast.net> 09/16/2010 1:53 PM »> Hello Lynn, I was given your name by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia. I am trying to play catch-up ball on this proposed demolition and the information generated by it. To that end, do you have any documents that have been generated by the City and Owner that I could have access to? If possible, just e-mail them to me. That would be a good start. if needed, I could ciome by and pick them up. At your convenience, Best wishes and thank you in advance, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolnikCa�comcast.net (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Page 1 From: Arthur <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> To: Lynn Miranda <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 09/20/2010 5:05 PM Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Thank you Lynn! may take you up on the file viewing. I'll call first. Art Sent from my iPhone On Sep 20, 2010, at 4:31 PM, "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> wrote: > Hi Arthur, > Per our telephone conversation, I wanted to get back to you on the > appeal process for the Boeing Plant 2 demolition permit. I've > attached the Notice of Decision for the permit. In Section III: Your > Appeal Rights, the applicable sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code > are referenced. If you have any specific questions on the process I > would encourage you to talk with your attorney. > I also wanted to give you a heads up that there is a fee of $515 > associated with the appeal of a Type 1 permit. > Given the short duration of time left for the appeal, if you want to > read any reports or materials associated with the project, you might > consider coming in to review the file. If you call ahead of time I > can have it ready for you. > Lynn > Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner > 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA > 98188 > Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm > P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail > »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net> 09/16/2010 1:53 > PM»> > Hello Lynn, > I was given your name by the Department of Archaeology and Historic > Preservation in Olympia. I am trying to play catch-up ball on this > proposed demolition and the information generated by it. To that > end, do you have any documents that have been generated by the City > and Owner that I could have access to? If possible, just e-mail them > to me. That would be a good start. If needed, I could ciome by and > pick them up. > At your convenience, 1, (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 proposed demolition Page 2 > Best wishes and thank you in advance, > Art > Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA > President, > THE SKOLNIK COMPANY > 4449 Nassau Ave. NE > Tacoma, Washington 98422 > Tel: 253.517.3745 > cell: 206.669.5048 > Fax: 253.517.3746 > arthurmskolnik@comcast.net > <NOD Demo permit FINAL.doc> (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Page 1 From: "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net> To: <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 09/21/2010 8:41 AM Subject: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition From: Arthur M. Skolnik [mailto:ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:56 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition After conferring with my attorney, and having to decide if filing an appeal to the City of Tukwila's issuance of a demolition permit on Sept. 7 was worth while, I had to make the difficult decision to not submit by the appeal deadline of 5 pm today. It would be too little too late! And, it would only provide a brief delay to the inevitable. I was hoping that the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation would have completed it's investigation of any federal government action that might adversely effecting this National Register eligible site. But, there is no news as of this e-mail. So, I regretfully am not filing an appeal, which is the final step in the process of the demolition. Standing back from this pending sad loss, there are things that have shone to be insufficient in our preservation tool box that might have provided a better means of being effective in this kind of situation. First, that the City of Tukwila, or any other city, can have NO preservation legislation, thus eliminating the public discussion of the significance of historic sites within their jurisdiction. State legislation should be introduced to require every city and county jurisdiction to create a landmark process with a citizen board and nominating procedure. A minimum standard should be produced as a guide to those communities. And, MORE INCENTIVES that can expand the discussion of how to effectively save and preserve sites such as the Boeing Plant 2. There needs to be an ongoing roundtable of interested parties, whose job it is to convenes annually and produces items for consideration for the development of new and more effective incentives at every level of government and public corporations. It just goes to show that not every endangered site gets the attention that is needed to turn things around. The discussion needs to be expanded. Regretfully, Art (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Page 2 Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolnik@comcast.net (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Page 1m,. From: Lynn Miranda To: Jack Pace; Minnie Dhaliwal; Shelley Kerslake Date: 09/21/2010 9:07 AM Subject: Fwd: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Looks like there will NOT be an appeal of the demo permit for Plant 2. See below. »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@ comcast.net> 09/21/2010 8:40 AM »> From: Arthur M. Skolnik fmailto:ArthurMSkolnik(alcomcast.net1 Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:56 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition After conferring with my attorney, and having to decide if filing an appeal to the City of Tukwila's issuance of a demolition permit on Sept. 7 was worth while, I had to make the difficult decision to not submit by the appeal deadline of 5 pm today. It would be too little too late! And, it would only provide a brief delay to the inevitable. I was hoping that the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation would have completed it's investigation of any federal government action that might adversely effecting this National Register eligible site. But, there is no news as of this e-mail. So, I regretfully am not filing an appeal, which is the final step in the process of the demolition. Standing back from this pending sad loss, there are things that have shone to be insufficient in our preservation tool box that might have provided a better means of being effective in this kind of situation. First, that the City of Tukwila, or any other city, can have NO preservation legislation, thus eliminating the public discussion of the significance of historic sites within their jurisdiction. State legislation should be introduced to require every city and county jurisdiction to create a landmark process with a citizen board and nominating procedure. A minimum standard should be produced as a guide to those communities. And, MORE INCENTIVES that can expand the discussion of how to effectively save and preserve sites such as the Boeing Plant 2. There needs to be an ongoing roundtable of interested parties, whose job it is to convenes annually and produces items for consideration for the development of new and more effective incentives at every level of government and public corporations. It just goes to show that not every endangered site gets the attention that is needed to turn things around. The discussion needs to be expanded. Regretfully, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave. NE (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Page 2 Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolnikacomcast. net (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: Arthur M. Skolnik Date: 09/21/2010 9:17 AM Subject: Re: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Art - Thanks for letting me know... Lynn »> "Arthur M. Skolnik" <ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.net> 09/21/2010 8:40 AM »> From: Arthur M. Skolnik jmailto:ArthurMSkolnik@comcast.netj Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:56 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition After conferring with my attorney, and having to decide if filing an appeal to the City of Tukwila's issuance of a demolition permit on Sept. 7 was worth while, I had to make the difficult decision to not submit by the appeal deadline of 5 pm today. It would be too little too late! And, it would only provide a brief delay to the inevitable. I was hoping that the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation would have completed it's investigation of any federal government action that might adversely effecting this National Register eligible site. But, there is no news as of this e-mail. So, I regretfully am not filing an appeal, which is the final step in the process of the demolition. Standing back from this pending sad loss, there are things that have shone to be insufficient in our preservation tool box that might have provided a better means of being effective in this kind of situation. First, that the City of Tukwila, or any other city, can have NO preservation legislation, thus eliminating the public discussion of the significance of historic sites within their jurisdiction. State legislation should be introduced to require every city and county jurisdiction to create a landmark process with a citizen board and nominating procedure. A minimum standard should be produced as a guide to those communities. And, MORE INCENTIVES that can expand the discussion of how to effectively save and preserve sites such as the Boeing Plant 2. There needs to be an ongoing roundtable of interested parties, whose job it is to convenes annually and produces items for consideration for the development of new and more effective incentives at every level of government and public corporations. It just goes to show that not every endangered site gets the attention that is needed to turn things around. The discussion needs to be expanded. Regretfully, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President, THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 11(11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: FW: Boeing Plant 2 proposed Demolition Page 2 4449 Nassau Ave. NE Tacoma, Washington 98422 Tel: 253.517.3745 cell: 206.669.5048 Fax: 253.517.3746 arthurmskolniki5 comcast.net (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 1 From: "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> To: "Lynn Miranda" <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 10/07/2010 12:31 PM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: mark.d.clement@boeing.com Date: 10/11/2010 10:03 AM Subject: Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Mark, I received this inquiry re: the SEPA for the Plant 2 demolition. Could you let me know if you looked into his concerns when preparing the checklist? Thanks! Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> 10/07/2010 12:30 PM »> Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: arthurmskolnik Date: 10/13/2010 9:19 AM Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Art, I wanted to let you know that I've forwarded your questions to my contact at Boeing, but haven't yet received a response. I can say that as part of their checklist, Boeing indicated that no known archaeological landmarks are on site. Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this. When I receive a response from Boeing I'll forward it on to you. Regards, Lunn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik((comcast.net> 10/07/2010 12:30 PM »> Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 1 From: "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> To: "'Lynn Miranda' <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 10/13/2010 11:46 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Thanks you Lynn I'll look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Thanks, again. Art From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:19 AM To: arthurmskolnik Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Art, I wanted to let you know that I've forwarded your questions to my contact at Boeing, but haven't yet received a response. I can say that as part of their checklist, Boeing indicated that no known archaeological landmarks are on site. Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this. When I receive a response from Boeing I'll forward it on to you. Regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm 1(11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 2 P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> 10/07/2010 12:30 PM »> Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Fwd: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 1 From: Lynn Miranda To: mark.d.clement@boeing.com Date: 10/13/2010 1:23 PM Subject: Fwd: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Mark, FYI. See below. Do you have a response? Thanks Lynn »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik(acomcast.net> 10/13/2010 11:45 AM »> Thanks you Lynn I11 look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Thanks, again. Art From:Lynn Miranda jmailto:lmirandaci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:19 AM To: arthurmskolnik Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Art, I wanted to let you know that I've forwarded your questions to my contact at Boeing, but haven't yet received a response. I can say that as part of their checklist, Boeing indicated that no known archaeological landmarks are on site. Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this. When I receive a response from Boeing I'll forward it on to you. Regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm PPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik(acomcast.net> 10/07/2010 12:30 PM »> Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. ILO Lynn Miranda - Fwd: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Page 2 When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolriik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - SEPA schedule From: Lynn Miranda To: mark.d.clement@boeing.com Date: 10/15/2010 10:41 AM Subject: SEPA schedule CC: Bill Rambo; Jennifer Marshall Hi Mark, It has come to my attention that we need to have a final planning inspection on the demolition of Plant 2. So, please add a Planning Final to your Inspection Card for permit #D10-118. Also, in order to track Boeing's progress towards the mitigation measures for the historic impacts proposed in your SEPA application, we are asking you to submit a schedule/timeline for those measures. This can be in a letter or memo addressed to me. Please let me know if you have any questions. Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm kipPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail -A file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CB82FDCtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C3341\GW} 00001... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: SEPA schedule From: "Clement, Mark D" To: Lynn Miranda Date: 10/19/2010 3:55 PM Subject: RE: SEPA schedule OK will do Mark Clement CeII phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark, Clement From: Lynn Miranda[mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:42 AM To: Clement, Mark D Cc: Bill Rambo; Jennifer Marshall Subject: SEPA schedule Hi Mark, It has come to my attention that we need to have a final planning inspection on the demolition of Plant 2. So, please add a Planning Final to your Inspection Card for permit #D10-118. Also, in order to track Boeing's progress towards the mitigation measures for the historic impacts proposed in your SEPA application, we are asking you to submit a schedule/timeline for those measures. This can be in a letter or memo addressed to me. Please let me know if you have any questions. Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm lip Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail file://C:\temp\XPGrp Wise\4CBDBF 82tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 C3D61 \GW } 0000... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2:Fwd: RE: Permit jurisdiction From: Lynn Miranda To: Minnie Dhaliwal Date: 10/25/2010 9:34 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2:Fwd: RE: Permit jurisdiction Hi Minnie Thanks for sending me this. Since I'd never seen this email, I did not attach the conditions mentioned in the email: "Both permits should reference each other, and state as a condition that no work could proceed on the demo until both permits have been issued." Is this going to be a problem?? »> Minnie Dhaliwal 10/22/2010 9:46 AM »> Here is another one... »> "Siu, Jon" <Jon.Siu@seattle.gov> 02/18/2010 10:43 AM »> Hi, Bob: Thanks for letting us know about this. I've talked it over with Andy Higgins (who co -manages our reviewers with me) and we have some concerns about the precedent this would set, and we do not feel a MOA would be appropriate. Therefore, our conclusion is Boeing should be applying for permits with each of us (Tukwila and Seattle) for the work being performed within our jurisdictions. So for instance, with the 2-40 building, you would issue a demo permit for the portion of the building within the City of Tukwila boundaries, and we would issue one for the portion in the City of Seattle. Both permits should reference each other, and state as a condition that no work could proceed on the demo until both permits have been issued. (It is worth noting that if the portion of the building within Seattle being demolished is large enough, it could trigger SEPA review, plus there may be Shoreline issues that would trigger the need for a Land Use permit.) For the 2-31 building, if the only work being performed is within the Tukwila boundaries, then we would not need a permit. However, if the work crosses into the City of Seattle limits, then Boeing needs to apply with us for a permit for that portion. Let us know if you have questions. Jon From: Bob Benedicto [mailto:bbenedicto@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 4:03 PM To: Siu, Jon Subject: Permit jurisdiction Hi Jon, file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC54F28tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4741\GW}00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 2 of 2 We will be having a pre application meeting with representatives of the Boeing Company. Boeing is proposing to demolish buildings at Plant II and do shoreline remediation in the area of said Plant II. They will be demolishing the 2-40,2-41,2-44 and 2-49 Buildings and they are going to do a boiler house upgrade to the 2-31 Building. Herein lies a potential issue: The City of Seattle jurisdictional boundary runs through a (relatively small) corner of the 2-40 Building and the boundary also runs through approximately a third of the 2-31 Building. I intend to issue a demolition permit for the 2-40 Building and a tenant improvement permit for the boiler house upgrade. Is this a problem for you? If so, do you feel that we need to produce some kind of memorandum of agreement? Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila 206/431-3675 bbenedicto(aci.tukwila.wa.us file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC54F28tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4741 \GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status From: "arthurmskolnik" To: Date: 10/25/2010 7:27 PM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status CC: "Gordon, Karen" , "Chris Moore" , "Brooks, Allyson (DAHP)" , "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" , "Clark, Sally" , "Leonard Garfield" , , "knute berger" , "knute berger" , "Lynn Miranda" , "Richard Conlin" , "Sodt, Sarah" "Chave, Beth" "David Brewster" "Houser, Michael (DAHP)" "seattleweekly.com" , Hello Diane, I am doing some timely and critical research on the processing of a demolition permit application by DPD for the above property and need to know when it was applied for, and if and when the permit was issued. I would appreciate your expedited attention to this matter since I was told by the SEPA administrator in Tukwila, Lynn Miranda, with her reference to Boeings comments, that Seattle already issued a demolition permit. I have no knowledge of such action, but would find that action odd.. I have recently communicated with Karen Gordon about this property, who told me adamantly in writing, over several e- mails, that she was asked by someone to find out if a portion of the Boeing Plant 2 was in Seattle's jurisdiction and was told by someone in DPD that it was NOT, therefore not a concern for the LPB process. With that advice, she did nothing else about I, especially involving the LPB. We now know that that DPD information was false, as evidence by the application for a Seattle demolition permit and statements by Tukwila and Boeing. Legally, DPD , when considering a demolition application for a potential historic property, would contact Karen Gordon or staff for consultation as to any LPB jurisdiction and requirements. If that consultation was NOT initiated by DPD, which is what Karen is saying, then the issuance of such a permit must be halted in order to have the LPB process take place. And, if such a LPB process finds the property to be designated as a Seattle Landmark, with placement of controls and incentives, that permit request would be denied, pending appeals. So in advance of any input from you, and until this unfortunate and potentially illegal incident is clarified, I along with others interested in the significance of this historic structure, and its role in putting Boeing on the World map, we respectfully request that your department take NO action and reverse any other previous actions, from this day forward, that would cause the partial or total destruction of the Boeing Plant 2, until such time as the LPB process is finalized. Thank you again for your expeditious attention to this request. I look forward to hearing back from you and would be willing to meet to discuss this matter further, at your convenience. Respectfully, Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC5DA3Ftuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4DD 1\GW} 0000... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status From: "Brooks, Allyson (DAHP)" To: "arthurmskolnik" , Date: 10/26/2010 8:28 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status CC: "Gordon, Karen" , "Chris Moore" , "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" , "Clark, Sally" , "Leonard Garfield" , , "knute berger" , "knute Berger" , "Lynn Miranda" , "Richard Conlin" , "Sodt, Sarah" , "Chave, Beth" , , "David Brewster" , , , "Houser, Michael (DAHP)" , , "seattleweekly.com" , We looked into this using our GIS system. The very northern most tip of the building falls in Seattle, the remainder is in Tukwila. However, in doing an area calculation we determined that the Seattle portion is less than 1% of the building..I think we calculated approximately .3% of the building falls in Seattle. Again, the boundary just crosses the northern most tip. I don't know what this means legally but just wanted you to know that we looked into it and less than .5% of the building seems to be in Seattle, the remaining 99.5% is definitely in Tukwila. Hope this helps. All the best Allyson Allyson Brooks Ph.D. Director/State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Ph: 360-586-3066 allyson.brooks@dahp.wa.gov Please note: As of Sept. 22nd 2008, DAHP will have new office hours. The agency will be open from 7-5:30 on M-Thurs and closed on Fridays. Our office hours are 7AM - 5:30PM Monday - Thursday, closed on Fridays From: arthurmskolnik [mailto:arthurmskolnik@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 7:28 PM To: Diane.Sugimura@ci.seattle.wa.us Cc: Gordon, Karen; Chris Moore; Brooks, Allyson (DAHP); Griffith, Greg (DAHP); Clark, Sally; Leonard Garfield; ebarnett@seattleweekly.com; knute berger; knute berger; Lynn Miranda; Richard Conlin; Sodt, Sarah; Chave, Beth; cenlow@hotmail.com; David Brewster; iwall@serv.net; jgodden@seattletimes.com; Houser, Michael (DAHP); nickelt@aol.com; seattleweekly.com; tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status Hello Diane, I am doing some timely and critical research on the processing of a demolition permit application by DPD for the file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC69145tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4E71 \GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 2 of 2 above property and need to know when it was applied for, and if and when the permit was issued. I would appreciate your expedited attention to this matter since I was told by the SEPA administrator in Tukwila, Lynn Miranda, with her reference to Boeings comments, that Seattle already issued a demolition permit. I have no knowledge of such action, but would find that action odd.. I have recently communicated with Karen Gordon about this property, who told me adamantly in writing, over several e-mails, that she was asked by someone to find out if a portion of the Boeing Plant 2 was in Seattle's jurisdiction and was told by someone in DPD that it was NOT, therefore not a concern for the LPB process. With that advice, she did nothing else about I, especially involving the LPB. We now know that that DPD information was false, as evidence by the application for a Seattle demolition permit and statements by Tukwila and Boeing. Legally, DPD , when considering a demolition application for a potential historic property, would contact Karen Gordon or staff for consultation as to any LPB jurisdiction and requirements. If that consultation was NOT initiated by DPD, which is what Karen is saying, then the issuance of such a permit must be halted in order to have the LPB process take place. And, if such a LPB process finds the property to be designated as a Seattle Landmark, with placement of controls and incentives, that permit request would be denied, pending appeals. So in advance of any input from you, and until this unfortunate and potentially illegal incident is clarified, I along with others interested in the significance of this historic structure, and its role in putting Boeing on the World map, we respectfully request that your department take NO action and reverse any other previous actions, from this day forward, that would cause the partial or total destruction of the Boeing Plant 2, until such time as the LPB process is finalized. Thank you again for your expeditious attention to this request. I look forward to hearing back from you and would be willing to meet to discuss this matter further, at your convenience. Respectfully, Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 93422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC69145tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4E71\GW} 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status From: "Brooks, Allyson (DAHP)" To: "arthurmskolnik" , Date: 10/26/2010 8:35 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status CC: "Gordon, Karen" , "Chris Moore" , "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" , "Clark, Sally" , "Leonard Garfield" , , "knute berger" , "knute berger" , "Lynn Miranda" , "Richard Conlin" , "Sodt, Sarah" "Chave, Beth" "David Brewster" "Houser, Michael (DAHP)" "seattleweekly.com" , Attachments: "Gordon, Karen" , "Chris Moore" , "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" , "Clark, Sally" , "Leonard Garfield" , , "knute berger" , "knute berger" , "Lynn Miranda" , "Richard Conlin" , "Sodt, Sarah" "Chave, Beth" "David Brewster" "Houser, Michael (DAHP)" "seattleweekly.com" , Attached is what our GIS showed. Hope this helps. All the best Allyson Allyson Brooks Ph.D. Director/State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Ph: 360-586-3066 allyson.brooks@dahp.wa.gov Please note: As of Sept. 22nd 2008, DAHP will have new office hours. The agency will be open from 7-5:30 on M-Thurs and closed on Fridays. Our office hours are 7AM - 5:30PM Monday - Thursday, closed on Fridays From: arthurmskolnik [mailto:arthurmskolnik@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 7:28 PM To: Diane.Sugimura@ci.seattle.wa.us Cc: Gordon, Karen; Chris Moore; Brooks, Allyson (DAHP); Griffith, Greg (DAHP); Clark, Sally; Leonard Garfield; ebarnett@seattleweekly.com; knute berger; knute berger; Lynn Miranda; Richard Conlin; Sodt, Sarah; Chave, Beth; cenlow@hotmail.com; David Brewster; iwall@serv.net; jgodden@seattletimes.com; Houser, Michael (DAHP); nickelt@aol.com; seattleweekly.com; tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status Hello Diane, I am doing some timely and critical research on the processing of a demolition permit application by DPD for the above property and need to know when it was applied for, and if and when the permit was issued. I would file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC692DEtuk-mail6300-po100172667711 C4E91\GW} 00001... 11/22/2010 Page 2 of 2 appreciate your expedited attention to this matter since I was told by the SEPA administrator in Tukwila, Lynn Miranda, with her reference to Boeings comments, that Seattle already issued a demolition permit. I have no knowledge of such action, but would find that action odd.. have recently communicated with Karen Gordon about this property, who told me adamantly in writing, over several e-mails, that she was asked by someone to find out if a portion of the Boeing Plant 2 was in Seattle's jurisdiction and was told by someone in DPD that it was NOT, therefore not a concern for the LPB process. With that advice, she did nothing else about I, especially involving the LPB. We now know that that DPD information was false, as evidence by the application for a Seattle demolition permit and statements by Tukwila and Boeing. Legally, DPD, when considering a demolition application for a potential historic property, would contact Karen Gordon or staff for consultation as to any LPB jurisdiction and requirements. If that consultation was NOT initiated by DPD, which is what Karen is saying, then the issuance of such a permit must be halted in order to have the LPB process take place. And, if such a LPB process finds the property to be designated as a Seattle Landmark, with placement of controls and incentives, that permit request would be denied, pending appeals. So in advance of any input from you, and until this unfortunate and potentially illegal incident is clarified, I along with others interested in the significance of this historic structure, and its role in putting Boeing on the World map, we respectfully request that your department take NO action and reverse any other previous actions, from this day forward, that would cause the partial or total destruction of the Boeing Plant 2, until such time as the LPB process is finalized. Thank you again for your expeditious attention to this request. I look forward to hearing back from you and would be willing to meet to discuss this matter further, at your convenience. Respectfully, Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC692DEtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4E91\GW } 00001... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 3 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status From: "arthurmskolnik" To: "'Brooks, Allyson (DAHP)"' , Date: 10/26/2010 9:03 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status CC: "'Gordon, Karen' , "'Chris Moore" , "'Griffith, Greg (DAHP)"' , "'Clark, Sally"' , "'Leonard Garfield' , , "'knute berger"' , "'knute berger"' , "'Lynn Miranda'" , "'Richard Conlin' , "'Sodt, Sarah' , "'Chave, Beth' , , "'David Brewster' , , "'Houser, Michael (DAHP)' , , "'seattleweekly.com"' , Allyson, Thanks for the calculation, but that is a technicality. If a portion of Plant 2 is in Seattle, it is under the jurisdiction of Seattle. Thus, that portion is subject to the city's land use regulations which includes the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. Due to the age of the building, DPD must consult the Landmarks staff as to the potential of its landmark significance and require the preparation of a nomination form and processed prior to a decision on the Seattle portion of the demolition. It appears that Seattle got the cart out front of the horse accidentally or on purpose. We will see. In any event this needs to be corrected and the proper procedures followed. This also has some bearing on what Tukwila allowed since there is no evidence that there has been any investigation of potential prehistoric or historic archaeological resources that could be harmed by the proposed demolition and disturbance of soil. All data gathered to date are insufficient to fully understand the potential of this property's cultural resources. Yet the SEPA process allowed Boeing to claim that no cultural resources would be effected. How could this be without a professional investigation? We have asked Boeing to supply us with evidence that, prior to the issuance of the Tukwila demolition permit, it hired a professional with expertise in the Duwamish waterway prehistory and history to investigate the likelihood of this property yielding cultural resources. As of this e-mail, Boeing has not responded to us or to the City of Tukwila. We believe that the Tukwila demolition should be stayed until such time as all the facts have been put on the table and reevaluated in light of these shortcomings. We'll see what Diane Sugimura comes back with. Thanks for your input. Art From: Brooks, Allyson (DAHP) [mailto:Allyson.Brooks@DAHP.WA.GOV] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 8:28 AM To: arthurmskolnik; Diane.Sugimura@ci.seattle.wa.us Cc: Gordon, Karen; Chris Moore; Griffith, Greg (DAHP); Clark, Sally; Leonard Garfield; ebarnett@seattleweekly.com; knute berger; knute berger; Lynn Miranda; Richard Conlin; Sodt, Sarah; Chave, Beth; cenlow@hotmail.com; David Brewster; iwall@serv.net; jgodden@seattletimes.com; Houser, Michael (DAHP); nickelt@aol.com; seattleweekly.com; tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status We looked into this using our GIS system. The very northern most tip of the building falls in Seattle, the remainder is in Tukwila. However, in doing an area calculation we determined that the Seattle portion is less than 1% of the building..I think we calculated approximately .3% of the building falls in Seattle. Again, the boundary just crosses the northern most tip. I don't know what this means legally but just wanted you to know file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC69974tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4EB 1 \GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 2 of 3 that we looked into it and less than .5% of the building seems to be in Seattle, the remaining 99.5% is definitely in Tukwila. Hope this helps. All the best Allyson Allyson Brooks Ph.D. Director/State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Ph: 360-586-3066 allyson.brooks(dahp.wa.gov Please note: As of Sept. 22nd 2008, DAHP will have new office hours. The agency will be open from 7-5:30 on M-Thurs and closed on Fridays. Our office hours are 7AM - 5:30PM Monday - Thursday, closed on Fridays From: arthurmskolnik [mailto:arthurmskolnik@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 7:28 PM To: Diane.Sugimura@ci.seattle.wa.us Cc: Gordon, Karen; Chris Moore; Brooks, Allyson (DAHP); Griffith, Greg (DAHP); Clark, Sally; Leonard Garfield; ebarnett@seattleweekly.com; knute berger; knute berger; Lynn Miranda; Richard Conlin; Sodt, Sarah; Chave, Beth; cenlow@hotmail.com; David Brewster; iwall@serv.net; jgodden@seattletimes.com; Houser, Michael (DAHP); nickelt@aol.com; seattleweekly.com; tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Partial Demolition: Application for demolition permit status Hello Diane, I am doing some timely and critical research on the processing of a demolition permit application by DPD for the above property and need to know when it was applied for, and if and when the permit was issued. I would appreciate your expedited attention to this matter since I was told by the SEPA administrator in Tukwila, Lynn Miranda, with her reference to Boeings comments, that Seattle already issued a demolition permit. I have no knowledge of such action, but would find that action odd.. I have recently communicated with Karen Gordon about this property, who told me adamantly in writing, over several e-mails, that she was asked by someone to find out if a portion of the Boeing Plant 2 was in Seattle's jurisdiction and was told by someone in DPD that it was NOT, therefore not a concern for the LPB process. With that advice, she did nothing else about I, especially involving the LPB. We now know that that DPD information was false, as evidence by the application for a Seattle demolition permit and statements by Tukwila and Boeing. Legally, DPD , when considering a demolition application for a potential historic property, would contact Karen Gordon or staff for consultation as to any LPB jurisdiction and requirements. If that consultation was NOT initiated by DPD, which is what Karen is saying, then the issuance of such a permit must be halted in order to have the LPB process take place. And, if such a LPB process finds the property to be designated as a Seattle file://C :\temp\:XPGrp Wise\4CC69974tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 C4EB 1 \GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 3 of 3 Landmark, with placement of controls and incentives, that permit request would be denied, pending appeals. So in advance of any input from you, and until this unfortunate and potentially illegal incident is clarified, I along with others interested in the significance of this historic structure, and its role in putting Boeing on the World map, we respectfully request that your department take NO action and reverse any other previous actions, from this day forward, that would cause the partial or total destruction of the Boeing Plant 2, until such time as the LPB process is finalized. Thank you again for your expeditious attention to this request. I look forward to hearing back from you and would be willing to meet to discuss this matter further, at your convenience. Respectfully, Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC69974tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4EB 1\GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 demolition permit from Seattle DPD From: To: Date: Subject: CC: "arthurmskolnik" Page 1 of 1 10/26/2010 12:32 PM Boeing Plant 2 demolition permit from Seattle DPD "Gordon, Karen" , "Sodt, Sarah" , "Chave, Beth" , "Brooks, Allyson Miranda" , "knute berger" , "knute berger" , "Chris Moore" , "Clark, Attachments: "Gordon, Karen" , "Sodt, Sarah" , "Chave, Beth" , "Brooks, Allyson Miranda" , "knute berger" , "knute berger" , "Chris Moore" , "Clark, (DAHP)" , "Lynn Sally" , (DAHP)" , "Lynn Sally" , Diane, Here is the demolition permit issued in June for the portion of the Plant 2 building. As was noted earlier, NO communication with historic preservation staff was pursued BY DPD prior to the issuance of this permit. Thus procedure and responsibility were ignored, avoiding the city's Landmark Preservation Ordinance. This substantiates the need to stay the demolition, until such time as the LPB has the opportunity to review and act on the significance of this structure to the citizens of Seattle. Art file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC6CA59tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C4F61\GW} 00001... 11/22/2010 (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing plant 2 Questions Page 1 From: "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> To: Lynn Miranda <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 10/27/2010 8:11 AM Subject: Boeing plant 2 Questions Attachments: pl2 archimage.pdf Lynn thanks for the e-mail My responses are noted in red. Question 1: When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? Response: Yes. For purposes of a separate project proposed along the shoreline of the Duwamish River adjacent to Plant 2, Boeing contacted the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in 1999 to request information regarding potential significant cultural resources located in the vicinity of the project. As indicated in the letter attached, DAHP concluded, based on its review of the Washington State Archaeological and Historic Site Inventories, that "no resources included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places have been recorded in the identified project area." The letter goes on to state that..."In the event that archaeological or historic materials are discovered during project activities, work in the immediate vicinity should be discontinued, the area secured, and this office notified." Since 1999, certain buildings located on the Plant 2 site have been determined eligible for listing on the National Historic Register. However, DAHP's conclusion regarding the lack of site listing on the Washington State Archaeological Inventory remains current. Question 2: I'll look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Response: See above for information regarding background research conducted by Boeing and DAHP to support information included in the project's SEPA Checklist indicating that there are no known archaeological resources in the project area. With respect to protocols established to protect archaeological resources that may be encountered during project construction, the Checklist states, consistent with the DAHP guidance described above, that "[if] artifacts are uncovered during the Plant 2 project, work in that area will be halted pending notification and response from appropriate agencies." In addition, the Staff Report issued by the City at the time of Plant 2 project approval addresses the required construction protocol in greater detail: Archaeological artifacts: Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), the County/City planning office, the affected Tribe(s) and the county coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is required . Please let me know if you require further information regarding this matter. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:24 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: Fwd: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al 1, (11/22/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing plant 2 Questions Page 2 Hi Mark, FYI. See below. Do you have a response? Thanks Lynn »> "arthurrnskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> 10/13/2010 11:45 AM »> Thanks you Lynn I'll look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Thanks, again. Art From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:19 AM To: arthurmskolnik Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Art, I wanted to let you know that I've forwarded your questions to my contact at Boeing, but haven't yet received a response. I can say that as part of their checklist, Boeing indicated that no known archaeological landmarks are on site. Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this. When I receive a response from Boeing I'll forward it on to you. Regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurrnskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net<mailto:arthurmskolnik@comcast.net» 10/07/2010 12:30 PM >:» Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) Page 1 of 3 Lynn Miranda - Fwd: Boeing plant 2 Questions From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Lynn Miranda Arthur M. Skolnik 10/27/2010 9:13 AM Fwd: Boeing plant 2 Questions Art - here are Boeing's responses to your questions re: historic archaeological resources. Lynn »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> 10/27/2010 8:10 AM »> Lynn thanks for the e-mail My responses are noted in red. Question 1: When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? Response: Yes. For purposes of a separate project proposed along the shoreline of the Duwamish River adjacent to Plant 2, Boeing contacted the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in 1999 to request information regarding potential significant cultural resources located in the vicinity of the project. As indicated in the letter attached, DAHP concluded, based on its review of the Washington State Archaeological and Historic Site Inventories, that "no resources included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places have been recorded in the identified project area." The letter goes on to state that..."In the event that archaeological or historic materials are discovered during project activities, work in the immediate vicinity should be discontinued, the area secured, and this office notified." Since 1999, certain buildings located on the Plant 2 site have been determined eligible for listing on the National Historic Register. However, DAHP's conclusion regarding the lack of site listing on the Washington State Archaeological Inventory remains current. Question 2: I'II look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Response: See above for information regarding background research conducted by Boeing and DAHP to support information included in the project's SEPA Checklist indicating that there are no known archaeological resources in the project area. With respect to protocols established to protect archaeological resources that may be encountered during project construction, the Checklist states, consistent with the DAHP guidance described above, that file://C:\temp\XPGrp Wise\4CC7ED2Dtuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 C 5181 \GW } 00001... 11/22/2010 Page 2 of 3 "[if] artifacts are uncovered during the Plant 2 project, work in that area will be halted pending notification and response from appropriate agencies." In addition, the Staff Report issued by the City at the time of Plant 2 project approval addresses the required construction protocol in greater detail: Archaeological artifacts: Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), the County/City planning office, the affected Tribe(s) and the county coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is required . Please let me know if you require further information regarding this matter. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:24 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: Fwd: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Mark, FYI. See below. Do you have a response? Thanks Lynn »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net> 10/13/2010 11:45 AM »> Thanks you Lynn I'll look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Thanks, again. Art From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:19 AM To: arthurmskolnik Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Art, I wanted to let you know that I've forwarded your questions to my contact at Boeing, but haven't yet received a response. I can say that as part of their checklist, Boeing indicated that no known archaeological landmarks are on site. Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this. When I receive a response from Boeing I'll forward it on to you. file://C:\temp\XPGrp Wise\4CC7ED2Dtuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 C5181 \GW } 00001... 11/22/2010 Page 3 of 3 Regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik@comcast.net<mailto:arthurmskolnik@comcast.net» 10/07/2010 12:30 PM »> Hello again Lynn, I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC7ED2Dtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C5181\GW } 00001... 11/22/2010 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing plant 2 Questions From: "arthurmskolnik" To: "'Lynn Miranda'" Date: 10/27/2010 10:25 AM Subject: RE: Boeing plant 2 Questions CC: "Brooks, Allyson (DAHP)" Thanks you Lynn. Page 1 of 4 Unfortunately, it illustrates that the project proponents only relied on the State's inventory, which is nowhere near complete or thoroughly researched for sites like this one, and which is in a highly sensitive area of potential cultural resources likely to yield information and artifacts and add to our understanding of prehistoric and historic cultural development. This least -effort example of minimal data gathering, for such a large project, is deplorable and should not have been used as justification to check the SEPA box that states no cultural resources will be effected. respectfully request, that in light of this insufficient effort and knowledge, that the City of Tukwila STAY the implementation of the demolition and site disturbance until such time as the proponent develop more data through the work and study of professionally trained and experienced historians and archaeologists who have unique knowledge and experience in the historic and prehistoric Duwamish waterway cultural development. To do less, is to risk the loss and or damage to irretrievable knowledge and artifacts critically important to the understanding of the cultural development of the State of Washington. And, please consult with the COE as to the issuance of their required worldwide permit and ask them to hold the request or STAY the permitted work until such time as the pertinent, above mentioned information has been accomplished and reviewed. Respectfully, Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 9:13 AM To: Arthur M. Skolnik Subject: Fwd: Boeing plant 2 Questions Art - here are Boeing's responses to your questions re: historic archaeological resources. Lynn file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC7FE 11 tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C5221 \GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 2 of 4 »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> 10/27/2010 8:10 AM »> Lynn thanks for the e-mail My responses are noted in red. Question 1: When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? Response: Yes. For purposes of a separate project proposed along the shoreline of the Duwamish River adjacent to Plant 2, Boeing contacted the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in 1999 to request information regarding potential significant cultural resources located in the vicinity of the project. As indicated in the letter attached, DAHP concluded, based on its review of the Washington State Archaeological and Historic Site Inventories, that "no resources included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places have been recorded in the identified project area." The letter goes on to state that..."In the event that archaeological or historic materials are discovered during project activities, work in the immediate vicinity should be discontinued, the area secured, and this office notified." Since 1999, certain buildings located on the Plant 2 site have been determined eligible for listing on the National Historic Register. However, DAHP's conclusion regarding the lack of site listing on the Washington State Archaeological Inventory remains current. Question 2: I'll look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Response: See above for information regarding background research conducted by Boeing and DAHP to support information included in the project's SEPA Checklist indicating that there are no known archaeological resources in the project area. With respect to protocols established to protect archaeological resources that may be encountered during project construction, the Checklist states, consistent with the DAHP guidance described above, that "[if] artifacts are uncovered during the Plant 2 project, work in that area will be halted pending notification and response from appropriate agencies." In addition, the Staff Report issued by the City at the time of Plant 2 project approval addresses the required construction protocol in greater detail: Archaeological artifacts: Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), the County/City planning office, the affected Tribe(s) and the county coroner (if applicable) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is required . file://C:\temp\:XPGrpWise\4CC7FE1 ltuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C5221\GW}00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 3 of 4 Please let me know if you require further information regarding this matter. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement From: Lynn Miranda fmailto:ImirandaOci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:24 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: Fwd: RE: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Mark, FYI. See below. Do you have a response? Thanks Lynn »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnikOcomcast.net> 10/13/2010 11:45 AM »> Thanks you Lynn I'll look forward to hearing what Boeing did to verify their SEPA Checklist statement about NO archaeological sites present, and that there are no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites identified or are likely to be identified prior to any construction taking place. And, what professional precautions they will be taking to avoid such a conflict and mishap prior to and then during construction (site disturbance). Thanks, again. Art From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda©ci.tukwila.wa.us} Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:19 AM To: arthurmskolnik Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 et al Hi Art, I wanted to let you know that I've forwarded your questions to my contact at Boeing, but haven't yet received a response. I can say that as part of their checklist, Boeing indicated that no known archaeological landmarks are on site. Also, DAHP did not provide any comments on this. When I receive a response from Boeing I'll forward it on to you. Regards, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail »> "arthurmskolnik" <arthurmskolnik(acomcast.net<mailto:arthurmskolnik@ comcast.net» 10/07/2010 12:30 PM »> Hello again Lynn, file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CC7FE 11 tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C5221\GW} 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 4 of 4 I had some question if you have a moment. When Boeing filled out their SEPA checklist for the demolition of Plant 2 and submitted it to the City of Tukwila, did you or someone else check with anyone regarding the sensitivities of the site as to any potential historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, finds or what likely might be revealed? Was there any investigation of the nearest known archaeological sites? I am concerned that this subject was insufficiently reviewed and, in particular, the focus on historic industrial archaeology on this important site. Thanks again, Art Arthur M. Skolnik FAIA President THE SKOLNIK COMPANY 4449 Nassau Ave., NE Tacoma, WA, 98422 206 669 5048 (Business) 253 517 3746 (FAX) file://C :\temp\XPGrp Wise\4CC7FE 11 tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 C5221 \GW } 00001.... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - boeing plant 2 letter From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Lynn Miranda mark.d.clement@boeing.com 11/10/2010 2:01 PM boeing plant 2 letter Hi Mark FYI, attached is a letter from the WA Trust for Historic Preservation dated 11.2.1020 re: the demo of Plant 2. I will send you a copy of our response. Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm ipPlease don't print this unless you have to. Reduce, reuse, recycle. file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CDAA5C0tuk-mail6300-po100172667711 C7EC 1\GW}0000... 11/22/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Lynn Miranda Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker; mark.d.clement@boeing.com 11/16/2010 9:20 AM Boeing Plant 2 Mark & Laura Please find attached a copy of the City's letter responding to Chris Moore's (WA Trust for Historic Preservation) concerns regarding the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. Thanks Laura, for your comments! Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm APlease don't print this unless you have to. Reduce, reuse, recycle. file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4CE24CEDtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 C8991\GW} 00001... 11/22/2010 August 5_2010 Lynn Miranda Department of Community Development Planning Division City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188-8548 Subject: Final Haer report — D10-118 The Boeing Company, Tukwila, Washington Lynn, Attached is an approval letter from DAHP regarding the HAER report. Also attached is the final HAER report itself. # WA -189 RECEIVED 'AUG 06 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT If you have any questions or if you need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (206) 617-2944 or via e-mail at Mark.d.clement@Boeing. Sincerely yours, /Mark C1eme Permit Specialist The Boeing Company. RECEIVED au00I 205 COMMUDEVELOPMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 • Fax Number (360) 586-3067 • Website: www.dahp.wa.gov July 28, 2010 Mr. Gabriel Rosenthal Boeing Legal Department PO Box 3707, MC 11 -XT Seattle, WA 98124-2207 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 033010 -03 -KI Property: Boeing Plant 2 Demo Re: HAER Document Dear Mr. Rosenthal: I have reviewed the HAER documentation for Boeing Plant 2. Your consultant has a done an exemplary job on the documentation. As such we considered this documentation complete and will be sending the information via Fed -EX to the HAER Office in D.C. tomorrow. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 michael.houser@dahp.wa.gov BOEING PLANT 2 ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle King County Washington HAER No. WA -189 PHOTOGRPAHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED & INTEPRETIVE DRAWINGS HISTORIC AMERICNA ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service U.S. department OF Interior 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20240 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 H.AER No. WA -189 Location: 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington 98108 Within an area bounded by East Marginal Way South on the east, the Duwamish Waterway on the west, 16th Avenue South on the north, and the Jorgensen property on the south. Quad: Seattle South UTM: Zone 10, 5264114 N / 551953 E Dates of Construction: 1936-1941 Original Designers: The Austin Company (Engineers and Builders) Original and Present Owner: The Boeing Company Original Uses: Airplane assembly (2-40 and 2-41) Warehouse storage, offices, and partial assembly (2-31 and 2-44) Present Use: Facilities storage (2-40) / Vacant (2-41) Offices, Shops and Storage (2-31) / Vacant (2-44) Significance: Boeing Plant 2 assembly buildings 2-40 and 2-41, and the two associated warehouses, 2-31 and 2-44, are significant for their direct association with the World War II defense industry, specifically production of B-17 aircraft. The plant serves as an intact example of industrial building design and construction by The Austin Company. Project Information: This HAER document has been prepared at the request of the property owner, The Boeing Company. The report provides historical and architectural information about Buildings 2-31, 2-40, 2-41 and 2-44 at the Plant 2 facility located south of Seattle. Historians, Drafters: The documentation, by BOLA Architecture + Planning was created by the following individuals: Susan D. Boyle, AIA, Principal Sonja Sokol Fi.iresz, Preservation Planner Curtis Bigelow, Architect Abby Martin, Intern Colin Walker, Job Captain Photographer: Brian Allen, Seattle Report Date: June 30, 2010 BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 2) PART I. HISTORICAL INFORMATION THE BOEING COMPANY IN SEATTLE The history of The Boeing Company can be traced back to 1916, when William Edward Boeing (1881- 1956) began building floatplanes in a small boathouse on the east side of Lake Union in Seattle. Boeing was born in Detroit, and attended Yale University. He moved to Seattle in 1908 after making money in timber around Grays Harbor, Washington. Boeing was fascinated by aviation, and in 1915 he and George Conrad Westervelt began building a seaplane. Westervelt was a Navy engineer who had studied aeronautics at MIT. William Boeing completed the plane on his own when Westervelt was transferred to the East Coast, and in 1916 he established the Pacific Aero Products Company. The following year, he reorganized the firm as the Boeing Airplane Company. During World War II the company was known as the Boeing Aircraft Company. The company's first manufacturing facility was located on the west side of the Duwamish, south of the Seattle city limits. The former Heath Shipyards site, which William Boeing had purchased in 1910, served as a location for some fabrication, as well as drafting and office space. In 1918, a tarpaper shed was replaced with a more substantial structure. It became known as Plant 1 following the establishment of Plant 2 in 1936 (Hansen, n.p.). During World War I, the Navy ordered 50 seaplane trainers from Boeing, and by May 1918 the company had 337 employees (Boeing Company, A Brief Histog, p. 7). Planes were tested on a grassy airstrip known as the Meadows, on the Duwamish Valley floor. This airstrip eventually was improved and acquired by King County in 1928. The 1920s was a decade of expansion in airplane manufacturing and related industries throughout the nation. Boeing developed and manufactured fighter planes for the military, as well as a mail plane that won an airmail contract with the U.S. Post Office. The airmail service was inaugurated in 1927 and provided limited passenger service in a two -seat cabin. The first dedicated passenger transport began in 1928 with Boeing's 12 -passenger Model 80 biplane, which a year later was upgraded to an 18 -passenger model. By the end of the decade, airplane manufacturers began developing new monoplanes—the beginning of contemporary commercial aviation (Boeing Company, A Brief Histoty, pp. 14-17). The Army Air Corps ordered the first 13 B-17 bombers from Boeing in 1936, and Plant 1 was inadequate to keep the production on schedule (Year by Year, p. 37). In a step that signaled the commencement of what would be a massive World War II expansion, Boeing purchased 28 acres on the east side of the Duwamish Waterway and built the first phase of Plant 2. CONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION OF THE. PLANT 2 BUILDINGS For a graphical depiction of the construction and expansion of the buildings, see the drawing on the first page of the Part V., the Supplemental Graphics Section. In March of 1936, Boeing purchased the first 28 acres of the new Plant 2 site. It was well -situated near the King County airport, across the Duwamish Waterway and south from Boeing Plant 1. At that time the King County Airport (Boeing Field) was being enlarged and improved with Works Progress Administration funds. Plans called for immediate construction of a "large and modern assembly plant [to] BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 3) be completed before the end of the year, with additions...to be made as business justifies" (Boeing press release, March 14, 1936). Site grading began in April and construction began in May, with scheduled completion within five months. The facility was necessitated by the Army Air Corps' order of 13 Yl B-17 (also known as 299) bombers from Boeing. The earliest portion of the assembly plant measured 200' wide by 300' deep, with an unobstructed floor area and a height of 53'. The building had giant rolling doors along the primary northeast facade, in an opening 198' wide by 35' high. Six hundred tons of structural steel were used in the building's construction. This first phase of the project cost approximately $250,000. Parts were trucked or barged from Plant 1 and assembled at the new Plant 2 site. A railroad spur to the site was laid parallel to East Marginal Way, and a dock served Plant 2 on the Duwamish Waterway. Between March and October of 1937, the assembly building was more than doubled in size by construction of an addition immediately northwest of the 1936 portion. The addition consisted of two bays each measuring 125' wide by 300' deep, for a total addition of 250' by 300'. The overall building then measured 450' wide by 300' deep. All of this construction comprised a portion of what is known as Building 2-40. "From the start, the Boeing facility expansions, in common with other aircraft manufacturing plants, were the results of production demands far in excess of original quantities requested by the Government" (Air Materiel Command Headquarters Report, p. 24). In 1940, the British government provided assistance to further expand Plant 2 for production of Douglas DB -7 bombers. This $2 million addition was built to meet the production demands of a $23 million order for the Allies. Approximately 600,000 square feet of floor space were added, and the existing building was extended southwest to the property line at the border of the Duwamish Waterway. This phase expanded Building 2-40 and provided the first portion of Building 2-41. Construction began in June 1940 and a dedication dance was held on October 12, 1940. A warehouse to the northwest—now known as Building 2-31—was constructed as well. It was immediately adjacent and internally connected to the assembly area. The first story of an engineering building (no longer extant) was added under this contract. Meanwhile, further expansion was already being necessitated by B-17 production demands. Under an Emergency Plant Facilities (EPF) contract, the U.S. government funded the purchase of additional land and plant expansion. (Later, in 1943, Boeing bought out the government share of Plant 2 for more than $7.7 million [Seattle Times, July 19, 1943].) Just three days after the dedication of the previous project, a construction contract was signed for a subsequent Plant 2 addition. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 were expanded to the southeast, and the one million square -foot project also included a four-story engineering and production department building, as well as a three-story office building. (The engineering and office buildings are no longer extant). Building 2-44, a warehouse southeast of the assembly area, was constructed under this contract and completed prior to the final 2-40 and 2-41 expansion. This addition was carried out in 1940 and 1941. A newspaper article from the period noted that: Immense as Plant No. 2 will be, the production arrangement is simple. The manufacturing area will be flanked by warehouse area. Raw materials and purchased parts will be routed into the plant as manufacturing work progresses. Subassembly work will be done in second -floor areas above the primary shop areas (Seattle Times, October 16, 1940). BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 4) A 6,000 -car employee parking lot, located across from Plant 2 on East Marginal Way, occupied land leased to Boeing by King County. The lot was sized to provide empty sections for workers coming on shift before those in the preceding shift had departed. Police and State Patrol were needed to direct the large volume of traffic during shift changes. According to 1946 analysis of construction progress, "[t]he several consecutive expansions at Boeing, Seattle, were efficiently planned and the actual expansions accomplished in commendable time, in comparison with similar West Coast expansions," (Air Materiel Command, p. 24). At each phase, buildings were occupied before their completion. Beginning in 1942, a camouflage project was undertaken to disguise the appearance of Plant 2 from above, to stymie potential air attacks on this strategically important facility. The camouflage project was delegated to rhe Seattle Army Corps of Engineers. Two men are credited with the design of the camouflage for the Boeing plant. William Bain Sr., a prominent Seattle architect, who served as the Camouflage Director for the State of Washington Office of Civil Defense beginning in 1942, is credited with the overall camouflage project. Its design is attributed to John Detlie, a designer with training in architecture and engineering, who worked as an art director at MGM studios in Hollywood from 1935 ro 1942. Detlie had been approached by Army personnel before the bombing of Pearl Harbor to discuss possibilities for camouflaging large plants on the West Coast. In response, he began designing and building models of camouflaged factories. In May of 1942 Detlie received orders to report ro Seattle to head the camouflage efforts for Plant 2. The resulting design converted the rooftop of Plant 2 into a complete, mock suburban neighborhood, nicknamed `Wonderland'. The sawtooth roof of the plant was covered with wire netting, burlap or canvas, and finished with small-scale trees and shrubs, houses, garages, and a gas station. Windows, skylights and clerestories throughout the plant were painted out for blackout purposes, and exterior walls were painted in a camouflage pattern. Although rhe threat of air attack faded and camouflage became unnecessary, removal of the rooftop work was not done until late June 1946. THE AUSTIN COMPANY, ORIGINAL. DESIGNER AND CONTRACTOR The Austin Company designed and constructed Boeing's Plant 2 buildings. Founded in 1878 in Cleveland by Samuel Austin, the company began as a carpentry, building, and contracting firm. Austin had his own shop and eventually his own mill and built residences, commercial buildings, and factory buildings. Many of these were also designed by Austin. Samuel's son Wilbert "W.J." received a degree in mechanical engineering from what is now Case Institute of Technology and in 1901 joined his father in business. The company was incorporated in 1904 as Samuel Austin & Son Company. The "Austin Method" became the company's hallmark. Under this method, the company provided full services by one firm—design, engineering, and construction. In 1908, the Samuel Austin & Son Company began a designing and constructing a series of factories for various electric lamp manufacturers. In 1911, the firm designed and built a campus research facility and a lamp manufacturing plant for the National Electric Lamp Association, both in Cleveland. Extensive work for the Association led W.J. Austin to the concept of standardization in design and construction. The company name changed to The Austin Company in 1916. Austin established sales offices in industrial centers—the first engineering and construction company to do so—eventually resulting in a network of offices around the country. The Seattle -area branch, which is attributed with the original design and construction of Plant 2, opened in 1926. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 5) During World War I, The Austin Company's volume of work increased nearly 35 percent (Greif, p. 60), as it undertook national railroad projects and several major military installations. The company's most extraordinary project of the time was the Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Corporation plant in Buffalo in 1918. The largest factory building in the world, at more than 600,000 square feet, it was completed in 90 working days and covered an area of approximately 28 acres under one roof. This plant continued to serve as an aircraft production plant throughout World War II, more than 25 years later. The Austin Company continued to develop new areas of standardization to provide facilities for different industries. Particularly, W.J. Austin's love of aviation and his contacts with the country's aircraft manufacturers resulted in his innovation in wide -span hangar doors and The Austin Company's eventual leadership in design and construction of air transport facilities. With extensive experience in standardization, aviation, and industry, The Austin Company was responsible for Boeing's development in the Puget Sound area from 1936—when the initial construction at Plant 2 was undertaken—into the 1960s. During World War II the company's work also included ship -building facilities, factories, special Naval facilities, and bomber assembly plants in the Southwest. After the war, The Austin Company added specialty practices for television studios. In 1984, National Gypsum bought The Austin Company. Austin's management bought the company back in 1997, and in 2006 Austin became part of the Kajima Family of Companies. From an architectural perspective, the Boeing Plant 2 buildings provide a clear contrast with many earlier industrial facilities. Constructed in the run-up to and during World War Il, they are much more straightforward and functional in their exterior appearance. Rather than masonry cladding, the facades of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 feature corrugated and plain metal panels, stripped of extraneous veneer and decorative details. In particular the highly visible Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 served as expressions of the power of production rather than an iconic image of industry. Original interior spaces within the Plant 2 are clear spans interrupted only by necessary structure. Here, too, the Boeing Plant 2 was created as a space with maximum flexibility, capable of supporting varied manufacturing in a multi -line process rather than a single assembly line. This flexibility proved its worth by allowing Boeing to change production processes with greater efficiency by using trenches below the concrete floorslab of the assembly floor, which ran along grid lines in both directions, for insertion and remodeling of rails and utility distribution systems responsive to changing means and methods of production. THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE DUWAMISH RIVER The physical context surrounding Boeing's Plant 2 has changed considerably from its early 20th century conditions. This is due in large part to the early history of the area and the modifications made to the Duwamish River's natural flow, which once wound north through the Green River Valley (present-day Kent and Auburn areas) to the headland at what is the present Duwamish Waterway. The Duwamish is Seattle's only river and is part of a collection of rivers that includes the White, the Green, and the Puyallup Rivers. These run through the broad, L-shaped valley south of Seattle in southern King County and northern Pierce County. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 6) The Duwamish was straightened and dredged as part of the early efforts by the City of Seattle to create infrastructure for industrial development. It presently runs through the flat bottomland that makes up much of the area from Tukwila to Harbor Island, passing along the west side of Plant 2, the west side of Seattle's Georgetown neighborhood, and the east side of the South Park neighborhood. South Park and Georgetown were annexed to Seattle in 1907 and 1910 respectively. Plant 2 borders the Georgetown neighborhood, which is located to the east of East Marginal Way. Georgetown emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and the area is characterized by a mix of industry and residential development. In addition to the undulating course of the river, a number of rail lines once ran through Georgetown to serve local industries. Seattle's economy through the early part of rhe 20th century remained focused on import/export activities and resource -extraction based industries rather than manufacturing. While a strong ship -building industry developed during the run-up to World War I, this business sector remained stagnant through much of the 1920s and 1930s. Thus there are few historic industrial facilities comparable to Boeing Plant 2 in the area. Boeing Field / King County International Airport is located south of Georgetown and east of East Marginal Way South. It was originally cleared as farmland and developed as the Meadows Race Track in 1902 with a 10,000 -seat wood -framed grandstand and nearby stables for 1,000 horses. The track, which was placed over flat river bottomland, began to be used as an airfield with the first airplane flight demonstration in Seattle in March 1910. The Meadows served as an informal airstrip for resting and demonstrating flights through the 1920s, during which time the Boeing Company began building airplanes for use by the Army and Navy. The airport opened in 1928 and scheduled air service began in 1929. After the opening of Boeing's Plant 2 and through World War II, the airfield was used to test the company's B-17 bombers. The nearby neighborhoods of Georgetown and South Park both result from a historic pattern of residential and industrial development. The typical buildings that dominate these areas are small one- and two-story wood -frame dwellings on small lots (typically 30' to 50' by 100'), small-scale wood -frame boarding houses, and apartment buildings. Retail stores, cafes, and taverns are located in older buildings in the commercial centers of both neighborhoods near Airport Way South and 13th Avenue South in Georgetown, and South Cloverdale Street and 14th Avenue South in South Park. In addition there is a library, community recreation center, and elementary school in South Park. The combined residential population of these two neighborhoods in 2000 was approximately 4,990. PLANT 2'S WORLD WAR II WORKERS The massive growth.of the aircraft industry during World War II is conveyed by employment and production numbers. Between 1939 and lace 1943, the number of aircraft workers in the United States grew exponentially—from 48,638 to more than 2 million (Lentz, p. 13). This facilitated the growth in aircraft production, from 6,019 planes in 1940 to a peak of 96,318 planes in 1944. The total aircraft production for the years 1940-1946 was 304,887 (Scoff, p. 175). There were other aspects of wartime aircraft production, beyond the advent of mass production of military aircraft, which had lasting implications. These include the large-scale admission into the workforce of women and the emerging role of minority workers in the industry and organized labor. The history of Boeing's Plant 2 celebrates the role that women played in production during World War II. However, the Boeing Aircraft Company had hired women in production roles as early 1916 when BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 7) seamstresses began sewing fabric for the company's first airplane. In 1917 the company's Drafting Department hired it first female engineer. By 1918 these women and other female employees made up almost 25% of the company's work force. Their numbers rose during World War II, ro approximately 15% in 1942. By 1928, with 800 employees, Boeing was one of the largest aircraft manufacturers in rhe country. By 1936, it had over 1,000 workers when production began at Plant 2. As military aircraft were ordered at an increasing rate and many men left for war, labor shortages loomed. Women, minorities, very young men, and retirees were hired to fill the need. In December 1940, Boeing had 8,427 Seattle employees; by the end of the war the number reached 46,000 (Year by Year, p. 46). In January 1943, there were 14,876 women employed at Boeing's Seattle and Renton plants, out of 34,087 total employees (Boeing "Payroll Headcount: Highest Peaks of Employment," cited in Myers, p. 40). Boeing's wartime employment of female workers reflected the role of women in defense industries throughout the country. Working mothers made up more than 40% of the nation's female workforce in 1940, and their number grew to nearly 46% by 1944. In Seattle alone, the employment of women increased by 55 percent between April 1940 and January 1943. By May of 1943, Boeing employed nearly 14,500 women. (Berner, 1999, p. 68 — 79). At rhe height of production, between 1942 and 1944, women made up 46% of Boeing's workforce. (Anderson, p. 77). Most of the women who came to work in Plant 2 were unskilled in the manufacturing process, with only 3,062 of those working in 1943 having semi -skilled positions and only 109 with skilled ones. Most of the women workers performed simplified tasks as part of an overall assembly line. In response to training needs, local public schools offered publicly funded training in aircraft trades, pre-flight, and map and blueprint reading, with specific programs cited as "Free Education for Boeing Employees." The Boeing Company also provided in -houses classes and ongoing training. Organized labor, in an effort to secure employment for male union members after the war, viewed women as temporary workers. The Aero Mechanics Local 751, Seattle's largest union prior to the war, fought for higher wages and more breaks for Boeing workers and equal (union scale) pay for equal work, along with calls for rent and price controls, and government-sponsored housing. While the union eventually supported wartime employment of women and African-Americans it did not welcome either as permanent employees. Local 751 briefly allowed African-Americans to become members in 1940, but under pressure it quickly changed this policy. Up to 1,600 African-Americans worked at Boeing at peak levels in 1943, but throughout the war era they were charged dues, but given only union work permits. Without seniority and other benefits of membership, more Blacks found work in local shipyards than in aircraft factories. It was not until the post-war period, in 1948, that the union ended this discrimination. Taylor, p. 164-166). The presence of women working on the factory floors of Plant 2 alongside men initially raised difficult social conditions, and some differences remained inherent in the workplace throughout the war. Publications and company records indicate the efforts undertaken by Boeing to train the new defense - industry employees, and its actions to address women's issues such as child-care and transportation needs. At Plant 2 meals were served in a cafeteria, and women were provided with separate locker rooms and security gates. Women employees were closely monitored, and as the company studied their performance it redesigned some production processes, such as the cockpit assembly, to utilize their smaller size and ability ro complete detailed tasks. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 8) Promotion of women workers occurred locally and at a national level. While most women were drawn to work in defense industries, government agencies and media at all levels promoted the concept of women as non-traditional factory workers as their patriotic and civic duty. The song, "Rosie the Riveter" was produced in 1942 as part of the federal effort to sell war bonds, and in May 1943 the Saturday Evening Post published an image of "Rosie" on its cover, using a portrait of a young telephone operator by painter Norman Rockwell. The iconic figure became a parr of popular culture during the war, and has continued to serve since then as a proud symbol of female workers. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 9) PART II. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION THE SETTING Buildings 2-31, 2-40, 2-41, and 2-44 make up the World War II era production facilities at The Boeing Company's Plant 2 in south Seattle. The approximately 110 -acre property that comprises Plant 2 is bounded by East Marginal Way South on the east, the Duwamish Waterway on the west, South Webster Street on the north, and the Jorgensen property on the south. The buildings are southeast of the 16th Avenue South Bridge (also known as the 14th Avenue South Bridge and the South Park Bridge), which bisects the current Plant 2 property. The facility is located in the industrial corridor of south Seattle, on the east bank of the Duwamish Waterway and across Marginal Way from Boeing Field / King County Airort. The original Plant 1 buildings, which are the subject of this report, were located to the east of 16` Avenue South, the street that led from East Marginal Way to the east side of the bridge. Nearby blocks of East Marginal Way also contain expansive and low -scale industrial sites. The Georgetown neighborhood is located north of Plant 2 and Boeing Field, and west across the Duwamish Waterway is the South Park neighborhood, with West Seattle beyond. Beacon Hill is farther east/northeast, beyond Boeing Field and Interstate 5. Seattle's commercial downtown is approximately five miles to the north. Historic photographs show that the property that became Boeing's Plant 2 consisted largely of fields before development of the facility, which allowed for great expansion over time. The siting of the buildings on this property provided a strategic location in relation to water, rail, and vehicular access and in close proximity to the King County Airport. The area surrounding Plant 2 has several transportation grids in addition to East Marginal Way South, resulting from the development of nearby South Michigan Street, Highway 99, and I-5. Heavy traffic traverses the Georgetown neighborhood along Airport Way South and on the major arterials that lead from it to East Marginal Way. East Marginal Way, the six -lane road that runs in front of Plant 2, serves as an urban freeway, providing access for commercial as well as private vehicles throughout the south Seattle industrial areas. Neighborhood streets from the east typically lead to and terminate at East Marginal Way. At the west end of 8th Avenue South, however, there is the recently -developed City of Seattle Gateway Park. Near the intersection of South Michigan. Street and East Marginal Way the Duwamish River is crossed by the 1st Avenue South Bridge, which was constructed in 1956 and 1998 and rebuilt in ca. 2001. 14th Avenue South, which passes through the present Boeing Plant 2, leads to the commercial center of the South Park neighborhood on the west side of the river. This historic double -leaf bascule bridge, which dates from 1929-1931, was closed in late June 2010 and is scheduled for replacement in the future. SITE FEATURES According to King County Tax Assessor's records, the tax parcel on which the subject buildings are located is 28.65 acres. Other buildings on the same parcel date from 1940 to 1953 and were built primarily for offices and additional warehouse space on additional property. The site is relatively flat. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 I-IAER No. WA -189 (page 10) The subject buildings are identified as 2-31, 2-40, 2-41, and 2-44. The primary assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41, do not stand as two distinct structures. Built in separate phases, they make up a single Targe structure with 2-40 being northeast of 2-41. The two abutting warehouse structures located ro the northwest (2-31) and southeast (2-44), are internally connected to Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. A tunnel system, situated below the first floor, links all four buildings. The tunnel system provides continuous access for plant personnel, along with restrooms, locker rooms and some storage and service spaces. Buildings2-31 and 2-40 are abutted by, and internally connected ro a newer structure, Building 2-25, an office facility, is situated northwest of 2-31. Building 2-44 is abutted by Building 249, a tall clear -span structure, on the southeast. A large asphalt -paved parking lot is located immediately northeast of Buildings 2-40 and 2-44 in the approximate 250' setback between the building and the roadbed of East Marginal Way. The Duwamish Waterway is located to the southwest of Building 2-31, 2-41, and 2-44. ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 AND 2-41 The buildings known as 2-40 and 2-41 form one vast structure, with an overall rectangular footprint of approximately 754' by approximately 1000'. (This area corresponds to column lines A to Q, northwest to southeast, by column lines 1 to 26, northeast to southwest.) The primary facade faces northeast, where it is set back approximately 250' from East Marginal Way South. The portion designated 2-40 is the northeastern (or "front") portion of the building, extending approximately 550' from column line 1 to column line 12. It is also known as the Assembly Building or Final Assembly Building. 2-41 is the southwestern (or "back") portion, extending approximately 450' from column line 12 to column line 26. This is also identified as the Primary Building or Basic Primary Building. Constructed in four phases between 1936 and 1941, the structure is composed a steel frame on concrete footings, with a 6" -thick concrete slab -on -grade foundation, and piers. The tunnel system, which extends below all four of the Plant 2 war era buildings, is constructed of concrete. The structure of Building 2-40 is made up by steel trusses, and riveted steel columns, with support a sawtooth roof with northeast -facing windows. The overall building height varies from approximately 42' to 53', with the tallest portion along the southeast. Most of 2-40 is a tall, single story volume, with a 50' - wide mezzanine running between column lines 11 and 12. An L-shaped second story is located also within 2-41, leaving the western corner as a taller single -story space. Where the building extends over the Duwamish Waterway on the southwest side, a 5" -thick structural concrete slab is used between column lines 25 and 26. Original structural drawings note the slab was set on 12x16 creosoted wood beams on creosoted wood pilings, approximately 10' on -center. A timber bulkhead runs northwest to southeast, below the southwest side of rhe building. The exterior facades are characterized by industrial steel sash ribbon windows, metal cladding, and seven giant overhead doors along the primary northeast facade. Cladding was noted on original drawings as "ferroclad." As subsequent additions were made, some windows and ferroclad panels from existing exterior walls were salvaged and reused on the new exterior walls. Metal cladding presently in place is a combination of flat panels and corrugated panels, all of it painted a buff beige color. The original drawings note composition roofing; presently there appears to be a combination of composition roofing and asphalt roofing. Typical window strips measure approximately 3'-6" and 5'-2" in height; these are continuous and contain various divided -light glazing patterns—two, three, or four lights tall. Windows along the northeast face of BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 11) each sawtooth are also steel sash windows set continuously, typically 7'-9" or 8'-7" tall. Each of these 30 - light (6 across by 5 high) fixed windows contains an operable 8 -light awning section at the top center portion. Numerous doors, of various sizes and rypes, provide access and egress around the building. The seven overhead doors on the northeast facade range in size from 94' to 100' wide. These oversized doors also contain strip windows, person doors, and several smaller vehicle doors within them. The assembly buildings was designed to provide as much open floor area as possible, uninterrupted by partitioned offices, restrooms, or other divided spaces. Building 2-40 consists of a single tall story, measuring approximately 36' from floor to underside of roof trusses. An estimated 37,500 -square -foot mezzanine runs along the full width of rhe southwest end, between column lines 11 and 12. At the main floor level below the mezzanine, the space is divided into numerous smaller offices and rooms. A concrete wall with large rolling fire doors along column line 12 indicates the transition between Building 2-40 and Building 2-41. Most of 2-41 has two floors; only the west corner of the building—from column lines 22 to 26 and from column lines A to D—is a tall single -story space. "The plant was laid out to be under one roof with no dividing walls [between 2-40 and 2-41]. After it was built the fire underwriters required that it be divided by a fire wall in the middle [along column line 12] on account of the Targe amount of insurable values within the bldg." This division reportedly modified the original ventilation and lighting design, and a later blackout requirement also affected the ventilation plan (Boeing News Bureau, July 26, 1943, p. 5). The interior space is characterized by its large volume, which is largely unobstructed but for the riveted steel columns; fully exposed structure, including massive steel roof trusses; concrete floor slabs at the first floor and maple flooring at the mezzanine (2-40) and second floor (2-41); ample natural light from continuous strip windows along the walls and the sawtooth roof; and restrooms contained ih sections that are suspended from the structure above the production floor. These restrooms are accessed by metal stairs. Additional restrooms are situated below the first floor, accessed by stairs. Single crane rails and craneways and large mechanical equipment elements are also distinguishing features of the interior. The cast -in-place concrete fire separation wall at column line 12 between 2-40 and 2-41 contains a series of large openings with sliding fire doors as well as conventionally -sized openings. A large concrete - enclosed room is located at both the north and east corners of Building 2-41. These two spaces have large metal fire doors and fire shutters and appear to have had large exhaust ductwork originally. One sign reads, "Central Fab. Conveyor Spray Painting," indicating that the space appears to have been used as a paint spray area. There are no other notations on drawings or earlier documentation. The interior face of the northeast and southwest perimeter walls is unfinished, with the structure exposed and the exterior cladding elements visible. On rhe northwest and southeast sides, Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 flow into the neighboring buildings without any wall separation. Beneath the building concrete tunnels, approximately 10' to 15' wide and 10' high, provided access and egress for personnel without interrupting work on the floor. A period article notes: "Beneath the factory floor at Plant No. 2 will be 3,000 lineal feet of concrete access tunnels, providing entrance and exit for workers. Large washrooms and locker rooms will be along the access corridors on the basement level" (Seattle Times, October 16, 1940). Narrower utility tunnels are reached from the larger access tunnels, along with a few storage and service spaces. There are also utility trenches accessed from openings (covered with metal plates) in the production floor of 2-40 and 2-41. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 12) CONSTRUCTION CHANGES TO BUILDINGS 2-40 AND 2-41 The original construction campaigns spanned 1936-1941, with the buildings constructed in phases as described earlier in this report. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are essentially unmodified from their original design and embody architectural integrity, although some various alterations have been made over time. Permit records were not available for review. The following description of changes is based primarily on visual observation and a review of more contemporary drawings. • The earliest portion of the building had massive sliding doors on the primary northeast facade. These doors were replaced early on by vertical lift doors, which remain in place today. These overhead doors have had subsequent alterations made to them—two rubber overhead doors have been inserted within the large metal overhead doors, some of the windows within the doors have been replaced with metal panels, and some of the windows in the doors appear to date from the later 1940s or 1950s. • The "Boeing" sign, visible in early photographs, was removed from the primary northeast facade. Historic photos indicate this occurred during WWII, apparently for the camouflage project. • The typical ferroclad original cladding panels on the northeast facade have been replaced or covered by vertical metal panels. The date of this change is unknown. • Some non -original doors have been inserted or have replaced original doors. • Minimal areas of glazing have been replaced with Plexiglas or metal panels. • Non -original ducts, vents, or exhaust lines are visible. • Non -original partitions were inserted to create office area below the mezzanine in 2-40. • Some original interior openings in the fire wall at column line 12 have been infilled with concrete masonry units. • On the second floor of Building 2-41, partitioned office space was created. Finishes in this area include gypsum wallboard, carpet, and acoustical drop ceiling. • Some newer mechanical / manufacturing equipment has been installed. Both buildings suffer from some deferred maintenance, particularly 2-41. Areas of water infiltration are visible; the evidence of greatest damage is at the southwest edge of the roof where a section of wood decking is extensively deteriorated. Bird infiltration is also evident. Some areas along the southwest part of 2-41 are cordoned off to prevent access, due to safety concerns. For the most part, original windows are extant and intact. There are some broken window panes and minimal replacement of original glass with Plexiglas. Some exterior window surfaces are painted, presumably a remnant from World War II blackout requirements, while others are clear. Second -floor office areas in Building 2-41, which were previously altered with contemporary office finishes, have been vacant since the 1990s. Maple flooring at the second floor in 2-41 is undergoing abatement of a substance related to former production work that was done in that area. Building 2-40 is presently used for facilities and fleet storage and a portion is leased out for historic aircraft restoration. This portion appears to be better -maintained than 2-41, which is vacant. Building systems—including electrical, fire protection, HVAC, plumbing, and related systems—are aging, and Boeing Company personnel have noted that in many cases these systems are not operational. Piping breaks and resulting failures in the underground fire lines have caused extensive flooding in the tunnel areas and this reportedly continues to be a problem. The power distribution system was last upgraded in BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 13) 1962. Wood pilings in the Duwamish Waterway, under the southwest edge of the building, show evidence of deterioration, although some repairs were made in the 1980s. BUILDING 2-31 (NORTH WAREHOUSE, 1940). Two structures on either side of the assembly buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are cited as warehouses in original drawings and planning documents. Building 2-31 is a steel and concrete frame warehouse that abutted the northwest perimeter of 2-40 and 2-41. Similar to Building 2-44, it is characterized by its lower scale than the assembly buildings and by its flat roof monitors with clerestory glazing. Because of the constraints of the site, 2-31 is not rectangular, but rather it tapers to the southwest of column 9. 2-31 contains a continuous, straight 20' -wide transit aisle that runs between column lines A and WJ, from the paved setback in front of the assembly complex to the back of the Boeing property. A second, perpendicular 20' wide transit aisle ("Burma Lane") is set between column lines 10 and 1 1, and extends to the southeast through 2-31 into building 2-41 and from there through 2-44 to 2-59. This aisle was once part of Plant 2's rail shuttle system, although the rails have since been removed. 2-31 has overall dimensions of approximately 664' by 224'. It has no primary facade facing toward East Marginal Way due to the construction of Building 2-25, a multi -story office facility, which abuts its northeast perimeter wall. Portions of the secondary west facade are aligned with the roadbed of 16 h Avenue South, while the narrow, 22' -wide back facade faces southwest toward the Duwamish River. The design concept for 2-31 is similar to the earlier assembly buildings as a large open space, punctuated by columns and illuminated by clerestories in two flat -roof monitors. The building structure is made up by both concrete columns with conical caps and steel columns, set on concrete footings, with a 6" -thick concrete slab -on -grade foundation, and foundation piers. The columns support steel roof trusses, set at 48' on center, which define five longitudinal bays. Above these there are long clerestory windows running longitudinally along rhe outsides of the roof monitors columns WA and WC, and WE and WF. Original floor plan indicates warehouse functions within 2-31, along with accessory restrooms and a switch room. As with the other buildings that made up Plant 2 it contained stairwells that led to the tunnel system and restrooms below grade. Changes to 2-31 include the addition of several flat roof carport like structures along its west facade, a loading dock near rhe northwest corner that continues along the back of Building 2-25, and a wood frame stair near rhe southwest corner that bridges over 2-31 with a raised walkway. The walkway leads to the second floor office area in Building 2-41. Offices, classrooms and conference rooms have been inserted into the front portion of the building on the first and second floor. These spaces feature gypsum wallboard walls, suspended acoustic -tile clad ceilings, and contemporary lighting systems in contrast to rhe unfinished original construction. An enclosed shop is situated to the northeast of the transit aisle and column line 11, between column lines WJ and WF, and a parts room is located in the triangular-shaped end space, southwest of the same drive aisle. BUILDING 2-44 (SOUTH WAREHOUSE, 1941) Examination of the original plans by The Austin Company, and historic information from records and photographs indicates that 2-44, the "South Warehouse", was used for production of small parts as well as BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 14) storage and office functions. The structure of 2-44 is made up by steel wide -flange columns, and flat trusses with perimeter walls on the four exposed facades clad with 8" of brick masonry. Steel columns and trusses are welded and bolted. The columns set along the northeast and southwest perimeter walls are enclosed in concrete to form pilasters. Building 2-44 is approximately 231' wide, with a single 31' -wide bay between column lines Qand R and four 50' bays that correspond to column lines R, T, U and V. The building is 1000' in depth, which is consistent with the adjacent assembly buildings. There are a total of 26 bays: 16 bays of 50' run between column lines 1 to 12 and 22 to 26 (including northeast and southeast outer walls that add 1'-1" at each end of the structural grid), and 10 bays of 25' from 12 to 22. A continuous, 31' wide transit aisle ("Burma Road"), runs straight through 2-44, between column lines 24 and 25, linking it with 2-41 and Building 2- 48. 2-48 is a tall steel -framed canopy of approximately 67' by 147', which serves as the south terminal of the transit aisle. Another abutting structure, Building 2-49, is located along the back of the southeast facade. Known as 2- 49, it was as a Jig Erection Building in 1953. Abutting both 2-49 and 2-44 there is small gable roofed, enclosed structure, No. 2-51, the 1954 "Box Storage and Shoring Shed." The 200' wide primary facade of Building 2-44 faces northeast. Set back situated approximately 250' from East Marginal Way South, it joins with the primary facade of Building 2-40, bur it is distinguished by its smaller scale, height, and roof monitors. This facade is finished with flat metal panels. The secondary facades, which faces southeast toward a large paved parking area and southwest along the Duwamish River, are clad with brick masonry. In contrast to the neighboring assembly building, 2-44 is characterized by its lower scale and two flat -roof monitors. The long sides of the roof monitors are clad primarily with glazing and "Transite" panels, made of a fire-resistant composite material, while the monitor ends are finished with 26 gage steel over 2x6 T&G framing. Some areas of the roof monitors are patched with corrugated metal panels. Windows in the facades are composed in strips, typically 3'-5" and 4'-10" in height. Notes on the original drawings indicate that some of the windows were recycled glass. Obscure glass was installed at the first floor level windows. Interiors partitions were originally constructed with vertical T&G boards, framed modular 3 -ply panels, plaster, and wire mesh, with wire mesh used also for sliding panels and gates. Large, "Burvett" counterbalance fire doors, clad on two sides with steel panels, were set into the wall between 2-44 and 2- 40 and 2-41. Plaster was used for the partitions that enclosed a row of offices, corridor and women's restroom, which were situated along the front (northeast) perimeter of the building, while wire mesh enclosed a nearby, 75' by 68' "Acct & Inst." classroom space. With exception of these enclosed rooms the interior of 2-44 was largely open, although there were specific areas cited on the floor plans as "Storage Area" for materials and parts, and another for "Maintenance." 2-44 contained some equipment that suggests its use in assembling some aircraft parts. These include spaces for propellers, engines in the front half, between column lines 3 and 7, a large Jig Shop in the center. Pits—recesses in the floor slab—were cited on original drawings for a planar pit, a resaw pit, veneer press pit, and several additional unidentified pits. This equipment was powered by electrical cables fed by conduits along the columns and ceiling areas. Below the first floor there were restrooms, transformer rooms and service spaces off underground tunnels. Interior changes in 2-44 include the later installation of large overhead cranes carrying electrical distribution cables, and several unidentified rooms. The offices along the front have been replaced by BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 15) other office and conference rooms and a paint -finishing area characterized by cast floor supports and ducting. There appears are more pits in the floor slab than shown on the original 1940 drawings, which suggests some of the changes made to the building over time. In the back section, southwest of column line L there are stairs leading up to non -original second floor office areas. Construction dates for these non -original spaces have not been confirmed. Some of these offices have been removed, but the areas identified by remnants of acoustic ceiling tiles and floor framing. 0 BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 16) PART III. PRODUCTION PROCESS AND OPERATIONS AND PROCESS THE B-17 BOMBER The Boeing B-17 bombers were used during World War II primarily on long-range missions in Europe flying out of bases in England. The aircrafts were designed and built for speed, range and defense capabilities, and thus they flew frequently in formations without fighter escorts. Boeing began to design and build its first long-range heavy bombers in Seattle in 1934. Early models included the XB -15 and rhe 299, a four -engine prototype for the B-17, which took its first flight in July 1935. By early 1937, when the U.S. Army Corps received delivery of the first 13 aircraft, they were designated as Model Y1 B-17. Improvements in Boeing's design of the B-17 were made throughout its ten-year period of production, particularly during the war in response to battle experience. Named the "Flying Fortress" by a local reporter, the B-17was known also as the "Flying Fort" because of its weight and defense capacity. The aircraft had a length of 74'-4", a height of 19'-1" and a wingspan of 103'-9", and carried four 1,200 horsepower engines and propeller blades nearly 12' in diameter. 13 Browning machine guns were fitted into dorsal, ventral, nose and tail turrets, in addition to side, waist and lower dorsal positions. The bomber featured a closed cockpit, a navigator's position, and a bombsight in the glazed nose. It held bomb racks and a catwalk in a bomb bay, and considerable radio equipment in a radio room. Weighing approximately 36,000 pounds the B-17 could carry a total of up to 65,500 pounds, including a typical bomb load of 8,000 pounds (or more with special external racks). It could climb to 35,600 feet, and had a maximum speed of 287 mph, and a range of 2,000 with a typical 6,000 pound bomb load. A typical B-17 crew was made up of ten airmen, including a pilot, co-pilot, navigator, bombardier, flight engineer, radio operator, two waist gunners, tail gunner, and ball turret gunner. Between 1935 and 1945, 12,732 of the B-17 bombers were produced. Production was greatest with the final model, the B -17G, with a total production of 8,680. An estimated 4,735 B -17s were lost in combat during the war. Soon afterwards the B -17s were replaced by newer aircraft. Current estimates of the remaining aircraft put their number at fewer than 100. THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS Aircraft production at Boeing's Plant 2 began in 1936 with approximately 1,000 workers. At that time large parts and materials were brought by barges up the Duwamish River to the rear doors of the facility. The plant grew to play a pivotal role in aircraft manufacture during World War 11, reaching a peak production in June 1944 when sixteen B -17s rolled off the production line in a 24-hour period (Year by Year, p. 39). The world record for a single month of production had been broken by Boeing in March 1944, when 362 B -17s were produced and delivered (Year by Year, p. 54). Cooperation among various aircraft manufacturers enabled a coordinated nationwide war effort, "widely viewed as one of the greatest industrial triumphs of all time" (Lentz, p. 12). The Allied victory is largely attributed by historians to American air power, and many cite the specific role of the B-17 bombers in this effort. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 17) The Boeing Company is credited with creating a flexible and highly efficient manufacturing process utilizing a multi -line system. A period newspaper article describes the system: Installation of an assembly -line production system in building the latest type of Flying Fortresses for the Army was announced today by the Boeing Aircraft Company. The new system, patterned after the mass production methods used in automobile plants, will be used in fulfilling the Army's order for thirty-nine of the Fortresses...The system is in line with a War Department plan to have all manufacturers of military equipment gear their plants to highest possible speed. Under the mass -production method, virtually all the 175,000 square feet of floor space in the company's No. 2 plant in East Marginal Way has been turned over to the new assembly line for speedy production of the twenty -two -ton bombers, known as B-l7B ... When the Flying Fortress production line is operating at full speed, the bombers will emerge ready for flight in virtually a steady stream...Boeing officials declared this is the first time an assembly line system has been used on planes as large as the bombers...Under the new system, special production lines of wings and sub -assemblies lead up to rhe main assembly line, where the planes progress successively through eight stages of construction...As the Flying Fortresses progress along the line, parts are fed to them by the plant's elaborate overhead crane system and specialized crews of men perform specific operations on each plane as it passes through their zone. (Seattle Times, May 31, 1939.) Various sized hoists, and heavy crane ways between beam and column lines carried partially assembled parts above rhe floor levels of the Plant 2 buildings. Eventually the parts were brought to the open -span assembly areas in Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. In lower -ceiling areas of the plants there were air intake supply and exhaust ducts, and flexible electrical power distribution drops from the ceilings served the factory equipment on the floor levels below. Manufacturing processes were carried out also on second floor spaces along with engineering, with steel stairs connecting rhe two levels for efficient access. Additional steel stairs accessed toiler facilities at upper mezzanine levels, while concrete stairs led to those along the tunnel system below the factory floor. Distinct production process plans have not been discovered for the Boeing Plant 2, bur historic photographs and diagrams describe the fabrication of B -17s within Plant 2 during the early 1940s. There were three assembly lines, each sized to accommodate multiple planes. Portions of the fuselage, nosing wing and tail sections, cockpit interiors and engines were assembled in the back portions of the plant. As rhe aircraft was brought toward to rhe front area in 2-40 the assembled fuselage would be carried forward, and tail and wing sections and engines added. Once rhe planes were finished they moved through the 21'-6" doors in the northeast facade of 2-40 to the paved area in front of Plant 2, and from there across East Marginal Way to Boeing Field. Company records indicate that many parts were manufactured offsite in six separate factories in Washington state. Production materials were stored in one of four large warehouses that the company leased in Seattle and delivered to the warehouses of Plant 2. The multi -line system instituted by Boeing has been recognized as a critical component in the high productivity at Plant 2, particularly when compared to similar wartime production of planes by former motor company plants in the Midwest, such as Willow Run. Other Boeing assembly plants, built in the 1940s in Renton and Wichita, were designed to follow the multi -line concept. This process proved its BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 18) flexibility when Plant 2 was reconfigured to produce B -29s in 1944. This conversion reduced the B-17 production to a single assembly line that ran along the southeast side of 2-40 and 2-41. While B -17s were built in Seattle, B -29s were built initially in Boeing's Wichita plant. In April 1944, portions of the Seattle Plant 2 were also converted to B-29 production, and its operations were coordinated closely with Boeing's Renton Plant southwest of Seattle. Fabrication, structural work, installation, and sub -assembly took place at Plant 2, and final assembly was completed at the Renton plant. (Year by Year, p. 54.) The first of the B -29s emerged from the assembly lines in June 1943, and the first B-29 mission took place on June 5, 1944. None of the original or later equipment and machinery used for aircraft production or assembly remains within Plant 2, although there are some parts stored in Building 2-31. Recessed floor slabs and plates in Building 2-44 recall the presence of jigs and other machinery that required greater clearance than allowed by the floor -to -ceiling heights, ventilation, or maintenance and operations access from below. During World War II, Boeing and other manufacturers throughout the county built aircrafts developed by one another in an effort to maintain maximum production. The Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and the Douglas Aircraft Company built B -29s, and the Bell and Glenn L. Martin Aircraft Companies built Boeing's B -17s. Between 1936 and 1944, Boeing produced Douglas DB -7B attack bombers, Waco - designed gliders, and Stearman Aircraft Company Kaydet trainers in its American factories. At the same rime Boeing Aircraft of Canada built amphibian aircraft designed by Consolidated Aircraft of San Diego and British -designed Blackburn Shark torpedo aircraft. PLANT 2 IN THE POST WAR ERA Drastic changes occurred in local industries immediately after World War II. Military orders largely ceased and Boeing closed down many of its production facilities. An estimated 70,000 employees in the Seattle area were laid -off. After the war the company continued to use Plant 2, however, for aircraft production, including assembly of B-50 and B-52 bombers. Boeing's Model 307 Stratoliner and Model 377 Stratocruiser airliners, and its initial four 737s, which were layer built in rhe Renton plant, also came off the assembly lines of the Seattle plant. Beginning the late 1950s, Boeing developed guided missiles, which went into mass production, including the off-site intercontinental ballistic missile system, the Minuteman program. It expanded jet aircraft production for private aviation, initiated space exploration and mass transit programs, and advanced new technologies in digital computers. The company went on to become a leading producer of commercial passenger planes, and layer manufactured manned and unmanned space vehicles such as the Space Shuttle and Apollo lunar vehicle. By 1968, Boeing employment in the Puget Sound area reached a peak of 101,000 workers, including many employed in its Everett plant. This 98.3 assembly plant was designed for production of the world's largest jet airliner, the 747. By 1968 construction of the Everett facility completed. Boeing continued to use its Renton plant and expanded its production facilities outside of Washington state, but its use of Plant 2 for aircraft production ended. Areas of the assembly buildings and warehouses were gradually converted to office and storage use, along with production of parts. For much of the last decade portions of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 have been donated for use by the Museum of Flight for storage of older airplanes, including a B-17 and B-29 bombers, which are undergoing restoration, and a Lockheed Super Constellation airliner. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 19) PART IV. SOURCES OF INFORMATION RESEARCH Research for this report was undertaken in April through July 2009, with additional research in May and June 2010. Research included examination of available drawing records; property tax records; historic maps, photos, company publications, newspaper articles, and internal reports; and site visits to measure the buildings and look at and document remaining original design features, subsequent changes, and current conditions. The primary source of information was the Boeing Company. Historic maps, photos, and company publications came from the Boeing Historical Archives. Original design drawings by The Austin Company and later construction drawings came from digital files in the company's Plant 2 Engineering Department. Other sources of information came from the following repositories: • Digital collections of the University of Washington Libraries Special Collections and Museum of History and Industry • Period newspaper clippings and other publications from the Seattle Public Library's special collections, available at the Central Library's Seattle Room • King County Tax Assessor's Property Record Cards from the Puget Sound Regional Archives, located at Bellevue Community College. DRAWINGS (Available at Boeing Engineering Department) The Austin Company, Engineers and Builders, Seattle. "Additions to Plant No. 2 Boeing Aircraft Company, Seattle, Washington, Building 2.31 – Concrete Warehouse, 5-25-40." (The title block on these sheets also cite" Parr of Steel Warehouse & Distribution Whse.") . "Additions to Plant No. 2 Boeing Aircraft Company, Seattle, Washington, Bldg. 2-44, 10-29-40." (Fire Wall and Detail Sheets are dated 10-17-40.) Boeing Company, "Company Office Graphics Plan (Building 2-31)," 4-7-99. SECONDARY SOURCES Air Materiel Command Headquarters, Los Angeles AAF, Procurement Field Office Industrial Planning Section. "Industrial Planning Project: Construction and Production Analysis, Boeing—Seattle, B- 17." May 1946. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives, this copy document contains a partially illegible floor plan, Exhibit 21 – B-17 Final Assembly Area, which appears to show a portion of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41.) "America from the Great Depression to World War II: Black -and -White Photographs from the FSA - OWI, 1935-1945," photograph collection. American Memory, Library of Congress. http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/b?ammem/fsaall:LC-USE6-D-008343:collection=fsa. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 20) Berner, Richard C. Seattle in the 2d" Century, Vol. 3: Seattle Transformer, World War 11 to the Cold War. Seattle: Charles Press, 1999. Boeing Company. A Brief History of the Boeing Company. Bellevue, Wash: Boeing Historical Services, 2006. . B -l7 Series Historical Study. Seattle, November 1945. . Manpower Utilization Survey Report, Boeing Aircraft Company, Seattle Division. Seattle: War Manpower Commission, November 1943. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) . "Plant II History, NAIOP Real Estate Challenge." PowerPoint presentation, January 2004. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) . "Boeing: History — Beginnings — Growing Pains," undated. Boeing Magazine "500`h Off the Line." March/April 1954. "Along the Line." November 1946. "Battle Damage." October 1952. [Cover Photo] November 1951. "Flight Without Wings." [Back cover.] March 1944. "Jigsaw Picture in 40,000 Parts." October 1944. "Make Ready for Tomorrow." February 1954. "Production Capability will be Greatly Increased by Facilities Expansion." February 1966. "Production Highlights." May 1947. "Stop, Look and Save." February 1953. "The 5000`h Boeing Built Flying Fortress Since Pearl Harbor." June 1944. "The Big Change." November 1944. "The Little Brother." November 1966. "The Right Perspective." February 1952. "We Deliver." June 1944. Boeing News "Camouflage Atop Plant to Come Off." June 27, 1946. [Cover photo.] June 1939. "Expansion..." June 1941 "Fortress Factory To -Be." November 1940. "Largest Crane for Airplanes." December 1937. "Modern Assembly Plant to Rise on New Boeing Site." April 1936. "New Plant Mushrooms." July 1940. "Now you see it, Now You Don't." November 1942. "Plant No. 2... Grows Larger." July 1937. "What Are Airplane Plants Made of?" September 1940. Boeing News Bureau. Unpublished transcript of notes on meeting July 26, 1943. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 21) Boyle • Wagoner Architects. "Federal Center South, Building No. 1201, GSA Building No. WA0953KC." Historic Building Preservation Plan, August 1997. Boynton, James. "Minds, Muscles, Machines Work on Biggest Building — Biggest Plane." Boeing Magazine, September 1966. Brannon, Donald. "Changeable Buildings." Boeing Magazine, November 1961. Bush, Peter. "The Aerospace Division has Targets for Today, Tomorrow, Infinity." Boeing Magazine, April 1960. Call, Helen. "The Roof Riders." Boeing News, July 1943. Call, Helen. "Your Move." Boeing News, October 1943. Donald, David. "Boeing Model 299 (B-17 Flying Fortress)." The Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada: Prospero Books, 1997. Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition. "Superfund Fact Sheet, Fall 2007 Update." (Brochure.) Gates, Dominic. "Wrecking ball looms for historic Boeing Plant 2." Seattle Times, July 13, 2010. Georgetown Riverview Restoration Project, http://georgetownneighborhoodcom/Riveiview.html. Graff, Cory. Images of Aviation— Boeing Field. Charleston, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing, 2008. Greif, Martin. The New Industrial Landscape: The Story of the Austin Company. Clinton, New Jersey: The Main Street Press, 1978. Hansen, David M., Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Boeing Airplane Company Building / Building 105; Red Barn." National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, July 1977. Huber, Louis R. "The Job Grows Bigger." Boeing Magazine, July 1951. King County, Washington: Parcel Viewer website. http://www.metrokc.gov/gis/mapportal/PViewer_main.htm. Tax Assessor Property Record Cards. (Available at Puget Sound Regional Archives, Bellevue Community College.) Klingle, Matthew. Emerald City: An Environmental History of Seattle. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2007. Kroll Map Company. Maps of Seattle, 1912 — 1920, 1940-1960, and ca. 2000. Laudan, Fred P. "Revolution in the Factory." Boeing Magazine, July 1956. Lacitis, Erik. "This is One of the Places That Won the War." Seattle Times, September 25, 2006. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 22) Lentz, Florence K. "Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance." Prepared for The Boeing Company, April 2000. Mike Lombardi, Mike. "'Rosie' a pioneer for women," Boeing Frontiers, May 22, 2002, Vol. 1, No. 1. McMinn, Thelma. "Wing Train." Boeing Magazine, June 1945. McClure, Robert, and Paul Joseph Brown. "The Duwamish - A River Lost?" Seattle Post Intelligencer, November 26, 27 and 28, 2007. Milbrooke, Anne, Patrick W. Andrus, Jody Cook, and David B. Whipple. Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation Properties. National Register Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places, 1998. Museum of History and Industry. Digital photography collection. http://www.seattlehistory.org/. Myers, Polly M. "Shop traditions: maintaining masculinity at Boeing Aircraft Company during World War 11." Unpublished Masters thesis, Western Washington University, 2003. Neprud, Robert. "727 Production Methods." Boeing Magazine, October 1962. Pacific Coast Architecture Database, University of Washington Special Collections. "Bain, William James Sr." https://digital.lib.washington.edu/architect/architects/2130/ Phillips, Reynolds. "10 Big Years." Boeing Magazine, October 1952. . `Always a Door to Open." Boeing Magazine, July 1951. Robertson, Major William B. `Production Methods for the Manufacture of Aircraft." Aeronautical World, March 1930. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) Schwantes, Carlos A. "The Pacific Northwest in World War II." Journal of the West, 25:3, July 1986. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "Boeing Field Jobs Must Wait, Says Gannon." April 9, 1936. "Airplanes Grow From Curiosity to City's Leading Industry in 38 Years." January 2, 1949, p. D12. "Top Architect William Bain Sr. Dies in Seattle." January 22, 1985. Seattle Public Library Special Collections. Clippings, 46-48 NW uncat. File, Seattle Industry Aircraft. Seattle Times: "Seattle Has Played Big Part in Developing U.S. Aircraft." December 15, 1935. "Huge Plant on 28 Acres Planned by Plane Firm." March 8, 1936. "Plane Firm Signs for Big Project." April 9, 1936. "Boeing to Spend Quarter -Mill for Expansion." March 28, 1937. "Assembly -Line Production of Boeing Bombers Begins." May 31, 1939. "Expansion Depends on War Orders." March 29, 1940. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 23) "Boeing to Build $23,000,000 Worth." May 20, 1940. "Boeing to Put in Speed -Up Device." May 22, 1940. "Boeing Million -A -Month Payroll Boosts State." July 28, 1940, p. 15. "15,000 Dance Dedication of Big New Boeing Building." October 13, 1940. "Boeing Expansion Calls for New Workers." October 16, 1940. '25th Birthday." July 27, 1941, special section. 'Women in the War Work." October 18, 1942 (series). `Boeing Buys U.S. Share in No. 2 for $7,769,363." July 19, 1943. "How Boeing Plant Would Look to Japanese Bomber." October 16, 1948. "City Has Fight of Life to Keep Boeing Plant." August 21, 1949. "Boeing Plans More Production Buildings." June 15, 1951. "Boeing Plant 2: B17s to Pipe Bumpers." May 4, 1975, p. El. "G.W. Dennis, Designer of Boeing Camouflage, Dies." February 20, 1982. Simonson, G. R., ed. The History of the American Aircraft Industry, an Anthology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1968. Stoff, Joshua. Picture History of World War 11 American Aircraft Production. New York: Dover Publications, 1993. Quintard Taylor. The Forging ofa Black Community: Seattle's Central District from 1870 through the Civil Rights Era. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1994. Twiss, Robert L. "Special Report: Boeing, the First 50 Years." American Aviation, July 1966: pp. 19-30. Umphrey, Wallace. "Evolution in rhe Factory." Boeing Magazine, May 1957. University of Washington Libraries. Special Collections. Vogt, Bill. "What You Can Do When You Have To." Target, Periodical of the Association for Manufacturing Excellence, vol. 15 no. 1: n.p. Watson, Tom. "The Day Boeing Disappeared." Seattle Weekly. June l0 June 16, 1987. West, H. Oliver. "What is the Multiline System?" Boeing News, March 1943. Wilma, David. "Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park — Thumbnail History (Essay 2985)." February 16, 2001. HistoryLink.org. . "Seattle Neighborhoods: Georgetown — Thumbnail History (Essay 2974)." February 10, 2001. HistoryLink.org. Year by Year: 75 Years of Boeing History, 1916-1991. Seattle: Boeing Historical Archives, 1991. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 H.AER No. WA -189, (page 24) PART V. SUPPLEMENTAL GRAPHICS -1.----1---1-----1- --1 .....-_.., -•ce W5.. 4g..-- _::: 7:, N .........., = 7."........, . i. .--/ , 1 C;,-, ..---- / ri-----1.- ---1_.---1,----L-1-1'. .." "',.. ....., OUI• roR VIEW 3LE 311ZET SERIAL 1,4a. — BOEING AIRCRAFT COMPANY •otANT NO 2 Mr Wash. Site plan showing Plant 2 in 1939. (Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 25) Perspective view of Plant 2, from a 1946 report by Air Materiel Command Headquarters. (Boeing Historical Archives.) . .....,-..........- 7,......,.......7.7.,--.-....-_,....-. .... - ......77..,_.....-,......_,..--.., . . . . - II:i'. EliJ i ) , : ...;• • 1. i+ .'7%. 1-: / ' f / ,..) r • y!' 11 1 ' 4 ,.. .., 1 , 1. ‘ 12..j a. ,....I.":". 2.." , . , , ,1 (c) .,. .., . 4 • ,..; h, , „ ' , f • ..... ; ' I: •:.-., -,-, -,., 4. , , (...,('''r-, fili4i,4„.",'. ..' , 4'',.1:4:' ,., 1 , . .... • r‘r. '.i.,..." - - ,.......--.7 cz . • ' \: ,,.'''4 ' , ,i \„ I. , ::., 44`.4 , • I , A ic, . , i , t -^A ,, r, ' , •`o.t.:: _2 II • .I\,, . r.,..- S. I' -4'. .,,, p ..„.1 1-7 , 1 I 7/ , 1 - - - - - - - - -- . Perspective view of Plant 2, from a 1946 report by Air Materiel Command Headquarters. (Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 26) Site plan showing Plant 2 in 1956. (Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 27) THIS IS A SAMPLE PANT AND MUST BE RETAINED 1: 1 RE ATI N N S B REAU FILE. The first portion of Building 2-40, view looking south in 1936. (Boeing Historical Archives, 2B1389.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 28) Aerial view showing the initial portion of 2-40, in 1936. (Boeing Historical Archives, P45685.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 29) rao /INS IS A PR1gT AND MUST B iN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS NEWS BUREAU FILE. View looking west, showing the expanded Building 2-40 in September 1939. (Boeing Historical Archives, P40039.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41. & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 30) This August 1940 photo is overlaid with marking to show the expansion of Plant 2, including the first portions of the assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41, and the North Warehouse 2-31. The area noted for further expansion refers to the later phase of 2-40 and 2-41. Some of the farmland in the background was used for construction of the South Warehouse, Building 2-44. (Boeing Historical Archives, 1293913.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 31) An aerial view dating from September 11, 1940 shows the assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41, warehouse 2-31 and the adjacent office facility, Building 2-25. Farmland to the southeast was used for later expansion of Buildings 2-40 and 241, and 2-44. (Boeing Historical Archives, P419.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 32) Adl9N I IV tory' AN • >��:�4011: ..__-_ 4It-. � ■ 111,, wow . ° . I fir ��:•�ii �a�� • : 1�,, ! �'► .� ENGINt Eks , E k Mww[...rrQ riG AIRGRAFT Co.- - Seattle, Wash 15 ,37 rHc o >. t IZ-4-40 ,. 2O b A December 4, 1940 view shows expansion of 2-40 and 2-41 under construction. (Boeing Historical Archives, Austin20B.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 33) An aerial view looking west in January 1941 shows the final phase of the 2-40 and 2-41 expansion, and warehouse 2-44 in the foreground. (Boeing Historical Archives, 15518B.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HA.ER No. WA -189, (page 34) View looking northwest at the edge of the Duwamish River, construction of warehouse 2-44, and the final expansion of the assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41. This view is looking northwest. (Boeing Historical Archives, P535.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 35) A view looking south across a parking lot toward the buildings in 1941. (Boeing Historical Archives, P982.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 36) A March 1941 aerial photo, view looking east at the completed Plant 2 with Assembly Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 along with adjacent structures 2-31 (the North Warehouse, left) and 2-44 (the South Warehouse, right). (Boeing Historical Archives, P643.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 37) f • �M S :E A SAMPLE PRINT AND MUST BE RETAINED IN 'I•L PUBLIC RELATIONS NEWS BUREAU FILE \e 1-1Q Similar aerial view and the photograph on the prior page, shows the camouflage treatment on the roof of Plant 2, which was installed in 1942 and removed in 1946. (Boeing Historical Archives, X-1228.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 38) 1942 interior view looking west into the northeast end of Building 2-40 and the final assembly of B17s. The wide vertical lift doors are visible in rhe upper foreground, partially raised. (Boeing Historical Archives, P1978.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 39) IN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS t* 1IIIRVIll FILE. Interior view looking across Building 2-40 in 1942. This view shows the northeastern portion of the vast assembly space between column lines D and Q. (Boeing Historical Archives, P1810.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 40) THIS ISA SAMPLE PRINT AND MUST BE RETAINED IN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS NEWS BUREAU FILE. Interior view of a second Floor area showing details of the steel trusses, ductwork and electrical power drops from the ceiling that served machinery for small parts manufacturing, and a steel stair leading to an upper mezzanine. (Boeing Archives P11705.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 41) A view looking north from the Duwamish Waterway, July 10, 1943. The southwest facade of Building 2-41 is visible, and the 16th Avenue South Bridge is in the background. (Boeing Historical Archives, 38917B.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 42) A shift change, August 1943. A small portion of the northwest facade of Building 2-41 k visible in the upper left corner of the photo. The concrete structure at the upper right is the support for 16th Avenue South Bridge. View looking south, with a portion of 2-3lvisible in the background. Note the separate exit route for women workers. (Boeing Historical Archives, P3404.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 43) Plant 2 in the post-war era. Aerial view from 1954 looking south at the complex, with 16th Avenue South to the left and the Duwamish River in the background. (Boeing Historical Archives, A68747.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 44) A view looking southwest at the partially raised doors and interior space of Building 2-40, October 1945. (Boeing Historical Archives, HS5060.) RECEIVED 06 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 • Fax Number (360) 586-3067 • Website: www.dahp.wa.gov July 28, 2010 Mr. Gabriel Rosenthal Boeing Legal Department PO Box 3707, MC 11 -XT Seattle, WA 98124-2207 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 033010 -03 -KI Property: Boeing Plant 2 Demo Re: HAER Document Dear Mr. Rosenthal: I have reviewed the HAER documentation for Boeing Plant 2. Your consultant has a done an exemplary job on the documentation. As such we considered this documentation complete and will be sending the information via Fed -EX to the HAER Office in D.C. tomorrow. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 michael.houser@dahp.wa.gov BOEING PLANT 2 ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle King County Washington HAER No. WA -189 PHOTOGRPAHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED & 1NTEPRETIVE DRAWINGS HISTORIC AMERICNA ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service U.S. department OF Interior 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20240 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 Location: 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington 98108 Within an area bounded by East Marginal Way South on the east, the Duwarnish Waterway on the west, 16th Avenue South on the north, and the Jorgensen property on the south. Quad: Seattle South UTM: Zone 10, 5264114 N / 551953 E Dates of Construction: 1936-1941 Original Designers: The Austin Company (Engineers and Builders) Original and Present Owner: The Boeing Company Original Uses: Airplane assembly (2-40 and 2-41) Warehouse storage, offices, and partial assembly (2-31 and 2-44) Present Use: Facilities storage (2-40) / Vacant (2-41) Offices, Shops and Storage (2-31) / Vacant (2-44) Significance: Boeing Plant 2 assembly buildings 2-40 and 2-41, and the two associated warehouses, 2-31 and 2-44, are significant for their direct association with the World War II defense industry, specifically production of B-17 aircraft. The plant serves as an intact example of industrial building design and construction by The Austin Company. Project Information: This HAER document has been prepared at the request of the property owner, The Boeing Company. The report provides historical and architectural information about Buildings 2-31, 2-40, 2-41 and 2-44 at the Plant 2 facility located south of Seattle. Historians, Drafters: The documentation, by BOLA Architecture + Planning was created by the following individuals: Susan D. Boyle, AIA, Principal Sonja Sokol FUresz, Preservation Planner Curtis Bigelow, Architect Abby Martin, Intern Colin Walker, Job Captain Photographer: Brian Allen, Seattle Report Date: June 30, 2010 BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 2) PART I. HISTORICAL INFORMATION THE BOEING COMPANY IN SEATTLE The history of The Boeing Company can be traced back to 1916, when William Edward Boeing (1881- 1956) began building floatplanes in a small boathouse on the east side of Lake Union in Seattle. Boeing was born in Detroit, and attended Yale University. He moved to Seattle in 1908 after making money in timber around Grays Harbor, Washington. Boeing was fascinated by aviation, and in 1915 he and George Conrad Westervelt began building a seaplane. Westervelt was a Navy engineer who had studied aeronautics at MIT. William Boeing completed the plane on his own when Westervelt was transferred to the East Coast, and in 1916 he established the Pacific Aero Products Company. The following year, he reorganized the firm as the Boeing Airplane Company. During World War 11 the company was known as the Boeing Aircraft Company. The company's first manufacturing facility was located on the west side of the Duwamish, south of the Seattle city limits. The former Heath Shipyards site, which William Boeing had purchased in 1910, served as a location for some fabrication, as well as drafting and office space. In 1918,. a tarpaper shed was replaced with a more substantial structure. It became known as Plant 1 following the establishment of Plant 2 in 1936 (Hansen, n.p.). During World War I, the Navy ordered 50 seaplane trainers from Boeing, and by May 1918 the company had 337 employees (Boeing Company, A Brief Histoly, p. 7). Planes were tested on a grassy airstrip known as the Meadows, on the Duwamish Valley floor. This airstrip eventually was improved and acquired by King County in 1928. The 1920s was a decade of expansion in airplane manufacturing and related industries throughout the nation. Boeing developed and manufactured fighter planes for the military, as well as a mail plane that won an airmail contract with the U.S. Post Office. The airmail service was inaugurated in 1927 and provided limited passenger service in a two -seat cabin. The first dedicated passenger transport began in 1928 with Boeing's 12 -passenger Model 80 biplane, which a year later was upgraded to an 18 -passenger model. By the end of the decade, airplane manufacturers began developing new monoplanes—the beginning of contemporary commercial aviation (Boeing Company, A Brief Histwy, pp. 14-17). The Army Air Corps ordered the first 13 B-17 bombers from Boeing in 1936, and Plant 1 was inadequate to keep the production on schedule (Year by Year, p. 37). In a step that signaled the commencement of what would be a massive World War II expansion, Boeing purchased 28 acres on the east side of the Duwamish Waterway and built the first phase of Plant 2. CONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION OF THE PLANT 2 BUILDINGS For a graphical depiction of the construction and expansion of the buildings, see the drawing on the first page of the Part V., the Supplemental Graphics Section. In March of 1936, Boeing purchased the first 28 acres of the new Plant 2 site. It was well -situated near the King County airport, across the Duwamish Waterway and south from Boeing Plant 1. At that time the King County Airport (Boeing Field) was being enlarged and improved with Works Progress Administration funds. Plans called for immediate construction of a "large and modern assembly plant [to] BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 3) be completed before the end of the year, with additions...to be made as business justifies" (Boeing press release, March 14, 1936). Sire grading began in April and construction began in May, with scheduled completion within five months. The facility was necessitated by the Army Air Corps' order of 13 Y1 B-17 (also known as 299) bombers from Boeing. The earliest portion of the assembly plant measured 200' wide by 300' deep, with an unobstructed floor area and a height of 53'. The building had giant rolling doors along the primary northeast facade, in an opening 198' wide by 35' high. Six hundred tons of structural steel were used in the building's construction. This first phase of the project cost approximately $250,000. Parts were trucked or barged from Plant 1 and assembled at rhe new Plant 2 site. A railroad spur to the site was laid parallel to East Marginal Way, and a dock served Plant 2 on the Duwamish Waterway. Between March and October of 1937, the assembly building was more than doubled in size by construction of an addition immediately northwest of the 1936 portion. The addition consisted of two bays each measuring 125' wide by 300' deep, for a total addition of 250' by 300'. The overall building then measured 450' wide by 300' deep. All of this construction comprised a portion of what is known as Building 2-40. "Frons the start, the Boeing facility expansions, in common with other aircraft manufacturing plants, were the results of production demands far in excess of original quantities requested by the Government" (Air Materiel Command Headquarters Report, p. 24). In 1940, the British government provided assistance to further expand Plant 2 for production of Douglas DB -7 bombers. This $2 million addition was built to meet the production demands of a $23 million order for the Allies. Approximately 600,000 square feet of floor space were added, and the existing building was extended southwest to the property line at the border of the Duwamish Waterway. This phase expanded Building 2-40 and provided the first portion of Building 2-41. Construction began in June 1940 and a dedication dance was held on October 12, 1940. A warehouse to the northwest—now known as Building 2-31—was constructed as well. It was immediately adjacent and internally connected to the assembly area. The first story of an engineering building (no longer extant) was added under this contract. Meanwhile, further expansion was already being necessitated by B-17 production demands. Under an Emergency Plant Facilities (EPF) contract, the U.S. government funded the purchase of additional land and plant expansion. (Later, in 1943, Boeing bought out the government share of Plant 2 for more than $7.7 million [Seattle Times, July 19, 1943].) Just three days after the dedication of the previous project, a construction contract was signed for a subsequent Plant 2 addition. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 were expanded to the southeast, and the one million square -foot project also included a four-story engineering and production department building, as well as a three-story office building. (The engineering and office buildings are no longer extant). Building 2-44, a warehouse southeast of the assembly area, was constructed under this contract and completed prior to the final 2-40 and 2-41 expansion. This addition was carried out in 1940 and 1941. A newspaper article from the period noted that: Immense as Plant No. 2 will be, the production arrangement is simple. The manufacturing area will be flanked by warehouse area. Raw materials and purchased parts will be routed into the plant as manufacturing work progresses. Subassembly work will be done in second -floor areas above the primary shop areas (Seattle Times, October 16, 1940). BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 4) A 6,000 -car employee parking lot, located across from Plant 2 on East Marginal Way, occupied land leased to Boeing by King County. The lot was sized to provide empty sections for workers coming on shift before those in the preceding shift had departed. Police and State Patrol were needed to direct the large volume of traffic during shift changes. According to 1946 analysis of construction progress, "[t]he several consecutive expansions at Boeing, Seattle, were efficiently planned and the actual expansions accomplished in commendable time, in comparison with similar West Coast expansions," (Air Materiel Command, p. 24). At each phase, buildings were occupied before their completion. Beginning in 1942, a camouflage project was undertaken to disguise rhe appearance of Plant 2 from above, to stymie potential air attacks on this strategically important facility. The camouflage project was delegated to the Seattle Army Corps of Engineers. Two men are credited with the design of the camouflage for the Boeing plant. William Bain Sr., a prominent Seattle architect, who served as the Camouflage Director for the State of Washington Office of Civil Defense beginning in 1942, is credited with the overall camouflage project. Its design is attributed to John Detlie, a designer with training in architecture and engineering, who worked as an art director at MGM studios in Hollywood from 1935 to 1942. Detlie had been approached by Army personnel before the bombing of Pearl Harbor to discuss possibilities for camouflaging large plants on rhe West Coast. In response, he began designing and building models of camouflaged factories. In May of 1942 Detlie received orders to report to Seattle to head the camouflage efforts for Plant 2. The resulting design converted the rooftop of Plant 2 into a complete, mock suburban neighborhood, nicknamed `Wonderland'. The sawtooth roof of the plant was covered with wire netting, burlap or canvas, and finished with small-scale trees and shrubs, houses, garages, and a gas station. Windows, skylights and clerestories throughout the plant were painted our for blackout purposes, and exterior walls were painted in a camouflage pattern. Although the threat of air attack faded and camouflage became unnecessary, removal of the rooftop work was not done until late June 1946. THE AUSTIN COMPANY, ORIGINAL DESIGNER AND CONTRACI'OR The Austin Company designed and constructed Boeing's Plant 2 buildings. Founded in 1878 in Cleveland by Samuel Austin, the company began as a carpentry, building, and contracting firm. Austin had his own shop and eventually his own mill and built residences, commercial buildings, and factory buildings. Many of these were also designed by Austin. Samuel's son Wilbert "W.J." received a degree in mechanical engineering from what is now Case Institute of Technology and in 1901 joined his father in business. The company was incorporated in 1904 as Samuel Austin & Son Company. The "Austin Method" became the company's hallmark. Under this method, the company provided full services by one firm—design, engineering, and construction. In 1908, the Samuel Austin & Son Company began a designing and constructing a series of factories for various electric lamp manufacturers. In 1911, the firm designed and built a campus research facility and a lamp manufacturing plant for the National Electric Lamp Association, both in Cleveland. Extensive work for the Association led W.J. Austin to the concept of standardization in design and construction. The company name changed to The Austin Company in 1916. Austin established sales offices in industrial centers—the first engineering and construction company to do so—eventually resulting in a network of offices around the country. The Seattle -area branch, which is attributed with the original design and construction of Plant 2, opened in 1926. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 5) During World War 1, The Austin Company's volume of work increased nearly 35 percent (Greif, p. 60), as it undertook national railroad projects and several major military installations. The company's most extraordinary project of the time was the Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Corporacion plant in Buffalo in 1918. The largest factory building in the world, at more than 600,000 square feet, it was completed in 90 working days and covered an area of approximately 28 acres under one roof. This plant continued to serve as an aircraft production plant throughout World War II, more than 25 years later. The Austin Company continued to develop new areas of standardization to provide facilities for different industries. Particularly, W.J. Austin's love of aviation and his contacts with the country's aircraft manufacturers resulted in his innovation in wide -span hangar doors and The Austin Company's eventual leadership in design and construction of air transport facilities. With extensive experience in standardization, aviation, and industry, The Austin Company was responsible for Boeing's development in the Puget Sound area from 1936—when the initial construction at Plant 2 was undertaken—into the 1960s. During World War II the company's work also included ship -building facilities, factories, special Naval facilities, and bomber assembly plants in the Southwest. After the war, The Austin Company added specialty practices for television studios. In 1984, National Gypsum bought The Austin Company. Austin's management bought the company back in 1997, and in 2006 Austin became part of the Kajima Family of Companies. From an architectural perspective, the Boeing Plant 2 buildings provide a clear contrast with many earlier industrial facilities. Constructed in the run-up to and during World War I1, they are much more straightforward and functional in their exterior appearance. Rather than masonry cladding, the facades of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 feature corrugated and plain metal panels, stripped of extraneous veneer and decorative details. In particular the highly visible Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 served as expressions of the power of production rather than an iconic image of industry. Original interior spaces within the Plant 2 are clear spans interrupted only by necessary structure. Here, too, the Boeing Plant 2 was created as a space with maximum flexibility, capable of supporting varied manufacturing in a multi -line process rather than a single assembly line. This flexibility proved its worth by allowing Boeing to change production processes with greater efficiency by using trenches below the concrete floor slab of the assembly floor, which ran along grid lines in both directions, for insertion and remodeling of rails and utility distribution systems responsive to changing means and methods of production. THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE DUWAMISH RIVER The physical context surrounding Boeing's Plant 2 has changed considerably from its early 20th century conditions. This is due in large parr to the early history of the area and the modifications made to the Duwamish River's natural flow, which once wound north through the Green River Valley (present-day Kent and Auburn areas) to the headland at what is the present Duwamish Waterway. The Duwamish is Seattle's only river and is part of a collection of rivers that includes the White, rhe Green, and the Puyallup Rivers. These run through the broad, L-shaped valley south of Seattle in southern King County and northern Pierce County. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 6) The Duwamish was straightened and dredged as part of the early efforts by the City of Seattle to create infrastructure for industrial development. It presently runs through the flat bottomland that makes up much of the area from Tukwila to Harbor Island, passing along the west side of Plant 2, the west side of Seattle's Georgetown neighborhood, and the east side of the South Park neighborhood. South Park and Georgetown were annexed to Seattle in 1907 and 1910 respectively. Plant 2 borders the Georgetown neighborhood, which is located to the east of East Marginal Way. Georgetown emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and the area is characterized by a mix of industry and residential development. In addition to the undulating course of the river, a number of rail lines once ran through Georgetown to serve local industries. Seattle's economy through the early part of the 20th century remained focused on import/export activities and resource -extraction based industries rather than manufacturing. While a strong ship -building industry developed during the run-up to World War I, this business sector remained stagnant through much of the 1920s and 1930s. Thus there are few historic industrial facilities comparable to Boeing Plant 2 in the area. Boeing Field / King County International Airport is located south of Georgetown and east of East Marginal Way South. It was originally cleared as farmland and developed as the Meadows Race Track in 1902 with a 10,000 -seat wood -framed grandstand and nearby stables for 1,000 horses. The track, which was placed over flat river bottomland, began to be used as an airfield with the first airplane flight demonstration in Seattle in March 1910. The Meadows served as an informal airstrip for testing and demonstrating flights through the 1920s, during which time the Boeing Company began building airplanes for use by the Army and Navy. The airport opened in 1928 and scheduled air service began in 1929. After the opening of Boeing's Plant 2 and through World War I1, the airfield was used to test the company's B-17 bombers. The nearby neighborhoods of Georgetown and South Park both result from a historic pattern of residential and industrial development. The typical buildings that dominate these areas are small one- and two-story wood -frame dwellings on small lots (typically 30' to 50' by 100'), small-scale wood -frame boarding houses, and apartment buildings. Retail stores, cafes, and taverns are located in older buildings in the commercial centers of both neighborhoods near Airport Way South and 13th Avenue South in Georgetown, and South Cloverdale Street and 14th Avenue South in South Park. In addition there is a library, community recreation center, and elementary school in South Park. The combined residential population of these two neighborhoods in 2000 was approximately 4,990. PLANT 2'S WORLD WAR II WORKERS The massive growth of the aircraft industry during World War 11 is conveyed by employment and production numbers. Between 1939 and late 1943, the number of aircraft workers in the United States grew exponentially—from 48,638 to more than 2 million (Lentz, p. 13). This facilitated the growth in aircraft production, from 6,019 planes in 1940 to a peak of 96,318 planes in 1944. The total aircraft production for the years 1940-1946 was 304,887 (Stoff, p. 175). There were other aspects of wartime aircraft production, beyond the advent of mass production of military aircraft, which had lasting implications. These include the large-scale admission into the workforce of women and the emerging role of minority workers in the industry and organized labor. The history of Boeing's Plant 2 celebrates the role that women played in production during World War II. However, the Boeing Aircraft Company had hired women in production roles as early 1916 when BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 7) seamstresses began sewing fabric for the company's first airplane. In 1917 the company's Drafting Department hired it first female engineer. By 1918 these women and other female employees made up almost 25% of the company's work force. Their numbers rose during World War 11, to approximately 15% in 1942. By 1928, with 800 employees, Boeing was one of the largest aircraft manufacturers in the country. By 1936, it had over 1,000 workers when production began at Plant 2. As military aircraft were ordered at an increasing rate and many men left for war, labor shortages loomed. Women, minorities, very young men, and retirees were hired to fill the need. In December 1940, Boeing had 8,427 Seattle employees; by the end of the war the number reached 46,000 (Year by Year, p. 46). In January 1943, there were 14,876 women employed at Boeing's Seattle and Renton plants, out of 34,087 total employees (Boeing "Payroll Headcount: Highest Peaks of Employment," cited in Myers, p. 40). Boeing's wartime employment of female workers reflected the role of women in defense industries throughout the country. Working mothers made up more than 40% of the nation's female workforce in 1940, and their number grew to nearly 46% by 1944. In Seattle alone, the employment of women increased by 55 percent between April 1940 and January 1943. By May of 1943, Boeing employed nearly 14,500 women. (Berner, 1999, p. 68 — 79). At the height of production, berween 1942 and 1944, women made up 46% of Boeing's workforce. (Anderson, p. 77). Most of the women who came to work in Plant 2 were unskilled in the manufacturing process, with only 3,062 of those working in 1943 having semi -skilled positions and only 109 with skilled ones. Most of the women workers performed simplified tasks as part of an overall assembly line. In response to training needs, local public schools offered publicly funded training in aircraft trades, pre-flight, and map and blueprint reading, with specific programs cited as "Free Education for Boeing Employees." The Boeing Company also provided in -houses classes and ongoing training. Organized labor, in an effort to secure employment for male union members after the war, viewed women as temporary workers. The Aero Mechanics Local 751, Seattle's largest union prior to the war, fought for higher wages and more breaks for Boeing workers and equal (union scale) pay for equal work, along with calls for rent and price controls, and government-sponsored housing. While the union eventually supported wartime employment of women and African-Americans it did not welcome either as permanent employees. Local 751 briefly allowed African-Americans to become members in 1940, but under pressure it quickly changed this policy. Up to 1,600 African-Americans worked at Boeing at peak levels in 1943, but throughout the war era they were charged dues, but given only union work permits. Without seniority and other benefits of membership, more Blacks found work in local shipyards than in aircraft factories. It was not until the post-war period, in 1948,.that the union ended this discrimination. Taylor, p. 164-166). The presence of women working on the factory floors of Plant 2 alongside men initially raised difficult social conditions, and some differences remained inherent in the workplace throughout the war. Publications and company records indicate the efforts undertaken by Boeing to train the new defense - industry employees, and its actions to address women's issues such as child-care and transportation needs. At Plant 2 meals were served in a cafeteria, and women were provided with separate locker rooms and security gates. Women employees were closely monitored, and as the company studied their performance it redesigned some production processes, such as the cockpit assembly, to utilize their smaller size and ability to complete detailed tasks. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 8) Promotion of women workers occurred locally and at a national level. While most women were drawn to work in defense industries, government agencies and media at all levels promoted the concept of women as non-traditional factory workers as their patriotic and civic duty. The song, "Rosie the Riveter" was produced in 1942 as part of the federal effort to sell war bonds, and in May 1943 the Saturday Evening Post published an image of "Rosie" on its cover, using a portrait of a young telephone operator by painter Norman Rockwell. The iconic figure became a part of popular culture during rhe war, and has continued to serve since then as a proud symbol of female workers. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 9) PART II. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION THE SETTING Buildings 2-31, 2-40, 2-41, and 2-44 make up rhe World War II era production facilities at The Boeing Company's Plant 2 in south Seattle. The approximately 110 -acre property that comprises Plant 2 is bounded by East Marginal Way South on the east, the Duwamish Waterway on the west, South Webster Street on the north, and the Jorgensen property on the south. The buildings are southeast of the 16th Avenue South Bridge (also known as the 14th Avenue South Bridge and the South Park Bridge), which bisects the current Plant 2 property. The facility is located in the industrial corridor of south Seattle, on the east bank of the Duwamish Waterway and across Marginal Way from Boeing Field / King County Airport. The original Plant 1 buildings, which are the subject of this report, were located to the east of 16' Avenue South, the street that led from East Marginal Way to the east side of the bridge. Nearby blocks of East Marginal Way also contain expansive and low -scale industrial sites. The Georgetown neighborhood is located north of Plant 2 and Boeing Field, and west across the Duwamish Waterway is the South Park neighborhood, with West Seattle beyond. Beacon Hill is farther east/northeast, beyond Boeing Field and Interstate 5. Seattle's commercial downtown is approximately five miles to the north. Historic photographs show that the property that became Boeing's Plant 2 consisted largely of fields before development of the facility, which allowed for great expansion over time. The siting of the buildings on this property provided a strategic location in relation to water, rail, and vehicular access and in close proximity to the King County Airport. The area surrounding Plant 2 has several transportation grids in addition to East Marginal Way South, resulting from the development of nearby South Michigan Street, Highway 99, and I-5. Heavy traffic traverses the Georgetown neighborhood along Airport Way South and on the major arterials that lead from it to East Marginal Way. East Marginal Way, the six -lane road that runs in front of Plant 2, serves as an urban freeway, providing access for commercial as well as private vehicles throughout the south Seattle industrial areas. Neighborhood streets from the east typically lead to and terminate at East Marginal Way. At the west end of 8th Avenue South, however, there is the recently -developed City of Seattle Gateway Park. Near the intersection of South Michigan Street and East Marginal Way the Duwamish River is crossed by the 1st Avenue South Bridge, which was constructed in 1956 and 1998 and rebuilt in ca. 2001. 14th Avenue South, which passes through the present Boeing Plant 2, leads to the commercial center of the South Park neighborhood on the west side of the river. This historic double -leaf bascule bridge, which dates from 1929-1931, was closed in late June 2010 and is scheduled for replacement in the future. SITE FEATURES According to King County Tax Assessor's records, the tax parcel on which the subject buildings are located is 28.65 acres. Other buildings on the same parcel date from 1940 to 1953 and were built primarily for offices and additional warehouse space on additional property. The site is relatively flat. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 10) The subject buildings are identified as 2-31, 2-40, 2-41, and 2-44. The primary assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41, do riot stand as two distinct structures. Built in separate phases, they make up a single large structure with 2-40 being northeast of 2-41. The two abutting warehouse structures located to the northwest (2-31) and southeast (2-44), are internally connected to Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. A tunnel system, situated below the first floor, links all four buildings. The tunnel system provides continuous access for plant personnel, along with restrooms, locker rooms and some storage and service spaces. Buildings2-31 and 2-40 are abutted by, and internally connected to a newer structure, Building 2-25, an office facility, is situated northwest of 2-31. Building 2-44 is abutted by Building 249, a tall clear -span structure, on the southeast. A large asphalt -paved parking lot is located immediately northeast of Buildings 2-40 and 2-44 in the approximate 250' setback between the building and the roadbed of East Marginal Way. The Duwamish Waterway is located to the southwest of Building 2-31, 2-41, and 2-44. ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 AND 2-41 The buildings known as 2-40 and 2-41 form one vast structure, with an overall rectangular footprint of approximately 754' by approximately 1000'. (This area corresponds to column lines A to Q, northwest to southeast, by column lines 1 to 26, northeast to southwest.) The primary facade faces northeast, where it is set back approximately 250' from East Marginal Way South. The portion designated 2-40 is the northeastern (or "front") portion of the building, extending approximately 550' from column line 1 to column line 12. It is also known as the Assembly Building or Final Assembly Building. 2-41 is the southwestern (or "back") portion, extending approximately 450' from column line 12 to column line 26. This is also identified as the Primary Building or Basic Primary Building. Constructed in four phases between 1936 and 1941, the structure is composed a steel frame on concrete footings, with a 6" -thick concrete slab -on -grade foundation, and piers. The tunnel system, which extends below all four of the Plant 2 war era buildings, is constructed of concrete. The structure of Building 2-40 is made up by steel trusses, and riveted steel columns, with support a sawtooth roof with northeast -facing windows. The overall building height varies from approximately 42' to 53', with the tallest portion along the southeast. Most of 2-40 is a tall, single story volume, with a 50' - wide mezzanine running between column lines 11 and 12. An L-shaped second story is located also within 2-41, leaving the western corner as a taller single -story space. Where the building extends over the Duwamish Waterway on the southwest side, a 5" -thick structural concrete slab is used between column lines 25 and 26. Original structural drawings note the slab was set on 12x16 creosoted wood beams on creosoted wood pilings, approximately 10' on -center. A timber bulkhead runs northwest to southeast, below the southwest side of the building. The exterior facades are characterized by industrial steel sash ribbon windows, metal cladding, and seven giant overhead doors along the primary northeast facade. Cladding was noted on original drawings as "ferroclad." As subsequent additions were made, some windows and ferroclad panels from existing exterior walls were salvaged and reused on the new exterior walls. Metal cladding presently in place is a combination of flat panels and corrugated panels, all of it painted a buff beige color. The original drawings note composition roofing; presently there appears to be a combination of composition roofing and asphalt roofing. Typical window strips measure approximately 3'-6" and 5'-2" in height; these are continuous and contain various divided -light glazing patterns—two, three, or four lights tall. Windows along the northeast face of BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 H.AER No. WA -189 (page 11) each sawtooth are also steel sash windows ser continuously, typically 7'-9" or 8'-7" tall. Each of these 30 - light (6 across by 5 high) fixed windows contains an operable 8 -light awning section at the top center portion. Numerous doors, of various sizes and types, provide access and egress around the building. The seven overhead doors on the northeast facade range in size from 94' to 100' wide. These oversized doors also contain strip windows, person doors, and several smaller vehicle doors within them. The assembly buildings was designed to provide as much open floor area as possible, uninterrupted by partitioned offices, restrooms, or other divided spaces. Building 2-40 consists of a single tall story, measuring approximately 36' from floor to underside of roof trusses. An estimated 37,500 -square -foot mezzanine runs along the full width of rhe southwest end, between column lines 11 and 12. At the main floor level below the mezzanine, the space is divided into numerous smaller offices and rooms. A concrete wall with large rolling fire doors along column line 12 indicates the transition between Building 2-40 and Building 2-41. Most of 2-41 has two floors; only the west corner of the building—from column lines 22 to 26 and from column lines A to D—is a tall single -story space. "The plant was laid out to be under one roof with no dividing walls [between 2-40 and 2-41]. After it was built the fire underwriters required that it be divided by a fire wall in the middle [along column line 12] on account of the large amount of insurable values within the bldg." This division reportedly modified the original ventilation and lighting design, and a later blackout requirement also affected the ventilation plan (Boeing News Bureau, July 26, 1943, p. 5). The interior space is characterized by its large volume, which is largely unobstructed but for the riveted steel columns; fully exposed structure, including massive steel roof trusses; concrete floor slabs at the first Floor and maple flooring at the mezzanine (2-40) and second floor (2-41); ample natural light from continuous strip windows along the walls and the sawtooth roof; and restrooms contained in sections that are suspended from the structure above the production floor. These restrooms are accessed by metal stairs. Additional restrooms are situated below the first floor, accessed by stairs. Single crane rails and craneways and large mechanical equipment elements are also distinguishing features of the interior. The cast -in-place concrete fire separation wall at column line 12 between 2-40 and 2-41 contains a series of large openings with sliding fire doors as well as conventionally -sized openings. A large concrete - enclosed room is located at both the north and east corners of Building 2-41. These two spaces have large metal fire doors and fire shutters and appear to have had large exhaust ductwork originally. One sign reads, "Central Fab. Conveyor Spray Painting," indicating that the space appears to have been used as a paint spray area. There are no other notations on drawings or earlier documentation. The interior face of the northeast and southwest perimeter walls is unfinished, with the structure exposed and the exterior cladding elements visible. On rhe northwest and southeast sides, Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 flow into the neighboring buildings without any wall separation. Beneath the building concrete tunnels, approximately 10' to 15' wide and 10' high, provided access and egress for personnel without interrupting work on the floor. A period article notes: "Beneath the factory floor at Plant No. 2 will be 3,000 lineal feet of concrete access tunnels, providing entrance and exit for workers. Large washrooms and locker rooms will be along the access corridors on the basement level" (Seattle Times, October 16, 1940). Narrower utility tunnels are reached from the larger access tunnels, along with a few storage and service spaces. There are also utility trenches accessed from openings (covered with metal plates) in the production floor of 2-40 and 2-41. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 12) CONSTRUCTION CHANGES TO BUILDINGS 2-40 AND 2-41 The original construction campaigns spanned 1936-1941, with the buildings constructed in phases as described earlier in this report. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are essentially unmodified from their original design and embody architectural integrity, although some various alterations have been made over time. Permit records were not available for review. The following description of changes is based primarily on visual observation and a review of more contemporary drawings. The earliest portion of the building had massive sliding doors on the primary northeast facade. These doors were replaced early on by vertical lift doors, which remain in place today. These overhead doors have had subsequent alterations made to them—two rubber overhead doors have been inserted within the large metal overhead doors, some of rhe windows within the doors have been replaced with metal panels, and some of the windows in the doors appear to date from the later 1940s or 1950s. • The "Boeing" sign, visible in early photographs, was removed from the primary northeast facade. Historic photos indicate this occurred during WWII, apparently for the camouflage project. • The typical ferroclad original cladding panels on the northeast facade have been replaced or covered by vertical metal panels. The date of this change is unknown. • Some non -original doors have been inserted or have replaced original doors. • Minimal areas of glazing have been replaced with Plexiglas or metal panels. • Non -original ducts, vents, or exhaust lines are visible. • Non -original partitions were inserted to create office area below the mezzanine in 2-40. • Some original interior openings in the fire wall at column line 12 have been infilled with concrete masonry units. • On the second floor of Building 2-41, partitioned office space was created. Finishes in this area include gypsum wallboard, carpet, and acoustical drop ceiling. • Some newer mechanical / manufacturing equipment has been installed. Both buildings suffer from some deferred maintenance, particularly 2-41. Areas of water infiltration are visible; the evidence of greatest damage is at the southwest edge of the roof where a section of wood decking is extensively deteriorated. Bird infiltration is also evident. Some areas along the southwest part of 2-41 are cordoned off to prevent access, due to safety concerns. For the most part, original windows are extant and intact. There are some broken window panes and minimal replacement of original glass with Plexiglas. Some exterior window surfaces are painted, presumably a remnant from World War II blackout requirements, while others are clear. Second -floor office areas in Building 2-41, which were previously altered with contemporary office finishes, have been vacant since the 1990s. Maple flooring at the second floor in 2-41 is undergoing abatement of a substance related to former production work that was done in that area. Building 2-40 is presently used for facilities and fleet storage and a portion is leased out for historic aircraft restoration. This portion appears to be better -maintained than 2-41, which is vacant. Building systems—including electrical, fire protection, HVAC, plumbing, and related systems—are aging, and Boeing Company personnel have noted that in many cases these systems are not operational. Piping breaks and resulting failures in the underground fire lines have caused extensive flooding in the tunnel areas and this reportedly continues to be a problem. The power distribution system was last upgraded in BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 13) 1962. Wood pilings in the Duwamish Waterway, under the southwest edge of the building, show evidence of deterioration, although some repairs were made in the 1980s. BUILDING 2-31 (NORTH WAREHOUSE, 1940) Two structures on either side of the assembly buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are cited as warehouses in original drawings and planning documents. Building 2-31 is a steel and concrete frame warehouse that abutted the northwest perimeter of 2-40 and 2-41. Similar to Building 2-44, it is characterized by its lower scale than the assembly buildings and by its flat roof monitors with clerestory glazing. Because of the constraints of the site, 2-31 is not rectangular, but rather it tapers to the southwest of column 9. 2-31 contains a continuous, straight 20' -wide transit aisle that runs between column lines A and WJ, from the paved setback in front of the assembly complex to the back of the Boeing property. A second, perpendicular 20' wide transit aisle ("Burma Lane") is set between column lines 10 and 11, and extends to the southeast through 2-31 into building 2-41 and from there through 2-44 to 2-59. This aisle was once part of Plant 2's rail shuttle system, although the rails have since been removed. 2-31 has overall dimensions of approximately 664' by 224'. It has no primary facade facing toward East Marginal Way due to the construction of Building 2-25, a multi -story office facility, which abuts its northeast perimeter wall. Portions of the secondary west facade are aligned with the roadbed of 16th Avenue South, while the narrow, 22' -wide back facade faces southwest toward the Duwamish River. The design concept for 2-31 is similar to the earlier assembly buildings as a large open space, punctuated by columns and illuminated by clerestories in two flat -roof monitors. The building structure is made up by both concrete columns with conical caps and steel columns, set on concrete footings, with a 6" -thick concrete slab -on -grade foundation, and foundation piers. The columns support steel roof trusses, set at 48' on center, which define five longitudinal bays. Above these there are long clerestory windows running longitudinally along the outsides of the roof monitors columns WA and WC, and WE and WF. Original floor plan indicates warehouse functions within 2-31, along with accessory restrooms and a switch room. As with the other buildings that made up Plant 2 it contained stairwells that led to the tunnel system and restrooms below grade. Changes to 2-31 include the addition of several flat roof carport like structures along its west facade, a loading dock near the northwest corner that continues along the back of Building 2-25, and a wood frame stair near the southwest corner that bridges over 2-31 with a raised walkway. The walkway leads to the second floor office area in Building 2-41. Offices, classrooms and conference rooms have been inserted into the front portion of the building on the first and second floor. These spaces feature gypsum wallboard walls, suspended acoustic -tile clad ceilings, and contemporary lighting systems in contrast to the unfinished original construction. An enclosed shop is situated to the northeast of the transit aisle and column line 11, between column lines WJ and WF, and a parts room is located in the triangular-shaped end space, southwest of the same drive aisle. BUILDING 2-44 (SOUTH WAREHOUSE, 1941) Examination of the original plans by The Austin Company, and historic information from records and photographs indicates that 2-44, the "South Warehouse", was used for production of small parts as well as BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 14) storage and office functions. The structure of 2-44 is made up by steel wide -flange columns, and flat trusses with perimeter walls on the four exposed facades clad with 8" of brick masonry. Steel columns and trusses are welded and bolted. The columns set along the northeast and southwest perimeter walls are enclosed in concrete to form pilasters. Building 2-44 is approximately 231' wide, with a single 31' -wide bay between column lines Q and R and four 50' bays that correspond to column lines R, T, U and V. The building is 1000' in depth, which is consistent with the adjacent assembly buildings. There are a total of 26 bays: 16 bays of 50' run between column lines 1 to 12 and 22 to 26 (including northeast and southeast outer walls that add l'-1" at each end of the structural grid), and 10 bays of 25' from 12 to 22. A continuous, 31' wide transit aisle ("Burma Road"), runs straight through 2-44, between column lines 24 and 25, linking it with 2-41 and Building 2- 48. 2-48 is a tall steel -framed canopy of approximately 67' by 147', which serves as the south terminal of the transit aisle. Another abutting structure, Building 2-49, is located along the back of the southeast facade. Known as 2- 49, it was as a Jig Erection Building in 1953. Abutting both 2-49 and 2-44 there is small gable roofed, enclosed structure, No. 2-51, the 1954 "Box Storage and Shoring Shed." The 200' wide primary facade of Building 2-44 faces northeast. Set back situated approximately 250' from East Marginal Way South, it joins with the primary facade of Building 2-40, but it is distinguished by its smaller scale, height, and roof monitors. This facade is finished with flat metal panels. The secondary facades, which faces southeast toward a large paved parking area and southwest along the Duwamish River, are clad with brick masonry. In contrast to the neighboring assembly building, 2-44 is characterized by its lower scale and two flat -roof monitors. The long sides of the roof monitors are clad primarily with glazing and "Transite" panels, made of a fire-resistant composite material, while the monitor ends are finished with 26 gage steel over 2x6 T&G framing. Some areas of the roof monitors are patched with corrugated metal panels. Windows in the facades are composed in strips, typically 3'-5" and 4'-10" in height. Notes on the original drawings indicate that some of the windows were recycled glass. Obscure glass was installed at the first floor level windows. Interiors partitions were originally constructed with vertical T&G boards, framed modular 3 -ply panels, plaster, and wire mesh, with wire mesh used also for sliding panels and gates. Large, "Burvett" counterbalance fire doors, clad on two sides with steel panels, were set into the wall between 2-44 and 2- 40 and 2-41. Plaster was used for the partitions that enclosed a row of offices, corridor and women's restroom, which were situated along the front (northeast) perimeter of the building, while wire mesh enclosed a nearby, 75' by 68' "Acct & Inst." classroom space. With exception of these enclosed rooms the interior of 2-44 was largely open, although there were specific areas cited on the floor plans as "Storage Area" for materials and parts, and another for "Maintenance." 2-44 contained some equipment that suggests its use in assembling some aircraft parts. These include spaces for propellers, engines in the front half, between column lines 3 and 7, a large Jig Shop in the center. Pits—recesses in the floor slab—were cited on original drawings for a planar pit, a resaw pit, veneer press pit, and several additional unidentified pits. This equipment was powered by electrical cables fed by conduits along the columns and ceiling areas. Below the first floor there were restrooms, transformer rooms and service spaces off underground tunnels. Interior changes in 2-44 include the later installation of large overhead cranes carrying electrical distribution cables, and several unidentified rooms. The offices along the front have been replaced by BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 15) other office and conference rooms and a paint -finishing area characterized by cast floor supports and ducting. There appears are more pits in the floor slab than shown on the original 1940 drawings, which suggests some of the changes made to the building over time. In the back section, southwest of column line L there are stairs leading up to non -original second floor office areas. Construction dates for these non -original spaces have not been confirmed. Some of these offices have been removed, but the areas identified by remnants of acoustic ceiling tiles and floor framing. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 16) PART III. PRODUCTION PROCESS AND OPERATIONS AND PROCESS THE B-17 BOMBER The Boeing B-17 bombers were used during World War II primarily on long-range missions in Europe flying out of bases in England. The aircrafts were designed and built for speed, range and defense capabilities, and thus they flew frequently in formations without fighter escorts. Boeing began to design and build its first long-range heavy bombers in Seattle in 1934. Early models included the XB -15 and the 299, a four -engine prototype for the B-17, which took its first flight in July 1935. By early 1937, when the U.S. Army Corps received delivery of the first 13 aircraft, they were designated as Model Y1 B-17. Improvements in Boeing's design of the B-17 were made throughout its ten-year period of production, particularly during the war in response to battle experience. Named the "Flying Fortress" by a local reporter, the B-17was known also as the "Flying Fort" because of its weight and defense capacity. The aircraft had a length of 74'-4", a height of 19'-1" and a wingspan of 103'-9", and carried four 1,200 horsepower engines and propeller blades nearly 12' in diameter. 13 Browning machine guns were fitted into dorsal, ventral, nose and tail turrets, in addition to side, waist and lower dorsal positions. The bomber featured a closed cockpit, a navigator's position, and a bombsight in the glazed nose. It held bomb racks and a catwalk in a bomb bay, and considerable radio equipment in a radio room. Weighing approximately 36,000 pounds the B-17 could carry a total of up to 65,500 pounds, including a typical bomb load of 8,000 pounds (or more with special external racks). It could climb to 35,600 feet, and had a maximum speed of 287 mph, and a range of 2,000 with a typical 6,000 pound bomb load. A typical B-17 crew was made up of ten airmen, including a pilot, co-pilot, navigator, bombardier, flight engineer, radio operator, two waist gunners, tail gunner, and ball turret gunner. Between 1935 and 1945, 12,732 of the B-17 bombers were produced. Production was greatest with rhe final model, the B -17G, with a total production of 8,680. An estimated 4,735 B -17s were lost in combat during the war. Soon afterwards the B -17s were replaced by newer aircraft. Current estimates of the remaining aircraft put their number at fewer than 100. THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS Aircraft production at Boeing's Plant 2 began in 1936 with approximately 1,000 workers. At that time large parts and materials were brought by barges up the Duwamish River to the rear doors of the facility. The plant grew to play a pivotal role in aircraft manufacture during World War II, reaching a peak production in June 1944 when sixteen B -17s rolled off the production line in a 24-hour period (Year by Year, p. 39). The world record for a single month of production had been broken by Boeing in March 1944, when 362 B -17s were produced and delivered (Year by Year, p. 54). Cooperation among various aircraft manufacturers enabled a coordinated nationwide war effort, "widely viewed as one of the greatest industrial triumphs of all time" (Lentz, p. 12). The Allied victory is largely attributed by historians to American air power, and many cite the specific role of the B-17 bombers in this effort. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 17) The Boeing Company is credited with creating a flexible and highly efficient manufacturing process utilizing a multi -line system. A period newspaper article describes the system: Installation of an assembly -line production system in building the latest type of Flying Fortresses for the Army was announced today by the Boeing Aircraft Company. The new system, patterned after the mass production methods used in automobile plants, will be used in fulfilling the Army's order for thirty-nine of rhe Fortresses...The system is in line with a War Department plan to have all manufacturers of military equipment gear their plants to highest possible speed. Under the mass -production method, virtually all the 175,000 square feet of floor space in the company's No. 2 plant in East Marginal Way has been turned over to the new assembly line for speedy production of the twenty -two -ton bombers, known as B -17B ... When the Flying Fortress production line is operating at full speed, the bombers will emerge ready for flight in virtually a steady stream...Boeing officials declared this is the first time an assembly line system has been used on planes as large as the bombers...Under the new system, special production lines of wings and sub -assemblies lead up to the main assembly line, where the planes progress successively through eight stages of construction...As the Flying Fortresses progress along the line, parts are fed to them by the plant's elaborate overhead crane system and specialized crews of men perform specific operations on each plane as it passes through their zone. (Seattle Times, May 31, 1939.) Various sized hoists, and heavy crane ways between beam and column lines carried partially assembled parts above the floor levels of the Plant 2 buildings. Eventually the parts were brought to the open -span assembly areas in Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. In lower -ceiling areas of the plants there were air intake supply and exhaust ducts, and flexible electrical power distribution drops from the ceilings served the factory equipment on the floor levels below. Manufacturing processes were carried out also on second floor spaces along with engineering, with steel stairs connecting the two levels for efficient access. Additional steel stairs accessed toilet facilities at upper mezzanine levels, while concrete stairs led to those along the tunnel system below the factory floor. Distinct production process plans have not been discovered for the Boeing Plant 2, but historic photographs and diagrams describe the fabrication of B -17s within Plant 2 during the early 1940s. There were three assembly lines, each sized to accommodate multiple planes. Portions of the fuselage, nosing wing and tail sections, cockpit interiors and engines were assembled in the back portions of the plant. As the aircraft was brought toward to the front area in 2-40 the assembled fuselage would be carried forward, and tail and wing sections and engines added. Once the planes were finished they moved through the 21'-6" doors in the northeast facade of 2-40 to the paved area in front of Plant 2, and from there across East Marginal Way to Boeing Field. Company records indicate that many parts were manufactured offsite in six separate factories in Washington state. Production materials were stored in one of four large warehouses that the company leased in Seattle and delivered to the warehouses of Plant 2. The multi -line system instituted by Boeing has been recognized as a critical component in the high productivity at Plant 2, particularly when compared to similar wartime production of planes by former motor company plants in the Midwest, such as Willow Run. Other Boeing assembly plants, built in the 1940s in Renton and Wichita, were designed to follow the multi -line concept. This process proved its BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 18) flexibility when Plant 2 was reconfigured to produce B -29s in 1944. This conversion reduced the B-17 production to a single assembly line that ran along the southeast side of 2-40 and 2-41. While B -17s were built in Seattle, B -29s were built initially in Boeing's Wichita plant. In April 1944, portions of the Seattle Plant 2 were also converted to B-29 production, and its operations were coordinated closely with Boeing's Renton Plant southwest of Seattle. Fabrication, structural work, installation, and sub -assembly took place at Plant 2, and final assembly was completed at the Renton plant. (Year by Year, p. 54.) The first of the B -29s emerged from the assembly lines in June 1943, and the first B-29 mission took place on June 5, 1944. None of the original or later equipment and machinery used for aircraft production or assembly remains within Plant 2, although there are some parts scored in Building 2-31. Recessed floor slabs and plates in Building 2-44 recall the presence of jigs and other machinery that required greater clearance than allowed by the floor -to -ceiling heights, ventilation, or maintenance and operations access from below. During World War II, Boeing and other manufacturers throughout the county built aircrafts developed by one another in an effort to maintain maximum production. The Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and the Douglas Aircraft Company built B -29s, and the Bell and Glenn L. Martin Aircraft Companies built Boeing's B -17s. Between 1936 and 1944, Boeing produced Douglas DB -7B attack bombers, Waco - designed gliders, and Stearman Aircraft Company Kaydet trainers in its American factories. At the same time Boeing Aircraft of Canada built amphibian aircraft designed by Consolidated Aircraft of San Diego and British -designed Blackburn Shark torpedo aircraft. PLANT 2 IN THE POST WAR ERA Drastic changes occurred in local industries immediately after World War II. Military orders largely ceased and Boeing closed down many of its production facilities. An estimated 70,000 employees in the Seattle area were laid -off. After the war the company continued to use Plant 2, however, for aircraft production, including assembly of B-50 and B-52 bombers. Boeing's Model 307 Stratoliner and Model 377 Stratocruiser airliners, and its initial four 737s, which were later built in the Renton plant, also came off the assembly lines of the Seattle plant. Beginning the late 1950s, Boeing developed guided missiles, which went into mass production, including the off-site intercontinental ballistic missile system, the Minuteman program. It expanded jet aircraft production for private aviation, initiated space exploration and mass transit programs, and advanced new technologies in digital computers. The company went on to become a leading producer of commercial passenger planes, and later manufactured manned and unmanned space vehicles such as the Space Shuttle and Apollo lunar vehicle. By 1968, Boeing employment in the Puget Sound area reached a peak of 101,000 workers, including many employed in its Everett plant. This 98.3 assembly plant was designed for production of the world's largest jet airliner, the 747. By 1968 construction of the Everett facility completed. Boeing continued to use its Renton plant and expanded its production facilities outside of Washington state, but its use of Plant 2 for aircraft production ended. Areas of the assembly buildings and warehouses were gradually converted to office and storage use, along with production of parts. For much of the last decade portions of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 have been donated for use by the Museum of Flight for storage of older airplanes, including a B-17 and B-29 bombers, which are undergoing restoration, and a Lockheed Super Constellation airliner. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 19) PART IV. SOURCES OF INFORMATION RESEARCH Research for this report was undertaken in April through July 2009, with additional research in May and June 2010. Research included examination of available drawing records; property tax records; historic maps, photos, company publications, newspaper articles, and internal reports; and site visits to measure the buildings and look at and document remaining original design features, subsequent changes, and current conditions. The primary source of information was the Boeing Company. Historic maps, photos, and company publications came from the Boeing Historical Archives. Original design drawings by The Austin Company and later construction drawings came from digital files in the company's Plant 2 Engineering Department. Other sources of information came from the following repositories: • Digital collections of the University of Washington Libraries Special Collections and Museum of History and Industry • Period newspaper clippings and other publications from the Seattle Public Library's special collections, available at the Central Library's Seattle Room • King County Tax Assessor's Property Record Cards from the Puget Sound Regional Archives, located at Bellevue Community College. DRAWINGS (Available at Boeing Engineering Department) The Austin Company, Engineers and Builders, Seattle. "Additions to Plant No. 2 Boeing Aircraft Company, Seattle, Washington, Building 2.31 — Concrete Warehouse, 5-25-40." (The title block on these sheets also cite" Part of Steel Warehouse & Distribution Whse.") . "Additions to Plant No. 2 Boeing Aircraft Company, Seattle, Washington, Bldg. 2-44, 10-29-40." (Fire Wall and Detail Sheets are dated 10-17-40.) Boeing Company, "Company Office Graphics Plan (Building 2-31)," 4-7-99. SECONDARY SOURCES Air Materiel Command Headquarters, Los Angeles AAF, Procurement Field Office Industrial Planning Section. "industrial Planning Project: Construction and Production Analysis, Boeing—Seattle, B- 17." May 1946. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives, this copy document contains a partially illegible floor plan, Exhibit 21 — B-17 Final Assembly Area, which appears to show a portion of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41.) "America from the Great Depression to World War I1: Black -and -White Photographs from the FSA - OWI, 1935-1945," photograph collection. American Memory, Library of Congress. http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/b?am mem/fsaall:LC-USE6-D-008343:collection=fsa. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 20) Berner, Richard C. Seattle in the 20' Century, Vol. 3: Seattle Transformer, World War II to the Cold War. Seattle: Charles Press, 1999. Boeing Company. A Brief Histoiy of the Boeing Company. Bellevue, Wash: Boeing Historical Services, 2006. . B-17 Series Historical Study. Seattle, November 1945. . Manpower Utilization Survey Report, Boeing Aircraft Company, Seattle Division. Seattle: War Manpower Commission, November 1943. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) . "Plant 11 History, NAIOP Real Estate Challenge." PowerPoint presentation, January 2004. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) . "Boeing: History — Beginnings — Growing Pains," undated. Boeing Magazine "500`h Off the Line." March/April 1954. "Along the Line." November 1946. "Bartle Damage." October 1952. [Cover Photo] November 1951. "Flight Without Wings." [Back cover.] March 1944. "Jigsaw Picture in 40,000 Parts." October 1944. "Make Ready for Tomorrow." February 1954. "Production Capability will be Greatly Increased by Facilities Expansion." February 1966. "Production Highlights." May 1947. "Stop, Look and Save." February 1953. "The 5000`h Boeing Built Flying Fortress Since Pearl Harbor." June 1944. "The Big Change." November 1944. "The Little Brother." November 1966. "The Right Perspective." February 1952. "We Deliver." June 1944. Boeing News "Camouflage Atop Plant to Come Off." June 27, 1946. [Cover photo.] June 1939. "Expansion..." June 1941 "Fortress Factory To -Be." November 1940. "Largest Crane for Airplanes." December 1937. "Modern Assembly Plant to Rise on New Boeing Site." April 1936. "New Plant Mushrooms." July 1940. "Now you see it, Now You Don't." November 1942. "Plant No. 2... Grows Larger." July 1937. "What Are Airplane Plants Made of?" September 1940. Boeing News Bureau. Unpublished transcript of notes on meeting July 26, 1943. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 21) Boyle • Wagoner Architects. "Federal Center South, Building No. 1201, GSA Building No. WA0953KC." Historic Building Preservation Plan, August 1997. Boynton, James. "Minds, Muscles, Machines Work on Biggest Building — Biggest Plane." Boeing Magazine, September 1966. Brannon, Donald. "Changeable Buildings." Boeing Magazine, November 1961. Bush, Peter. "The Aerospace Division has Targets for Today, Tomorrow, Infinity." Boeing Magazine, April 1960. Call, Helen. "The Roof Riders." Boeing News, July 1943. Call, Helen. "Your Move." Boeing News, October 1943. Donald, David. "Boeing Model 299 (B-17 Flying Fortress)." The Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada: Prospero Books, 1997. Duwarnish River Cleanup Coalition. "Superfund Fact Sheet, Fall 2007 Update." (Brochure.) Gates, Dominic. "Wrecking ball looms for historic Boeing Plant 2." Seattle Times, July 13, 2010. Georgetown Riverview Restoration Project, http://georgerownneighborhoodcom/Riveiview.html. Graff, Cory. Images of Aviation— Boeing Field. Charleston, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing, 2008. Greif, Martin. The New Industrial Landscape: The Story of the Austin Company. Clinton, New Jersey: The Main Street Press, 1978. Hansen, David M., Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Boeing Airplane Company Building / Building 105; Red Barn." National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, July 1977. Huber, Louis R. "The Job Grows Bigger." Boeing Magazine, July 1951. King County, Washington: Parcel Viewer website. http://www.metrokc.gov/gis/mapportal/PViewer_main.htm. Tax Assessor Property Record Cards. (Available at Puget Sound Regional Archives, Bellevue Community College.) Klingle, Matthew. Emerald City: An Environmental History of Seattle. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2007. Kroll Map Company. Maps of Seattle, 1912 — 1920, 1940-1960, and ca. 2000. Laudan, Fred P. "Revolution in the Factory." Boeing Magazine, July 1956. Lacitis, Erik. "This is One of the Places That Won the War." Seattle Times, September 25, 2006. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 22) Lentz, Florence K. "Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance." Prepared for The Boeing Company, April 2000. Mike Lombardi, Mike. "'Rosie' a pioneer for women," Boeing Frontiers, May 22, 2002, Vol. 1, No. 1. McMinn, Thelma. "Wing Train." Boeing Magazine, June 1945. McClure, Robert, and Paul Joseph Brown. "The Duwarnish - A River Lost?" Seattle Post Intelligencer, November 26, 27 and 28, 2007. Milbrooke, Anne, Patrick W. Andrus, Jody Cook, and David B. Whipple. Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation Properties. National Register Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places, 1998. Museum of History and Industry. Digital photography collection. http://www.seattlehistory.org/. Myers, Polly M. "Shop traditions: maintaining masculinity at Boeing Aircraft Company during World War IL" Unpublished Masters thesis, Western Washington University, 2003. Neprud, Robert. "727 Production Methods." Boeing Magazine, October 1962. Pacific Coast Architecture Database, University of Washington Special Collections. "Bain, William James Sr." https://digital.lib.washington.edu/architect/architects/2130/ Phillips, Reynolds. "10 Big Years." Boeing Magazine, October 1952. . "Always a Door to Open." Boeing Magazine, July 1951. Robertson, Major William B. "Production Methods for the Manufacture of Aircraft." Aeronautical World, March 1930. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) Schwantes, Carlos A. "The Pacific Northwest in World War II." journal of the West, 25:3, July 1986. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "Boeing Field Jobs Must Wait, Says Gannon." April 9, 1936. "Airplanes Grow From Curiosity to City's Leading Industry in 38 Years." January 2, 1949, p. D12. "Top Architect William Bain Sr. Dies in Seattle." January 22, 1985. Seattle Public Library Special Collections. Clippings, 46-48 NW uncat. File, Seattle Industry Aircraft. Seattle Times: "Seattle Has Played Big Part in Developing U.S. Aircraft." December 15, 1935. "Huge Plant on 28 Acres Planned by Plane Firm." March 8, 1936. "Plane Firm Signs for Big Project." April 9, 1936. "Boeing to Spend Quarter -Mill for Expansion." March 28, 1937. "Assembly -Line Production of Boeing Bombers Begins." May 31, 1939. "Expansion Depends on War Orders." March 29, 1940. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41, & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189 (page 23) "Boeing to Build $23,000,000 Worth." May 20, 1940. "Boeing to Put in Speed -Up Device." May 22, 1940. "Boeing Million -A -Month Payroll Boosts State." July 28, 1940, p. 15. "15,000 Dance Dedication of Big New Boeing Building." October 13, 1940. "Boeing Expansion Calls for New Workers." October 16, 1940. '25th Birthday." July 27, 1941, special section. `Women in the War Work." October 18, 1942 (series). `Boeing Buys U.S. Share in No. 2 for $7,769,363." July 19, 1943. "How Boeing Plant Would Look to Japanese Bomber." October 16, 1948. "City Has Fight of Life to Keep Boeing Plant." August 21, 1949. "Boeing Plans More Production Buildings." June 15, 1951. "Boeing Plant 2: B17s to Pipe Bumpers." May 4, 1975, p. El. "G.W. Dennis, Designer of Boeing Camouflage, Dies." February 20, 1982. Simonson, G. R., ed. The History of the American Aircraft Industry, an Anthology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1968. Stoff, Joshua. Picture History of World War II American Aircraft Production. New York: Dover Publications, 1993. Quintard Taylor. The Forging of a Black Community: Seattle's Central District from 1870 through the Civil Rights Era. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1994. Twiss, Robert L. "Special Report: Boeing, the First 50 Years." American Aviation, July 1966: pp. 19-30. Umphrey, Wallace. "Evolution in the Factory." Boeing Magazine, May 1957. University of Washington Libraries. Special Collections. Vogt, Bill. "What You Can Do When You Have To." Target, Periodical of the Association for Manufacturing Excellence, vol. 15 no. 1: n.p. Watson, Tom. "The Day Boeing Disappeared." Seattle Weekly. June 10 June 16, 1987. West, H. Oliver. "What is the Multiline System?" Boeing News, March 1943. Wilma, David. "Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park— Thumbnail History (Essay 2985)." February 16, 2001. HistoryLink.org. . "Seattle Neighborhoods: Georgetown — Thumbnail History (Essay 2974)." February 10, 2001. HistoryLink.org. Year by Year: 75 Years of Boeing History, 1916-1991. Seattle: Boeing Historical Archives, 1991. BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 24) PART V. SUPPLEMENTAL GRAPHICS ros VIEW Xe SHEET SERIAL Na 2930; UOEINC AIRCRAFT COMPANY .1.414T NO 2` Sc„tLr Wash. Site plan showing Plant 2 in 1939. (Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 25) Perspective view of Plant 2, from a 1946 report by Air Materiel Command Headquarters. (Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 26) ,. i ®Ru' Ji _a +' 1 Sire plan showing Plant 2 in 1956. (Boeing Historical Archives.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 27) THIS IS A SAMPLE PINT AND MUST 8E RETAINE IN THF PLJBUC RrI ATIrNS NEWS BUREAU FILE, The first portion of Building 2-40, view looking south in 1936. (Boeing Historical Archives, 2B1389.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 28) Aerial view showing the initial portion of 2-40, in 1936. (Boeing Historical Archives, P45685.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 29) A EPR $ AND M UST BE RETAINED iN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS NEWS BUREAU FILE. t View looking west, showing the expanded Building 2-40 in September 1939. (Boeing Historical Archives, P40039.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 30) RTS"" < M,SION ..`. Pl:A1lotE This August 1940 photo is overlaid with marking to show the expansion of Plant 2, including the first portions of the assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41, and the North Warehouse 2-31. The area noted for further expansion refers to the later phase of 2-40 and 2-41. Some of the farmland in the background was used for construction of the South Warehouse, Building 2-44. (Boeing Historical Archives, 1293913.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 31) An aerial view dating from September 11, 1940 shows the assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41, warehouse 2-31 and the adjacent office facility, Building 2-25. Farmland to the southeast was used for later expansion of Buildings 2-40 and 241, and 2-44. (Boeing Historical Archives, P419.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 32) 111.1111P.m.11111111111111Mr- •wiimiii.mmomannimm paw411110a ag...ra 7.411/111111111111111Mw I I r-divtamw7:111F-drolv,":1111h:' RI NM tog If -. -7-.0111 MIK 4111111emi I V ";'i w fill I Idea WV,' Iwo 1....APREP.21.1111 • i ar.,,./........11h2WWNWIM.'.......• lin, I I r — • 01IP ail OEM-. " I • as I v." • VII I IN ' 1/.411 /. tiG el I RC,R F T CO. Seatt le, Wash. NO 4 0 A December 4, 1940 view shows expansion of 2-40 and 2-41 under construction. (Boeing Historical Archives, Austin20B.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HA.ER No. WA -189, (page 33) An aerial view looking west in January 1941 shows the final phase of the 2-40 and 2-41 expansion, and warehouse 2-44 in the foreground. (Boeing Historical Archives, 15518B.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 34) View looking northwest at the edge of the Duwamish River, construction of warehouse 2-44, and the final expansion of the assembly buildings, 2-40 and 2-41. This view is looking northwest. (Boeing Historical Archives, P535.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 35) A view looking south across a parking lot toward the buildings in 1941. (Boeing Hisrorical Archives, P982.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 36) A March 1941 aerial photo, view looking east at the completed Plant 2 with Assembly Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 along with adjacent structures 2-31 (the North Warehouse, left) and 2-44 (the South Warehouse, right). (Boeing Historical Archives, P643.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 37) t.: a TI -ES IS A SAMPLE PPINT AND MUST BE RETAINED J.1 h :.F. FUflt_tC RELATIONS NEWS SFIRFAU FILE. v '- c Similar aerial view and the photograph on the prior page, shows the camouflage treatment on the roof of Plant 2, which was installed in 1942 and removed in 1946. (Boeing Historical Archives, X-1228.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 38) 1942 interior view looking west into the northeast end of Building 2-40 and the final assembly of B 17s. The wide vertical lift doors are visible in the upper foreground, partially raised. (Boeing Historical Archives, P1978.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 39) Interior view looking across Building 2-40 in 1942. This view shows the northeastern portion of the vast assembly space between column lines D and Q. (Boeing Historical Archives, P1810.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 40) THIS ISA SAMPLE PRINT AND MUST BE RETAINED IN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS NEWS BUREAU FILE. Interior view of a second floor area showing details of the steel trusses, ductwork and electrical power drops from the ceiling that served machinery for small parrs manufacturing, and a steel stair leading to an upper mezzanine. (Boeing Archives P11705.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 41) A view looking north from the Duwamish Waterway, July 10, 1943. The southwest facade of Building 2-41 is visible, and the 16th Avenue South Bridge is in the background. (Boeing Historical Archives, 38917B.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 42) A shift change, August 1943. A small portion of the northwest facade of Building 2-41 is visible in the upper left corner of the photo. The concrete structure at the upper right is the support for 16th Avenue South Bridge. View looking south, with a portion of 2-31 visible in the background. Note rhe separate exit route for women workers. (Boeing Historical Archives, P3404.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 43) Plant 2 in the post-war era. Aerial view from 1954 looking south at the complex, with 166 Avenue South to the left and the Duwamish River in the background. (Boeing Historical Archives, A68747.) BOEING PLANT 2, ASSEMBLY BUILDINGS 2-40 & 2-41 & WAREHOUSES 2-31 & 2-44 HAER No. WA -189, (page 44) A view looking southwest at the partially raised doors and interior space of Building 2-40, October 1945. (Boeing Historical Archives, HS5060.) • STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 • Fax Number (360) 586-3067 • Website: www.dahp.wa.gov July 8, 2010 Mr. Jack Pace, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 070810 -06 -KI Property: Boeing Plant 2 Re: Determination of Non -Significance E10-010 Dear Mr. Pace: The Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) is in receipt of the Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) regarding the above referenced action at the Boeing Plant 2. As you are aware, Plant 2 on East Marginal Way is not formally listed in the National Register of Historic Places. However, documentation indicates that the building meets criteria for a historic designation in light of its important role on the homefront during World War II. In view of the proposed demolition of the building, DAHP recommends that certain measures and activities be identified and undertaken to serve as mitigation for the loss of this historically significant building. With that, a mitigated determination of non -significance (MDNS) would be a more appropriate result of this project review. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 360-586-3073 or greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov. Sincerely, Gregory Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer �, Jl DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION / Protect the Past, Shape the Future 1 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 DNS From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Minnie Dhaliwal Lynn Miranda 07/12/2010 3:15 PM Fwd: Boeing Plant 2 DNS »> Jack Pace 07/12/2010 1:51 PM »> Should we send a copy to Diana? »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> 07/08/2010 4:55 PM »> «070810-06-KI_070810.pdf» Jack, attached, please find my comment letter regarding DNS E10-010 on the Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Feel free to give me a call or email if you have any questions, but fyi...I will be out of the office until Tuesday July 13 as a result of the State's furlough day on Monday. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.eov/documents/CR ReportPDF Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. file://C :\temp\XPGrp Wise\4C3 B 3184tuk-mai163 00-po 100172667711 B4DF 1 \GW } 00001.... 07/13/2010 • Lynn Miranda - DNS comment letter - Boeing Plant 2 Page 1 of 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: "Chris Moore" "'Lynn Miranda?" , 07/12/2010 5:02 PM DNS comment letter Boeing Plant 2 Dear Ms. Miranda & Mr. Pace, Please find attached a comment letter from the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation on the City of Tukwila's DNS for Boeing Plant 2 — File Number El 0-010. Please include these comments in the public record. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! www.wa-trust.orq file://C:\ temp \XPGrpWise\4C3B4AA5tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B4E91\GW} 00001... 07/13/2010 WASHINGTON TRUSTFOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION July 12, 2010 Mr. Jack Pace, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Determniation of Non -Significance: Boeing Plant 2 (File # E010-010) Dear Mr. Pace, On Behalf of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation, I am writing to raise concerns regarding the City of Tukwila's process in issuing a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) related to the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. The Washington Trust is a nonprofit, 501(c)3 advocacy organization dedicated to safeguarding the historic and cultural resources of Washington. Please include this letter in the public record for the demolition application. Boeing Plant 2 has been identified as eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places in at least three different studies and has been Determined Eligible for listing in the National Register by the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation. As such, the demolition of Plant 2 does have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Tukwila's DNS includes a list of measures The Boeing Company has proposed to mitigate the adverse impact that demolition would have on Plant 2 - measures the city's planning department has deemed to be adequate. As stated, the DNS determines that the demolition of Plant 2 does not have a probable significant adverse impact, yet a list of mitigation measures is included. The rightful determination should have been a Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS). The proposed demolition of Boeing Plant 2 has not gone through the Section 106 Review process. The City of Tukwila maintains that no federal undertaking is involved in the application for and proposed implementation of the plant's demolition. Yet, The Boeing Company's impetus to demolish Plant 2 stems from an agreement to clean up the Lower Duwamish Waterway — an agreement in which several federal agencies are involved. The proposed demolition of Plant 2 is a direct result of federal involvement in the Consent Decree governing the Lower Duwamish Waterway cleanup, therefore Section 106 Review should be required. Finally, the Scope of Work as described in Appendix A of the Consent Decree issued for the Lower Duwamish Waterway cleanup identifies the required removal of only that 1204 Minor Avenue • Seattle, WA 98101 • tel 206.624.9449 fax 206.624.2410 • wa-trust.org Mr. Jack Pace July 12, 2010 Page 2 portion of Plant 2 (Building 2-41) that overhangs the water. The City of Tukwila's DNS does not adequately address the option to demolish only that portion of the building that overhangs the water and retain as intact a significant portion of Plant 2. The Washington Trust restates our previous requests that alternatives to complete demolition be fully investigated and evaluated prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chris Moore Field Director Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Comment letter on Boeing demo From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: "Diana Painter" "Lynn Miranda" 07/13/2010 9:52 AM Comment letter on Boeing demo Hi Lynn, I've made a few small corrections to typos on this letter. If you wouldn't mind replacing the letter I sent last night, I'd appreciate it. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3 C376Dtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B5031 \GW } 00001.... 07/13/2010 PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING (HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN July 12, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda, Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re Notice of Decision — Determination of Non -Significance Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 Dear Lynn, Thank you for your thorough discussion of the historic significance of Boeing Plant 2 in your staff report for the Notice of Decision for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. This gives a much more complete picture of the history of the building than was available in the previous documentation for the Notice of Application. I am also encouraged by the fact that Boeing and the city have apparently given a great deal of thought to the mitigation plan. And the completed HABS documentation will be a valuable contribution to the public record. Nonetheless, I have some comments, some of which I have brought up in the past and some in direct response to the Notice of Decision. They generally fall in the categories of: • Environmental compliance issues, • Public process concerns, and • Appropriateness of the mitigation. Because a specific mitigation plan was not previously available for comment in conjunction with the Notice of Application, I have included my comments here. I hope you will be able to take them into consideration. While no mitigation can actually mitigate for the loss of a historic resource, the mitigation plan proposed in your staff report could be made more effective and more directly related to mitigating for loss of this significant historic resource. Environmental compliance SEPA. The threshold determination for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a significant historic resource Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register, should have clearly been labeled a Mitigated Determination of Non -significance (MDNS). It should have adhered to the appropriate disclosure of mitigation measures upfront and in the appropriate MDNS format so the public would know it was DS except for mitigation measures. See directions from SEPA Handbook below: "Mitigated DNS. A primary goal of SEPA is to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts. If significant impacts are identified that would require the preparation of an EIS, those impacts can be reduced either by the applicant(s) making changes to the proposal or by requiring mitigation measures as a condition of approving the project. When changes to the proposal or mitigation measures are identified that will reduce 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 2 of 9 likely significant adverse environmental impacts down to a less -than -significant level, a "mitigated DNS" is issued [WAC 197-11-350]. The mitigating measures are typically shown on the face of the DNS, or as an attachment. A 14 -day comment period, distribution, and public notice are required for the mitigated DNS. The City of Tukwila incorrectly issued a DNS for this project, which misleads the reader as to the severity of impacts. I am requesting that the project be re -issued as a MDNS with mitigation stated upfront and in the appropriate format, with a new public comment period so that the public understands that there are significant impacts to the project and that those impacts are proposed to be mitigated. *WAC 197-11-766 Mitigated DNS. "Mitigated DNS" means a DNS that includes mitigation measures and is issued as a result of the process specified in WAC 197-11- 350. *WAC 197-11-350 Mitigated DNS. The purpose of this section is to allow clarifications or changes to a proposal prior to making the threshold determination. (1) In making threshold determinations, an agency may consider mitigation measures that the agency or applicant will implement. (2) ... The applicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be prepared. (5) Agencies may clarify or change features of their own proposal, and may specify mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a result of comments by other agencies or the public or as a result of additional agency planning. Section 106. The Boeing has stated that the need to demolish the building is inextricably bound with the clean-up of the Duwamish: "In conjunction with this activity, Boeing will demolish several aging buildings located at its Plant 2 facility in Seattle to facilitate cleanup efforts" ("Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration," Press Release, May 4, 2010). The City of Tukwila has stated that the building is contaminated as well, which justifies its demolition: " ... testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws." ("Final Staff Evaluation for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition Project, June 23, 2010). It is my interpretation that, by making these staternents, Boeing and the City believe that the building demolition and Duwamish clean-up are part of the same action. Yet it: is my understanding that the potential demolition of potential historic resources was not addressed in the 1994 MOA between Boeing and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a Federal agency. I also assume the recent (May 2010) agreement between Boeing and the Naticnal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the US Department of the Interior, and others on the clean-up of the Duwamish constitutes a Federal undertaking and is therefore subject to Section 106. I have addressed this question to the appropriate agencies. 3518 11. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 3 of 9 Public process SEPA Checklist. As discussed in my letter of May 14, 2010, the SEPA checklist and accompanying documentation for the Notice of Application was misleading and did not include the appropriate documentation in the attached technical report. Boeing stated in their checklist that, "Although not listed on national, state or local registers, Bldgs. 2-40 and 2-41 on the Plant site have been determined to be eligible for listing and may be considered historically significant for their association with the World War II defense industry, specifically aircraft production." The attached documentation should have included the survey(s) by which that determination was made or, at minimum, the state's Historic Property Inventory Report, the basis for the determination. As I noted in my email of June 21, 2010, a decision that a property is "determined eligible" has the same standing as if it is listed on the National Register. "Determined eligible" generally means that the property is historic, but the owner has declined to list it. Because a SEPA checklist and accompanying documentation is a disclosure document, the public did not have an opportunity to fully understand the importance of the building and comment appropriately. The Notice of Application should have been re -issued. SEPA Determination. Our State Environmental Policy Act is another means by which the public is involved in a development process. When a Determination of Significance is issued, such as when the demolition of a historic property is contemplated, it affords the public an opportunity to be involved in the development and examination of alternatives to that demolition. It requires an analysis of the issues and a weighing of the costs and benefits of the proposed actions. In this way, the public is more fully engaged in public decision-making. Because a DNS was issued (in this case inappropriately, in my view), the public was not brought into the process. They did not have an opportunity to make informed comments. There is public interest in this building and its proposed demolition. Sixty comments were generated after articles were published in the Seattle Times, PreservationNation, the National Trust's online publication, and on the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's blog in January and February 2010. However, the way in which Tukwila has handled the public notice and public information on this project, as discussed in my letter of May 14, 2010 and email of June 20, 2010, has undermined opportunities for public comment on the undertaking. Section 106 Review. I understand from my recent conversation with Minnie Dhaliwal that the clean-up efforts being undertaken by Boeing on the Duwamish River involve no Federal funds, and therefore in her view does not trigger a Section 106 review. However, a Section 106 review is triggered if there are any permits required for the project from a Federal agency: Section 106 [16 U.S.C. 470f—Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, comment on Federal undertakings] The head of any Federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking in any State and the head of any Federal department or independent agency having authority to license any undertaking shall, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, as the case may be, take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The head of any such Federal agency shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation established under Title II of this 351811. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 4 of 9 Act a reasonable opportunity to comment with regard to such undertaking. (http://www.achp.gov/docs/nhpa%202008-final.pdfi In other words, if there are any Federal permits required as part of the project, this would evoke a Section 106 review. The Section 106 process does not have a stipulated outcome; it merely requires that the involved parties discuss the project. It is another means by which interested parties are brought into the process. Mitigation measures Again, I am happy to see that the City of Tukwila and the Boeing Company has considered mitigation measures in response to the planned demolition of the National Register -eligible Boeing Plant 2. While the mitigation measures do not mitigate for the loss of a historic resource, they clo contribute to the historic record and help mitigate for the loss of a resource. Mitigation measures should be commensurate with the importance of the building, and they should be developed as part of a public process. Because of the significance of this building, which I believe is eligible as a National Historic Landmark, defined as a nationally significant historic place possessing "exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States," proposed mitigation should be of the highest level feasible. Comments to the specific mitigations outlined in the June 28, 2010 Notice of Decision are below, followed by additional suggestions. Mitigation: Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010 This is a great idea. Apparently it is by invitation only, however, because it is now July and there has been no public notice that I am aware of for this event. I also do not know of anyone who has been :invited, including my father, who worked in Flight Test for 30+ years and is also a WWII veteran, or any of his friends. Almost everyone from Seattle has personal connections to Boeing Plant 2, and the building has great meaning for them, judging from 60+ comments on web -based articles on the building's demolition. People have an interest because they are interested in aviation history, or because they are veterans of World War II, or have family members who worked at the plant. This broader public should be involved in a "celebration" of the plant as well, and the celebration should be widely advertised. Suggestion: Hold a public open house to tour the factory, with adequate publicity and interpretative tours of the plant designed to educate the general public on its purpose, its history andfunctions, and what will be lost by its demolition. Mitigation: MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower It is not clear from this mitigation measure what this $500,000 is to be used for. If it is to be used toward MOHAI's building fund, I'm sure MOHAI welcomes the extra money, but represents less than 1% of the building fund, and this mitigation measure has no nexus with the environmental impact of the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. There would be a nexus if Boeing were to contribute some of its collections/archives to the museum (or copies of their collections/archives), contribute money toward accessioning and interpreting the materials and contribute money toward developing an exhibit and a place for it to reside. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 5 of 9 Exhibits are always a good idea. Exhibits are expensive to mount and funds need to cover design, content development, programming, construction and installation. Using the $500,000 for development of a permanent exhibit is an effective use of the money. It would be even more effective if Boeing donated materials from their own archives that MOHAI does not have, and that would benefit both the exhibit and their archives. Because there is such a rich and extensive history around this topic, consideration might be made of a framework -type exhibit where aspects of the content could be rotated, to bring in repeat visitors. Suggestion: Clark this mitigation measure to ensure that the money goes toward the exhibit. Suggest that Boeing donate some of its own extensive archives or copies of materials where this would contribute to both the exhibit and archival holdings of MOHAI. Mitigation: Boeing Company/Plant 2/MOHAI Partnership This portion of the mitigation plan is less clear to me. It concerns me that these mitigations depend on MOHAI to carry out, and they are not underway to my knowledge. Museums program their exhibits years in advance. I am not certain that these will be achieved as apparently envisioned. • Living History/Interactive Memory Books This item says it is to be up and running May 2010 through December 2010 on the MOHAI website. It is now July and I do not see it on the website. If this is to be a web - based program, it should be kept in mind that many of those who were involved in developing or flying the planes that Plant 2 produced, particularly those who flew or in some manner produced the planes during World War II, are in their 80s today. A web - based program does not necessarily cater to their skills or needs. An oral history program should be planned using best practices (there are readily available guidelines for oral histories and people trained specifically in this area). While it is a nice idea to have live interviews (by which I assume you mean videotaped interviews), this is not necessarily the best way to serve historians. Oral history transcripts need to be developed for archival purposes. Also, the program needs to be designed and carried out in such a manner that a representative cross section of the people who had a connection with Plant 2 and/or were involved in the planes that were manufactured at the plant are recorded. This mitigation should be designed with the intention of achieving the best possible results, not just taking the information that is offered on the web. • World War IIBoeing Display Again, this item is supposed to occur in July/August and I am not aware that it is underway. Nonetheless, my comment is that if MOHAI "enhances" their display of World War II subjects from their existing collection, this has nothing to do with mitigating the loss of the historic Boeing Plant 2. Again, if Boeing were to make contributions from their own collection, donate money towards preparing an enlarged exhibit, donate money towards creating a really effective oral history program, there would be a nexus. But as this is written, it has nothing to do with the building. • Plant 2/Boeing History Week Again, this is to occur in July, and I am not aware of it happening. There is no detail here, and it is not clear what it consists of. What exactly is the King County Heritage Association to promote? Where and when is this happening, and what is it? There is no 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12,, 2010 Page 6 of 9 nexus between a promotion held by King County Heritage Association and the loss of the historic plant. Suggestion: Ensure that Boeing is contributing artifacts and information towards these displays that offers something that does not already exist, and that they provide enough funding to make effective use of the materials. Ensure that any "celebration" that occurs happens at the site, where an understanding of the building can be gleaned. Ensure that the event reaches a broad audience but also an appropriate audience. Ensure that it is truly educational. Ensure that any related programs undertaken in conjunction with these mitigation measures add to the historic record, are accessible by both the public and researchers/historians, and relate to the building, how it was used, what it produced, and the role the planes played in the pre-war years, the World War L!years, the Cold War years, and the subsequent development of the commercial airplane industry, where this is relevant. Otherwise, MOHAI is carrying out mitigations for Boeing that have nothing to do with the loss of the historic structure. Mitigation: Historical Marker/Plaque As currently defined, this is not a meaningful mitigation. The significance of the plant is due, in part, to its sheer scale and the level of activity that occurred there. There is no way that a plaque or marker can capture this. This mitigation is also particularly ineffective if there is no public access to the site. Suggestion: I suggest that the City of Tukwila oversee the design, content, and placement of this "plaque" in order to ensure that it is as effective as it can be. It should be placed where it's possible to understand the site from the vantage point, and it should be in a location accessible by the public. Mitigation: HABS/HAER documentation The HABS/HAER documentation being prepared for this building and site will be a valuable contribution to the historic record, particularly as the narrative for the document goes beyond what is ordinarily provided for this type of documentation. HABS/HAER documentation is prepared according to one of three models, depending on the significance of the resource. Since the significance of this building is of the highest level, it is appropriate to require Level Three HABS documentation. The preparation of HABS/HAER documentation is standard operating procedure when a historic resource is to be lost. The documentation is also donated to the Library of Congress as a matter of course. HABS/HAER materials should also, however, be placed in local repositories so that they can be accessed by researchers and the interested public. While it is positive that the resulting materials will be made available to HistoryLink, HistoryLink has many World War II resources available now. Suggestion: In addition to ensuring that the HABS/HAER documentation responds to the requests of the DAHP (as documented in Michael Houser's letter of March 30, 2010), the city should ensure that HABS/HAER documentation is prepared to Level Three standards. They should also see that copies of the documentation, including archival black and white photographs, be placed in the following repositories, if they have the facilities for them: the Museum of Flight, the Museum of History and Industry, the Seattle Room and the Aviation History Collection of the Seattle Public Library, the Pacific Northwest Collection of the University of Washington Libraries, the Washington State Historical Society, and the Tukwila 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161. • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 7 of 9 Historical Society. Otherwise, there will be limited access to the materials, particularly if the Library of Congress does not have funds to digitize them. If Boeing truly wanted to be effective and benefit the public, in addition to filing the HABS/HAER documentation with the Library of Congress, they would make a contribution towards digitizing the collection for the Library of Congress ' American Memory program. Mitigation: Small portion of building on display (possibly) It is difficult to imagine how this could be effective. Again, what is significant about the building is its scale, its design, and how it was used. It is difficult to imagine how a building piece with no context will convey any meaningful information. Suggestion: A building 'piece' might be effective as a remembrance of the site if it were part of a larger public art piece that interpreted the building and was somehow able to convey some of the building's actual physical presence. There are some quite well known public art pieces that have been relatively effective at conveying the scale of a place and how a building related to its site anted _context. Since the site is going to be used as a parking lot (ie no development is planned for the site), this is a possibility. The only effective mitigation measures presented here, in my opinion, are • the contribution to a permanent exhibit at MOHAI, • an Oral History program (provided it is appropriately designed), and • the HABS/HAER documentation. The degree to which a "celebration" would be effective depends on how it is designed and carried out. The other mitigations offered may have some nexus with the loss of a historic resource and may be somewhat effective, depending on how they are designed and carried out, how they contribute our understanding of the Plant and the historic record, and the audience they reach. ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS Preserve a portion of the building I suggest that, if preservation of the building is not feasible and at least partial demolition cannot be avoided, that a portion of the building be preserved to be used for the restoration and storage of historic planes. This is what the building is being used for now, and it is a perfect extension of the Museum of Flight's programming. If this is not possible or desirable, it would at minimum allow for the continuation of restoration activities on the site. As previously discussed, because of the nature of the building and its historic uses, if there is not a physical presence that in some way conveys the building's scale and how it was used, any other physical commemoration of the building on the site is fairly useless and in no way mitigates for the loss of the historic building. It would be ideal if the remainder of the building were then interpreted in the site through site design and detailing, to convey the scale and location of the building. Produce a videotape of the building In order to preserve a sense of the building, an interpretive tour of the building with a person knowledgeable about its history, design and construction should be filmed and copies made available to the Museum of Flight, Museum of History and Industry, the Seattle Room and the Aviation History Collection of the Seattle Public Library, the Pacific Northwest Collection of the University of Washington Libraries, the Washington State Historical Society, and the Tukwila Historical Society. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page R of 9 Summary The mitigations as proposed to date do not, in my view, mitigate for the Loss of the building and are not commensurate with the importance of the building. My summarized suggestions are as follows. I believe these mitigations would go a long ways toward mitigating the loss of the building. • Celebration. Plan an effective celebration of the building, with a broad audience (or multiple audiences on different days), on site, with effective publicity, and an educational and oral history component (consider having people bring their photographs and other materials, etc., and record them and their materials at the time). • Exhibit. Contribute funds toward a permanent display of the building and the role of the building and the products it produced at MOHAI (make it clear that the money will go toward the exhibit). Contribute additional materials (or copies) from Boeing's archives toward the display and MOHAI's research collection that enhances our understanding of the importance of the building. Contribute sufficient funds such that any materials donated can be accessioned for use by the public and research~ ers nd historians. • Oral History. Plan and undertake an effective oral history program that is tailored to the subjects. Design the program so that a cross-section of people associated with the building is interviewed. Provide also for transcriptions of recordings and/or videos so that they are accessible in the future by researchers, historians, and the public. • Web -Based Exhibit. Ensure that the "Boeing Company/Plant 2/MOHAI Partnership" described in the mitigation document is effective, has a nexus with loss of the historic structure, and is an effort that Boeing is undertaking, not MOAHI or the King County Heritage Society or another group that is not responsible for mitigation. My understanding of what would be effective here is for Boeing to provide funding for the design of a web -based interpretive program, based on the materials described in (2) and (3). For excellent examples, see the Oregon Historical Society's on-line Home Front exhibit, http://www.ohs.org/education/focus/wartime_portland.cfm, and the National Park Service's Rosie the Riveter website, http://www.nps.gov/rori. • Historical Marker. This will only be effective if it is well designed, if it effectively interprets the site, and if it is accessible by the public. If these objectives can be met, this mitigation is worth undertaking. If it makes sense to incorporate a portion of the building here, that might contribute to the design. However, it is a minor point. • HABS/HAER Documentation. HABS/HAER documentation should be undertaken to Level Threeas well as responding to the State's requirements. Documentation should be submitted to the repositories named earlier, as well as the Library of Congress, to ensure their value to the region. • Preservation of Portion of Building. Preserve a portion of the building that can be used for storage and restoration of historic planes associated with Boeing Plant 2 (a suggestion has been made that the two "high bays" be preserved). This task should be undertaken in consultation with the people that are working to restore the planes at present, as well as the Museum of Flight. If it is desirable and feasible, this area can also be used for educational and interpretive purposes. Use the site itself to present an interpretation of how this portion of the building represents only a small proportion of the overall building. • Film. Prepare an interpretive tour of the interior and exterior of the building and make it available on MOHAI's website, YouTube and local repositories. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5'161. • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 9 of 9 • Salvage Materials. Salvage materials that can be re -used and re -cycled to the extent feasible. It has been noted that there are large beams in the building that are old growth wood. These in particular should be re -cycled by re -use. Another mitigation that is sometimes adopted is for the project proponent to fund a survey of like resources for future preservation efforts. This is less desirable than some of the other mitigations here, as the nexus is not as strong; this is a completely unique building; and the Seattle/Tukwila area has already lost many of its World War II -era resources. But it is a way to help expand our knowledge of these resources and perhaps preserve some of them in the future. I realize that Tukwila, by virtue of their regulations, cannot mandate preservation. It can, however, encourage creative, thoughtful and effective consideration of preservation and mitigation options by taking advantage of the regulations they do have at hand and their responsibility to carry them out under the law. Sincerely, Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP 351.8 11. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161. • diana@preservationplans.com Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Deadline for appeal for DNS for Boeing From: "Diana Painter" To: "Jack Pace" Date: 07/13/2010 6:56 AM Subject: Deadline for appeal for DNS for Boeing CC: "Lynn Miranda" Hi Jack, I understand that the appeal period for the DNS for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2 is different than the comment period publicized for the DNS. Could you tell me what that date is? Thanks. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3C0E2ltuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B4FC 1 \GW} 00001.... 07/13/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Comment letter on Boeing Plant 2 NOD From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: "Diana Painter" "Lynn Miranda" 07/12/2010 4:56 PM Comment letter on Boeing Plant 2 NOD Hard copy to follow. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 CeII: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3B4948tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B4E61 MOW} 00001.... 07/13/2010 PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESKIN July 12, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda, Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re Notice of Decision — Determination of Non -Significance Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 Dear Lynn, Thank you for your thorough discussion of the historic significance of Boeing Plant 2 in your staff report for the Notice of Decision for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. This gives a much more complete picture of the history of the building than was available in the previous documentation for the Notice of Application. I am also encouraged by the fact that Boeing and the city have apparently given a great deal of thought to the mitigation plan. And the completed HABS documentation will be a valuable contribution to the public record. Nonetheless, I have some comments, some of which I have brought up in the past and some in direct response to the Notice of Decision. They generally fall in the categories of: • Environmental compliance issues, • Public process concerns, and • Appropriateness of the mitigation. Because a specific mitigation plan was not previously available for comment in conjunction with the Notice of Application, I have included my comments here. I hope you will be able to take them into consideration. While no mitigation can actually mitigate for the loss of a historic resource, the mitigation plan proposed in your staff report could be made more effective and more directly related to mitigating for loss of a significant historic resource. Environmental compliance SEPA. The threshold determination for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a significant historic resource Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register, should clearly have been labeled a Mitigated Determination of Non -significance (MDNS). It should have adhered to the appropriate disclosure of mitigation measures upfront and in the appropriate MDNS format so the public would know it was DS except for mitigation measures. See directions from SEPA Handbook below: "Mitigated DNS. A primary goal of SEPA is to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts. If significant impacts are identified that would require the preparation of an EIS, those impacts can be reduced either by the applicant(s) making changes to the proposal or by requiring mitigation measures as a condition of approving the project. When changes to the proposal or mitigation measures are identified that will reduce 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 2 of 9 likely significant adverse environmental impacts down to a nonsignificant level, a "mitigated DNS" is issued [WAC 197-11-3501 The mitigating measures are typically shown on the face of the DNS, or as an attachment. A 14 -day comment period, distribution, and public notice are required for the mitigated DNS. The C Ty of Tukwila incorrectly issued a DNS for this project, which misleads the reader as to the severity of impacts. I am requesting that the project be re -issued as a MDNS with mitigation stated upfront and in the appropriate format, with a new public comment period so that the public understands that there are significant impacts to the project and that those impacts are proposed to be mitigated. *WAC 197-11-766 Mitigated DNS. "Mitigated DNS" means a DNS that includes mitigation measures and is issued as a result of the process specified in WAC 197-11- 350. *WAC 197-11-350 Mitigated DNS. The purpose of this section is to allow clarifications or changes to a proposal prior to making the threshold determination. (1) In making threshold determinations, an agency may consider mitigation measures that the agency or applicant will implement. (2) ... The applicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be prepared. (5) Agencies may clay fy or change features of their own proposal, and may spec mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a result of comments by other agencies or the public or as a result of additional agency planning. Section 106. The Boeing has stated that the need to demolish the building is inextricably bound with the clean-up of the Duwamish: "In conjunction with this activity, Boeing will demolish several aging buildings located at its Plant 2 facility in Seattle to facilitate cleanup efforts" ("Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration," Press Release, May 4, 2010). The City of Tukwila has stated that the building is contaminated as well, which justifies its demolition: " . . . testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws." ("Final Staff Evaluation for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition Project, June 23, 2010). It is my interpretation that, by making these statements, Boeing and the City believe that the building demolition and Duwamish clean-up are part of the same action. Yet it is my understanding that the potential demolition of potential historic resources was not addressed in the 1994 MOA between Boeing and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a Federal agency. I also assume the recent (May 2010) agreement between Boeing and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the US Department of the Interior, and others on the clean-up of the Duwamish constitutes a Federal undertaking and is therefore subject to Section 106. I have addressed this question to the appropriate agencies. 5518 11. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 3 of 9 Public process SEPA Checklist. As discussed in my letter of May 14, 2010, the SEPA checklist and accompanying documentation for the Notice of Application was misleading and did not include the appropriate documentation in the attached technical report. Boeing stated in their checklist that "Although not listed on national, state or local registers, Bldgs. 2-40 and 2-41 on the Plant site have been determined to be eligible for listing and may be considered historically significant for their association with the World War II defense industry, specifically aircraft production." The attached documentation should have included the survey(s) by which that determination was made or, at minimum, the state's Historic Property Inventory Report, the basis for the determination. As I noted in my email of June 21, 2010, a decision that a property is "determined eligible" has the same standing as if it is listed on the National Register. "Determined eligible" generally means that the property is historic, but the owner has declined to list it. Because a SEPA checklist and accompanying documentation is a disclosure document, the public did not have an opportunity to fully understand the importance of the building and comment appropriately. The Notice of Application should have been re -issued. SEPA Determination. Our State Environmental Policy Act is another means by which the public is involved in a development process. When a Determination of Significance is issued, such as when the demolition of a historic property is contemplated, it affords the public an opportunity to be involved in the development and examination of alternatives to that demolition. It requires an analysis of the issues and a weighing of the costs and benefits of the proposed actions. In this way, the public is more fully engaged in public decision-making. Because a DNS was issued (in this case inappropriately, in my view), the public is not brought into the process. They do not have an opportunity to make informed comments. There is public interest in this building and its proposed demolition. Sixty comments were generated after articles were published in the Seattle Times, PreservationNation, the National Trust's online publication, and on the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's blog in January and February 2010. However, the way in which Tukwila has handled the public notice and public information on this project, as discussed in my letter of May 14, 2010 and email of June 20, 2010, has undermined opportunities for public comment on the undertaking. Section 106 Review. I understand from my recent conversation with Minnie Dhaliwal that the clean-up efforts being undertaken by Boeing on the Duwamish River involve no Federal funds, and therefore in her view does not trigger a Section 106 review. However, a Section 106 review is triggered if there are any permits required for the project from a Federal agency also: Section 106 [16 U.S.C. 470f— Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, comment on Federal undertakings] The head of any Federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking in any State and the head of any Federal department or independent agency having authority to license any undertaking shall, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, as the case may be, take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The head of any such Federal agency shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation established under Title II of this 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.51.61. • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 4 of 9 Act a reasonable opportunity to comment with regard to such undertaking. (http: //www. achp.gov/docs/nhpa%202008-final.pd, f) In other words, if there are any Federal permits required as part of the project, this would evoke a Section 106 review. The Section 106 process does not have a stipulated outcome; it merely requires that the involved parties discuss the project. It is another means by which interested parties are brought into the process. Mitigation measures Again, I am happy to see that the City of Tukwila and the Boeing Company has considered mitigation measures in response to the planned demolition of the National Register -eligible Boeing :Plant 2. While the mitigation measures do not mitigate for the loss of a historic resource, they do contribute to the historic record and help mitigate for the loss of a resource. Mitigation measures should be commensurate with the importance of the building, and they should be developed as part of a public process. Because of the significance of this building, which I believe is eligible as a National Historic Landmark, defined as a nationally significant historic place possessing "exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States," proposed mitigation should be of the highest level feasible. Comments to the specific mitigations outlined in the June 28, 2010 Notice of Decision are below, followed by additional suggestions. Mitigation: Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010 This is a great idea. Apparently it is by invitation only, however, because it is now July and there has been no public notice that I am aware of for this event. I also do not know of anyone who has been invited, including my father, who worked in Flight Test for 30+ years and is also a WWII veteran, or any of his friends. Almost everyone from Seattle has personal connections to Boeing Plant 2, and the building has great meaning for them, judging from 60+ comments on web -based articles on the building's demolition. People have an interest because they are interested in aviation history, or because they are veterans of World War II, or have family members who worked at the plant. This broader public should be involved in a "celebration" of the plant as well, and the celebration should be widely advertised. Suggestion: Hold a public open house to tour the factory, with adequate publicity and interpretative tours of the plant designed to educate the general public on its purpose, its history and functions, and what will be lost by its demolition. Mitigation: MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower It is not clear from this mitigation measure what this $500,000 is to be used for. If it is to be used toward MOHAI's building fund, I'm sure MOHAI welcomes the extra money, but represents less than 1°/i of the building fund, and this mitigation measure has no nexus with the environmental impact ,of the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. There would be a nexus if Boeing were to contribute some of its collections/archives to the museum (or copies of their collections/archives), contribute money toward accessioning and interpreting the materials and contribute money toward developing an exhibit and a place for it to reside. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 5 of 9 Exhibits are always a good idea. Exhibits are expensive to mount and funds need to cover design, content development, programming, construction and installation. Using the $500,000 for development of a permanent exhibit is an effective use of the money. It would be even more effective if Boeing donated materials from their own archives that MOHAI does not have, and that would benefit both the exhibit and their archives. Because there is such a rich and extensive history around this topic, consideration might be made of a framework -type exhibit where aspects of the content could be rotated, to bring in repeat visitors. Suggestion: Clam this mitigation measure to ensure that the money goes toward the exhibit. Suggest that Boeing donate some of its own extensive archives or copies of materials where this would contribute to both the exhibit and archival holdings of MOHAI. Mitigation: Boeing Company/Plant 2/MOHAI Partnership This portion of the mitigation plan is less clear to me. It concerns me that these mitigations depend on MOHAI to carry out, and they are not underway to my knowledge. Museums program their exhibits years in advance. I am not certain that these will be achieved as apparently envisioned. • Living History/Interactive Memory Books This item says it is to be up and running May 2010 through December 2010 on the MOHAI website. It is now July and I do not see it on the website. If this is to be a web - based program, it should be kept in mind that many of those who were involved in developing or flying the planes that Plant 2 produced, particularly those who flew or in some manner produced the planes during World War II, are in their 80s today. A web - based program does not necessarily cater to their skills or needs. An oral history program should be planned using best practices (there are readily available guidelines for oral histories and people trained specifically in this area). While it is a nice idea to have live interviews (by which I assume you mean videotaped interviews), this is not necessarily the best way to serve historians. Oral history transcripts need to be developed for archival purposes. Also, the program needs to be designed and carried out in such a manner that a representative cross section of the people who had a connection with Plant 2 and/or were involved in the planes that were manufactured at the plant are recorded. This mitigation should be design with the intention of achieving the best possible results, not just taking the information that is offered on the web. • World War II/Boeing Display Again, this item is supposed to occur in July/August and I am not aware that it is underway. Nonetheless, my comment is that if MOHAI "enhances" their display of World War II subjects from their existing collection, this has nothing to do with mitigating the loss of the historic Boeing Plant 2. Again, if Boeing were to make contributions from their own collection, donate money towards preparing an enlarged exhibit, donate money towards creating a really effective oral history program, there would be a nexus. But as this is written, it has nothing to do with the building. • Plant 2/Boeing History Week Again, this is to occur in July, and I am not aware of it happening. There is no detail here, and it is not clear what it consists of. What exactly is the King County Heritage Association to promote? Where and when is this happening, and what is it? There is no 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 6 of 9 nexus between a promotion held by King County Heritage Association and the loss of the historic plant. Suggestion: Ensure that Boeing is contributing artifacts and information towards these displays that offers something that does not already exist, and that they provide enough funding to make effective use of the materials. Ensure that any "celebration" that occurs happens at the site, where an understanding of the building can be gleaned. Ensure that the event reaches a broad audience but also an appropriate audience. Ensure that it is truly educational. Ensure that any related programs undertaken in conjunction with these mitigation measures add to the historic record, are accessible by both the public and researchers/historians, and relate to the building, how it was used, what it produced, and the role the planes played in the pre-war years, the World War II years, the Cold War years, and the subsequent development of the commercial airplane industry, where this is relevant. Otherwise, MOHAI is carrying out mitigations for Boeing, and one which has nothing to do with the loss of the historic structure. Mitigation: Historical Marker/Plaque As currently defined, this is not a meaningful mitigation. The significance of the plant is due, in part, to its sheer scale and the level of activity that occurred there. There is no way that a plaque or marker can capture this. This mitigation is also particularly ineffective if there is no public access to the site. Suggestion: I suggest that the City of Tukwila oversee the design, content, and placement of this "plaque" in order to ensure that it is as effective as it can be. It should be placed where it's possible to understand the site from the vantage point, and it should be in a location accessible by the public. Mitigation: HABS/HAER documentation The HABS/HAER documentation being prepared for this building and site will be a valuable contribution to the historic record, particularly as the narrative for the document goes beyond what is ordinarily provided for this type of documentation. HABS/HAER documentation is prepared according to one of three models, depending on the significance of the resource. Since the significance of this building is of the highest level, it is appropriate to require Level Three HABS documentation. The preparation of HABS/HAER documentation is standard operating procedure when a historic resource is to be lost. The documentation is also donated to the Library of Congress as a matter of course. HABS/HAER materials should also, however, be placed in local repositories so that they can be accessed by researchers and the interested public. While it is positive that the resulting materials will be made available to HistoryLink, HistoryLink has many World War II resources available now. Suggestion: In addition to ensuring that the HABS/HAER documentation responds to the requests of the DAHP (as documented in Michael Houser's letter of March 30, 2010), the city should ensure that HABS/HAER documentation is prepared to Level Three standards. They should also see that copies of the documentation, including archival black and white photographs, be placed in the following repositories, if they have the facilities for them: the Museuni of Flight, the Museum of History and Industry, the Seattle Room and the Aviation History Collection of the Seattle Public Library, the Pacific Northwest Collection of the University of Washington Libraries, the Washington State Historical Society, and the Tukwila 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 7 of 9 Historical Society. Otherwise, there will be limited access to the materials, particularly if the Library of Congress does not have funds to digitize them. If Boeing truly wanted to be effective and benefit the public, in addition to filing the HABS/HAER documentation with the Library of Congress, they would make a contribution towards digitizing the collection for the Library of Congress' American Memory program. Mitigation: Small portion of building on display (possibly) It is difficult to imagine how this could be effective. Again, what is significant about the building is its scale, its design, and how it was used. It is difficult to imagine how a building piece with no context will convey any meaningful information. Suggestion: A building 'piece' might be effective as a remembrance of the site if it were part of a larger public art piece that interpreted the building and was somehow able to convey some of the building's actual physical presence. There are some quite well known public art pieces that have been relatively effective at conveying the scale of a place and how a building related to its site a context. Since the site is going to be used as a parking lot (ie no development is planned for the site), this is a possibility. The only effective mitigation measures presented here, in my opinion, are • the contribution to a permanent exhibit at MOHAI, • an Oral History program (provided it is appropriately designed), and • the HABS/HAER documentation. The degree to which a "celebration" would be effective depends on how it is designed and carried out. The other mitigations offered may have some nexus with the loss of a historic resource and may be somewhat effective, depending on how they are designed and carried out, how they contribute our understanding of the Plant and the historic record, and the audience they reached. ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS Preserve a portion of the building I suggest that, if preservation of the building is not feasible and at least partial demolition cannot be avoided, that a portion of the building be preserved to be used for the restoration and storage of historic planes. This is what the building is being used for now, and it is a perfect extension of the Museum of Flights programming. If this is not possible or desirable, it would at minimum allow for the continuation of restoration activities on the site. As previously discussed, because of the nature of the building and its historic uses, if there is not a physical presence that in some way conveys the building's scale and how it was used, any other physical commemoration of the building on the site is fairly useless and in no way mitigates for the loss of the historic building. It would be ideal if the remainder of the building were then interpreted in the site through site design and detailing, to convey the scale and location of the building. Produce a videotape of the building In order to preserve a sense of the building, an interpretive tour of the building with a person knowledgeable about its history, design and construction should be filmed and copies made available to the Museum of Flight, Museum of History and Industry, the Seattle Room and the Aviation History Collection of the Seattle Public Library, the Pacific Northwest Collection of the University of Washington Libraries, the Washington State Historical Society, and the Tukwila Historical Society. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 8 of 9 Summary The mitigations as proposed to date do not, in my view, mitigate for the loss of the building and are not commensurate with the importance of the building. My summarized suggestions are as follows.. I believe these mitigations would go a long ways toward mitigating the loss of the building. • Celebration. Plan an effective celebration of the building, with a broad audience (or multiple audiences on different days), on site, with effective publicity, and an educational and oral history component (consider having people bring their photographs and other materials, etc., and record them and their materials at the time). • Exhibit. Contribute funds toward a permanent display of the building and the role of the building and the products it produced at MOHAI (make it clear that the money will go toward the exhibit). Contribute additional materials (or copies) from Boeing's archives toward the display and MOHAI's research collection that enhances our understanding of the importance of the building. Contribute sufficient funds that any materials donated can be accessioned for use by the public and researchers` arid—orians. • Oral History. Plan and undertake an effective oral history program that is tailored to the subjects. Design the program so that a cross-section of people associated with the building is interviewed. Provide also for transcriptions of recordings and/or videos so that they are accessible in the future by researchers, historians, and the public. • Web -Based Exhibit. Ensure that the "Boeing Company/Plant 2/MOHAI Partnership" described in the mitigation document is effective, has a nexus with loss of the historic structure, and is an effort that Boeing is undertaking, not MOAHI or the King County Heritage Society or another group that is not responsible for mitigation. My understanding of what would be effective here is for Boeing to provide funding for the design of a web -based interpretive program, based on the materials described in (2) and (3). For excellent examples, see the Oregon Historical Society's on-line Home Front exhibit, http://www.ohs.org/education/focus/wartimejortland.cfm, and the National Park Service's Rosie the Riveter park website, http://www.nps.gov/rori. • Historical Marker. This will only be effective if it is well designed, if it effectively interprets the site, and if it is accessible by the public. If these objectives can be met, this mitigation is worth undertaking. If it makes sense to incorporate a portion of the building here, that might contribute to the design. However, it is a minor point. • HABS/HAER Documentation. HABS/HAER documentation should be undertaken to Levellll,,.as well as responding to the State's requirements. Documentation should be submitted to the repositories named earlier, as well as the Library of Congress, to ensure their value to the region. • Preservation of Portion of Building. Preserve a portion of the building that can be used for storage and restoration of historic planes associated with Boeing Plant 2 (a suggestion has been made that the two "high bays" be preserved. This task should be undertaken in consultation with the people that are working to restore the planes at present, as well as the Museum of Flight. If it is desirable and feasible, this area can also be used for educational and interpretive purposes. Use the site itself to present an interpretation of how this portion of the building represents only a small proportion of the overall building. • Film. Prepare an interpreted tour of the interior and exterior of the building and make it available on MOHAI's website, YouTube and local repositories. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 9 of 9 Salvage Materials. Salvage materials that can be re -used and re -cycled to the extent feasible. It has been noted that there are large beams in the building that are old growth wood. These in particular should be re -cycled by re -use. Another mitigation that is sometimes adopted is for the project proponent to fund a survey of like resources for future preservation efforts. This is less desirable than some of the other mitigations here, as the nexus is not as strong; this is a completely unique building; and the Seattle/Tukwila area has already lost many of its World War II -era resources. But it is a way to help expand our knowledge of these resources and perhaps preserve some of them in the future. I realize that Tukwila, by virtue of their regulations, cannot mandate preservation. It can, however, encourage creative, thoughtful and effective consideration of preservation and mitigation options by taking advantage of the regulations they do have at hand and their responsibility to carry them out under the law. Sincerely, -13 r z • (-11 Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs From: "Diana Painter" To: "Jack Pace" Date: 07/12/2010 6:03 AM Subject: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs CC: "Lynn Miranda" , Hi Jack, I hope you are doing well. I have written to the Federal Preservation Officers that are a party to the agreement for restoration of the Lower Duwamish Waterway (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758) to ask them whether Section 106 review was ever done as a part of this agreement, which dates May 2010. The plan associated with the agreement calls for the demoliton of 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (1 bay). The agreement addresses archaeological resources, but not historic resources. The building has, as you know, been Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register. The comment period for this agreement and plan has lien extended by the Department of Justice to August 9, 2010, due to public comment (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 1115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). The appeal period for the demolition of the entire building, 754,000 square feet, expires today, per the City of Tukwila's Notice of Decision and Determination of Non -Significance. our office has stated that Section 106 review is not necessary, but according to Minnie Dhaliwal, she was not ware that Section 106 review was called for if there was any Federal permitting involved (EPA, Corps of Enginee s, Fish and Wildlife, etc), as well as actual Federal funding. If it were me, I would not issue a demolition permit for the project until ttfis is sorted out, in order to avoid complications. I've copied DAHP on my letter. I will forward my comments on the Notice of Decision in a separate email. Cheers, Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3AB034tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B49D 1 \GW } 00001... 07/13/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Attachments to previous email From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Attachments: "Diana Painter" 07/12/2010 6:48 AM Attachments to previous email "'Lynn Miranda' "'Lynn Miranda' Jack, sorry, I forgot to send attachments to previous email. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Tel: (707) 763-6500 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3ABAD8tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B49F 1 \GW} 0000... 07/13/2010 PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN July 12, 2010 Recipients: Mr. Miguel M. Aparicio, FPO, NOAA Mr. Kevin Kilcullen, FPO, US FWS Mr. Bob Hargrove, Deputy FPO, EPA Mr. Shawn Blocker, PM, RCRA, EPA Region 10 Ms. Christine S. Lehnertz, FPO, NPS Mr. Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General, USDOJ Re: Section 106 review in response to Consent Decree No. 10-758 & planned demolition of Boeing Plant 2, Tukwila, Washington The City of Tukwila has issued a Determination of Non -Significance for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a National Register -eligible property that is highly significant as the manufacturing plant for the B-17 and the B-29 bombers, which played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in World War II. This decision was made under the auspices of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act. The permit application covers the demolition of the entire plant, which occupies a 28 -acre site. I believe the action is likely to cause a significant, adverse impact on the environment. The comment/appeal period for this action expires Monday July 12, 2010. The City of Tukwila has said that no Section 106 review is required as a part of this environmental process. Clean-up of the site, which is adjacent to the Lower Duwamish Waterway, is being overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of a 1994 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Boeing Company. To my knowledge, no Section 106 review was conducted in conjunction with this MOA. Plant 2, as it is colloquially known, consists of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. It has been identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places in at least three studies (Lentz, 2002; Harvey, ca 2007; Bola, 2010) and Determined Eligible by the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (the SHPO) in 2007 (see attached). I believe that it is additionally eligible for listing as a National Historic Landmark, for its national significance and the fact that it displays excellent integrity. The attached article, "Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 — Home of the B-17 `Flying Fortress' — Planned," provides a short synopsis of the reasons for its significance. Parallel to the above activities, a settlement was reached in May 2010 between the Boeing Company and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the US Department of the Interior, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the Suquamish and Muckleshoot Indian tribes (the "Trustees") as part of a lawsuit between the Boeing Company and the US government, represented by the Trustees. As part of the settlement, Boeing is responsible for restoration of habitat along the Lower Duwamish Waterway. Both Boeing and the City of Tukwila have said that demolition of the plant is a necessary and integral part of clean-up activities on the property. Boeing has implied (see attached press release) that demolition of the entire plant is necessary to facilitate the restoration project, whereas the work 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 2 of 2 plan identifies only one bay of the building, 50' in width, which must be demolished as part of the project. Because there are future actions necessary to undertake the restoration (the Consent Decree refers to EPA approvals), and because these actions are `caused' by the settlement and agreement between Boeing and the Trustees, wouldn't a Section 106 review be necessary as a part of this undertaking? The agreement addresses archeological resources and how they must be addressed, but it does not address historic resources (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758, p. 17). Again the work plan requires removing 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (Appendix A, Scope of Work, Boeing Habitat Projects, Seattle/Tukwila, Washington). Boeing, however, plans to demolish the entire 754,000 square foot historic plant, a portion of which is being used to store and restore historic planes, including a B-17 and B-29 bomber. The comment period for the settlement and subsequent activities has been extended to August 9, 2010 as a result of public comment (Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). According to the Department of Justice, "The letters noted the complexity of the subject matter and stated that the original thirty (30) day comment period was not sufficient to adequately evaluate the proposed Consent Decree." Surely part of the complexity of the project is that a portion of a National Register -eligible property must be demolished as a part of the work plan attached to this agreement, and the impacts of this action have not been addressed? An additional complexity is the fact that the Boeing Company has applied for the demolition of the entire 17+ acre plant as a part of the clean-up, an action that has in essence been approved by local government and condoned (to date) by the State of Washington. Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Note again that the appeal period for environmental entitlements for the demolition of the structure expires today, July 12, 2010. Sincerely, Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP Attachments • "Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration" (press release) • Notice of Decision — Determination of Non -Significance, City of Tukwila • Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Primary Building, B2-41 • "Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 — Home of the B-17 `Flying Fortress' — Planned," RRPN Copies • Allyson Brooks, Historic Preservation Officer, State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation • Anthea Hartig, Director, Western Regional Office, National Trust for Historic Preservation • Tom F. King, PhD, Consultant 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Boeing press release on restoration — May 4, 2010 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration... Page 1 of 2 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration SEATTLE, May 4 /PRNewswire/ — Boeing (NYSE: BA) today announced an environmental cleanup and habitat restoration project that will create nearly five acres of contiguous intertidal wetlands, restore more than half a mile of waterway and establish a resting area for migratory fish in and along the lower Duwamish Waterway. "We are committed to restoring habitat along the Duwamish and conducting environmental work that is vital to the ecosystem, nearby wetlands, the Puget Sound and to our community," said Mary Armstrong, Boeing vice president of Environment, Health and Safety. "This is the largest planned habitat restoration in the Duwamish Waterway, and it will provide an important ecological resource to improve Puget Sound fish runs." Boeing has reached a settlement agreement to clean up high priority areas. The agreement — signed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of Interior, the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Suquamish and Muckleshoot Indian tribes — fulfills significant federal and state requirements for Boeing along the waterway. This agreement is part of the overall process to clean up the Duwamish Waterway and focuses on restoration of the waterway ecosystem as cleanup continues. Cleanup and restoration activity is scheduled to begin in fall 2012, once fmal agency approvals and permits are obtained, and expected to take several years to complete. The project will involve excavating more than 100,000 cubic yards of sediment and replacing it with clean sand. This work is being done in coordination with source control measures to mitigate the impact of materials flowing into the waterway from Boeing property, nearby King County International Airport, local highways and roads and surrounding businesses and residential neighborhoods. In conjunction with this activity, Boeing will demolish several aging buildings located at its Plant 2 facility in Seattle to facilitate cleanup efforts. The buildings — which were partially constructed on pilings over the waterway between 1936 and 1941— produced many of the B -17s used in World War II and have not been an active part of Boeing's airplane production operations for 40 years. Boeing will demolish the buildings, cleaning up the effects from past practices and restoring the waterway and nearby wetlands. The company is developing plans to commemorate the site's historic legacy prior to the demolition. Today's announcement is the latest in a series of recent developments in restoring the Duwamish Waterway. On March 3, Boeing and the Washington State Department of Ecology reached agreement on plans to test soil, ground water and sediment at the 9.8 -acre Isaacson site and the 19.4 -acre Thompson site, both south of Plant 2. On February 12, Boeing, King County and the City of Seattle reached agreement regarding cleanup of Slip 4, a 6.4 -acre parcel of the waterway north of Plant 2. The Duwamish Waterway was created in the early 1900s when a 9.3 -mile (14.9 -kilometer) stretch of the Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 1 Boeing press release on restoration — May 4, 2010 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration... Page 2 of 2 waterway in south Seattle was straightened, dredged and transformed into a 5.3 mile -long (8.5 kilometer) navigational channel with deep -water port facilities. In 1909, what was then the world's largest man-made island was built at the mouth of the waterway for industrial uses. Boeing began operations along the Duwamish Waterway in 1936. In 2001, the waterway was listed as a Superfund site by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Puget Sound Regional Council estimates that businesses along the lower Duwamish Waterway currently provide approximately 80,000 jobs, and that 84 percent of the industrial lands within the city of Seattle are located along the waterway. Contact: Blythe Jameson Boeing Environment, Health and Safety Communications + 1 562-484-1536 blythe.e.jameson@boeing.com SOURCE Boeing Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 2 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF DECISION JUNE 28, 2010 TO: Mark D. Clement, The Boeing Company Diana J. Painter Thomas F. King Washington Trust for Historic Preservation King County Historic Preservation Program WA State Dept. of Ecology, SEPA Division WA State Dept. of Ecology, Shoreland Div. US Corps of Engineers US Dept of Fish & Wildlife US EPA WA State Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation WA State Dept of Natural Resources Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director WA State Dept of Fish & Wildlife WA State Office of Attorney General King County Assessor's Office Port of Seattle King County Dept of Natural Resources Seattle Public Utilities City of Seattle Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Indian Tribe Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition Washington Environmental Council People for Puget Sound Tukwila Historical Society PROJECT: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project FILE NUMBERS: E10-010 (SEPA) ASSOCIATED FILES: N/A APPLICANT: The Boeing Company REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, undergo a partial tenant improvement of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and construct a new stormwater system. The project will be completed in three phases. LOCATION: 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA 98188, south of the 16t1 Avenue Bridge. Tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non -significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, environmental documents, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: LM Page 1 of z 06/23/2010 W:1Uses1LYNNM\SEPA 2010WoeinkN9D Bizeioaksloc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206- 431-3665 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 3 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Lynn Miranda, who may be contacted at (206) 431-3670 or via email at Lmiranda cl,ci.tukwila.wa.us for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 4 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite ii 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431.3665 Web site: http://wwwcitukwilawa.us DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number. E10-010 Applied: 04/09/2010 Issue Date: 06/28/2010 Status: ISSUED Applicant MARK CLEMENT WITH THE HOEING COMPANY Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition of burldinge 2-49, 2-44, 2-40, 2-48 & 2-81, and a partial demolition of 2-31 building. The tunnels under the buildings will also be removed. Included in the demo will be removal of old storm lines, sanitary sewer lines, water lines & power feeds. Project will also construct a new boiler house and the installation of new boilers for the South Yard at plant 2. Project will install a new exterior. non-structural wall around part of the retaining portions for the 2-31 building that were adjacent to demolished structures, and upgrade existing walls to increase building strength. Will add new storntwater system south of 18th ave bridge, including new storm linea, catch baains and treatment system. Grading & paving, adding parking & landscaping. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township/Range: 7755 EAST MARGINAL WY S THEW 3324049002 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by i_� �' t l / /" tL . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Jack Pac ,'Respon3ibia Official City of T a 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (208)431-3670 Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.078) Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 5 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Location Historic Property Inventory Report Field Site No. HR -25 Historic Name: Boeing Primary Building Common Name: 82-41 Property Address: 7775 E Marginal Way S, Tukwila, WA 98108 Comments: Tax No./Parcel No. 3324049002 Plat/Block/Lot East South Park Addition Acreage 28.65 Supplemental Maps) DAHP No. Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/4 1/4 Sec County Quadrangle T74R04E 33 NW King SEATTLE SOUTH Coordinate Reference Fasting: Northing: Zane: Spatial Type: Point Acquisition Code: Geocoded Sequence: 0 Sunday, May 16, 2010 Page 1 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 6 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Identification Historic Property Inventory Report Survey Name: South Park Bridge Date Recorded: 10/02/2007 Reid Recorder: Harvey, D & Flathman, J Owner's Name: The Boeing Company Owner Address: PO Box 3707 M/C 20-00 City: Seattle State: Washington Zip: 98124 Classification: Building Resource Status: Survey/Inventory Determined Eligible - SHPO Comments: Within a District? No Contributing? National Register Nomination: Local District: National Register District/Thematic Nomination Name: Description Histork Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Current Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Manufacturing Manufacturing Facility Facility Pian: Rectangle Stories: 2 Structural System: Mixed Changes to Plan: Intact Changes to Interior: Moderate Changes to Original Cladding: Intact Changes to Windows: Intact Changes to Other: Other(specify): Style: Other - Industrial Form/Type: Industrial Cladding: Brick Foundation: Roof Type: Sawtooth / Folded Plate Roof Material: Asphalt / Composition - Shingle Narrative Study Unit Other Community Planning/Development Date of Construction: 1941 Architect: Builder: Engineer: Property appears to meet criteria for the National Register of Historic Places:Yes Sunday, May 16, 2010 Page 2 of 5 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 7 July 12, 2010 Historic :Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Historic Property Inventory Report Oosalption of Constructed in two phases during 1940-41, building 2-41 occupies the southwest corner of Boeing Plant 2 Physical in Tukwila, Washington. The building stretches approximately 780 feet north to south before joining Appearance: Boeing Building 2-44. The building extends approximately 450 feet east of the Duwamish Waterway before joining Boeing building 2-40. The building's north elevation faces 16th Avenue South and at its northeast corner adjoins building 2-31. The majority of the rectangular building rests on a concrete foundation but its southwestern edge rests on wooden piers above the Duwamish Waterway. A sawtooth roof clad in asphalt shingles covers the Industrial -Style building. The building features a variety of cladding materials including a board formed concrete base, structural brick laid In an American bond pattern, and corrugated, cement -asbestos panels. Fenestration on the building consists of multi -pane, metal windows with an operable industrial -style sash. The building features an open floor plan defined by cylindrical columns approximately ten inches in diameter that support flat, steel trusses. The trusses are supported by wooden beams approximately sixteen inches deep that support the wood floor of the mezzanine. This mezzanine, used for small lot production, covers the eastern portion of the building (Richard White). The mezzanine features maple floors supported on tongue and groove decking (Lentz: 2000). The northeastern portions of the mezzanine feature dropped ceilings, fluorescent lighting, and carpeting. A series of tunnels run below the building providing office space, an internal circulation corridor, and ducts for services including electricity and compressed air (Lentz 2000). Major Bagley, C. B. 1929. History of King County, Volume I. S. J. Clarke, Chicago, Illinois. Bibliographic Boeing News. 1936-1954, various articles: References: "Modern Assembly Plant to rise on New Boeing Site," April, 1936. "Contractors Rush Plant 2 Addition," June, 1940. "New Plant Mushrooms," July, 1940. 'Expansion," June, 1941. "Building for a Bigger Job," January 1952. Denny, A. A. 1888. Pioneer Days on Puget Sound. Reprinted in Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Washington, 1965. Historical Research Associates. 2004. South Park Bridge Project, Draft EIS and Section 4 (f) Evaluation. Seattle, Washington. History Link. 2001a. Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park - Thumbnail History. In, 'www. history) i nk.org/essays/output'. History Link. 2001b. Straightening of Duwamish River Begins on October 14, 1913. In, 'www. historyii n k. org/essays/output'. History Link. 2001c. Boeing Field, Seattle: first municipal airport is dedicated oon July 26, 1928. In, 'www. historyi in k. org/essays/output'. King County Assessor. Property Record Cards, Washington State Division of Archives, Puget Sound Regional Branch, Bellevue, WA. Kroll Map Company, Inc. 1912 Krolfs Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1930 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1946 Krolls Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. Lentz, F. K. 2000. Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance. Cultural Resource Consultant, for The Boeing Company. Reinartz, K. F. 1991. Tukwila, Community at the Crossroads. The City of Tukwila, Washington. Sunday, May 16. 2010 Page 4 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 8 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Historic Property Inventory Report R.t_ Polk and Co. 1888-1979 City of Seattle, Washington City Directory. Kansas City, Mo: R.L. Polk & Co. Sanborn Fire Insurance Co. 1904-05 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1917 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1929-1950 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. Zahler, A. A Marti, and G. Thomsen. 2006. Images of America: Seattle's South Park. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco, California. Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 9 July 12, 2010 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 DEMOLITION OF BOEING PLANT 2 — HOME OF THE 8-17 "FLYING FORTRESS" — PLANNED Submitted by Diana J. Painter July 07 2.010 he City of Tukwila, Washington. on the southern border of Seattle. has issued a "Determination of Non -Significance" (DNS) tor the demoli±ion of Boeing Plant #2, a building that has been determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, issuing a DNS means Mat, in the City's view and under Washington Slate environmental taw, demolition of the structure will rot cause an adverse impact to the environment Boeing Plant #2 was where the 3-17 -- the Flying Fortress -- and the 3-29 -- the Super Fortress -- were manufactured during World War II. These planes played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in Europe. making this bu.'ding central to the war effort. fleeing manufactured nearly 7.000 B -17s in this plant during World War 11, running three sniffs per day, peaking at 16 planes per day in 1944. The building was also a place where women and minorities in the Seattle area had employment opportunities never before afforded them_ in the post-war era the building continued to be central to the aerospace industry, which was the mainstay of the region's economy. It is considered architecturally significant for its design, wr cn was a tanar•,tark soli.tron to enc ccirg very large spaces, developed by the Cleveland -based Austin Engineering Company. According to the 2007 historic survey for the property, the trusses for the building -were among the largest of their type in the world at that time." The camouflage built in 1942 to hide the enormous factory from enemy aircraft was also a design feat. The significance of the building is elevated by the feet that the Seattie region has lost many of its World War ll -era properties, Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 10 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 including manufacturing sites and defense housing, as development pressures ar.d lack of a strong preservation ethic have taken their toll. But this budding is singular in its importance. The 1936-1941 Plant 2 is the colloquial name for Buildings 2-40 and 2-41, which occupy a 28,65 -acre site. Despite the fact that the property is an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) clean-up site, the City determined that a Section 106 review for demolition of the building was not required Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, requires that any "undertaking" funded or permitted by a Federal agency take into account the effect of that activity on a historic property listed or eligible for listing on the National Register. Section 106 review would be required if activities on the site, which is on the uuwamish River and adjacent to Seeing Field, required any permits from. for example, the EPA, the FAA, the Army Corps of Engineers, US Fish and Wildlife, etc. And despite the fact that the building is recognized by the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) as a historic resource, a Determination of Significance (DS) was not issued. This decision would have required that alternatives to demolishing the budding be explored in a public process through an Environmental Impact Statement. it would also have required that the development of mitigation occur in the public arena, rather than as a negotiation between the City and Boeing Company representatives. Short pieces on the impending demolition of the building were posted on the PreseivationNation.arg Nog on February 5, 2010 (http://www.preservationnation.org/magazine/2010/tadays-news/seattles-1936-boeing- plant.htrnl) and on DAHP's bloc) on January 14, 2010 (http:/nuadahp wordoress.com/2010/01/14M-17- boeing-factory-to-be-demolished/). The demolition announcement generated comments from the general public when an article was published or January 13, 2010 in the Seattle Times (htip:llseattletimes.nwsource.com/htm/boeingaerospace/2010787200_boeingptantl4.htmi). Fifty comments were posted in a 72 -hour period. Although the comments ranged in subject area, the following were fairly typical responses: '`it will be a very sad day seeing Plant II go .. , Too many lives have been touched by that place for it to simply be torn down and swept into a salvage truck" and. "My Mom and Dad met on the B- 17 assembly line at Plant 2 in World War II. Dad built bomb racks and Morn was Rosie." And on the PreservationNation biog: "This location is truly a piece of aviation history and t hate to see it destroyed" Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 11 July 12, 2010 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 Demolition of the budding is part of clean-up and restoration activities that Boeing and the EPA are undertaking at this site on the Duwamish River. A parking tot is planned to take the place of the building in addition to losing the historic structure, demolition of building will mean that the Museum of Flight will have to find alternative storage space for soma of its histone planes. Additionally, a iccai group mat is restoring what wit be War:h rgton Stare's only remaining B•17. fore " tetr workspa,:a fa 3-29 and Lockheed Constellation are also being restored there). According to the City of Tukwila, they have done the minimum necessary by law to administer this environmental compliance process A more public process, however, wouid not have teff as many questions up in the air. V by :s the demolition necessary? Are there alternatives to full -scala d. m:Alt:cn? Why was a Section 106 review not required? How car demof;Uon of .a rvaitonal Register -eligible p+operty not misti1i,le an impact to the environment? Will the public have any role in developing a mitigation. plan? These are the types of questions that could be discussed in a mere meaningful environmental review process. Comments on the building demolition anti environmental compliance process will be received by the City of Tukwila through July 12, 2010. Additional information. including the proposed mitigation plan, can be obtained tram ;te Ci:y of Tukwila, 206 433 7102, Lnironda, ,ci Iukwtia wa.us Photos from Wash,agton State Department 3r Arcr.aeol gy and lister: 9reser aLor,. Addd.onal Photos Lan ae cie::eg at Tam PO1g's Photography Website http wwkk,rV:,:ntpast.ur mews nihil<ttCS-10:cnil.ulgorod-rct,otlrcvs 221-1lgeing- tiernnIltir7n. Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 12 PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN July 12, 2010 Recipients: Mr. Miguel M. Aparicio, FPO, NOAA Mr. Kevin Kilcullen, FPO, US FWS Mr. Bob Hargrove, Deputy FPO, EPA Mr. Shawn Blocker, PM, RCRA, EPA Region 10 Ms. Christine S. Lehnertz, FPO, NPS Mr. Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General, USDOJ Re: Section 106 review in response to Consent Decree No. 10-758 & planned demolition of Boeing Plant 2, Tukwila, Washington The City of Tukwila has issued a Determination of Non -Significance for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a National Register -eligible property that is highly significant as the manufacturing plant for the B-17 and the B-29 bombers, which played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in World War II. This decision was made under the auspices of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act. The permit application covers the demolition of the entire plant, which occupies a 28 -acre site. I believe the action is likely to cause a significant, adverse impact on the environment. The comment/appeal period for this action expires Monday July 12, 2010. The City of Tukwila has said that no Section 106 review is required as a part of this environmental process. Clean-up of the site, which is adjacent to the Lower Duwamish Waterway, is being overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of a 1994 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Boeing Company. To my knowledge, no Section 106 review was conducted in conjunction with this MOA. Plant 2, as it is colloquially known, consists of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. It has been identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places in at least three studies (Lentz, 2002; Harvey, ca 2007; Bola, 2010) and Determined Eligible by the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (the SHPO) in 2007 (see attached). I believe that it is additionally eligible for listing as a National Historic Landmark, for its national significance and the fact that it displays excellent integrity. The attached article, "Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 — Home of the B-17 `Flying Fortress' — Planned," provides a short synopsis of the reasons for its significance. Parallel to the above activities, a settlement was reached in May 2010 between the Boeing Company and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the US Department of the Interior, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the Suquamish and Muckleshoot Indian tribes (the "Trustees") as part of a lawsuit between the Boeing Company and the US government, represented by the Trustees. As part of the settlement, Boeing is responsible for restoration of habitat along the Lower Duwamish Waterway. Both Boeing and the City of Tukwila have said that demolition of the plant is a necessary and integral part of clean-up activities on the property. Boeing has implied (see attached press release) that demolition of the entire plant is necessary to facilitate the restoration project, whereas the work 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 2 of 2 plan identifies only one bay of the building, 50' in width, which must be demolished as part of the project. Because there are future actions necessary to undertake the restoration (the Consent Decree refers to EPA approvals), and because these actions are `caused' by the settlement and agreement between Boeing and the Trustees, wouldn't a Section 106 review be necessary as a part of this undertaking? The agreement addresses archeological resources and how they must be addressed, but it does not address historic resources (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758, p. 17). Again the work plan requires removing 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (Appendix A, Scope of Work, Boeing Habitat Projects, Seattle/Tukwila, Washington). Boeing, however, plans to demolish the entire 754,000 square foot historic plant, a portion of which is being used to store and restore historic planes, including a B-17 and B-29 bomber. The comment period for the settlement and subsequent activities has been extended to August 9, 2010 as a result of public comment (Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). According to the Department of Justice, "The letters noted the complexity of the subject matter and stated that the original thirty (30) day comment period was not sufficient to adequately evaluate the proposed Consent Decree." Surely part of the complexity of the project is that a portion of a National Register -eligible property must be demolished as a part of the work plan attached to this agreement, and the impacts of this action have not been addressed? An additional complexity is the fact that the Boeing Company has applied for the demolition of the entire 17+ acre plant as a part of the clean-up, an action that has in essence been approved by local government and condoned (to date) by the State of Washington. Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Note again that the appeal period for environmental entitlements for the demolition of the structure expires today, July 12, 2010. Since:rely, `--zfi , P - Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP Attachments • "Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration" (press release) • Notice of Decision — Determination of Non -Significance, City of Tukwila • Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Primary Building, B2-41 • "Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 — Home of the B-17 `Flying Fortress' — Planned," RRPN Copies • Allyson Brooks, Historic Preservation Officer, State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation • Anthea Hartig, Director, Western Regional Office, National Trust for Historic Preservation • Tom F. King, PhD, Consultant 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 demo From: "Shelley Kerslake" To: "'Minnie Dhaliwal"' , "'Shelley Kerslake' Date: 07/14/2010 6:01 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 demo CC: "'Jack Pace' , "'Lynn Miranda' Minnie — In order to answers your question, I will need to see the notice of decision and any other documents that were issued as part of the City's decision. Thanks! From: Minnie Dhaliwal[mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukw!la.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 3:16 PM To: Shelley Kerslake Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: Boeing Plant 2 demo Shelley, You will probably be getting a call from Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie who is representing Boeing and is preparing a response to the comment letters received in response to the DNS for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. We have a couple of procedural questions and want to confirm that we have the correct understanding of the judicial appeal procedures. 1.Per TMC 21.04.280 administrative appeals are allowed only in case the city issues a MDNS. Under RCW 36.70C.040(3) land use petition is considered timely if filed within 21 days of issuance of the land use decision. Also, per RCW 43.21C.075, SEPA appeals shall be of the underlying government action together with its accompanying environmental determination. TMC 21.04.280(C), states no appeals pursuant to "SEPA appeal section" shall be permitted for proposals that involve only Type I decision. Does that mean that SEPA appeal period starts from the date of the issuance of the SEPA determination and not the issuance of the demolition permit(Type 1)? We typically do not issue notice of decisions for building permits (Type 1), which are appealable to the hearing examiner. The folks who submitted comment letters are now asking when is the appeal deadline. In the notice of decision that they received it states 'The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the judicial review of land use decision RCW 36.70C." Should we state it back to them or can we tell them 21 days from the date of issuance of DNS? 2.The comment period on the DNS expired on July 12th and we received four comment letters. Our understanding is that the comment period just means that the agency cannot take any action on the proposal until the comment period is over. Based on our review of the comment letters we do not believe we need to change our decision. We are waiting to get Boeing's response and will make the final decision at that time. All comment letters suggest that the city should have issued a MDNS instead of a DNS. Since the proposal included mitigation related to historic preservation we considered it part of the proposal and decided to issue a DNS as opposed to MDNS. Thanks for your input. I will probably set up a meeting with you tomorrow to go over this issue. Also, I have attached the four comment letters. file ://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3D52D8tuk-mail6300-po l 00172667711 B5571 GW} 00001.... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: d.painterl5@comcast.net Date: 07/14/2010 10:15 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination CC: cmoore@wa-trust.org; Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV; Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Diana, am responding to your voice mail to Lynn regarding expiration of comment period. As the notice of decision and the SEPA determination that you received stated the comment period expired on July 12, 2010. The Notice of Decision also stated that the decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the judicial review of land use decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Since Lynn is on vacation the next couple of weeks feel free to contact me if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal rIanningSupervisor 1 pity of Tukwila 1 206-431-3685 1 mclhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3D8E62tuk-mail6300-po100172667711 B56C1\GW}00001.... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: DNS From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Lynn Miranda; Mark D Clement Date: 07/14/2010 1:35 PM Subject: RE: DNS CC: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Attachments: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Mark, I think you have all the comment letters that we have received. There is one revised letter that Diana Painter submitted today. It is attached. Minnie DhaIiwaI rlanning jupervisor 1City of Tukwila 1206-431-36851mdkaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> 07/13/2010 1:11 PM »> Lynn is there any more information or direction from your mtg today that you would like us at Boeing to respond too?. Laura Whitaker of Perkins Coie will be responding on behalf of the Boeing Co. shortly, and I wanted give her any late breaking information. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark/Clement From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 5:27 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: DNS Mark, we plan on getting together internally tomorrow to go over the concerns voiced in all 3 letters received today, which I've cc'd to you. Most likely we'll want Boeing to address all 3 letters in one response, but I'll get back to you tomorrow about that. Lynn file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C3DBDOBtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B5781 \GW } 0000... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Crosscut article on planned Boeing demolition From: "Diana Painter" To: "Jack Pace" , "Lynn Miranda" Date: 07/17/2010 6:38 PM Subject: Crosscut article on planned Boeing demolition Hi Jack and Miranda, The attached article on the planned demolition of Boeing Plant 2 came out on Crosscut on Sat., fyi. Diana http://crosscut.com/2010/07/17/history/19981 /Seattle -s -history -at -risk -in -plans -for -Boeing -plant -demolition---/ Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservatiormlans.com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C41 F8B 8tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B5F01\GW } 00001.... 08/02/2010 Crosscut.com: Seattle's history at risk in plans for Boeing plant demolition go to mobile version 0,Crosscut& News of the Great Nearby Seattle 7.010 Our Sponsors: A`rfIaF1 NB/EMI-1:Y SE 1 I;.rLE Most Popular Crosscut articles of the past 10 days with the most clicks. Elliott Bay Book Company's move was a blessing in disguise for Pioneer Square Patty Murray has a strategy but her party is in trouble In defense of Mike McGinn's tunnel position Homeless artist's photographs capture quirky beauty McGinn is engaged in textbook manipulation about tunnel 10 reasons we shouldn't vote on the waterfront tunnel Upside of a downturn: new neighborhood housing for the low- income Vance Report: A red tide is still favoring Republicans City Council: Don't worry, we are taking over on tunnel How a Seattle group helped save the north's forests This portion of the requested page has been blocked. Click here for details . _. _. _.... _.. _ _... ............... .' Most Commented Crosscut articles of the past 10 days with the most reader comments. Patty Murray has a strategy but her party is in trouble (76 comments) McGinn is engaged in textbook manipulation about tunnel (47 comments) Page 1 of 5 Login / Register ifesaving Drugs Deadly Consequences ATCH ONLINE OKCTS9 Home By Location Arts Juty 17, 2010 Seattle's history at risk in plans for Boeing plant demolition The city of Tukwila, which has no historic preservation ordinance, has a leading position in plans that involve the possible demolition of Boeing's Plant 2, where workers built planes critical to U.S. victory in World War II. By Diana Painter The Seattle area will soon lose an important historic structure if Boeing and the city of Tukwila have their way: a building perhaps second only to the Hanford Reservation for its association with this state's legendary World War II history. Boeing Plant 2 was where the B-17 — the Flying Fortress — and the B-29 — the Super Fortress — were manufactured during World War II: planes that played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in Europe. Photographs of planes being assembled in the Tukwila plant leave an indelible impression of the sheer scale of production and the enormous human effort involved in manufacturing these planes. Boeing manufactured nearly 7,000 B -17s there during World War II, running three shifts per day, peaking at 16 planes per day in 1944. Today, only 14 B -17s are left in the world — none in Washington — and only ten in flying condition, according to Scott Maher of the Liberty Foundation. The plant sits within the boundaries of a federal project aimed at restoring the environmentally damaged habitat along the Lower Duwamish Waterway. Last May, a lawsuit was settled between Boeing and the federal government, calling on the company to restore the river bank, which supports salmonids, birds, and other wildlife, and pay $2 million to cover costs to the agencies involved. But the agreement failed to address the fact that the property contained a building of historical importance to this region, Boeing Plant 2, which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Duwamish restoration plan calls for removal of a single 53,000 -square -foot bay from the enormous 754,000 -square -foot structure, listed technically as Buildings 2-41 and 2-42 but known to generations as Plant 2. Boeing, however, would like to demolish the entire plant. The company says it has not actively occupied the site for 40 years. There has been so much public comment on the restoration plan that the U.S. Department of Justice, which is overseeing the proposed Consent Decree that governs the plan, has extended the comment period until Aug. 9, an additional 60 days due to the complexity of the subject. Politics Diversions Business More Topics E2 AOo THIS it SEARCH Sub Become aMember's. DONATE Join Nowt Get th Crosscut! Daily Email Newsletter Washington state Department of Ecology Boeing Plant 2 KING FM 98.1 CLASStCAI MUSIC ON THE RADIO U.S. government/No WTMmedta Commons A B-17 Flying Fortress Topics: Boeing FOSTER PEPPER... ATTORNEYS AT LAW SEATTLE 1 SPOKANE Since 1904, serving the legal needs of companies, municipalities and individuals, Ranked a leading firm by Chambers USA. LISTEN AT 98.1 KING FM W W W.KI NGFM,ORG When ,t Happens, We are There, rrna.rara2YfQ993.5982 I amu.::FOSTER. esu e,ss.cewusesti r WITTENTWT cacosVPe5TsuPCPPga. PROVIDENCE Senior and Community Services We give hope to the communities we serve Learn more and watch our video { ) http://crosscut. com/2010/07/ 17/history/ 19981 /Seattle-s-history-at-risk-in-plans-for-Boein... 08/02/2010 Crosscut.com: Seattle's history at risk in plans for Boeing plant demolition Page 2 of 5 10 reasons we shouldn't vote on the waterfront tunnel (46 comments) In defense of Mike McGinn's tunnel position (31 comments) Vance Report: A red tide is still favoring Republicans (21 comments) Elliott Bay Book Company's move was a blessing in disguise for Pioneer Square (20 comments) Our vanishing ice caps, disaster -film style (8 comments) City Council: Don't worry, we are taking over on tunnel (8 comments) Homeless artist's photographs capture quirky beauty (7 comments) Are consumer -driven churches betraying the American soul? (7 comments) ALL COMMENTS This portion of the requested page has been blocked. Click here for details Popular Blog Posts Crosscut blog posts of the past 10 days with the most clicks. Dino vs. Didier: closer than you might think Just what state Democrats don't need: a special session America's best bartender Is right here Seattle's botanical gap Remembering George Shangrow U.S. Senior Open at Sahalee: Maybe it's worth being there Seattle's Allrecipes.com launches a web TV show Crosscut is looking for new office space Apple 'Genius' bar: Nothing to yap about this time Oil spill provides Seattle -based 'Grist' with traffic Architecturally, the building is considered a landmark design solution for enclosing very large spaces. Built by the Cleveland -based Austin Engineering Co. and constructed in two major stages, in 1936 and 1941, the structure was camouflaged to make it appear from the air as a quiet residential neighborhood, thus hiding the enormous factory from enemy aircraft. The camouflage was designed by Seattle architects John Detlie, who had a background in set design, and William Bain Sr., who was named "camouflage director' for Washington state during the war. The building is also significant as a place where women and minorities in the Seattle area during World War II had employment opportunities never before afforded them. In the post-war era, workers continued to design and produce planes in Plant 2 for the Cold War and, as defense contracts waned, for the commercial airline market. Boeing signed an agreement in 1994 with the Environmental Protection Agency to clean the site of heavy metals and other contaminants in the soil and ground water, and of sediment in the Duwamish Waterway. The company did not, apparently, contemplate demolishing the building at that time, nor did it initiate a "Section 106 Review" for Plant 2 (note that the building was not considered "historic" at that point). Implemented under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, this Section 106 requirement applies if a project receives any federal funding or needs a federal permit of some kind and involves a potential adverse effect to a listed property or a property eligible for listing on the National Register. The federal agency involved must "take into account the effect of that activity" on the proposed historic resource. This generally involves meetings among the affected parties to discuss alternatives and options for minimizing impacts. The plant, which turned 50 in 1991, is "determined eligible" for listing on National Register of Historic Places, but that eligibility offers little real protection. A National Register property is more effectively protected if a local government has a preservation ordinance and it is listed on a local historic register. Boeing Plant 2 is shared by the cities of Tukwila and Seattle. Tukwila has no preservation ordinance; Seattle has a strong preservation ordinance but has ceded lead -agency status to Tukwila in this case. Despite the fact that the plan calls for the removal of only one bay, Boeing and Tukwila maintain that the demolition of the entire building is necessary for the site clean-up and waterway restoration. While the company noted in a May press release that it is "developing plans to commemorate the site's historic legacy," no mention was made of the historic status of the buildings. In the meantime, Tukwila has undertaken environmental review under the auspices of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for demolition of the entire structure, noting in its paperwork that there is "no probable significant adverse environmental impact" anticipated from the demolition. It appears that a Determination of Significance would have been a more appropriate call. The state's Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, however, has apparently elected to not exercise its authority under SEPA to question the city's actions and decisions. And despite the city of Tukwila's position, which would not ordinarily require mitigating for the loss of the historic structure, the city and the Boeing Company have offered a series of mitigation measures, from documenting the structure, to contributing $500,000 to the Museum of History and Industry to prepare an exhibit on the building, to placing a plaque on the property. 112 Print this 1 Email this NEXT PAGE Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today! Login or register to speak your piece. Comments: Posted Sat, Jul 17, 7:47 a.m. The 8-29 prototypes were built and tested at Plant 2, but production was in Renton, Omaha, and Wichita. — Sawman Posted Sat, Jul 17, 12:25 p.m. Crosscut Diana: Thanks for taking this story on. It's a big one. I'm a bit baffled by the lack of a Section 106 Writer process since the demolition is, ostensibly, due to an agreement with a federal agency. 1 know —1-1-11-1 these things get complicated, but it would be good to get clarification on that. The Section 106 process would have required consideration of alternatives to demolition. And it appears total demolition is not necessary to the clean-up process (and clean up is a good thing, no one denies). Also, how could this structure, if eligible for the National Register, be considered "non-significant'? Isn't that a contradiction in terms? — Knute Berger "inthe ever-thaiging new world of online media, Ifounton Crosscut toRavi dea qualified filter for local news and issues." rfaielwi 1 learn something new every day.` rawscpumaearkeran liabYg .This portion of the ;requested page has been blocked. Click here .for details .......... ............ Follow lis `1 `lj Follow us on --' Twitter. ppLike us on Facebook. Subscribe to our R55 Feeds. Read us on your Kindle. Get our Daily Email Newsletter. http://crosscut. com/2010/07/ 17/history/ 19981 /Seattle-s-history-at-risk-in-plans-for-Boein... 08/02/2010 Crosscut.com: Seattle's history at risk in plans for Boeing plant demolition Page 3 of 5 Posted Sat, Jul 17, 1:24 p.m. Knute, it's a curious thing - the tack of Section 106 and the "non -significance." I don't know how you can propose demolishing a portion of a NR -eligible building, account in the plan for archaeology, and not account for the historic structure, as the MOA with NOAA et al did. At Least folks are talking about it now. Sawman, thanks for the clarification. Diana — djpainter Posted Sat, Jul 17, 2:30 p.m. Another do -good er out to "help" the landowner with the decision about what to do with prime industrial property. WWII was then, this is now. You want a museum, or a factory? We already have the flight museum which is partly devoted to the B•17. That's enough. My wife's Uncle was killed on his 23rd combat mission in a B-17 on the first Bremen raid. My guess is he would accept your thanks for his giving up his tomorrows for your today's, and would want something built to benefit those alive today. — eastkingcountyrednecklogger Posted Sat, Jul 17, 3:20 p.m. Tear it down. The building is not very attractive to look at. Not everything historical needs to be preserved. The river needs all the help it can get for to restoration. — knoppy44 Posted Sat, Jul 17, 5:47 p.m. Are preservationists keeping track of the building where Bill Gates, Paul Allen and maybe one or two others cobbled together the infamous "QED" operating system? and then where was Slo-Mo made? I think the distinction should be made between the B-17, an undoubtedly fine work of engineering and manufacturing, and the building where it was produced (or the prototype was produced). The airplane was magnificent but I dont think that fact makes the building historic. — kleth Posted Sun, Jul 18, 7:27 a.m. As a matter of fact, the Jenson boatyard where the Slo-Mos were built has been preserved, in spite of a vigorous effort by the University to take over the property and 'digest it into their west campus. The building is of undoubted historical significance. The 6-17, the B-29, the B-57 and the B-52, with their civilian follow-ons, were the leaders in aviation. The pressurized cabin, the swept wing, the nacelle mounting of the engines- all emerged from Plant Two and changed aviation from a dangerous toy of the rich into a dependable means of transportation. The modem forward-looking workforce quite arguably made Seattle different from Tacoma, with the results we see today. It would, in fact, trivialize the building to keep it as a white elephant, visited by a few dozen (if that) tourists a day. Give it to the University School of Architecture, with the charge of building a new south campus for the University in the unchanged outer shell. Its the right thing to do. — serial catowner Posted Sun, Jul 18, 12:24 p.m. Diana (Dr. Painter) has done a great service to all by investing her time and expertise in bringing this matter to the attention of Washington residents and to professional historians and historic preservationists around the country. Not every historic property has a pretty face or pleasant story. The Boeing plant represents an important chapter in American history. Unfortunately, the Section 106 tale Diana recounts underscores the need for serious reform in the cultural resource management industry. Just because someone can check off the "archaeology" box in a standard form does not mean that an agency (or its licensee or grantee) has done its due diligence with regard to compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act or the National Environmental Policy Act. The way things work now (and how they have worked in the compliance world for the past 45 years) is great for archaeologists who get paid for their services but lousy for the communities with significant resources that are overlooked and the stakeholders attached to the properties. http://crosscut.com/2010/07/17/history/19981 /Seattle-s-history-at-risk-in-plans-for-Boein... 08/02/2010 Crosscut.com: Seattle's history at risk in plans for Boeing plant demolition Page 4 of 5 — Historian Posted Sun, Jul 18, 12:33 p.m. Tear it down, but don't put up new industry there! I worked there 1951-52, and also in what was called the DPC (Defense Plant Corporation) box office building across the street, between Marginal Way and Boeing Field. Where we saw the XB -52 take off, with the road atop the hill still further east (there was no 1-5 then) totally lined with cars, hot dogs sold,etc. for what was supposed to be a secret appointed time for the take -off, the behemoth aircraft guided aloft by Legendary Test Pilot Tex Johnson. Let's hear more about just what would be accomplished by way of Duwamish clean-up if Plant 2 were demolished. Assuming no new source of pollution was put on the site, of course... Charlton Price — Charlton Price Posted Sun, Jul 18, 12:56 p.m. Just because a site is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places doesn't mean it should be included on the register, nor does it mean that the site's existence can't be commemorated in ways other than physical preservation. As mentioned in this article, options include signage, a display featuring the history of this building in the Museum of Flight, photos and narrative text on a website documenting the rich history of this part of the Duwamish corridor, etc. It sounds like DHAP and the Muckleshoot tribe already have been consulted in the context of the Section 106 process and are supportive of the cleanup process. Just because a site is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places doesn't mean it should be included on the register, nor does it mean that the site's existence can't be commemorated in ways other than physical preservation. Options include signage, a display featuring the history of this building in the Museum of Flight, photos and narrative text on a website documenting the rich history of this part of the Duwamish corridor, etc. Anyone who advocates the preservation of all or part of Plant 2 should propose viable sources of revenue to enable cleanup of the contamination and ensure that it is kept in a safe and serviceable condition in perpetuity. To insist that Tukwila undertake this, or even waste precious funds doing an EIS at a time when the city is flat out broke and is laying off staff is to clamor that money be wasted on process rather than the constructive outcome of cleanup and environmental restoration of the site. — Mud Baby Posted Mon, Jul 19, 2:27 p.m. Self-styled "serial_catowner" writes: "The modern forward-looking workforce quite arguably made Seattle different from Tacoma, with the results we see today." Wow, thank God Tacoma dodged that bullet! — dbreneman Posted Mon, Jul 19, 5:29 p.m. In, I believe, 1968 thousands of UW students and like minded people surged on to Intersate 5 (Northbound only, I think) and stopped traffic for several hours. It was a major event and could be reasonably regarded as historic; it likely changed Washington politics for at least a generation and maybe to this day. Does that mean the Interstate 5 between 45th St. and Roanoke should be have some sort of historic designation? it would probably not be unprecedented to do so; several Revolutionary War battles were fought on or near roads and some of those locations have historic designation. But I would argue that, like Plant Two, the physical place where some significant events occur are neutral with regard to the event or accomplishment itself. Thus Madame Curie's laboratory would have a lot more significance to Curie's accomplishments than the office building where some ground -breaking software was devised. I admit this is a shaky distinction but applying the historic straitjacket to buildings and places with little or no significance to our history risks damaging the social utility of the marketplace. — kieth Posted Tue, Jul 20, 9:11 a.m. Robert Burwell says: July 16, 2010 at 4:53 pm I worked at plant 2 from 1987 to 1990. Manufacturing still existed there well into the 90?s, however assembly of aircraft ceased at plant 2 after the first few 737s. That building has a lot of history. Its a shame to see it tom down. Three generations of my family worked in that building. I still work for Boeing in Aubum Washington, and all of us here hate to see it go. Of special note, After commercial operations ended at plant http://crosscut. com/2010/07/ 17/history/ 19981 /Seattle-s-history-at-risk-in-plans-for-Boein... 08/02/2010 Crosscut.com: Seattle's history at risk in plans for Boeing plant demolition Page 5 of 5 2, defense and space took over and many projects vital to our freedoms were carried out in this historic landmark. This nation owes a debt of gratitude to the people who worked in this place and built the products that kept this country free for over half a century. Re -post from http: //thereifixedit.com/2010/07/15/white-trash-repairs-historical-thursday-kludge- city/#comments — djpainter Posted Tue, Jul 20, 2:37 p.m. Plant 2 has certainly been used in the last 40 years) I worked in that building many years and did not start at Boeing until 1980. It had an overhead catwalk that went to a computer complex and the remainder of the second floor from the headquarters building. Surely, there must be some executive still in Seattle that worked there. Are they planning to demolish the old headquarters, also? While it is historic, it is just plain gorgeous piece of history. Maybe someone more familiar with the architecture can do a little reseach and come up with additional reasons to save that too. lynnperkins — Iynnperkins Login or register to speak your piece. ADVERTISE AND REACH INFORMED, THOUGHTFUL PEOPLE! CLICK HERE FP Crosscut Pubik Media COPYRIGHT (/; 2010 BY CROSSCUT PUBLIC MEDIA ARA, 6 A2 hake a difference. Contribute to high minded journalism. crosscut N1i31,b ADVERTISING 1 JOBS 1 USER AGREEMENT ; PRIVACY 1 FEEDS 1 ABOUT 1 CONTACT http://crosscut.com/2010/07/17/history/19981 /Seattle-s-history-at-risk-in-plans-for-Boein... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 DNS From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Lynn Miranda; Mark D Clement Date: 07/19/2010 9:49 AM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 DNS CC: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Attachments: Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker Mark, Attached is another email from Diana referencing her article in Crosscut. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning 5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1 206-451-5685 1 mdlialiwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> 07/13/2010 1:11 PM »> Lynn is there any more information or direction from your mtg today that you would like us at Boeing to respond too?. Laura Whitaker of Perkins Coie will be responding on behalf of the Boeing Co. shortly, and I wanted give her any late breaking information. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark/Clement From: Lynn Miranda[mailto:lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 5:27 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: DNS Mark, we plan on getting together internally tomorrow to go over the concerns voiced in all 3 letters received today, which I've cc'd to you. Most likely we'll want Boeing to address all 3 letters in one response, but I'll get back to you tomorrow about that. Lynn file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C441FBDtuk-mail6300-po100172667711B6051\GW} 00001.... 08/02/2010 1 (08/02/2010) Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Page 1 ' From: "Allen, Joan D. (Perkins Coie)" <JAllen@perkinscoie.com> To: <Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 07/19/2010 11:27 AM Subject: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Attachments: Dhaliwal.PDF CC: "Whitaker, Laura (Perkins Coie)" <LWhitaker@perkinscoie.com> «Dhaliwal.PDF» At Laura Whitaker's request, attached is a letter sent today to Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal regarding the above matter. If you have any problem opening or viewing the document, please contact me and I'll resend. Thanks. Joan Allen 1 Perkins Coie LLP Legal Secretary 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 PHONE: 206.359.3267 FAX: 206.359.9000 E-MAIL: JAllen@perkinscoie.com The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Dhaliwal.PDF Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we inform you that, unless expressly indicated otherwise, any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written by Perkins Coie LLP to be used, and cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein (or any attachments). ********** NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. Laura Neebling Whitaker PHONE: (206) 359-8584 FAX: (206) 359-9584 EMAIL: LWhitaker©perkinscoie.com July 19, 2010 VIA ELECTRONIC DELIVERY AND U.S. MAIL Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Perkins Coie 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 PHONE 206.359.8000 FAX: 206.359.9000 www.perkinscoie.com Re: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Dear Ms. Dhaliwal: We represent the Boeing Company with respect to the above -referenced project. You have asked us to respond to two comments raised during the comment period for the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") threshold determination that has been issued as part of the City's project review. We summarize our understanding of the two comments below and address each in turn. Comment 1: The City has issued a determination of nonsignificance ("DNS") for the demolition project but, in light of the historic significance of Plant 2 and the requirements of SEPA, a mitigated determination of nonsignificance ("MDNS") would be more appropriate. Our review of the SEPA process conducted by the City for the Plant 2 project indicates that the City's process has been both consistent with SEPA requirements and appropriate given the elements of the demolition project proposed. WAC 197-11-340 states, in pertinent part: If the responsible official determines that there will be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts from a proposal, the lead agency shall prepare and issue a determination of nonsignficance (DNS).... 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 ANCHORAGE • BEIJING • BELLEVUE BOISE • CHICAGO • DENVER • LOS ANGELES • MADISON MENLO PARK • PHOENIX • PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO • SEATTLE • SHANGHAI • WASHINGTON, D.C. Perkins Coie LLP and Affiliates Boeing July 19, 2010 Page 2 The proposal at issue here incorporated numerous project components at or before the time of permit application (e.g., HABS/HAER documentation; Plant 2 celebration; Plant 2/Boeing History Week; submission of the completed HABS/HAER report to HistoryLink.org; and • numerous other actions, events and activities) designed to record, preserve, communicate and celebrate the important role that the Plant 2 buildings have played in the history of Boeing, Washington State, and the nation. The importance of the historic preservation components of the Boeing proposal, and Boeing's commitment with respect to those project features, is reflected in the detailed SEPA documentation submitted with the project application, which includes a number of significant exhibits addressing Plant 2's architecture and cultural importance. While the applicant developed several of these components in consultation with the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, they are elements of the project as originally proposed, not agency measures imposed later to mitigate project impacts. Citations to SEPA regulations by one commenter attempt to establish that because the Plant 2 proposal includes components addressing historic impacts, an MDNS is required (letter from Diana Painter to Lynn Miranda, dated July 2010). The citations advanced, however, either omit important aspects of the relevant rule or do not apply to private proposals. For example, the excerpt of WAC 197-11-350 (2) cited by Ms. Painter appears intended to suggest that if an applicant clarifies or supplements a proposal in response to agency comments, an MDNS is required. But read in its entirety, WAC 197-11-350 (2) applies to situations in which the agency is prepared. to issue a determination of significance (DS) on a proposal, a situation not present here: (2) After submission of an environmental checklist and prior to the lead agency's threshold determination on a proposal, an applicant may ask the lead agency to indicate whether it is considering a DS. If the leads agency indicates a DS is likely, the applicant may clarify or change features of the proposal to mitigate the impacts which led the agency to consider a DS likely. The applicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be prepared. Other SEP.A regulations cited by Ms. Painter in support of her request for an MDNS are either irrelevant or apply to agency (not private) proposals. Citations to the SEPA Handbook (which does not rise to the level of regulation in any event) are similarly unrelated to the SEPA review process that has been conducted here. 03003-0185/LEi3AL 18765239.1 7/19/10 Boeing July 19, 2010 Page 3 Based on all components of the Plant 2 demolition proposal, SEPA documentation submitted by Boeing as part of the project application, and detailed supplemental information supplied by Boeing at the City's request during the course of the City's SEPA review (see, e.g., supplemental information on historic issues submitted by Boeing to Lynn Miranda, Senior Planner, June 15, 2010), the City determined, consistent with SEPA requirements, that "there will be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts from the proposal" (WAC 197-11-340) and issued a DNS. The City's determination is supported by the plain language of SEPA and is appropriate in light of the significant historic preservation record that has been established during the course of the City's review. Comment 2: The National Preservation Act requires the Federal Advisory Council to review the Plant 2 demolition proposal prior to issuance of demolition permits by the City. Section 106 of the National Preservation Act (the "Act") requires federal agencies "to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and afford the Federal Advisory Council ("Federal Advisory Council") a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings." 36 C.F.R. § 800.1. A "Section 106 review" must be completed prior to the approval of any expenditure of federal funds or the issuance of any federal license, permit or approval. A federal agency may seek consultation from the Federal Advisory Council and other specialists concerning the review, or the Federal Advisory Council may impose its involvement at different stages of the review process. The DAHP may also play a consultative role in the Section 106 review. The record demonstrates that Plant 2 is being demolished because the 2-40 Complex (buildings 2-40, 41, 43, 44, 48, 49 and 51) is neither structurally sound nor been an active part of Boeing's airplane production for 40 years. See Boeing press release on Duwamish Cleanup and Restoration project, May 4, 2010). The buildings are old, dilapidated, in a poor state of repair, unsafe, and continuing to deteriorate. See, e.g., cover letter for SEPA application for Plant 2 demolition, April 9, 2010; e-mail correspondence from Mark Clement to Lynn Miranda, June 22, 2010). For example, sections of the roof decking in the 2-41 building have failed. While the demolition project is required for safety and structural reasons, it has also provided Boeing with a greater ability to discuss more comprehensive cleanup and habitat restoration options for the Duwamish Waterway with the natural resource trustees. While Boeing and the natural resource trustees have reached tentative agreement on a proposed habitat restoration project and natural resource damage settlement for the Waterway, neither the project nor the settlement have been approved. Given the increasing deterioration of the buildings, the demolition is required and will proceed regardless of when the cleanup and habitat restoration project are constructed. (See, e.g., e-mail correspondence from Mark Clement to Lynn Miranda, July 12, 2010). The Plant 2 demolition project does not require federal permits and will not receive federal funding. The demolition is a local project that does not constitute an "undertaking" for purposes 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 Boeing July 19, 2010 Page 4 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The fact that the demolition may facilitate a more comprehensive habitat restoration project for the Duwamish does not render the demolition a federal undertaking. Accordingly, Section 106 consultation under the Act is not required as a prerequisite to issuance of local demolition permits. Please let me know if you require additional information regarding the issues addressed above. ry truly yours, P-04%; Laura Neebling Whitaker LNW:ja Cc: Lynn Miranda Shelley Kerslake Mark Clement Gabriel Rosenthal 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 (AJLA-117Ak Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: DNS From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Mark D Clement Date: 07/20/2010 3:58 PM Subject: RE: DNS CC: Jack Pace; Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker; Lynn Miranda Mark, Based on review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS andithe letter submitted by Laura Whitaker on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal rlanning5upervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-1-51-3685 I mcihaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> 07/13/2010 1:11 PM »> Lynn is there any more information or direction from your mtg today that you would like us at Boeing to respond too?. Laura Whitaker of Perkins Coie will be responding on behalf of the Boeing Co. shortly, and I wanted give her any late breaking information. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mas- 'Cl -hent From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:Imiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 5:27 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: DNS Mark, we plan on getting together internally tomorrow to go over the concerns voiced in all 3 letters received today, which I've cc'd to you. Most likely we'll want Boeing to address all 3 letters in one response, but I'll get back to you tomorrow about that. Lynn file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C45C7B6tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B6571\GW} 00001.... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Re: Boeing Plant 2 DNS From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV Date: 07/20/2010 4:19 PM Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 DNS CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Greg, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning5upervisor 1Cit,y of Tukwila 206-+51-36851 mcilialiwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> 07/08/2010 4:55 PM »> «070810-06-KI_070810.pdf» Jack, attached, please find my comment letter regarding DNS E10-010 on the Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Feel free to give me a call or email if you have any questions, but fyi...I will be out of the office until Tuesday July 13 as a result of the State's furlough day on Monday. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR ReportPDF Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. file://C :\temp\XPGrp Wise\4C45 CC7Btuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 B 65A 1 \GW } 00001... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Re:DNS Boeing Plant 2 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Diana Painter Date: 07/20/2010 4:23 PM Subject: Re:DNS Boeing Plant 2 CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Diana, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie DJ,aIiwaI Planning Supervisor 1 City of Tukwila 206-4 1 -5 68 5 1 mclhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Diana Painter" <d.painterl5@att.net> 07/14/2010 11:34 AM »> Hi Jack, I understand that Lynn is on vacation for two weeks. I am copying this comment letter to you. It contains a detailed discussion of mitigation for the proposed demolition of Plant 2, which I think is important to take into consideration in your refinement of the demolition plan, which at this time I believe is not adequate and has insufficient detail to mitigate for the loss of the building. assume that Minnie has a copy of the letter, as she answered my recent email. Minnie, I made one correction in this letter. If you would replace the existing letter, I'd appreciate it. The correction is, I stated that I believe HABS/HAER documentation should be prepared to a Level Three. I think Level Two is appropriate and consistent with what the state has suggested. I am copying the letter to Greg Griffith and Michael Houser, as I understand they met with Boeing to craft early drafts of a mitigation plan. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www. preservation plans. com file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C45CD87tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B65C 1 \GW) 00001... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Chris Moore Date: 07/20/2010 4:20 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal rlanning jupervisor I City of Tukwila 1206-451-5685 I mdliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C45CCDEtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B65B 1\GW } 0000... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination From: "Chris Moore" To: "'Minnie Dhaliwal'" Date: 07/20/2010 4:49 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination CC: "'Jack Pace' , "'Lynn Miranda' Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! www.wa-trust.orq Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Planning Supervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1 206-45 1-5685 1 mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C45D3A3tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B65F 1 \GW } 00001.... 08/02/2010 Page 1 of 2 Lynn Miranda - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Chris Moore Date: 07/21/2010 12:23 PM Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Attachments: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Chris, Attached is the letter you have requested. Let me know if you need anything else. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal Manning5upervisor 1 City of Tukwila 1 206-451-5685 1 mdiialiwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Chris Moore" <cmoore@wa-trust.org> 07/20/2010 4:49 PM »> Hi Minnie, Thank you for your response. At your convenience, could you please email me a copy of the letter submitted by Ms. Whitaker on Boeing's behalf? If email is not possible, please let me know how I can attain a copy of the letter. Best, Chris Moore Field Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206.624.9449 office 206.930.5067 cell file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C46E6C 5tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 B6761 \GW } 00001.... 08/02/2010 Page 2 of 2 Preserving Washington's historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration and stewardship Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation! www.wa-trust.orq Original Message From: Minnie Dhaliwal [mailto:mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:21 PM To: Chris Moore Cc: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dbaliwal Manning jupervisor ICit.9 of Tukwila 1206-1-51-5685 1 mdhaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4C46E6C5tuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 B6761\GW } 00001.... 08/02/2010 RECEIVED JUL 2 0 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Laura Neebling Whitaker PHONE: (206) 359-8584 FAX: (206) 359-9584 EMAIL: LWhitaker@perkinscoie.com July 19, 2010 VIA ELECTRONIC DELIVERY AND U.S. MAIL Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Perkins COIF 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 PHONE: 206.359.8000 FAX: 206.359.9000 www.perkinscoie.com Re: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project, File No. E10-010 Dear Ms. Dhaliwal: We represent the Boeing Company with respect to the above -referenced project. You have asked us to respond to two comments raised during the comment period for the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") threshold determination that has been issued as part of the City's project review. We summarize our understanding of the two comments below and address each in turn. Comment 1: The City has issued a determination of nonsignificance ("DNS") for the demolition project but, in light of the historic significance of Plant 2 and the requirements of SEPA, a mitigated determination of nonsignificance ("MDNS") would be more appropriate. Our review of the SEPA process conducted by the City for the Plant 2 project indicates that the City's process has been both consistent with SEPA requirements and appropriate given the elements of the demolition project proposed. WAC 197-11-340 states, in pertinent part: If the responsible official determines that there will be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts from a proposal, the lead agency shall prepare and issue a determination of nonsignficance (DNS).... 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 ANCHORAGE • BEIJING • BELLEVUE • BOISE • CHICAGO • DENVER • LOS ANGELES • MADISON MENLO PARK • PHOENIX PORTLAND • SAN FRANCISCO • SEATTLE • SHANGHAI • WASHINGTON, D.C. Perkins Coie LLP and Affiliates RECEIVE {: Boeing July 19, 2010 JUL 2 0 2.01 Page 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The proposal at issue here incorporated numerous project components at or before the time of permit application (e.g., HABS/HAER documentation; Plant 2 celebration; Plant 2/Boeing History Week; submission of the completed HABS/HAER report to HistoryLink.org; and numerous other actions, events and activities) designed to record, preserve, communicate and celebrate the important role that the Plant 2 buildings have played in the history of Boeing, Washington State, and the nation. The importance of the historic preservation components of the Boeing proposal, and Boeing's commitment with respect to those project features, is reflected in the detailed SEPA documentation submitted with the project application, which includes a number of significant exhibits addressing Plant 2's architecture and cultural importance. While the applicant developed several of these components in consultation with the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, they are elements of the project as originally proposed, not agency measures imposed later to mitigate project impacts. Citations to SEPA regulations by one commenter attempt to establish that because the Plant 2 proposal includes components addressing historic impacts, an MDNS is required (letter from Diana Painter to Lynn Miranda, dated July 2010). The citations advanced, however, either omit important aspects of the relevant rule or do not apply to private proposals. For example, the excerpt of WAC 197-11-350 (2) cited by Ms. Painter appears intended to suggest that if an applicant clarifies or supplements a proposal in response to agency comments, an MDNS is required. But read in its entirety, WAC 197-11-350 (2) applies to situations in which the agency is prepared to issue a determination of significance (DS) on a proposal, a situation not present here: (2) After submission of an environmental checklist and prior to the lead agency's threshold determination on a proposal, an applicant may ask the lead agency to indicate whether it is considering a DS. If the leads agency indicates a DS is likely, the applicant may clarify or change features of the proposal to mitigate the impacts which led the agency to consider a DS likely. The appiicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be prepared. Other SEPA regulations cited by Ms. Painter in support of her request for an MDNS are either irrelevant or apply to agency (not private) proposals. Citations to the SEPA Handbook (which does not rise to the level of regulation in any event) are similarly unrelated to the SEPA review process that has been conducted here. 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 Boeing July 19, 2010 Page 3 PPCEIVED JUL 2 20m COMMUNJrf Based on all components of the Plant 2 demolition proposal, SEPA documentation submitted by Boeing as part of the project application, and detailed supplemental information supplied by Boeing at the City's request during the course of the City's SEPA review (see, e.g., supplemental information on historic issues submitted by Boeing to Lynn Miranda, Senior Planner, June 15, 2010), the City determined, consistent with SEPA requirements, that "there will be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts from the proposal" (WAC 197-11-340) and issued a DNS. The City's determination is supported by the plain language of SEPA and is appropriate in light of the significant historic preservation record that has been established during the course of the City's review. Comment 2: The National Preservation Act requires the Federal Advisory Council to review the Plant 2 demolition proposal prior to issuance of demolition permits by the City. Section 106 of the National Preservation Act (the "Act") requires federal agencies "to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and afford the Federal Advisory Council ("Federal Advisory Council") a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings." 36 C.F.R. § 800.1. A "Section 106 review" must be completed prior to the approval of any expenditure of federal funds or the issuance of any federal license, permit or approval. A federal agency may seek consultation from the Federal Advisory Council and other specialists concerning the review, or the Federal Advisory Council may impose its involvement at different stages of the review process. The DAHP may also play a consultative role in the Section 106 review. The record demonstrates that Plant 2 is being demolished because the 2-40 Complex (buildings 2-40, 41, 43, 44, 48, 49 and 51) is neither structurally sound nor been an active part of Boeing's airplane production for 40 years. See Boeing press release on Duwamish Cleanup and Restoration project, May 4, 2010). The buildings are old, dilapidated, in a poor state of repair, unsafe, and continuing to deteriorate. See, e.g., cover letter for SEPA application for Plant 2 demolition, April 9, 2010; e-mail correspondence from Mark Clement to Lynn Miranda, June 22, 2010). For example, sections of the roof decking in the 2-41 building have failed. While the demolition project is required for safety and structural reasons, it has also provided Boeing with a greater ability to discuss more comprehensive cleanup and habitat restoration options for the Duwamish Waterway with the natural resource trustees. While Boeing and the natural resource trustees have reached tentative agreement on a proposed habitat restoration project and natural resource damage settlement for the Waterway, neither the project nor the settlement have been approved. Given the increasing deterioration of the buildings, the demolition is required and will proceed regardless of when the cleanup and habitat restoration project are constructed. (See, e.g., e-mail correspondence from Mark Clement to Lynn Miranda, July 12, 2010). The Plant 2 demolition project does not require federal permits and will not receive federal funding. The demolition is a local project that does not constitute an "undertaking" for purposes 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 Boeing July 19, 2010 Page 4 RECEIVED JUL 2 0 MO CEVELOPM,iEN DEVELOPMENT of the National Historic Preservation Act. The fact that the demolition may facilitate a more comprehensive habitat restoration project for the Duwamish does not render the demolition a federal undertaking. Accordingly, Section 106 consultation under the Act is not required as a prerequisite to issuance of local demolition permits. Please let me know if you require additional information regarding the issues addressed above. ery truly yours, 1\J.e/'2(AJ Laura Neebling Whitaker LNW:ja Cc: Lynn Miranda Shelley Kerslake Mark Clement Gabriel Rosenthal 03003-0185/LEGAL 18765239.1 7/19/10 (Alt -;17"14 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 • Fax Number (360) 586-3067 • Website: www.dahp.wa.gov July 8, 2010 Mr. Jack Pace, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 070810 -06 -KI Property: Boeing Plant 2 Re: Determination of Non -Significance E10-010 Dear Mr. Pace: The Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) is in receipt of the Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) regarding the above referenced action at the Boeing Plant 2. As you are aware, Plant 2 on East Marginal Way is not formally listed in the National Register of Historic Places. However, documentation indicates that the building meets criteria for a historic designation in light of its important role on the homefront during World War II. In view of the proposed demolition of the building, DAHP recommends that certain measures and activities be identified and undertaken to serve as mitigation for the loss of this historically significant building. With that, a mitigated determination of non -significance (MDNS) would be a more appropriate result of this project review. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 360-586-3073 or greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov. Sincerely, Gregory Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protect the Post. Shope the Future Minnie Dhaliwal - Re: Boeing Plant 2 DNS From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV Subject: Re: Boeing Plant 2 DNS CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Greg, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie »> "Griffith, Greg (DAHP)" <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> 07/08/2010 4:55 PM »> «070810-06-KI_070810.pdf» Jack, attached, please find my comment letter regarding DNS E10-010 on the Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Feel free to give me a call or email if you have any questions, but fyi...1 will be out of the office until Tuesday July 13 as a result of the State's furlough day on Monday. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) PO Box 48343/Olympia WA 98504-8343 greg.griffith@dahp.wa.gov 360-586-3073/360-586-3067 FAX www.dahp.wa.gov Please Note: Effective November 2, 2009, DAHP requires that all cultural resource reports be submitted in PDF format on a labeled CD along with an unbound paper copy. For further information please see http://www.dahp.wa.gov/documents/CR ReportPDF Requirement.pdf DAHP office hours are 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday thru Thursday and closed on Friday. Minnie Dhaliwal - RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Chris Moore Subject: RE: Boeing Plant 2 SEPA determination Chris, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dhaliwal - Re:DNS Boeing Plant 2 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Diana Painter Subject: Re:DNS Boeing Plant 2 CC: Jack Pace; Lynn Miranda Diana, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the DNS issued for Boeing Plant 2 demolition. Based on the review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker, Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie »> "Diana Painter" <d.painterl5@att.net> 07/14/2010 11:34 AM »> Hi Jack, I understand that Lynn is on vacation for two weeks. I am copying this comment letter to you. It contains a detailed discussion of mitigation for the proposed demolition of Plant 2, which I think is important to take into consideration in your refinement of the demolition plan, which at this time I believe is not adequate and has insufficient detail to mitigate for the loss of the building. I assume that Minnie has a copy of the letter, as she answered my recent email. Minnie, I made one correction in this letter. If you would replace the existing letter, I'd appreciate it. The correction is, I stated that I believe HABS/HAER documentation should be prepared to a Level Three. I think Level Two is appropriate and consistent with what the state has suggested. I am copying the letter to Greg Griffith and Michael Houser, as I understand they met with Boeing to craft early drafts of a mitigation plan. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com Minnie Dhaliwal - RE: DNS From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Mark D Clement Date: 07/20/2010 3:58 PM Subject: RE: DNS CC: Jack Pace; Laura (Perkins Coie) Whitaker; Lynn Miranda Mark, Based on review of the comment letters received in response to the DNS and the letter submitted by Laura Whitaker on behalf of the Boeing Company, the city has determined to retain the original Determination of Non Significance. Let me know if you have any other questions. Minnie Minnie Dia/iwaI rIanning Supervisor 1Cit,9 of Tukwila 12.06-451-56851 mcihaliwal@ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Clement, Mark D" <mark.d.clement@boeing.com> 07/13/2010 1:11 PM »> Lynn is there any more information or direction from your mtg today that you would like us at Boeing to respond too?. Laura Whitaker of Perkins Coie will be responding on behalf of the Boeing Co. shortly, and I wanted give her any late breaking information. thanks Mark Clement Cell phone 206 617-2944 Permit Administrator THE BOEING CO. Mark Clement From: Lynn Miranda [mailto:lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 5:27 PM To: Clement, Mark D Subject: DNS Mark, we plan on getting together internally tomorrow to go over the concerns voiced in all 3 letters received today, which I've cc'd to you. Most likely we'll want Boeing to address all 3 letters in one response, but I'll get back to you tomorrow about that. Lynn PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN July 12, 2010 Ms. Lynn Miranda, Plann City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, Washington 981)88 Re Notice of Decision — Determination of Non -Significance Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 Dear Lynn, (I Thank you for your thorough discus:, ion of the historic significance of Boeing Plant 2 in your staff report for the Notice of Decisictt} for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. This gives a much more complete picture of the history bf the building than was available in the previous documentation for the Notice of Application. I am also encouraged by the fact that Boeing and the city have apparently given a great deal of thought to the mitigation plan. And the completed NABS documentation will be a valuable contribution to the public record. Nonetheless, I have some comments, some of which I have brought up in the past and some in direct response to the Notice of Decision. They generally fall in the categories of: • Environmental compliance issues, • Public process concerns, and • Appropriateness of the mitigation. Because a specific mitigation plan was not previously available for comment in conjunction with the Notice of Application, I have included my comments here. I hope you will be able to take them into consideration. While no mitigation can actually mitigate for the loss of a historic resource, the mitigation plan proposed in your staff report could be made more effective and more directly related to mitigating for loss of this significant historic resource. Environmental compliance SEPA. The threshold determination for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a significant historic resource Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register, should have clearly been labeled a Mitigated Determination of Non -significance (MDNS). It should have adhered to the appropriate disclosure of mitigation measures upfront and in the appropriate MDNS format so the public would know it was DS except for mitigation measures. See directions from SEPA Handbook below: "Mitigated DNS. A primary goal of SEPA is to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts. If significant impacts are identified that would require the preparation of an EIS, those impacts can be reduced either by the applicant(s) making changes to the proposal or by requiring mitigation measures as a condition of approving the project. When changes to the proposal or mitigation measures are identified that will reduce 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 2 of 9 likely significant adverse environmental impacts down to a less -than -significant level, a "mitigated DNS" is issued [WAC 197-11-3501 The mitigating measures are typically shown on the face of the DNS, or as an attachment. A 14 -day comment period, distribution, and public notice are required for the mitigated DNS. The City of Tukwila incorrectly issued a DNS for this project, which misleads the reader as to the severity of impacts. I am requesting that the project be re -issued as a MDNS with mitigation statedupfront and in the appropriate format, with a new public comment period so that the public understands that there are significant impacts to the project and that those impacts are proposed to be mitigated. *WAC 197-11-766 Mitigated DNS. "Mitigated DNS" means a DNS that includes mitigation measures and is issued as a result of the process specified in WAC 197-11- 350. *WAC 197-11-350 Mitigated DNS. The purpose of this section is to allow clarifications or changes to a proposal prior to making the threshold determination. (1) In making threshold determinations, an agency may consider mitigation measures that the agency or applicant will implement. (2) ... The applicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be prepared. (5) Agencies may clarify or change features of their own proposal, and may specify mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a result of comments by other agencies or the public or as a result of additional agency planning. Section 106. The Boeing has stated that the need to demolish the building is inextricably bound with the clean-up of the Duwamish: "In conjunction with this activity, Boeing will demolish several aging buildings located at its Plant 2 facility in Seattle to facilitate cleanup efforts" ("Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration," Press Release, May 4, 2010). The City of Tukwila has stated that the building is contaminated as well, which justifies its demolition: " . .. testing has shown that the building materials are contaminated and will be sent to disposal sites per applicable laws." ("Final Staff Evaluation for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition Project, June 23, 2010). It is my interpretation that, by making these staternents, Boeing and the City believe that the building demolition and Duwamish clean-up are part of the same action. Yet i1: is my understanding that the potential demolition of potential historic resources was not addressed in the 1994 MOA between Boeing and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a Federal agency. I also assume the recent (May 2010) agreement between Boeing and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the US Department of the Interior, and others on the clean-up of the Duwamish constitutes a Federal undertaking and is therefore subject to Section 106. I have addressed this question to the appropriate agencies. 351.8 11. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 3 of 9 Public process SEPA Checklist. As discussed in my letter of May 14, 2010, the SEPA checklist and accompanying documentation for the Notice of Application was misleading and did not include the appropriate documentation in the attached technical report. Boeing stated in their checklist that, "Although not listed on national, state or local registers, Bldgs. 2-40 and 2-41 on the Plant site have been determined to be eligible for listing and may be considered historically significant for their association with the World War II defense industry, specifically aircraft production." The attached documentation should have included the survey(s) by which that determination was made or, at minimum, the state's Historic Property Inventory Report, the basis for the determination. As I noted in my email of June 21, 2010, a decision that a property is "determined eligible" has the same standing as if it is listed on the National Register. "Determined eligible" generally means that the property is historic, but the owner has declined to list it. Because a SEPA checklist and accompanying documentation is a disclosure document, the public did not have an opportunity to fully understand the importance of the building and comment appropriately. The Notice of Application should have been re -issued. SEPA Determination. Our State Environmental Policy Act is another means by which the public is involved in a development process. When a Determination of Significance is issued, such as when the demolition of a historic property is contemplated, it affords the public an opportunity to be involved in the development and examination of alternatives to that demolition. It requires an analysis of the issues and a weighing of the costs and benefits of the proposed actions. In this way, the public is more fully engaged in public decision-making. Because a DNS was issued (in this case inappropriately, in my view), the public was not brought into the process. They did not have an opportunity to make informed comments. There is public interest in this building and its proposed demolition. Sixty comments were generated after articles were published in the Seattle Times, PreservationNation, the National Trust's online publication, and on the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's blog in January and February 2010. However, the way in which Tukwila has handled the public notice and public information on this project, as discussed in my letter of May 14, 2010 and email of June 20, 2010, has undermined opportunities for public comment on the undertaking. Section 106 Review. I understand from my recent conversation with Minnie Dhaliwal that the clean-up efforts being undertaken by Boeing on the Duwamish River involve no Federal funds, and therefore in her view does not trigger a Section 106 review. However, a Section 106 review is triggered if there are any permits required for the project from a Federal agency: Section 106 [16 U.S.C. 470f—Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, comment on Federal undertakings] The head of any Federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking in any State and the head of any Federal department or independent agency having authority to license any undertaking shall, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, as the case may be, take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The head of any such Federal agency shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation established under Title II of this 3518 1Y. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161. • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 4 of 9 Act a reasonable opportunity to comment with regard to such undertaking. (http://www.achp.gov/docs/nhpa%202008-finalpdf) In other words, if there are any Federal permits required as part of the project, this would evoke a Section 106 review. The Section 106 process does not have a stipulated outcome; it merely requires that the involved parties discuss the project. It is another means by which interested parties are brought into the process. Mitigation measures Again, I am happy to see that the City of Tukwila and the Boeing Company has considered mitigation measures in response to the planned demolition of the National Register -eligible Boeing Plant 2. While the mitigation measures do not mitigate for the loss of a historic resource, they do contribute to the historic record and help mitigate for the loss of a resource. Mitigation measures should be commensurate with the importance of the building, and they should be developed as part of a public process. Because of the significance of this building, which I believe is eligible as a National Historic Landmark, defined as a nationally significant historic place possessing "exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States," proposed mitigation should be of the highest level feasible. Comments to the specific mitigations outlined in the June 28, 2010 Notice of Decision are below, followed by additional suggestions. Mitigation: Plant 2 Celebration in July 2010 This is a great idea. Apparently it is by invitation only, however, because it is now July and there has been no public notice that I am aware of for this event. I also do not know of anyone who has been :invited, including my father, who worked in Flight Test for 30+ years and is also a WWII veteran, or any of his friends. Almost everyone from Seattle has personal connections to Boeing Plant 2, and the building has great meaning for them, judging from 60+ comments on web -based articles on the building's demolition. People have an interest because they are interested in aviation history, or because they are veterans of World War II, or have family members who worked at the plant. This broader public should be involved in a "celebration" of the plant as well, and the celebration should be widely advertised. Suggestion: Hold a public open house to tour the factory, with adequate publicity and interpretative tours of the plant designed to educate the general public on its purpose, its history andfunctions, and what will be lost by its demolition. Mitigation: MOHAI "Pillars of Industry" Boeing Tower It is not clear from this mitigation measure what this $500,000 is to be used for. If it is to be used toward MOHAI's building fund, I'm sure MOHAI welcomes the extra money, but represents less than 1 % of the building fund, and this mitigation measure has no nexus with the environmental impact of the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. There would be a nexus if Boeing were to contribute some of its collections/archives to the museum (or copies of their collections/archives), contribute money toward accessioning and interpreting the materials and contribute money toward developing an exhibit and a place for it to reside. 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.516.1. • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 5 of 9 Exhibits are always a good idea. Exhibits are expensive to mount and funds need to cover design, content development, programming, construction and installation. Using the $500,000 for development of a permanent exhibit is an effective use of the money. It would be even more effective if Boeing donated materials from their own archives that MOHAI does not have, and that would benefit both the exhibit and their archives. Because there is such a rich and extensive history around this topic, consideration might be made of a framework -type exhibit where aspects of the content could be rotated, to bring in repeat visitors. Suggestion: Clark this mitigation measure to ensure that the money goes toward the exhibit. Suggest that Boeing donate some of its own extensive archives or copies of materials where this would contribute to both the exhibit and archival holdings of MOHAI. Mitigation: Boeing Company/Plant 2/MOHAI Partnership This portion of the mitigation plan is less clear to me. It concerns me that these mitigations depend on MOHAI to carry out, and they are not underway to my knowledge. Museums program their exhibits years in advance. I am not certain that these will be achieved as apparently envisioned. • Living History/Interactive Memory Books This item says it is to be up and running May 2010 through December 2010 on the MOHAI website. It is now July and I do not see it on the website. If this is to be a web - based program, it should be kept in mind that many of those who were involved in developing or flying the planes that Plant 2 produced, particularly those who flew or in some manner produced the planes during World War II, are in their 80s today. A web - based program does not necessarily cater to their skills or needs. An oral history program should be planned using best practices (there are readily available guidelines for oral histories and people trained specifically in this area). While it is a nice idea to have live interviews (by which I assume you mean videotaped interviews), this is not necessarily the best way to serve historians. Oral history transcripts need to be developed for archival purposes. Also, the program needs to be designed and carried out in such a manner that a representative cross section of the people who had a connection with Plant 2 and/or were involved in the planes that were manufactured at the plant are recorded. This mitigation should be designed with the intention of achieving the best possible results, not just taking the information that is offered on the web. • World War IIBoeing Display Again, this item is supposed to occur in July/August and I am not aware that it is underway. Nonetheless, my comment is that if MOHAI "enhances" their display of World War II subjects from their existing collection, this has nothing to do with mitigating the loss of the historic Boeing Plant 2. Again, if Boeing were to make contributions from their own collection, donate money towards preparing an enlarged exhibit, donate money towards creating a really effective oral history program, there would be a nexus. But as this is written, it has nothing to do with the building. • Plant 2/Boeing History Week Again, this is to occur in July, and I am not aware of it happening. There is no detail here, and it is not clear what it consists of. What exactly is the King County Heritage Association to promote? Where and when is this happening, and what is it? There is no 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.516.1. • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter—Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 6 of 9 nexus between a promotion held by King County Heritage Association and the loss of the historic plant. Suggestion: Ensure that Boeing is contributing artifacts and information towards these displays that offers something that does not already exist, and that they provide enough funding to make effective use of the materials. Ensure that any "celebration" that occurs happens at the site, where an understanding of the building can be gleaned. Ensure that the event reaches a broad audience but also an appropriate audience. Ensure that it is truly educational. Ensure that any related programs undertaken in conjunction with these mitigation measures add to the historic record, are accessible by both the public and researchers/historians, and relate to the building, how it was used, what it produced, and the role the planes played in the pre-war years, the World War Lr years, the Cold War years, and the subsequent development of the commercial airplane industry, where this is relevant. Otherwise, MOIIAI is carrying out mitigations for Boeing that have nothing to do with the loss of the historic structure. Mitigation: Historical Marker/Plaque As currently defined, this is not a meaningful mitigation. The significance of the plant is due, in part, to its sheer scale and the level of activity that occurred there. There is no way that a plaque or marker can capture this. This mitigation is also particularly ineffective if there is no public access to the site. Suggestion: I suggest that the City of Tukwila oversee the design, content, and placement of this "plaque" in order to ensure that it is as effective as it can be. It should be placed where it's possible to understand the site from the vantage point, and it should be in a location accessible by the public. Mitigation: HABS/HAER documentation The HABS/HAER documentation being prepared for this building and site will be a valuable contribution to the historic record, particularly as the narrative for the document goes beyond what is ordinarily provided for this type of documentation. HABS/HAER documentation is prepared according to one of three models, depending on the significance of the resource. Since the significance of this building is of the highest level, it is appropriate to require Level Three HABS documentation. The preparation of HABS/HAER documentation is standard operating procedure when a historic resource is to be lost. The documentation is also donated to the Library of Congress as a matter of course. HABS/HAER materials should also, however, be placed in local repositories so that they can be accessed by researchers and the interested public. While it is positive that the resulting materials will be made available to HistoryLink, HistoryLink has many World War II resources available now. Suggestion: In addition to ensuring that the HABS/HAER documentation responds to the requests of the DAHP (as documented in Michael Houser 's letter of March 30, 2010), the city should ensure that HABS/HAER documentation is prepared to Level Three standards. They should also see that copies of the documentation, including archival black and white photographs, be placed in the following repositories, if they have the facilities for them: the Museum of Flight, the Museum of History and Industry, the Seattle Room and the Aviation History Collection of the Seattle Public Library, the Pacific Northwest Collection of the University of Washington Libraries, the Washington State Historical Society, and the Tukwila 351811. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • dianaC preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 7 of 9 Historical Society. Otherwise, there will be limited access to the materials, particularly if the Library of Congress does not have funds to digitize them. If Boeing truly wanted to be effective and benefit the public, in addition to filing the HABS/K4ER documentation with the Library of Congress, they would make a contribution towards digitizing the collection for the Library of Congress ' American Memory program. Mitigation: Small portion of building on display (possibly) It is difficult to imagine how this could be effective. Again, what is significant about the building is its scale, its design, and how it was used. It is difficult to imagine how a building piece with no context will convey any meaningful information. Suggestion: A building piece' might be effective as a remembrance of the site if it were part of a larger public art piece that interpreted the building and was somehow able to convey some of the building's actual physical presence. There are some quite well known public art pieces that have been relatively effective at conveying the scale of a place and how a building related to its site and context. Since the site is going to be used as a parking lot (ie no development is planned for the site), this is a possibility. The only effective mitigation measures presented here, in my opinion, are • the contribution to a permanent exhibit at MOHAI, • an Oral History program (provided it is appropriately designed), and • the HABS/HAER documentation. The degree to which a "celebration" would be effective depends on how it is designed and carried out. The other mitigations offered may have some nexus with the loss of a historic resource and may be somewhat effective, depending on how they are designed and carried out, how they contribute our understanding of the Plant and the historic record, and the audience they reach. ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS Preserve a portion of the building I suggest that, if preservation of the building is not feasible and at least partial demolition cannot be avoided, that a portion of the building be preserved to be used for the restoration and storage of historic planes. This is what the building is being used for now, and it is a perfect extension of the Museum of Flight's programming. If this is not possible or desirable, it would at minimum allow for the continuation of restoration activities on the site. As previously discussed, because of the nature of the building and its historic uses, if there is not a physical presence that in some way conveys the building's scale and how it was used, any other physical commemoration of the building on the site is fairly useless and in no way mitigates for the loss of the historic building. It would be ideal if the remainder of the building were then interpreted in the site through site design and detailing, to convey the scale and location of the building. Produce a videotape of the building In order to preserve a sense of the building, an interpretive tour of the building with a person knowledgeable about its history, design and construction should be filmed and copies made available to the Museum of Flight, Museum of History and Industry, the Seattle Room and the Aviation History Collection of the Seattle Public Library, the Pacific Northwest Collection of the University of Washington Libraries, the Washington State Historical Society, and the Tukwila Historical Society. 351.8 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page E; of 9 Summary The mitigations as proposed to date do not, in my view, mitigate for the loss of the building and are not commensurate with the importance of the building. My summarized suggestions are as follows. I believe these mitigations would go a long ways toward mitigating the loss of the building. • Celebration. Plan an effective celebration of the building, with a broad audience (or multiple audiences on different days), on site, with effective publicity, and an educational and oral history component (consider having people bring their photographs and other materials, etc., and record them and their materials at the time). • Exhibit. Contribute funds toward a permanent display of the building and the role of the building and the products it produced at MOHAI (make it clear that the money will go toward the exhibit). Contribute additional materials (or copies) from Boeing's archives toward the display and .MOHAI's research collection that enhances our understanding of the importance of the building. Contribute sufficient funds such that any materials donated can be accessioned for use by the public and researchers and historians. • Oral History. Plan and undertake an effective oral history program that is tailored to the subjects. Design the program so that a cross-section of people associated with the building is interviewed. Provide also for transcriptions of recordings and/or videos so that they are accessible in the future by researchers, historians, and the public. • Web -Based Exhibit. Ensure that the "Boeing Company/Plant 2/MOHAI Partnership" described in the mitigation document is effective, has a nexus with loss of the historic structure, and is an effort that Boeing is undertaking, not MOAHI or the King County Heritage Society or another group that is not responsible for mitigation. My understanding of what would be effective here is for Boeing to provide funding for the design of a web -based interpretive program, based on the materials described in (2) and (3). For excellent examples, see the Oregon Historical Society's on-line Home Front exhibit, http://www.ohs.org/education/focus/wartimejortland.cfm, and the National Park Service's Rosie the Riveter website, http://www.nps.gov/rori. • Historical Marker. This will only be effective if it is well designed, if it effectively interprets the site, and if it is accessible by the public. If these objectives can be met, this mitigation is worth undertaking. If it makes sense to incorporate a portion of the building here, that might contribute to the design. However, it is a minor point. • HABS/HAER Documentation. HABS/HAER documentation should be undertaken to Level Three as well as responding to the State's requirements. Documentation should be submitted to the repositories named earlier, as well as the Library of Congress, to ensure their value to the region. • Preservation of Portion of Building. Preserve a portion of the building that can be used for storage and restoration of historic planes associated with Boeing Plant 2 (a suggestion has been made that the two "high bays" be preserved). This task should be undertaken in consultation with the people that are working to restore the planes at present, as well as the Museum of Flight. If it is desirable and feasible, this area can also be used for educational and interpretive purposes. Use the site itself to present an interpretation of how this portion of the building represents only a small proportion of the overall building. • Film. Prepare an interpretive tour of the interior and exterior of the building and make it available on MOHAI's website, YouTube and local repositories. 3518 11. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.516.1 • diana@preservationplans.com Comment letter — Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 9 of 9 • Salvage Materials. Salvage materials that can be re -used and re -cycled to the extent feasible. It has been noted that there are large beams in the building that are old growth wood. These in particular should be re -cycled by re -use. Another mitigation that is sometimes adopted is for the project proponent to fund a survey of like resources for future preservation efforts. This is less desirable than some of the other mitigations here, as the nexus is not as strong; this is a completely unique building; and the Seattle/Tukwila area has already lost many of its World War II -era resources. But it is a way to help expand our knowledge of these resources and perhaps preserve some of them in the future. I realize that Tukwila, by virtue of their regulations, cannot mandate preservation. It can, however, encourage creative, thoughtful and effective consideration of preservation and mitigation options by taking advantage of the regulations they do have at hand and their responsibility to carry them out under the law. Sincerely, 41; Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP 351.8 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Boeing press release on restoration — May 4, 2010 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration... Page 1 of 2 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration SEATTLE, May 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) today announced an environmental cleanup and habitat restoration project that will create nearly five acres of contiguous intertidal wetlands, restore more than half a mile of waterway and establish a resting area for migratory fish in and along the lower Duwamish Waterway. "We are committed to restoring habitat along the Duwamish and conducting environmental work that is vital to the ecosystem, nearby wetlands, the Puget Sound and to our community," said Mary Armstrong, Boeing vice president of Environment, Health and Safety. "This is the largest planned habitat restoration in the Duwamish Waterway, and it will provide an important ecological resource to improve Puget Sound fish runs." Boeing has reached a settlement agreement to clean up high priority areas. The agreement — signed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of Interior,'the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Suquamish and Muckleshoot Indian tribes — fulfills significant federal and state requirements for Boeing along the waterway. This agreement is part of the overall process to clean up the Duwamish Waterway and focuses on restoration of the waterway ecosystem as cleanup continues. Cleanup and restoration activity is scheduled to begin in fall 2012, once final agency approvals and permits are obtained, and expected to take several years to complete. The project will involve excavating more than 100,000 cubic yards of sediment and replacing it with clean sand. This work is being done in coordination with source control measures to mitigate the impact of materials flowing into the waterway from Boeing property, nearby King County International Airport, local highways and roads and surrounding businesses and residential neighborhoods. In conjunction with this activity, Boeing will demolish several aging buildings located at its Plant 2 facility in Seattle to facilitate cleanup efforts. The buildings — which were partially constructed on pilings over the waterway between 1936 and 1941— produced many of the B -17s used in World War II and have not been an active part of Boeing's airplane production operations for 40 years. Boeing will demolish the buildings, cleaning up the effects from past practices and restoring the waterway and nearby wetlands. The company is developing plans to commemorate the site's historic legacy prior to the demolition. Today's announcement is the latest in a series of recent developments in restoring the Duwamish Waterway. On March 3, Boeing and the Washington State Department of Ecology reached agreement on plans to test soil, ground water and sediment at the 9.8 -acre Isaacson site and the 1 9.4 -acre Thompson site, both south of Plant 2. On February 12, Boeing, King County and the City of Seattle reached agreement regarding cleanup of Slip 4, a 6.4 -acre parcel of the waterway north of Plant 2. The Duwamish Waterway was created in the early 1900s when a 9.3 -mile (14.9 -kilometer) stretch of the Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 1 Boeing press release on restoration — May 4, 2010 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration... Page 2 of 2 waterway in south Seattle was straightened, dredged and transformed into a 5.3 mile -long (8.5 kilometer) navigational channel with deep -water port facilities. In 1909, what was then the world's largest man-made island was built at the mouth of the waterway for industrial uses. Boeing began operations along the Duwamish Waterway in 1936. In 2001, the waterway was listed as a Superfund site by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Puget Sound Regional Council estimates that businesses along the lower Duwamish Waterway currently provide approximately 80,000 jobs, and that 84 percent of the industrial lands within the city of Seattle are located along the waterway. Contact: Blythe Jameson Boeing Environment, Health and Safety Communications + 1 562-484-1536 b:lythe.e Jameson®boeing.com SOURCE Boeing Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 2 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF DECISION JUNE 28, 2010 TO: Mark D. Clement, The Boeing Company Diana J. Painter Thomas F. King Washington Trust for Historic Preservation King County Historic Preservation Program WA State Dept. of Ecology, SEPA Division WA State Dept. of Ecology, Shoreland Div. US Corps of Engineers US Dept of Fish & Wildlife US EPA WA State Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation WA State Dept of Natural Resources Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director WA State Dept of Fish & Wildlife WA State Office of Attorney General King County Assessor's Office Port of Seattle King County Dept of Natural Resources Seattle Public Utilities City of Seattle Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Indian Tribe Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition Washington Environmental Council People for Puget Sound Tukwila Historical Society PROJECT: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project FILE NUMBERS: E10-010 (SEPA) ASSOCIATED FILES: N/A APPLICANT: The Boeing Company REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, undergo a partial tenant improvement of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and construct a new stormwater system. The project will be completed in three phases. LOCATION: 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA 98188, south of the 16`° Avenue Bridge. Tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non -significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, environmental documents, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: LM Page 1 of 2 06/23/2010 W:IU ers1LYNNMISEPA 20100Boeing1NOD B eins1.4o 6300 Southcemer Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Far: 206- 431-3665 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 3 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Lynn Miranda, who may be contacted at (206) 431-3670 or via email at Lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 4 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: /etp;//wwwcitukwilawa.ut DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number. E10-010 Applied: 04/08/2010 Issue Date: 06/28/2010 Status: ISSUED Applicant MARK CLEMENT WITH THE BOEING COMPANY Tukwila Lead Agency: City of Description of Proposal: SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition of buildings 2-49, 2-44, 2-40, 2-48 & 2-81, and a partial demolition of 2-31 building. The tunnels under the buildings will also be removed. Included in the demo will be removal of old storm lines, sanitary sewer lines, water lines & power feeds. Project will also construct a new boiler house and the installation of new boilers for the South Yard at plant 2. Project will install a new exterior. non-structural wall around part of the . retaining portions for the 2-31 building that were adjacent to demolished structures, and upgrade existittg walls to increase building strength. Will add new stormwater system south of 16th ave bridge, including new storm lines, catch basins and treatment system. Grading & paving, adding parking & landscaping. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township/Range: 7755 EAST MARGINAL WY S TIIRW 3324049002 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information ie available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by It.(Lj 1? 1 "71C . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. r Jack Paek, $espor!ible Official City of �a 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670 Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 5 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Location Historic Property Inventory Report Field Site No. HR -25 H'Aoric Name: Boeing Primary Building Common Name: 82-41 Property Address: 7775 E Marginal Way 5, Tukwila, WA 98108 Comments: Tcoc No./Parcel No. 3324049002 Plat/Block/lot East South Park Addition Acreage 28.65 Supplemental Map(si DAHP No. Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/41/4 Sec County Quadrangle T. 4R04E 33 NW King SEATTLE SOUTH Coordinate Reference Eesting: Northing: time: Spatial Type: Point Acquisition Code: Geocoded Sequence: 0 Sunday, May 16, 2010 Page 1 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Identification Historic Property Inventory Report Survey Name: South Park Bridge Field Recorder: Harvey, 0 & Flathman, J Owner's Name: The Boeing Company Owner Address: PO Box 3707 M/C 20-00 State: Washington City: Seattle Classification: Building Resource Status: Survey/Inventory Determined Eligible - SHPO Comments: Within a District? No Contributing? National Register Nomination: Local District: National Register Dlstrkt/Thematic Nomination Name: Description Historic Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Manufacturing Facility Pian: Rectangle Stories: 2 Changes to Plan: Intact Changes to Original Gadding: Intact Changes to Other: Other(specify): Style: Other - Industrial Cladding: Brick Roof Type: Sawtooth / Folded Plate Narrative Study Unit Community Planning/Development Date of Construction: 1941 Architect: Other Date Recorded: 10/02/2007 Zip: 98124 Current Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Manufacturing Facility Structural System: Mixed Changes to interior: Moderate Changes to Windows: intact Form/Type: Industrial Foundation: Roof Material: Asphalt / Composition - Shingle Builder: Engineer: Property appears to meet criteria for the National Register of Historic Places:Yes Sunday, May 16, 2010 Page 2 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 7 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Historic Property Inventory Report Description of Constructed in two phases during 1940-41, building 2.41 occupies the southwest corner of Boeing Plant 2 Physical in Tukwila, Washington. The building stretches approximately 780 feet north to south before joining Appearance: Boeing Building 2-44. The building extends approximately 450 feet east of the Duwamish Waterway before joining Boeing building 2-40. The building's north elevation faces 16th Avenue South and at its northeast corner adjoins building 2-31. The majority of the rectangular building rests on a concrete foundation but its southwestern edge rests on wooden piers above the Duwamish Waterway. A sawtooth roof clad in asphalt shingles covers the Industrial -Style building. The building features a variety of cladding materials including a board formed concrete base, structural brick laid In an American bond pattern, and corrugated, cement -asbestos panels. Fenestration on the building consists of multi -pane, metal windows with an operable industrial -style sash. The building features an open floor plan defined by cylindrical columns approximately ten inches in diameter that support flat, steel trusses. The trusses are supported by wooden beams approximately sixteen inches deep that support the wood floor of the mezzanine. This mezzanine, used for small lot production, covers the eastern portion of the building (Richard White). The mezzanine features maple floors supported on tongue and groove decking (Lentz: 2000). The northeastern portions of the mezzanine feature dropped ceilings, fluorescent lighting, and carpeting. A series of tunnels run below the building providing office space, an internal circulation corridor, and ducts for services including electricity and compressed air (Lentz 2000). Major Bagley, C. B. 1929. History of King County, Volume I. S. J. Clarke, Chicago, Illinois. BibBographic Boeing News. 1936-1954, various articles: References: "Modern Assembly Plant to rise on New Boeing Site," April, 1936. "Contractors Rush Plant 2 Addition," June, 1940. "New Plant Mushrooms," July, 1940. "Expansion," June, 1.941. "Building for a Bigger Job," January 1952. Denny, A. A. 1888. Pioneer Days on Puget Sound. Reprinted in Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Washington, 1965. Historical Research Associates. 2004. South Park Bridge Project, Draft EIS and Section 4 (f) Evaluation. Seattle, Washington. History Link. 2001a. Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park - Thumbnail History. In, 'www.historylink.org/essays/output'. History Link. 2001b. Straightening of Duwamish River Begins on October 14, 1913. In, 'www. historyl i nk.org/essays/output'. History LJnk. 2001c. Boeing Field, Seattle: first municlpal airport is dedicated oon July 26, 1928. In, 'www.historyl in k.org/essays/output'. King County Assessor. Property Record Cards, Washington State Division of Archives, Puget Sound Regional Branch, Bellevue, WA. Kroll Map Company, Inc. 1912 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1930 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1946 KrolYs Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc, Seattle, WA. Lentz, F. K. 2000. Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance. Cultural Resource Consultant, for The Boeing Company. Reinartz, K. F. 1991. Tukwila, Community at the Crossroads. The City of Tukwila, Washington. Sunday, May 16, 2010 Page 4 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 8 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 1[111&.3 Historic Property Inventory Report R.L. Polk and Co. 1888-1979 City of Seattle, Washington City Directory. Kansas City, Mo: R.I.. Polk & Co. Sanborn Fire Insurance Co. 1904-05 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1917 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1929-1950 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. Zahler, A. A Marti, and G. Thomsen. 2006. Images of America: Seattle's South Park. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco, California. Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 9 July 12, 2010 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 DEMOLITION OF BOEING PLANT 2 — HOME OF THE B-17 "FLYING FORTRESS" — PLANNED Submitted by Diana J Painter ( July 07 2010 he City of Tukwila, Washington. on the southern border of Seattle. has issued a "Determination of Non -Significance" (DNS) for the demolition of Boeing Plant #2, a building that has been determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Issuing a DNS means ;hat, in the Citys view and under Washington State environmental law, demolition of the structure will not cause an adverse impact to the environment. Boeing Plant #2 was where the 3.17 — the Flying Fortress -- and the 9-29 -- the Super Fortress -- were manufactured during World War II. These planes played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in Europe, making this bi.'ding central to the war effort. Boeing manufactured nearly 7.000 B -17s in this plant during World War tl, running three shifts per day, peaking at 18 planes per day in 1944. The building was also a place where women and rrinorifies in the Seattle area had employment opportunities never before afforded there. In the post-war era the building continued to be central to the aerospace industry, which was the mainstay of the region's economy. it is considered architecturally significant for its design, which was a landmark solution to enclosing very large spaces, developed by the Cleveland -based Austin Engineering Company. According to the 2007 historic survey for the property, the trusses for the building 'were among the largest or their tyre fir, the worrl al that time ' The oa:r.culage built ;n 1942 to hide the enormous, factory from enemy aircraft was also a design feat. The significance of the building is elevated by the fact that the Seattle region has lost many of its World War ii -era properties, Attachmer,.ts: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 10 July 12, 2010 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 including manufacturing sites and defense housing, as deveiopment pressures and lack of a strong preservation ethic have taken their tot. But this budding is singular in its importance. The 1936-1941 Plant 2 is the coi;oquial name for Buildings 2-40 and 2-41, which occupy a 23,65 -acre site. Despite the fact that fine property is an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) clear, -up sire, the City determined that a Section 106 review for demolition of the building was not required Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, requires that any "undertaking funded or permitted by a Federal agency take into account the effect of that activity on a historic property listed or eligible for listing on the National Register. Sector, 106 review would be required if activities on the site. which Is on the Duwarnish River and adjacent to Boeing Field, required any permits from, for example, the EPA. the FAA, the Army Corps of Engineers. US Fish and Wildlife, etc. And despite the fact that the building is recognized by the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAMP) as a historic resource. a Determination of Significance (DS) was not issued. This decision would have required that alternatives to demolishing the pudding be explored in a public process through an Environmental impact Statement. It would also have required that the development of mitigation occur in the public arena, rather than as a negotiation between the City and Boeing Company representatives. Short pieces on the impending demolition of the building were posted on the PreservabonNation.ory bldg on February 5, 2010 (http:i;vww.preservationnation.orgenagaziner2010/todays-newsiseattles-1936-boeing- ptanthtml) and en DAHP s blog on January 14. 2010 (http:;iwadahp.wordpress.comi2010/011141b-17- boe i n g -fact o ry- to- be -d em o ff i s h edt). The demolition announcement generated comments from the general public when an article was published on January 13, 2010 in the Seattle limes (http:J/seattletimes,nwsource.comihtm iboeingaerospace/201078720Q_boeingptantl4.html). Fifty comments were posted In a 72 -hour period. Although the comments ranged in subject area, the following were fairly typicat responses: `It will be a very sad day seeing Plant 11 go . , , Too many fives have been touched by that place for it to simply be torn down and swept into a salvage truck' and. "My Mom and Dad met on the B- 17 assembly line at Plant 2 in World War il. Dad built bomb racks and Mom was Rosie." And on the PreservationNation Wog: "This location is truly a piece of aviation history and I hate to see it destroyed"." Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 11 July 12, 2010 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 Demolition of the building is part of clean-up and restoration activities that Boeing and the EPA are undertaking at this site on the Duwamish River. A parking lot is planned to take the place of the building in addition to losing the historic structure, demolition of =Icing wit: mean that the :Museum of Flight will have to find alternative storage space for some of is historic planes. Additionally, s local group that is restoring what will be V•lash.rgton State's only remaining 8-17, will lose their' workspace (a 8-29 and Lockheed Constellation are also being restored there). According to the City of Tukwila, they have done the minimum necessary by law to administer this environmental compliance process. A more public process, however. would not have ;eft as many questions up in the air. Why is the demolition necessary? Are there alternatives to full-scale demolition? Why was a Section 108 review nut required? How car deinc`aon of a Nat:oral Register-efi;ible ptopeny not constitute an impact to the environment? Will the public have any role in developing a mitigation plan? These are the types of questions that could be discussed in a mere meaningful environmental review process. Comments on the building demolition and environmental compliance process will be received by the City of T4 rv;a through July 12, 2010 Additional information, including the proposed mitigation plan, can be obtained from the City of Tukwila, 206-433-7102, Imirandaffci.tukwi'a.via us Photo; from Washington State Department orArcnaeuiogy and Histcrc P;esar,atian. AOc t :nal Photos car be e.eweo at Tcrr, Pnilc's P"ctbgrapay Website http:i:tvww.rcc,:ntpast•or ticwsinevvs-ululate.;-1OJer.J 1 erect-rcx urces`'-2i-booing- dcmaliticrn, Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 12 July 12, 2010 1 &„4 PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIGN July 12, 2010 Recipients: Mr. Miguel M. Aparicio, FPO, NOAA Mr. Kevin Kilcullen, FPO, US FWS Mr. Bob Hargrove, Deputy FPO, EPA Mr. Shawn Blocker, PM, RCRA, EPA Region 10 Ms. Christine S. Lehnertz, FPO, NPS Mr. Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General, USDOJ Re: Section 106 review in response to Consent Decree No. 10-758 & planned demolition of Boeing Plant 2, Tukwila, Washington The City of Tukwila has issued a Determination of Non -Significance for the demolition of Boeing Plant 2, a National Register -eligible property that is highly significant as the manufacturing plant for the B-17 and the B-29 bombers, which played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in World War II. This decision was made under the auspices of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act. The permit application covers the demolition of the entire plant, which occupies a 28 -acre site. I believe the action is likely to cause a significant, adverse impact on the environment. The comment/appeal period for this action expires Monday July 12, 2010. The City of Tukwila has said that no Section 106 review is required as a part of this environmental process. Clean-up of the site, which is adjacent to the Lower Duwamish Waterway, is being overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of a 1994 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Boeing Company. To my knowledge, no Section 106 review was conducted in conjunction with this MOA. Plant 2, as it is colloquially known, consists of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41. It has been identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places in at least three studies (Lentz, 2002; Harvey, ca 2007; Bola, 2010) and Determined Eligible by the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (the SHPO) in 2007 (see attached). I believe that it is additionally eligible for listing as a National Historic Landmark, for its national significance and the fact that it displays excellent integrity. The attached article, "Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 — Home of the B-17 `Flying Fortress' — Planned," provides a short synopsis of the reasons for its significance. Parallel to the above activities, a settlement was reached in May 2010 between the Boeing Company and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the US Department of the Interior, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the Suquamish and Muckleshoot Indian tribes (the "Trustees") as part of a lawsuit between the Boeing Company and the US government, represented by the Trustees. As part of the settlement, Boeing is responsible for restoration of habitat along the Lower Duwamish Waterway. Both Boeing and the City of Tukwila have said that demolition of the plant is a necessary and integral part of clean-up activities on the property. Boeing has implied (see attached press release) that demolition of the entire plant is necessary to facilitate the restoration project, whereas the work 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Page 2 of 2 plan identifies only one bay of the building, 50' in width, which must be demolished as part of the project. Because there are future actions necessary to undertake the restoration (the Consent Decree refers to EPA approvals), and because these actions are `caused' by the settlement and agreement between Boeing and the Trustees, wouldn't a Section 106 review be necessary as a part of this undertaking? The agreement addresses archeological resources and how they must be addressed, but it does not address historic resources (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758, p. 17). Again the work plan requires removing 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (Appendix A, Scope of Work, Boeing Habitat Projects, Seattle/Tukwila, Washington). Boeing, however, plans to demolish the entire 754,000 square foot historic plant, a portion of which is being used to store and restore historic planes, including a B-17 and B-29 bomber. The comment period for the settlement and subsequent activities has been extended to August 9, 2010 as a result of public comment (Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). According to the Department of Justice, "The letters noted the complexity of the subject matter and stated that the original thirty (30) day comment period was not sufficient to adequately evaluate the proposed Consent Decree." Surely part of the complexity of the project is that a portion of a National Register -eligible property must be demolished as a part of the work plan attached to this agreement, and the impacts of this action have not been addressed? An additional complexity is the fact that the Boeing Company has applied for the demolition of the entire 17+ acre plant as a part of the clean-up, an action that has in essence been approved by local government and condoned (to date) by the State of Washington. Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Note again that the appeal period for environmental entitlements for the demolition of the structure expires today, July 12, 2010. Sincerely, Diana J. Painter, PhD, AICP Attachments • "Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration" (press release) • Notice of Decision — Determination of Non -Significance, City of Tukwila • Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Primary Building, B2-41 • "Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 — Home of the B-17 `Flying Fortress' — Planned," RRPN Copies • Allyson Brooks, Historic Preservation Officer, State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation • Anthea Hartig, Director, Western Regional Office, National Trust for Historic Preservation • Tom F. King, PhD, Consultant 3518 N. C Street • Spokane, WA 99205 • 509.290.5161 • diana@preservationplans.com Tri WASHINGTON TRUSTFOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION July 12, 2010 Mr. Jack Pace, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Determniation of Non -Significance: Boeing Plant 2 (File # E010-010) Dear Mr. Pace, On Behalf of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation, I am writing to raise concerns regarding the City of Tukwila's process in issuing a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) related to the demolition of Boeing Plant 2. The Washington Trust is a nonprofit, 501(c)3 advocacy organization dedicated to safeguarding the historic and cultural resources of Washington. Please include this letter in the public record for the demolition application. Boeing Plant 2 has been identified as eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places in at least three different studies and has been Determined Eligible for listing in the National Register by the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation. As such, the demolition of Plant 2 does have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Tukwila's DNS includes a list of measures The Boeing Company has proposed to mitigate the adverse impact that demolition would have on Plant 2 - measures the city's planning department has deemed to be adequate. As stated, the DNS determines that the demolition of Plant 2 does not have a probable significant adverse impact, yet a list of mitigation measures is included. The rightful determination should have been a Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS). The proposed demolition of Boeing Plant 2 has not gone through the Section 106 Review process. The City of Tukwila maintains that no federal undertaking is involved in the application for and proposed implementation of the plant's demolition. Yet, The Boeing Company's impetus to demolish Plant 2 stems from an agreement to clean up the Lower Duwamish Waterway — an agreement in which several federal agencies are involved. The proposed demolition of Plant 2 is a direct result of federal involvement in the Consent Decree governing the Lower Duwamish Waterway cleanup, therefore Section 106 Review should be required. Finally, the Scope of Work as described in Appendix A of the Consent Decree issued for the Lower Duwamish Waterway cleanup identifies the required removal of only that 1204 Minor Avenue • Seattle, WA 98101 • tel 206.624.9449 fax 206.624.2410 • wa-trust.org Mr. Jack Pace July 12, 2010 Page 2 portion of Plant 2 (Building 2-41) that overhangs the water. The City of Tukwila's DNS does not adequately address the option to demolish only that portion of the building that overhangs the water and retain as intact a significant portion of Plant 2. The Washington Trust restates our previous requests that alternatives to complete demolition be fully investigated and evaluated prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chris Moore Field Director Lynn Miranda - Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs r - Page 1 of 1 From: "Diana Painter" To: "Jack Pace" Date: 07/12/2010 6:03 AM Subject: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - letter to FPOs CC: "Lynn Miranda" , Hi Jack, I hope you are doing well. I have written to the Federal Preservation Officers that are a party to the agreement for restoration of the Lower Duwamish Waterway (Consent Decree for Civil Action No. 10-758) to ask them whether Section 106 review was ever done as a part of this agreement, which dates May 2010. The plan associated with the agreement calls for the demoliton of 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2 (1 bay). The agreement addresses archaeological resources, but not historic resources. The building has, as you know, been Determined Eligible for listing on the National Register. The comment period for this agreement and plan has been extended by the Department of Justice to August 9, 2010, due to public comment (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 1115, June 16, 2010, p. 34155). The appeal period for the demolition of the entire building, 754,000 square feet, expires today, per the City of Tukwila's Notice of Decision and Determination of Non -Significance. Your office has stated that Section 106 review is not necessary, but according to Minnie Dhaliwal, she was not aware that Section 106 review was called for if there was any Federal permitting involved (EPA, Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife, etc), as well as actual Federal funding. If it were me, I would not issue a demolition permit for the project until this is sorted out, in order to avoid complications. I've copied DAHP on my letter. will forward my comments on the Notice of Decision in a separate email. Cheers, Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com file://C:\temp \XPGrp Wise\4C3AB034tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 B49D 1 \GW} 00001... 07/12/2010 PAINTER PRESERVATION PLANNING HISTORIC PRESERVATION & URBAN DESIOPI 3518 N. C Street Spokane, Washington 99205 Sent via email August 9, 2010 Pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov Hard copy mailed to: PO Box 7611 US Department of Justice Washington DC 20044-7611 Vex rllIf Re: United States of America et al. v. The Boeing Company, DJ Reference No. 90-11-3- 07227/1 To whom it may concern: I am writing regarding the lack of a Section 106 review for the above -referenced decision and settlement. The plan that implements the settlement, entitled "Appendix A: Scope of Work, Boeing Habitat Projects, Seattle/Tukwila, Washington," which is attached to the Consent Decree, proposes partial demolition of a National Register -eligible building. No Section 106 review has been conducted for this demolition, even though the "Trustees" that represent the United States of America here include the NOAA, the Department of the Interior, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service, among other agencies. Provisions were made for the archaeological resources (Consent Decree No. CV -10-78, p. 17), but equivalent consideration has not been given to the.historic building on the site. The plan ("Scope of Work") calls for the demolition of 53,000 square feet of Boeing Plant 2, a property that has been determined eligible for the National Register (Harvey, 2007), as well as being identified as historically significant in three additional studies. In my opinion the 754,000 square foot building is eligible as a National Landmark for its national significance. It is primarily significant as the manufacturing plant for the B-17 and the B-29 bombers, which played a pivotal role in the Allied victory in World War II, and secondarily significant for its engineering design. The building is intact and is being used at this time for restoring B-17 and B-29 bombers, as well as other historic planes. The lawsuit brought against the Boeing Company by the Trustees charged the company with polluting the Duwamish Waterway. The company lost the suit and as a result, is charged with implementing a plan overseen by the agencies involved (Scope of Work, p. 18) to restore habitat along the waterway and pay $2,000,000 to the Trustees to recover their costs. Even if this plan is not considered a Federal undertaking and therefore not subject to Section 106, it is highly likely that federal agencies, such as the Army Corps of Engineers, will be issuing permits for the work (see Scope of Work, p. 18). In this sense, the Consent Decree and the plan that implements the decision under the decree will cause a federal undertaking, surely requiring Section 106 review for the affected historic resource. On a separate but related note, the City of Tukwila has issued a Determination of Non - Significance for the demolition of the entire Plant, which means that, under the Washington State Environmental Protection Act, there is "no probable adverse effect on the environment" from the demolition of the building. This decision was defended by Boeing's attorneys in a letter dated July 19, 2010 (letter from Laura Neebling Whitaker, Perkins Coie, to Minnie Dhaliwal,, City of Tukwila), and the decision was therefore upheld by the City of Tukwila. A Determination of Significance would have been more appropriate under the law. Even a Mitigated Determination of Significance would have made more sense, particularly as a series of mitigations were offered. The State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) has not commented on this determination. The Washington Department of Ecology, which is scheduled to receive $54,000 in funds as part of the settlement, also did not comment in response to my inquiries. DAHP gave tacit approval to the mitigation plan (letter from Greg Griffith , DAHP, to Shaunta Hyde, The Boeing Company, March 25, 2010), which was conceptual at that point, and with the exception of the HABS/HAER documentation, largely ineffectual in my view. It does not mitigate for the loss of the building. And because there has been only the minimal public process required by law under SEPA, no alternatives have been discussed or considered and little opportunity afforded for public input. (For example, to my knowledge, my nine -page letter on the mitigation plan was not taken into consideration as part of the public process (letter from Diana Painter to Lynn Miranda, City of Tukwila, July 12, 2010)). The city says the building must be demolished. However, the Environmental Protection Agency has said that Boeing's clean-up of the site, under their direction, does not require demolition of the building. The plan implementing the Consent Decree calls for demolition of less than 10% of the building. Yet it is a demolition and should be reviewed consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. The Section 106 process is another way in which a discussion of the adverse effects from demolition of the historic plant can be considered and alternatives to its demolition discussed. The fact that these processes, which are intended for these very purposes, have not taken place at the local, state or federal levels is very distressing, particularly considering the importance of this building to the cities involved (Tukwila and Seattle), the Puget Sound region, and the country. I would like to see a formal Section 106 review be conducted, involving all interested parties, including those associated with the building, before the decision is made for implementing the settlement. Your attention to this is appreciated. Sincerely, Diana Painter, PhD Boeing press release on restoration — May 4, 2010 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration... Page 1 of 2 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration SEATTLE, May 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) today announced an environmental cleanup and habitat restoration project that will create nearly five acres of contiguous intertidal wetlands, restore more than half a mile of waterway and establish a resting area for migratory fish in and along the lower Duwamish Waterway. "We are committed to restoring habitat along the Duwamish and conducting environmental work that is vital to the ecosystem, nearby wetlands, the Puget Sound and to our community," said Mary Armstrong, Boeing vice president of Environment, Health and Safety. "This is the largest planned'ltabitat restoration in the Duwamish Waterway, and it will provide an important ecological'resource to4}mprove Puget Sound fish runs." Boeing has reached a settlement agreement to clean up high priority areas. The agreement — signed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of Interior,'the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Suquamish and Muckleshoot Indian tribes — fulfills significant federal and state requirements for Boeing along the waterway. This agreement is part of the overall process to clean up the Duwamish Waterway and focuses on restoration of the waterway ecosystem as cleanup continues. Cleanup and restoration activity is scheduled to begin in fall 2012, once final agency approvals and permits are obtained, and expected to take several years to complete. The project will involve excavating more than 100,000 cubic yards of sediment and replacing it with clean sand. This work is being done in coordination with source control measures to mitigate the impact of materials flowing into the waterway from Boeing property, nearby King County International Airport, local highways and roads and surrounding businesses and residential neighborhoods. In conjunction with this activity, Boeing will demolish several aging buildings located at its Plant 2 facility in Seattle to facilitate cleanup efforts. The buildings — which were partially constructed on pilings over the waterway between 1936 and 1941— produced many of the B -17s used in World War II and have not been an active part of Boeing's airplane production operations for 40 years. Boeing will demolish the buildings, cleaning up the effects from past practices and restoring the waterway and nearby wetlands. The company is developing plans to commemorate the site's historic legacy prior to the demolition. Today's announcement is the latest in a series of recent developments in restoring the Duwamish Waterway. On March 3, Boeing and the Washington State Department of Ecology reached agreement on plans to test soil, ground water and sediment at the 9.8 -acre Isaacson site and the 19.4 -acre Thompson site, both south of Plant 2. On February 12, Boeing, King County and the City of Seattle reached agreement regarding cleanup of Slip 4, a 6.4 -acre parcel of the waterway north of Plant 2. The Duwamish Waterway was created in the early 1900s when a 9.3 -mile (14.9 -kilometer) stretch of the Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 1 Boeing press release on restoration — May 4, 2010 Boeing Announces Duwamish Waterway Environmental Cleanup and Habitat Restoration... Page 2 of 2 waterway in south Seattle was straightened, dredged and transformed into a 5.3 mile -long (8.5 kilometer) navigational channel with deep -water port facilities. In 1909, what was then the world's largest man-made island was built at the mouth of the waterway for industrial uses. Boeing began operations along the Duwamish Waterway in 1936. In 2001, the waterway was listed as a Superfund site by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Puget Sound Regional Council estimates that businesses along the lower Duwamish Waterway currently provide approximately 80,000 jobs, and that 84 percent of the industrial lands within the city of Seattle are located along the waterway. Contact: Blythe Jameson Boeing Environment, Health and Safety Communications + 1 562-484-1536 blythe.e.jameson@boeing.com SOURCE Boeing Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 2 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF DECISION JUNE 28, 2010 TO: Mark D. Clement, The Boeing Company Diana J. Painter Thomas F. King Washington Trust for Historic Preservation King County Historic Preservation Program WA State Dept. of Ecology, SEPA Division WA State Dept. of Ecology, Shoreland Div. US Corps of Engineers US Dept of Fish & Wildlife US EPA WA State Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation WA State Dept of Natural Resources Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director WA State Dept of Fish & Wildlife WA State Office of Attorney General King County Assessor's Office Port of Seattle King County Dept of Natural Resources Seattle Public Utilities City of Seattle Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Indian Tribe Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition Washington Environmental Council People for Puget Sound Tukwila Historical Society PROJECT: FILE NUMBERS: ASSOCIATED FILES: APPLICANT: REQUEST: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project E10-010 (SEPA) N/A The Boeing Company The applicant is proposing to demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series buildings, undergo a partial tenant improvement of the 2-31 building, construct a new boiler house, add new parking, and construct a new stonnwater system. The project will be completed in three phases. LOCATION: 7755 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA 98188,south of the 16' Avenue Bridge. Tax parcels #3324049002, 2824049009 & 0001600020. This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non -significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, environmental documents, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: LM Page 1 aft 0623!2010 W:1U er\LYNNM'SEPA 2010\�ssoein WOA B e)9a1.doe 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206- 431-3665 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 3 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Lynn Miranda, who may be contacted at (206) 431-3670 or via email at Lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 4 July 12, 2010 City of Tukwila Notice of Decision — June 28, 2010 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://wwwcitukwi/awo.uF DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number. E10-010 Applied: 04/09/2010 Issue Date: 06/28/2010 Status: ISSUED Applicant MARK CLEMENT WITH THE BOEING COMPANY Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SEPA determination for Boeing Plant 2 Demolition of buildings 2-49, 2-44, 2-40, 2-48 & 2-81, and a partial demolition of 231 building. The tunnels under the buildings will also be removed. Included in the demo will be removal of old storm lines, sanitary sewer limes, water lines & power feeds. Project will also construct a new boiler hoose and the installation of new boilers for the South Yard at plant 2. Project will install a new exterior non-structural wall around part of the rmaining portions for the 2-31 building that were adjacent to demolished structures, and upgrade existing walls to increase building strength. Will add new stormwater system south of 18th ave bridge, including new storm lines, catch basins and treatment system Grading & paving, adding parking & landscaping. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township/Range: 7755 EAST MARGINAL WY S VIEW 3324049002 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (ELS) is not required under RCW 43.21 c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by -ill �� 1 t' / �. l[' . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. jack Pae , Reapor Ible Official City of 6300 Sonthcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (208)4313670 Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.2IC.078) Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 5 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Location Historic Property Inventory Report Ned Site No. HR -25 Historic Name: Boeing Primary Building Common Name: 82-41 Property Address: 7775 E Marginal Way S, Tukwila, WA 98108 Comments: Tax No./Parcel No. 3324049002 Plat/Block/lot East South Park Addition Acreage 28.65 Supplemental Maps) DAHP No. Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/41/4 Sec County Quadrangle T24R04E 33 NW King SEATTLE SOUTH Coordinate Reference Easting: Northing; Zone: Spatial Type: Point Acquisition Code: Geocoded Sequence: 0 Sundry, May 16, 2010 Page 1 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 a Yl lIIVIYTIUN w Identification Historic Property Inventory Report Survey Name: South Park Bridge Date Recorded: 10/02/2007 Feld Recorder: Harvey, 0 & Flathman, J Owner's Name: The Boeing Company Owner Address: PO Box 3707 M/C 20-00 City: Seattle State: Washington Zip: 98124 Classification: Building Resource Status: Survey/Inventory Determined Eligible SHPO Comments: Within a District? No Contributing? National Register Nomination: Local District National Register District/Thematic Nomination Name: Description Historic Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Current Use: Industry/Processing/Extraction - Manufacturing Manufacturing Facility Facility Plan: Rectangle Stories: 2 Structural System: Mixed Changes to Plan: Intact Changes to Interior: Moderate Changes to Original padding: Intact Changes to Windows: Intact Changes to Other: Other(specify): Style: Other- Industrial Form/Type: Industrial Cladding: Brick Foundation: Roof Type: Sawtooth / Folded Plate Roof Material: Asphalt / Composition - Shingle Narrative Study Unit Other Community Planning/Development Date of Construction: 1941 Architect: Builder: Engineer: Property appears to meet criteria for the National Register of Historic Places:Yes Sunday, May 16, 2010 Page 2 of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 7 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Historic Property Inventory Report D!scrlotion of Constructed in two phases during 1940-41, building 2-41 occupies the southwest corner of Boeing Plant 2 Physical in Tukwila, Washington. The building stretches approximately 780 feet north to south before joining Appearance: Boeing Building 2-44. The building extends approximately 450 feet east of the Duwamish Waterway before joining Boeing building 2-40. The building's north elevation faces 16th Avenue South and at its northeast corner adjoins building 2-31. The majority of the rectangular building rests on a concrete foundation but its southwestern edge rests on wooden piers above the Duwamish Waterway. A sawtooth roof clad in asphalt shingles covers the Industrial -Style building. The building features a variety of cladding materials including a board formed concrete base, structural brick laid In an American bond pattern, and corrugated, cement -asbestos panels. Fenestration on the building consists of multi -pane, metal windows with an operable industrial -style sash. The building features an open floor plan defined by cylindrical columns approximately ten inches in diameter that support flat, steel trusses. The trusses are supported by wooden beams approximately sixteen inches deep that support the wood floor of the mezzanine. This meuanine, used for small lot production, covers the eastern portion of the building (Richard White). The mezzanine features maple floors supported on tongue and groove decking (Lentz: 2000). The northeastern portions of the meuanine feature dropped ceilings, fluorescent lighting, and carpeting. A series of tunnels run below the building providing office space, an Internal circulation corridor, and ducts for services including electricity and compressed air (Lentz 2000). Major Bagley, C. 5.1929. History of King County, Volume I. 5. J. Clarke, Chicago, Illinois. Bibliographic Boeing News. 1936-1.954, various articles: R4ferences: "Modern Assembly Plant to rise on New Boeing Site," April, 1936. "Contractors Rush Plant 2 Addition," June, 1940. "New Plant Mushrooms," July, 1940. "Expansion," June, 1941. "Building for a Bigger Job, January 1952. Denny, A. A. 1888. Pioneer Days on Puget Sound. Reprinted in Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Washington, 1965. Historical Research Associates. 2004. South Park Bridge Project, Draft EIS and Section 4 (f) Evaluation. Seattle, Washington. History Link. 2001a. Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park - Thumbnail History. In, ',,vww.historylink.org/essaysioutpue. History Link. 2001b. Straightening of Duwamish River Begins on October 14, 191.3. In, 'www. historyl in k.org/essays/output'. History Unk. 2001c. Boeing Field, Seattle: first munidpai airport is dedicated o0n July 26, 1928. In, 'www. historyl in k.org/essays/output'. King County Assessor. Property Record Cards, Washington State Division of Archives, Puget Sound Regional Branch, Bellevue, WA. Kroll Map Company, Inc. 1912 Kroli's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc., Seattle, WA. 1930 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc, Seattle, WA. 1946 Krolls Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, Inc, Seattle, WA. Lentz, F. K. 2000. Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance. Cultural Resource Consultant, for The Boeing Company. Reinartz, K. F. 1991. Tukwila, Community at the Crossroads. The City of Tukwila, Washington. Sundry, May 16, 2010 Page 4 Of 6 Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 8 July 12, 2010 Historic Property Inventory Report — Boeing Plant 2 — October 2, 2007 Historic Property Inventory Report R.t_ Polk and Co. 1888-1979 City of Seattle, Washington City Directory. Kansas City, Mo: R.I.. Polk & Co. Sanborn Fire Insurance Co. 1904-05 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1917 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. 1929-1950 Maps for City of Seattle, Washington. Zahler, A. A Marti, and G. Thomsen. 2006. Images of America: Seattle's South Park. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco, California. Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 9 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 DEMOLITION OF BOEING PLANT 2 — HOME OF THE B-17 "FLYING FORTRESS" — PLANNED Subm:t•e^ by Clara Jt.'v 0.7 2C10 City of Tukwila, Washington. on the southern border of Seatte. has :issued a Determination of Non -Significance" (CNS) for the demoG„on of 3oe:ng Plan: 2, a oudcirg that las been deterr fined c%apple for iistutg an the National Register of Historic Places. Issuing a DNS means ;hat, in the City's view and under' Washington State environmental law. demolition of the structure will rot ca ,s•e an adverse impact to the environment Boeing Katt 42 was where :he 3-17 - the Flying Forties:: - • and the 926 - the Super Fortress - were rn.ar.ufacturcd during 'Nord'Nar 11. These panes prayed a p.vcta: r.7!e :n ;he Allied floury in Er:rope mating tn.s b..:din9 central to :he war effort Boeing manufactured neat }y 7,000 8-17s in this part during World Warn, running three stuffs per day, peaking at 19 planes per day in 1944. The budding was also a place where vrorren and Irl.tor''ies in the Seattle arca hid employment opportunities never before afforded them. ,'n the post war era :he building continued lc be central to the aerospace ndustry, which wja the maristay .,f :he re;;:on a errnnrny 1 is considered arcni`ectura[ty significant for its design, wh ch: ,•,as a lancmark soiut•on ;o cnt:'csir g very ,aisle rip ices deveiop.eC by the Cleveland -bawd Austin E;rgrneerrr; Company According in Me 2007 r >'oric s,rvey `or the nrot'eey, the trusses for 'he guild rg arrceg the ;a:g at of;heir type :n the word at that time The caroulope built in 1942 to h:de 'he enormous factory from enemy aircraft was also a des gn 'eat The s:gnifcarce of the building is elefated by the fool that the Seattre region has Zest many of its Wand War b -era properties. Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 July 12, 2010 10 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 including manufacturing sites and defense housing, as development pressures and lack of a strong preservation ethic have taken their toll, But this budding is singular in its importance. The 1936-1941 Plant 2 is the colloquial name for Buildings 2-40 and 2-41, which occupy a 28.65 -acre site. Despite the fact that the property is an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) clean-up site, the City determined that a Section 106 review for demolition of the building was not required Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, requires that any "undertaking" funded or permitted by a Federal agency take ?tto account the effect of that activity or a historic property listed or eligible for listing on the National Register, Section 106 review would be required if activities on the site, which is on the Duwamish River and adjacent to Boeing Field, required any permits from, for example, the EPA, the FAA, the Army Corps of Engineers. US Fish and Wildlife, ate. And despite the fact that the building is recognized by the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) as a historic resource, a Determination of Significance (DS) was not issued. This decision would have required that alternatives to demolishing the curtding be explored in a public process through an Environmental impact Statement. It would also have required that the development of mitigation occur ;n the public arena, rather than as a negotiation between the City and Boeing Company representatives. Short pieces on the impending demolition of the building were posted on the PreservationNation.org Wog on February 5, 2010 (http:Nwww preservationsation.org/rnagazinei2010/iodays-newslseatties-1936-boemg- plant.htrnl) and on DAHP's blog on January 14, 2010 (http://wadahp wordpress.com/2010/011141b-17 - boei ng -factory -to- be -demolished/). The demolition announcement generated comments from the general public when an article was published on January 13. 2010 in the Seattle 'Times (http:)/seattletimes.nwsource.comihtmi/boeingaerospace/2010767200 boeingplantl4.html). Fifty comments were posted in a 72 -hour period. Although the comments ranged in subject area, the following were fairly typical responses: 'It will be a very sad day seeing Plant it go ... Too many lives have been touched by that place for it to simply be tom down and swept into a salvage truck" and. "My Mom and Dad met on the B- 17 assembly line at Plant 2 in World War ll. Dad built bomb racks and Mom was Rosie." And on the PreservationNation biog: "This location is truly a piece of aviation history and I hate to see it destroyed!" Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 11 July 12, 2010 Article on demolition of Boeing Plant 2 - RRPN — July 7, 2010 Demolition of the building is part of clean up and reStoratton ac;ivtties that Boeing and the EPA are undertaking at this site on the Duwamish River. A parking lot is planned to take the place of the building In addition to losing the historic structure. demolition of buitang will mean that the Museum of Flight will have to find aiternatve storage space for some of As historic planes. Additionally, a local group that is restoring what w It he Washington State's only remaining R-17. will lose their workspace (a B-29 and Lockheed Constcilaticn are also being restorad there), According to the City cf Tukwiia, they nave done the minimum necessary by law to administer this environmental compliance process. A more public process, however. wouid not have left as many questions up in the air. Why is the demolition necessary? Are Mere alternatives to full-scale demclitten? Why was a Section 106 review not required? How car. demolition of a National Register -eligible property not constitute an impact to the environment? Will the public have any role in developing a mitigation plan? These are the types of questions that could be discussed in a mere meaningful environmental review process. Comments on the building demolition and environmental compliance process will be received by the City of Tukwila through July 12, 2010. Additional information, including the proposed mitigation plan, can be obtained from the City of Tukwila, 206-433.7162, itnirandagci.tukwila.waus . Photos from Washington State Department of Arcnaeoiogy and Historic Preser.ation• Add -total Photos car be sie::e0 at Torr Ph•.'c's Protograsiy'Wefrite http:%•'t�uw.r.r<rt}t<ut.kFri;strwsn.w-uh.l<rtc•.-lt).csz .urvurotl-rcurce>. __•-hi�rsn;�- demolttinn. Attachments: Demolition of Boeing Plant 2 12 July 12, 2010 Page 1 of 1 Lynn Miranda - Boeing Plant #2 demo From: "Diana Painter" To: "Lynn Miranda" Date: 07/03/2010 11:55 AM Subject: Boeing Plant #2 demo CC: Hi Lynn, Can you tell me why a Notice of Application for the Boeing work never appeared on the City of Tukwila's Notice of Application map on their website? Also, can you tell me under what circumstances a public notice is listed on Tukwila's "public notice" website? Thanks. Diana Diana J. Painter, PhD Painter Preservation & Planning 3518 N. C Street Spokane, WA 99205 Tel: (509) 290-5161 7 4th Street, Suite 34 Petaluma, CA 94952 Cell: 707-364-0697 www.preservationplans.com file://C :\temp\XPGrp Wise\4 C2F2514tuk-mail63 00-po 100172667711 B 3 C 01 \GW } 00001.... 07/06/2010 • RECEIVED 'AUG 06 2010 COMMTY DEVELOPMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 • Fax Number (360) 586-3067 • Website: www.dahp.wa.gov July 28, 2010 Mr. Gabriel Rosenthal Boeing Legal Department PO Box 3707, MC 11 -XT Seattle, WA 98124-2207 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 033010 -03 -KI Property: Boeing Plant 2 Demo Re: HAER Document Dear Mr. Rosenthal: I have reviewed the HAER documentation for Boeing Plant 2. Your consultant has a done an exemplary job on the documentation. As such we considered this documentation complete and will be sending the information via Fed -EX to the HAER Office in D.C. tomorrow. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, , Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 michael.houser@dahp.wa.gov JOCuV&VVL// IP -41A e Goov b) b U .011 ,12 ( fife jakired 'GvLa_ vlLk) Wwi -tOv a, ` -' August _52010 Lynn Miranda Department of Community Development Planning Division City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188-8548 Subject: Final Haer report — D10-118 The Boeing Company, Tukwila, Washington Lynn, Attached is an approval letter from DAHP regarding the HAER report. Also attached is the final HAER report itself. # WA -189 RECEIVED AUG O 6 2010; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT If you have any questions or if you need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (206) 617-2944 or via e-mail at Mark.d.clement@Boeing. Sincerely yours, "Mart Cle Permit Specialist The Boeing Company. a SEPA Submittal Demolition and Site Development Boeing -Plant 2 The Boeing Company P.O Box 3707 M/S 1W-09 Seattle WA 98124-2207 April, 2010 Prepared by Mark Clement RECEIVED !APR 0 9 2010 COMMUv.t 1 Y DEVELOPMENT Index of Documents 1 . Cover letter 2 .SEPA Application 3 . Project outline 4. Affidavit of Ownership 5 Phasing plan layout 6 . Attachment A- Boeing, DAHP letters & comments 7. HABS/HARE report 8. Geotech report 9 11 by 17 Project Drawings -1 copy 10 24 by 36 Project Drawings -5 copies (Title sheet includes area Location, vicinity maps and legal description) April, 2010 Prepared by Mark Clement RECEIVED !APR O 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0___AtorztezArA7 April 9, 2010 Mr. Jack Pace Department of Community Development Planning Division City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188-8548 Subject: SEPA Application — Plant 2 Demolition and Site development project The Boeing Company, Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Pace, Enclosed is the Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development project SEPA application. The proposed project will demolish Boeing's ageing 2-40 series Buildings, identified as the 2-40, 2-41, 2-44 , 2-48, 2-49 and 2-51 buildings), and a partial tenant improvement of the 2-31 building. The project adds new parking and creates an environmentally improved new storm water system. The project will also provide a new boiler house that will support the south area of Plant 2. For your convenience, I have attached an outline of the different phases of the project with a permit & construction schedule and scope of work. The Boeing Company looks forward to teaming with you on this exciting project, as well as future projects at Plants 2, when they become defined. If you have any questions or if you need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (206) 617-2944 or via e-mail at mark.d.clement a Boeing. Sincerely yours, Mark Clement Permit Specialist The Boeing Company cc. Mrs. Shaunta Hyde, the Boeing Co. CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Suulhcenicr Boulevard, Tukwila. 111-I 981M Telephone: 1206) .131-3670 FAX (21)6) 431-3665 .. , EK© 9 201 COMMUNITY ! T SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires all agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a development before slaking decisions (43.21C RCW). The purpose of environmental review is to identify a proposal's significant adverse impacts, measures to minimize or avoid such impacts, and allow wide public review for a wide range of projects. REQUIREMENTS: SEPA review is required for any action associated with the following types of decisions: Developing 10 or more dwelling units. 2. Developing agricultural structures over 10.000 s.f. 3. Developing office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings over 12,000 s.f. and 40 parking spaces (certain utility lines, personal wireless communication facilities. and normal maintenance/replacement activities are fully exempt). 4. Developing parking Tots with over 40 spaces. 5. Landfills and excavations over 500 cubic yards. 6. Installation of impervious underground tanks with a capacity over I0,000 gallons. The accompanying application must be completed. If a question docs not apply, "Does not apply" or "NA" may be entered. Complete answers to the checklist may avoid unnecessary delays later. City staff may also be able to help about governmental designations (e.g., zoning, shoreline, and landmark status). PROCEDURES: At the time you submit your application you must have all of the items listed on the attached "Complete Application Checklist" as well as the submittal for the underlying action (building* permit, subdivision etc.). You may request a waiver from items on the checklist that arc not applicable to your project. Please discuss this waiver request with City staff either at a pre -application meeting or at the time of application submittal. Within 28 days of receiving your application. City staff will determine if it is complete based on the attached checklist. If not complete City staff will mail you a letter outlining what additional information is needed. If you do not submit requested materials within 90 days frolll the City's request for additional information the City may cancel your application. Once the application is "complete. substantkc review will begin and a "Notice of Application" must be posted/mailed to begin a public comment period. After completing the environmental analysis and considering public comments, the Director will issue a determination for the project. A Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) says that the project as proposed will not have probable. significant. negative environmental impacts. A mitigated DNS will be issued if the project must be modified to mitigate its negative impacts. An En\ ironmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared if the probable negative impacts are unavoidable. RECEIVED COMMUNITY SEPA CITY OF TUKWILA DEVELOPMENT Department of Community Development 6300 Saz, hcenler Boulevard. Tukwila, 01.4 98/88 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 FAX (206) 431-3665 E -Tori/: tukplan;ci.tukwila.wa.us ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacarr[, indicate !offs), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 7755 EAST MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA WA 98108 LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be. /bund on your tax statement). 3324049002 , 2824049009, 0001600020 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner/applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Mark Clement / Bee , C 0 Name: Address: PO. Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle WA, Phone: 206 617-2922 FAX: 206 544 2531 E-mail: mark.d.clement@boein Signature: .com Date: _9-1c� FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus TYPE P-SEPA Planner: File Number: E) 0 - 0 t) Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: U (,E ) 0-002_ Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacarr[, indicate !offs), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 7755 EAST MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA WA 98108 LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be. /bund on your tax statement). 3324049002 , 2824049009, 0001600020 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner/applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Mark Clement / Bee , C 0 Name: Address: PO. Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle WA, Phone: 206 617-2922 FAX: 206 544 2531 E-mail: mark.d.clement@boein Signature: .com Date: _9-1c� COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items arc not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff arc available to answer questions about application materials at 206-431-3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206-433-0179 (Department of Public Works). Check items submitted with application Information Required. May he waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works cind Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: x 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. x 2. Completed ESA Screening Checklist, SEPA Environmental Checklist and drawings (5 copies). x 3. One set of all plans reduced to 8 1/2" by 11" or 1 1" by 17". x 4. Application Fee: See Land Use Fee Schedule. waived 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA review. PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: Pay 6. Payment of a $365 notice board fee to FastSigns Tukwila or Provide a 4' x 4' public notice board on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received (sec Public Notice Sign Specifications Handout). Pay . 7. Provide two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Note: Each unit in multiple -family buildings--e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks --must be included (see Public Notice Mailing Label Handout). Or you may pay the City to generate the mailing labels. See Land Use Fee Schedule under `Public Notice Mailing labels" for the fee amount. 8. if providing own labels King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: x 9. Vicinity Map with site location. X 10. Provide four (4) copies of any sensitive arca studies such as wetland or geotechnical reports if needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). See the Geotechnical Report Guidelines and Sensitive Area Special Study Guidelines (online at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us/dcd/dcdplan.htm) for additional information. X 11. Any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36". RECEIVED COANMt,nav Y DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: 3/23/10 Applicant Name: Boeing CO./ Mark Clement Street Address: PO. Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle WA, City, State, zip: TU KW I LA WA 98108 Telephone: 206 617 2944 Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, or Cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1-0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (TMC 18.06.370). Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 2-0 YES - ontinue to Question 1-1 (Page 3) 2-0 i 1 the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (18.06.145). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3-0 YES - Continue to Question 2-1 (Page 4) 3-0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (sec TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18-15). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 4-0 YES - Continue to Question 3-1 (Page 5) 4-0 ( Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This docs not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173-303 (TMC 18.06.385). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on-site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 5-0 ,----,----s - Continue to Question 5-0 5-0 ' i the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but arc not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 6-0 YES - Continue to Question 6-0 City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part A (continued) 6-0 Will the project involve landscaping or re -occurring outdoor maintenance that includes thc regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This docs not include the one-time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. Checklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1-1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water nark and top of bank'? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a rive• or stream, but will not require work below thc ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 1-2 YES - Continue to Question 1-2 1-2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading_ and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answcr Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answcr Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1-3 Continue to Question 1-3 1-3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? lmpevious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into thc soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development. Such areas include, but arc not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect thc natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to elopment (TMC 18.06.445). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 1-4 City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) 1-4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stonmvater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2-1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Qucstion 3-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2-2 . 2-2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self-supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast -height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-3 YES - Continue to Question 2-3 2-3 Will the project involve clearing 'Dimly evergreen trccs from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-4 YES - Continue to Question 2-4 2-4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watcrcoursc or the Grccn/Duwamish or Black Rivers'? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 1) YES - Continue to Question 2-5 2-5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Grcen/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish/Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3-1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the arca between the ordinary high water nark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-2 YES - Continue to Question 3-2 3-2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing. into via a surface connection or culvert. or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man-made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-3 YES - Continue to Question 3-3 3-3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-4 YES - Continue to Question 3-4 3-4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross-sectional arca of a watercourse or the Grcen/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross-sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-5 YES - Continue to Question 3-5 3-5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist NO - Continue to Question 3-6 YES - Continue to Question 3-6 3-6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but arc not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow/groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-7 YES - Continue to Question 3-7 3-7 Will the project include the constriction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to.a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-8 YES - Continue to Question 3-8 3-8 Will the project include bank stabilization'? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project 2. Name of Applicant: Mark Clement 3. Date checklist prepared: 4/2010 4. Agency requesting checklist: City. of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 7/2010 to 9/2012 - See Attached outline 6. Do you have any plans for future additions. expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal'? if yes, explain. None at this time. 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will he prepared, directly related to this proposal. Well management Plan has been submitted to EPA Soil Excavation Plan is in process of being submitted to EPA ii. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal'? If yes, explain. Soil Excavation Plan is in process of be submitted to EPA for final approval Well management Plan has been approved by the EPA Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. .Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Construction Storm Water permit -DOE. PSCAA Air Permit for new boilers Soil Excavation Plan, Well management Plan -EPA 10. Give britt, complete description of your proposal. including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There arc several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Demolition of the 2-40 buildings and slabs, removal of old utilties, Construction of new boiler house and boilers for the south site. New storm water system for site. New parking and landscaping see attached outline for more details Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any. the tax lot number, and section. township, and range. II a proposal would occur over a range of arca, provide the range or boundaries of the sitets). Provide a legal description. site plan, vicinity map. and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate naps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. See attached legal description, site plan, vicinity map, 12. Docs the proposal lie within an arca designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes , the 2-49 , 2-44 and 2-41 demolition portion of the project is adjacent to the Duwamish river Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: B. ENV1RONMEN 1'A1_ ELEMENTS I. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one ):�„Flat /rolling, hilly, steep slopes. mountainous, other: b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? c. What general types of soils arc found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? 1t you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prink farmland. Fill sand silt and gravel d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? lfso. describe. Plant 2 is in liquefaction zone c. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of 1911. Existing tunnels will be filled with crushed concrete from site Grade will be adjusted to accommodate new Storm water system. Final site grade will remain as existing Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? if so. generally describe. No, Demolish building area will be repaved About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (lbr example, asphalt or buildings)? 99% no new impervious surface created h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: See erosion control drawings T2 ?. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (fir example, dust, automobile odors. industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, gcnerully describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust for demolition Nitrogen oxide and sulfur oxide and other air pollutants from boilers b. Are there any oft -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: New boilers are low Nitrogen oxide type boilers Demolition dust will be controlled by standard construction measures Water a. Surface: I. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (includin2g year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If ycs, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Duwamish river. Green river flows in it. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If ycs, please describe and attach available plans. Yes , Part of Storm System, water quality treatment vaults, parking and paving are within 200 ft. zone Demolition of 2-41 building superstructure 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the arca of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. none Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 4. Will the proposal require surface water xvithdrawals or diversions'? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. none 5. Docs the proposal lie xvithin a I00 -year floodplain? I f so, note location on the site plan. yes 6. Docs the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters'? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume 01' discharge. none b. Ground: I. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water'? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No, Temporary infiltration of rain water during construction Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 2. Describe waste materials that gill be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (tor example: Domestic scwagc: industrial, containing the following chemicals...: agricultural: etc). Describe the general size (lithe system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number or animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve: none c. \Vater Runoff (including storm water): I . Describe the source of runoff storm water) and method of collection and disposal. if any (include quantities. if known). Where will this water floe'? Will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters'? If so. describe. Construction Storm water. Some of the Construction Storm water will be directed away from the river and infiltrated into soil on the construction site Any stormwater discharged to the Duwamish will meet the Construction Stormwater Permit benchmark levels 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so. generally describe. no d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, i f any: Details of Storm water controls will be in compliance with regulations and will be shown in site Construction storm water control plan/ SWPP Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments Plants a. Check: or circle types of vegetation found on the site: What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? none List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead trout Coastal Puget Sound Bull trout in Duwamish waterway d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance \ cgetation on the site, i r any: New Landscaping in parking areas, around new stormwater vaults Deciduous tree: alder. maple. aspcn.(itherx' Lv,Sa, eun tree: lir. cedar, pine, other '''-----/ Shl -ts*> Pasture Crop or grain Wet soil plants: cattail. buttercup, bulrush. skunk cabbage. other Water plants vRater lily, eelgrass. milluil, other Other types Ot vegetation What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? none List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead trout Coastal Puget Sound Bull trout in Duwamish waterway d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance \ cgetation on the site, i r any: New Landscaping in parking areas, around new stormwater vaults Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. .1pplicant Responses: Agency Comments 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: I-lawk, heron. ca l(sorrgbirds) other: Mammals Deer, heat,, elk, heave tithe Fish 13as, salnih', trout, hcrrimz. shellfish, other: Other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead trout , Coastal Puget Sound Bull trout c. Is the site part ot'a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, Migratory birds flying south for the winter, Pacific flyway Migratory route for Puget Sound Chinook and Coho Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead trout d. Proposed measures 10 preserve or enhance wildlife, irany: New stormwater system will improve water quality to duwamish waterway 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs:' Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical generators and fuel for heavy equipment, Pumps for Storm water work Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so. ;_genera l l y describe. no c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, it any: none 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? lfso, describe. PCB contaminated concrete. Lead base paint chips and dust from bldg demo. Soil excavation• I. Describe special emergency scrcices that might be required. None 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Boeing to use best management practices. to control dust. Lead to be removed and disposed per regulations. PCB'S will be handled per TSCA regulations. Soil will be excavated in accordance with plans approved by EPA and Site-specific health and safety plans. Please respond to all questions. Usc separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Ailency Comments b. Noise I. What types of noise exist in thc area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment. operation. other)' King County international Airport is adjacent to the project. No impacts expected What types and levels of noise would he created by or associated with the project on a short-term or Ions -term basis (tor example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Temporary large equipment noise. Temporary noise during demolition of the buildings 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, il'any: Project to be worked between 7:00 Am to 5:00 PM 8. Land and Shoreline Usc a. What is thc current use of the site and adjacent properties? Industrial , research and development buildings b. Has the site been used for atr,riculturc? If so. describe. No Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Describe any structures on the site. Commercial office/ Lab buildings : Vacant storage buildings, utility buildings d. Will any structures be demolished'? If so, what'? Yes Vacant storage Buildings 2-40, 2-41 2-44, 2-48, 2-49, 2-51 c. \Vhat is the current zoning classification or the site? Manufacturing Industrial Center Heavy industry f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the sitc? MICH If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation oldie site? urban industrial h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "em ironmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Seismic hazard. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project'' 4 maintenance personnel in boiler room Approximately how many people would the completed project displace'' none k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NA I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Designed Per City municipal codes Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any'' Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? NA Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated'? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. NA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, it any: NA 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height ()limy proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed'' new boiler house is 26 ft high h. What views in the immediate vicinity wouild be altered or obstructed'? Areas on the west side of the Duwamish river will see portions of KCIA and the west side of Beacon hill after the 2-40 buildings are demolished c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, iI any: New landscaping, see plan LS1 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 1 1. Light and Glare a. What type of Tight or glare will the proposal produce'? What time of day would it mainly occur? none b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views'? no, none c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal'? none d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: NA 1"). Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity'? Walking paths along the river, north of the site Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses'? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation. including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: NA 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed tor, National, State. or Local preservation registers known to be on or next 10 the site'? If so, generally describe. Yes. The 16th Avenue South Park Bridge, which spans the Duwamish River and is located adjacent to the site (but not on Boeing -owned property), is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the Washington Heritage Register and is a designated King County Landmark. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. As noted above, the 16th Avenue Bridge is located adjacent to the site and is listed on several historic registers .Although not listed on national, state or local registers, Bldgs 2-40 and 2-41 on the Plant 2 site have been determined to be eligible for listing and may be considered historically significant for their a association with the World War I I defense industry specifically aircraft production. There is no known evidence of archaeological significant landmarks on the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts. if any: The proposed Plant 2 project will not have any foreseen impacts on the adjacent 16th Ave bodge. If artifacts are uncovered during the plant 2 project, work in that area will halted pending notification and response from appropriate agencies. Please see letters attached as exhibit A which sets forth Boeing proposed mitigation measures regarding the 2-40, 2-41 buildings. Also attached is the current version of the HABS/HAER report referenced in such letters. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposal access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. East marginal way S b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit Stop? Yes, Metro Bus c. Flow many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate'? 2.162 Parking spaces -See parking plan dwg C2. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so. generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No c. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity ol) water, rail. or air transportation? if so, generally describe. Project is near Duwamish waterway, and King County international Airport, railroad spur. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project'? If known, indicate xvhen peak volumes would occur. No additional vehicular trips Proposed measures to rcducc or control transportation impacts, if any: NA 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services for example: fire protection. police protection, health care. schools, other)'.' If so, generally describe. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. NA 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity;. natural gas`��atcr,( fisc scr�icctelephonc s nitary se\�cr. septic system- other: ystem other: Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. New storm water system and water quality treatment of Storm water. Other utilities currently exist on site (NON -PR (kJEC`l' PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). C. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general. it may be helpful to read them in conjunction \vith the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. Please respond to all questions. Usc separate sheets as necessary. Agency Comments Applicant Responses: Agency Continents 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air: production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise'? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are.: Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. :applicant Responses: Agency Comments 2. How would the proposal he likely to affect plants, animals, fish; or marine life'? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitats, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts arc: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existinu plans'? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities'? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State. or Federal Taws or requirements for the protection of the environment. D. SIGN'AT'URE Under the penalty of perjury the above answers under ESA Screening Checklist and State Environmental Policy Act Checklist are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. understand that the Icad agency is relying on them to make its decision. `_ -, / L: ``v 1, Signatirc: ,¢� „�/ ^..�` / ( .%1 1 J O I Date Submitted: L - t6 Agency Comments Plant 2 Demolition and Site improvement Project Outline Demolition 2-40X Buildings This project will demolish the 2-49, 2-44, 2-41, 2-40, 2-48 and 2-51 buildings, and a partial demolition of the 2- 31 building. The tunnels under the buildings will also be removed. The tunnels are referred to as the 2-43 building on Boeing drawings. The central area slabs west of the 2-40 series buildings will be removed. Included in the demolition will be the removal of old storm lines, old sanitary sewer lines, water lines and power feeds back to or near the source. All clean concrete will be crushed and used for back fill and under pavement rock on the site. Schedule Permit submittal April 2010 Start: July 2010 Complete: March 2012 New Boiler House This project will construct a new boiler house and the installation of new boilers for the area known as the South Yard at plant 2. Included in this work will be a new gas service for this area and an additional main fire connection at the south end of the site. Schedule Permit submittal June 2010 Start: September 2010 Complete: April 2011 2-31 Tenant Improvement This project will install a new exterior non structural wall around part of the remaining portions for the 2-31 building. These areas were adjacent to demolished structures. We will also be upgrading the existing interior brick wall with a new structural wall to increase the strength of the building and will be doing some interior TI work to make the building more efficient to use. Schedule Start: December 2011 Complete: May 2012 New Site Development: Permit submittal May 2011 This project will add a new storm water system to the Boeing Plant south of the 16th Ave Bridge. Included are all new storm lines, which will connect to existing system, catch basins and an extensive new water quality treatment system. After installation of this system, we will be grading and paving, adding parking to the 2-25 building, and providing landscaping around the parking areas. The central area, which includes the former -60 series building slab, will be paved with a cap and fenced off from the south and north part of the site until a future plan is developed. Schedule Start: March 2012 Permit submittal Early 2011 Complete: September 2012 STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 FAX (206) 431-3665 E-mail: tukplan(aki.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY RECF11VED 092010 D�iOPM ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: I . 1 am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its em loyees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 7 5 5 £ q 5+ M A v y ; 14411 W P y 5, To Kw; lvt for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at Se -y"14z (city), wA (state), on 3/31 /` b , 20 iv Eric Hajek / Boeing CO. Print Name Address PO. Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle WA, Phone Number 425 238 3531 Signature On this day personally appeared before me Er1`G / . //ea'f Q& to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her veiuntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 3/ 6r DAY OF / ' /lf^c.1A , 20 /6 Notary Public Stale of Washington MARIO A CORONADO My Appointment Expires Sip 24.20111 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at Keki+ , /1 vW, My Commission expires on fi/ 1 /20/1 Plant 11 Demolition Sequence of Building Demo r ,`- 2010 2011 2012 RECEIVED APR 0 9 Mt )°,111V11..; .r ri_U '-` NT Copyright © 2007 Boeing. All rights reserved. OvC PI a E ®mehl 200 Foot Setback (approx) 2 - oiler Hance 2010-201111 P.. Site Development Filename.ppt I 1 4/8/2010 jandrAFeAraw April 9, 2010 Attachment A RECEIVED AN 0 9%` � February 12, 2010 Allyson Brooks, Ph. D. Agency Director Dept. of Archaeology- & Historic Preservation 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia. WA 95501 Re: Pending Plant 2 Project Dear Dr. Brooks: Thank you, and please thank Michael and Greg, for taking the time to meet with me and the others from Boeing last week to discuss Boeing's Plant 2 site, and our anticipated plans. In particular. we appreciated your thoughts and recommendations as to potential preservation and mitigation efforts we may undertake to address the historic aspects of the Plant 2 buildings. We understood you to say that while the development of a record on Plant 2's place in Washington history is important to the preservation process, perhaps equally important is that in some way that record be made available and accessible to the general public. Based on our discussions, our plan will include a combination of the following elements: o Celebration Event. As we discussed in our tneeting. Boeing plans to hold a celebration event later this year. The event will include presentations and speeches on the historical relevance of Plant 2, We will he celebrating the site's history throughout the year by collecting oral histories from our employees, and we Bill have a process in place to collect records and memorables for the Boeing archives, which will be shared. O Historic American. Engineering Record (F1AFRI. A draft of this report, which includes a text history, current and historical photos. and current and historical architectural drawings, lias been sent to Michael Houser of your office. Subject to being accepted by the appropriate agencies, we intend to lodge this report with both State and Federal archives, making it available to the public. O Internet Postings. Boeing will investigate available educational internet sites where historical information about Plant 2 could he posted and made available to the general public. Specifically, we will look at HistoryLink.org. one of the sites you recommended, which is an online data base devoted to chronicling the history of Seattle and King County. We vkill continue to look into other sites. and ifyou havc additional recommendations. please let us know. a tt O School Curriculums. We will review options for creation of potential school curticulums addressing the significance of Plant 2 and the related aerospace history o1 the region, which could be used for local northwest history, classes. o Museums. We have plans to work with local museums to continue to share our story about the iniporta►►ce of the role our company. played in the WWII effort and the crucial aspect of our Plant 2 buildings. 64041 It is our understanding that by performing some combination of the measures listed above; Boeing will have taken reasonable and appropriate measures to document the historical aspects of Plant 2 and l have created adequate public access to that documentation. Please let me know if our understanding is not correct. We will continue to keep you posted and involved in all mitigation efforts undertaken, and update you as eve progress toward a final mitigation plan. It' you have any other questions about our project. require any further information from us. or 4vould like to visit the site in person, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely. C _ 1 rt Shaunta R. I lyde 4.e r t. Government Relations Manager The Boeing Company STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESE rVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 c Fax Number (360) 586-3067 Website: www.dahp.wa.gov March 25, 2010 Ms Shaunta R. Hyde Government Relations Manager The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707 MC 1 I -XT Seattle. Washin<�ton 95124-2207 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 032510 -25 -KI Re: February ? 2010 Meeting Summary Dear Ms Hyde: Thank you for your letter to Dr. Allyson Brooks, State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) summarizing our February 2, 2010 meeting. At the meeting we discussed proposed measures to mitigate for the planned demolition of Boeing's Plant 2 in Tukwila. in response, Dr. Brooks. Michael Houser, and myself have reviewed the meeting summary and proposed mitigation efforts. Asa result of our review, we agree that these measures comprise reasonable and appropriate measures to document the building's historical significance. Please note that under separate cover, We will provide you with comments on the draft Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) documentation of the building prepared by BOLA Architecture + Planning. As you are aware, Plant 2 is historically significant for its role in local, state, and even national history for the role it played during World War II and in Boeing's corporate history. The Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) appreciates your willingness to celebrate and share the buildings legacy through the measures discussed at our meeting. Again, thank you for your contact with our Department. We look forward to working with you as Boeing moves forward in implementing the mitigation measures. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact nic at 360-586-3073 or tzreg.grilTith@dahp.wa.gov. - Sincerely. Gregory Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, Washington 98501 Mailing address: PO Box 48343 Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 (360) 586-3065 0 Fax Number (360) 586-3067 G Website: www.dahp.wa.gov March 30, 2010 Mr. Gabriel Rosenthal Boeing Legal Department PO Box 3707, MC 11 -XT Seattle, WA 98124-2207 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 033010 -03 -KI Property: Boeing Plant 2 Demo Re: More Information Needed Dear Mr. Rosenthal: Thank you for contacting our office. I have reviewed the draft HAER documentation for Plant 2. Your consultant has a great start on the documentation, but I believe that it needs additional work to be considered complete. The following are issues that I have found while reviewing the document: 1) Based on the historic images, the progression of the plant construction paints a very different picture than is presented in the documentation. While the buildings currently are divided parallel to Marginal Way, historically they appear to have been divided perpendicularly. Please adjust data and provide map(s) which shows the progression of construction for the complex as a whole. 2) I am unclear as to why buildings 2-44 and 2-31 are not part of this documentation. Clearly theses buildings/additions date to the same period of construction and were essential to how Plant 2 functioned as an industrial building. It is our understanding that these buildings/wings will be partially or fully demolished as part of this project. Please adjust your text and graphics to include these resources. 3) In reading the document, as written, you do not come away with an understanding how the building operated as a factory. While it mentions that an assembly line process was used, which areas of building housed different functions of the assembly process. It would be great to provide some type of graphic. 4) In reviewing current aerial images of building it appears that some parts of the roof structure have been heavily modified. What internal functions prompted the need for these changes and when did they take place? 5) I don't understand the comparable analysis to the Ford Assembly Plant. Please remove. While the plant is in Seattle, beyond that, the buildings and history differ greatly. A better comparative analysis would be to look at other airplane factories such as those in Renton, or even as far away as Willow Run. How does the Plant 2 complex differ from those? 6) The later history of the plant is mentioned with one sentence on page 3. Please expand on the post WWII history of the complex and how it was used and what it was sued for. What types of planes were developed there, what type were constructed? Number of employees, etc... 7) Your text mentions briefly the camouflaging project. Who ordered this to be done? The Army or Boeing? How long did the project take? Etc.. 8) The text on pg 10 for the interior description mentions a separate concrete room inside the building but surmises what the use of the space was. Such facts should be clarified as to the use. 9) It does not appear from the text that the authors had a chance to explore the basement areas of the building. Please provide a better architectural description of this area and its uses and current condition. You should also provide a floor plan of this area in the drawing set. 10) Standard HAER documentation also needs to include a full set of B&W archival images which documents the inside and outside of the building. These comments are based on the information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 michael.houser@dahp.wa.gov HABS No. WA - HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle, King County, Washington BOLA Architecture + Planning October 14, 2009 Historic American Buildings Survey Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 Seattle, King County, Washington October 14, 2009 CONTENTS Property Summary Sheet 1 1. Historical Information The Boeing Company in Seattle World War II Aircraft Manufacture Construction and Expansion of the Buildings The Austin Company, Original Designer Comparable Industrial Plants The Surrounding South Seattle Neighborhoods and the Duwamish River 2. Architectural Description Context Site Features Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 Structure and Exterior Interior and Plan Elements Changes over Time 3. Project Information Background Research 2 8 13 4. Bibliography and Sources 14 6. Supplemental Graphics 17 Cover: Brian Allen Photographer BOLA Architecture + Planning 159 Western Avenue West, Suite 486 Seattle, Washington 98119 206.447.4749 HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY Location: Original & Present Owner: Present Use: Original Uses: Dates of Construction: Original Designers: Significance: Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 NABS No. WA - 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington 98108 Within an area bounded by East Marginal Way South on the east, the Duwamish Waterway on the west, 16th Avenue South on the north, and the Jorgensen property on the south. Parcel No.: 3324049002 Quad: Seattle South UTM: Zone 10, 5264114 N / 551953 E The Boeing Company Facilities storage (2-40) / Vacant (2-41) Airplane assembly 1936-1941 The Austin Company. Boeing Plant 2 Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are significant for their direct association with the World War II defense industry, specifically aircraft production, and as an intact example of industrial design by The Austin Company. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 2 1. HISTORICAL INFORMATION The Boeing Company in Seattle The history of The Boeing Company can be traced back to 1916, when William Edward Boeing (1881- 1956) began building floatplanes in a small boathouse on the east side of Lake Union in Seattle. Boeing was born in Detroit, attended Yale University, and moved to Seattle in 1908 after making money in timber around Grays Harbor, Washington. He was fascinated by aviation, and in 1915 he and George Conrad Westervelt began building a seaplane. Westervelt was a Navy engineer who had studied aeronautics at MIT. William Boeing completed the plane on his own when Westervelt was transferred to the East Coast, and in 1916 he established the Pacific Aero Products Company. The following year, he reorganized the firm as the Boeing Airplane Company. The company's first manufacturing facility was located on the west side of the Duwamish, south of the Seattle city limits. The former Heath Shipyards site, which William Boeing had purchased in 1910, served as a location for some fabrication, as well as drafting and office space. In 1918, a tarpaper shed was replaced with a more substantial structure. It became known as Plant 1 following the establishment of Plant 2 in 1936. (Hansen, n.p.) During World War I, the Navy ordered 50 seaplane trainers from Boeing, and by May 1918 the company had 337 employees (Boeing Company, A Brief History, p. 7). Planes were tested on a grassy airstrip (the Meadows) on the Duwamish Valley floor, which eventually was improved and acquired by King County in 1928. The 1920s was a decade of expansion in airplane manufacturing and related industries throughout the nation. Boeing developed and manufactured fighter planes for the military, as well as a mailplane that won an airmail contract with the U.S. Post Office. The airmail service was inaugurated in 1927 and provided limited passenger service in a two -seat cabin. The first dedicated passenger transport began in 1928 with Boeing's 12 -passenger Model 80 biplane, which a year later was upgraded to an 18 -passenger model. By the end of the decade, airplane manufacturers began developing new monoplanes—the beginning of contemporary commercial aviation. (Boeing Company, A Brief History, pp. 14-17). The Army Air Corps ordered the first 13 B-17 bombers from Boeing in 1936, and Plant 1 was inadequate to keep the production on schedule (Year by Year, p. 37). In a step that signaled the commencement of what would be a massive World War II expansion, Boeing purchased 28 acres on the east side of the Duwamish Waterway and built the first phase of Plant 2. World War II Aircraft Manufacture Boeing's Plant 2 played a pivotal role in aircraft manufacture during World War II, reaching a peak production in June 1944 of 16 B -17s rolled off the line in a 24-hour period (Year by Year, p. 39). The world record for a single month of production had been broken by Boeing in March 1944, when 362 B - 17s were produced and delivered (Year by Year, p. 54). Cooperation among various aircraft manufacturers enabled a coordinated nationwide war effort, "widely viewed as one of the greatest industrial triumphs of all time" (Lentz, p. 12). The Allied victory is largely attributed by historians to American air power. Some other aspects of wartime aircraft production also had long-lasting implications—the advent of mass production of military aircraft and the large-scale admission into the workforce of women and minorities. As military aircraft were ordered at an increasing rate and many men left for war, labor shortages loomed. Women, minorities, very young men, and retirees were hired to fill the need. In December 1940, Boeing Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 3 had 8,427 Seattle employees; by the end of the war the number reached 46,000 (Year by Year, p. 46). In January 1943, there were 14,876 women employed at Boeing's Seattle and Renton plants, out of 34,087 total employees (Boeing "Payroll Headcount: Highest Peaks of Employment," cited in Myers, p. 40). Many of these numerous workers performed simplified tasks as part of an overall assembly line. A period newspaper article describes the system: Installation of an assembly -line production system in building the latest type of Flying Fortresses for the Army was announced today by the Boeing Aircraft Company. The new system, patterned after the mass production methods used in automobile plants, will be used in fulfilling the Army's order for thirty-nine of the Fortresses...The system is in line with a War Department plan ro have all manufacturers of military equipment gear their plants to highest possible speed. Under the mass -production method, virtually all the 175,000 square feet of floor space in the company's No. 2 plant in East Marginal Way has been turned over to the new assembly line for speedy production of the twenty -two -ton bombers, known as B-17B...When the Flying Fortress production line is operating at full speed, the bombers will emerge ready for flight in virtually a steady stream...Boeing officials declared this is the first time an assembly line system has been used on planes as large as the bombers...Under rhe new system, special production lines of wings and sub- assemblies lead up to rhe main assembly line, where the planes progress successively through eight stages of construction...As the Flying Fortresses progress along the line, parts are fed to them by the plant's elaborate overhead crane system and specialized crews of men perform specific operations on each plane as it passes through their zone. (ST, May 31, 1939.) While B -17s were built in Seattle, B -29s were built in Boeing's Wichita plant. In April 1944, Plant 2 was also converted to B-29 production. Fabrication, structural work, installation, and sub -assembly took place at Plant 2, and final assembly was completed at the Renton plant. (Year by Year, p. 54.) The first B-29 mission took place on June 5, 1944. The massive growth of the aircraft industry during World War II is conveyed by employment and production numbers. Between 1939 and late 1943, the number of aircraft workers in the United States grew exponentially—from 48,638 to more than 2 million (Lentz, p. 13). This facilitated the growth in aircraft production, from 6,019 planes in 1940 to a peak of 96,318 planes in 1944. The total aircraft production for rhe years 1940-1946 was 304,887. (Scoff, p. 175.) The end of World War II brought production to a halt and resulted in the layoff of 30,000 Boeing employees in the Puget Sound area (Year by Year, pp. 56-57). It was not until the early 1950s the work at Plant 2 gained momentum again with production of the B-52 jet bomber (Lentz, p. 14). Construction and Expansion of the Buildings In March of 1936, Boeing purchased the first 28 acres of rhe new Plant 2 site. It was well -situated near the King County airport, across the Duwamish Waterway and south from Boeing Plant 1. At that time the King County Airport (Boeing Field) was being enlarged and improved with Works Progress Administration funds. Plans called for immediate construction of a "large and modern assembly plant [to] be completed before the end of the year, with additions...to be made as business justifies" (Boeing press release, March 14, 1936). Site grading began in April and construction began in May, with scheduled completion within five months. The facility was necessitated by the Army Air Corps' order of 13 Y1B-17 (also known as 299) bombers from Boeing. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 4 The earliest portion of the assembly plant measured 200' wide by 300' deep, with an unobstructed floor area and a height of 53'. The building had giant rolling doors along the primary northeast facade, in an opening 198' wide by 35' high. Six hundred tons of structural steel were used in the building's construction. This first phase of the project cost approximately $250,000. Parts were trucked or barged from Plant 1 and assembled at the new Plant 2 site. A railroad spur to the site was laid parallel to East Marginal Way, and a dock served Plant 2 on the Duwamish Waterway. Between March and October of 1937, the assembly building was more than doubled in size by construction of an addition immediately northwest of the 1936 portion. The addition consisted of two bays each measuring 125' wide by 300' deep, for a total addition of 250' by 300'. The overall building Then measured 450' wide by 300' deep. All of this construction comprised a portion of what is known as Building 2-40. "From the start, the Boeing facility expansions, in common with other aircraft manufacturing plants, were the results of production demands far in excess of original quantities requested by the Government" (Air Materiel Command Headquarters report, p. 24). In 1940, the British government provided assistance to further expand Plant 2 for production of Douglas DB -7 bombers. This $2 million addition was built ro meet the production demands of a $23 million order for the Allies. Approximately 600,000 square feet of floor space were added, and the existing building was extended southwest to the property line at the border of the Duwamish Waterway. This phase expanded Building 2-40 and provided the first portion of Building 2-41. Construction began in June 1940 and a dedication dance was held on October 12, 1940. Meanwhile, further expansion was already being necessitated by B-17 production demands. Under an Emergency Plant Facilities (EPF) contract, rhe U.S. government funded the purchase of additional land and plant expansion. (Later, in 1943, Boeing bought out rhe government share of Plant 2 for more than $7.7 million [ST, July 19, 1943].) Just three days after the dedication of the previous project, a construction contract was signed for a subsequent Plant 2 addition. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 were expanded southward, and the one million square -foot project also included a four-story engineering and production department building, as well as a three-story office building (neither of which are included in this documentation). This final addition to Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 was carried our in 1940 and 1941. A newspaper article from the period noted that: Immense as Plant No. 2 will be, the production arrangement is simple. The manufacturing area will be flanked by warehouse area. Raw materials and purchased parts will be routed into the plant as manufacturing work progresses. Subassembly work will be done in second -floor areas above the primary shop areas. (ST, October 16, 1940.) A 6,000 -car employee parking lot, located across from Plant 2 on East Marginal Way, occupied land leased to Boeing by King County. The lot was sized to provide empty sections for workers corning on shift before those in the preceding shift had departed. Police and State Patrol were needed to direct the large volume of traffic during shift changes. Beginning in 1942, a camouflaging project was undertaken ro disguise the appearance of Plant 2 from above, in order ro stymie potential air arracks on this strategically important facility. Architect John Detlie, who was an art director at MGM studios in Hollywood from 1935 to 1942, received orders to Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 5 report CO Seattle in May of 1942 to head the camouflage efforts for Plant 2. Under a design by Detiie and Seattle architect William Bain, Sr., the sawtooth roof was covered with wire netting, burlap or canvas, and finished with miniature trees and shrubs, houses, garages, and a gas station. Windows were painted out for blackout purposes, and the exterior walls were painted in a camouflage pattern. Although the threat of air attack faded and camouflage became unnecessary, removal of the rooftop work was not completed until 1946. The Austin Company, Original Designer The Austin Company designed and constructed Boeing's Plant 2 buildings. Founded in 1878 in Cleveland by Samuel Austin, the company began as a carpentry, building, and contracting firm. Austin had his own shop and eventually his own mill and built residences, commercial buildings, and factory buildings. Many of these were also designed by Austin. Samuel's son Wilbert "W.J." received a degree in mechanical engineering from what is now Case Institute of Technology and in 1901 joined his father in business. The company was incorporated in 1904 as Samuel Austin & Son Company. The "Austin Method" became the company's hallmark. Under this method, the company provided full services by one firm—design, engineering, and construction. In 1908, the Samuel Austin & Son Company began a designing and constructing a series of factories for various electric lamp manufacturers. In 1911, the firm designed and built a campus research facility and a lamp manufacturing plant for the National Electric Lamp Association, both in Cleveland. Extensive work for the Association led W.J. Austin to the concept of standardization in design and construction. Austin established sales offices in industrial centers—the first engineering and construction company to do so—eventually resulting in a network of offices around the country. (A Seattle -area branch opened in 1926.) The company name changed to The Austin Company in 1916. During World War I, The Austin Company's volume of work increased nearly 35 percent (Greif, p. 60), as it undertook national railroad projects and several major military installations. The company's most extraordinary project of the time was the Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Corporation plant in Buffalo in 1918. The largest factory building in the world, at more than 600,000 square feet, it was completed in 90 working days and covered an area of approximately 28 acres under one roof. This plant continued to serve as an aircraft production plant throughout World War II, more than 25 years later. The Austin Company continued to develop new areas of standardization to provide facilities for different industries. Particularly, W.J. Austin's love of aviation and his contacts with the country's aircraft manufacturers resulted in his innovation in wide -span hangar doors and The Austin Company's eventual leadership in design and construction of air transport Etcilities. With extensive experience in standardization, aviation, and industry, The Austin Company was responsible for Boeing's development in the Puget Sound area from 1936—when the initial construction at Plant 2 was undertaken—into the 1960s. During World War II the company's work also included ship -building facilities, factories, special Naval facilities, and bomber assembly plants in the Southwest. After the war, The Austin Company added specialty practices for television studios. In 1984, National Gypsum bought The Austin Company. Austin's management bought the company back in 1997, and in 2006 Austin became part of the Kajima Family of Companies. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. \VA-, page 6 Comparable Industrial Plants Seattle's economy through the early part of the 20th century remained focused on import/export activities and resource -extraction based industries rather than manufacturing. While a strong ship -building industry developed during the run-up to World War I, this business sector remained stagnant through much of the 1920s and 1930s. Thus there are few industrial facilities comparable to Boeing Plant 2. One such facility was the Ford Assembly Plant (Federal Center South Building 1201), constructed in 1930-1932 approximately two miles north of the Boeing sire. The Ford Motor Company had established an assembly plant in Seattle's South Lake Union neighborhood in 1913, where the final assembly of automobiles was completed using manufactured components brought by rail from Detroit. New manufacturing techniques, including the assembly line, and the desire to develop and serve an Asian market led the company to design and construct a much larger assembly plant in the city's south industrial area. The Ford Company Assembly Plant on East Marginal Way included a large, two-story manufacturing structure containing offices above an assembly floor, a powerhouse, and separate low -bay and high -bay warehouses. The high -bay section was located along a shipping pier. These buildings were designed by architect Albert Kahn of Detroit. A world-renowned industrial architect, Kahn is credited with revolutionizing American factory design just as Henry Ford is credited with revolutionizing the manufacturing process. Kahn designed buildings for the Ford Company for over 30 years. Kahn focused on building design and manufacturing process expertise, often with his brother Julius, a well-known inventor and structural engineer. The Ford Motor Company Assembly Plant is a local representation of national economic trends in 1920- 1940 linked with the national boom of the 1920s automobile industry. The Plant was built at a pivotal time when industry was not only a symbol of employment, but also of patriotism. Announcement of the new Seattle factory was made in mid -1930, on the heels of the automobile industry's record year. It is not surprising that the plant was built as a regional distribution center since by this time Henry Ford was a proponent of industrial decentralization. The Ford plant property was a 30 -acre flat, wedge-shaped sire situated between rhe Duwamish Waterway and East Marginal Way. The plant remains and is presently part of the larger complex. The Federal Center South properry includes the original 30 -acre Ford site. The site of the Ford Plant was selected by the Ford Company for reasons similar to Boeing's selection of the Plant 2 site—located in the industrial area of South Seattle, near potential suppliers, it was served by rail, truck, and barge transportation and had convenient access to Boeing Field and the Port of Seattle. Ford developed the site with construction of a dock, rail lines, and internal driving lanes. The buildings were designed and placed to enhance the industrial process of moving materials, parrs, and finished products. (The federal General Services Administration renovated the site in the early 1970s for use as offices, shipping, warehouse space, and a vehicle repair facility known as Federal Center South.) The Ford Motor Company Assembly Plant expresses an exposed, rational steel structure and a linear plan designed for future expansion; with sawtooth roof profile and clerestory windows for extensive lighting; integration of flexible electrical, mechanical, and conveying systems; and large window walls. Generous column spacing and judicious placement of utilities were features designed for the expressed purpose of allowing assembly -line production; departmental layouts sufficiently elastic to permit rearrangement and expansion; unobtrusive elevators, restrooms, lockers, and stairs; adequate natural and artificial light and ventilation; and low construction and maintenance costs. The complex originally housed the assembly and production line for Ford vehicles, as well as an automobile showroom. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-_, page 7 The original building facades are characterized by glazed buff brick veneer, laid in common and decorative patterns over the concrete walls and pilasters; a flat roof parapet capped with gray granite; and multi -paned, steel -frame industrial sash windows (replaced by GSA with larger -scale, aluminum -frame, double -glazed windows). Articulated brick dentils are placed below the second floor window sills and above a gray granite water table. Ornamentation includes inlaid brick patterns using concrete accent blocks to highlight major openings and rhe gabled ends of prominent walls. An original cast-iron marquee was once located above the double doors at the building's main entry. From an architectural perspective, the Boeing Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 provide a clear contrast with the Ford Assembly Plant. Constructed in the run-up to and during World War II, they are much more straightforward and functional in their exterior appearance. Rather than masonry cladding, the facades of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 feature corrugated and plain metal panels, stripped of extraneous veneer and decorative details. In contrast to the Ford Assembly Plant, Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 serve not as an iconic image of industry, but rather express the power of production. Interior spaces within both plants are clear spans interrupted only by necessary structure. Here, too, the Boeing Plant was created as a more flexible space, capable of supporting varied manufacturing rather than a single assembly line evident in the Ford Plant design. This flexibility proved its worth by allowing Boeing to change production by using trenches below the concrete floor slab of the assembly floor, which ran along grid lines in both directions, for insertion and remodeling of rails and utility distribution systems responsive to changing means and methods of production. The multi -line system instituted by Boeing was recognized as a critical component in its high productivity at Plant 2, particularly when compared to similar wartime production of planes by in former motor company plants in the Midwest. The Surrounding South Seattle Neighborhoods and the Duwamish River The physical context surrounding Boeing's Plant 2 has changed considerably from its early 20th century conditions. This is due in large parr to the early history of the area and the modifications made to the Duwamish River's natural flow, which once wound north through the Green River Valley (present-day Kent and Auburn areas) to the headland at what is the present Duwamish Waterway. The Duwamish is Seattle's only river and is part of a collection of rivers that includes the White, the Green, and the Puyallup Rivers. These run through the broad, L-shaped valley south of Seattle in southern King County and northern Pierce County. The Duwamish was straightened and dredged as part of the early efforts by the City of Seattle to create infrastructure for industrial development. It runs through the flat bottomland that makes up much of the area from Tukwila to Harbor Island, passing along the west side of Plant 2, the west side of Seattle's Georgetown neighborhood, and the east side of the South Park neighborhood. South Park and Georgetown were annexed to Seattle in 1907 and 1910 respectively. Plant 2 borders the Georgetown neighborhood, which is located to the east of East Marginal Way. Georgetown emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and the area is characterized by a mix of industry and residential development. In addition to the undulating course of the river, a number of rail lines once ran through Georgetown to serve local industries. Boeing Field / King County International Airport is located south of Georgetown and east of East Marginal Way South. It was originally cleared as farmland and developed as the Meadows Race Track in 1902 with a 10,000 -seat wood -franked grandstand and nearby stables for 1,000 horses. The track, which was placed over flat river bottomland, began to be used as an airfield with the first airplane flight Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 8 demonstration in Seattle in March 1910. The Meadows served as an informal airstrip for testing and demonstrating flights through the 1920s, during which time the Boeing Company began building airplanes for use by the Army and Navy. The airport opened in 1928 and scheduled air service began in 1929. After the opening of Boeing's Plant 2 and through World War II, the airfield was used to test the company's B-17 bombers. The nearby neighborhoods of Georgetown and South Park both result from a historic pattern of residential and industrial development. The typical buildings that dominate these areas are small one - and two-story wood -frame dwellings on small lots (typically 30' to 50' by 100'), small-scale wood -frame boarding houses, and apartment buildings. Retail stores, cafes, and taverns are located in older buildings in the commercial centers of both neighborhoods near Airport Way South and 13th Avenue South in Georgetown, and South Cloverdale Street and 14th Avenue South in South Park. In addition there is a library, community recreation center, and elementary school in South Park. The combined residential population of these two neighborhoods in 2000 was approximately 4,990. 2. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Context Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are part of The Boeing Company's Plant 2. The approximately 110 -acre property that comprises Plant 2 is bounded by East Marginal Way South on the east, the Duwamish Waterway on the west, South Webster Street on the north, and the Jorgensen property on the south. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are southeast of the 14th Avenue South Bridge (also known as the 16th Avenue South Bridge and the South Park Bridge), which bisects Plant 2. The facility is located in the industrial corridor of south Seattle, on the east bank of the Duwamish Waterway and across Marginal Way from Boeing Field / King County Airport. Nearby blocks of East Marginal Way also contain expansive and low -scale industrial sites. The Georgetown neighborhood is located north of Plant 2 and Boeing Field, and west across the Duwamish Waterway is the South Park neighborhood, with West Seattle beyond. Beacon Hill is farther east/northeast, beyond Boeing Field and Interstate 5. Seattle's commercial downtown is approximately five miles to the north. Historic photographs show that the property that became Boeing's Plant 2 consisted largely of fields before development of the facility, which allowed for great expansion over time. The siting of the buildings on this property provided a strategic location in relation to water, rail, and vehicular access and in close proximity to the King County Airport. The area surrounding Plant 2 has several transportation grids in addition to East Marginal Way South, resulting from the development of nearby South Michigan Street, Highway 99, and I-5. Heavy traffic traverses the Georgetown neighborhood along Airport Way South and on the major arterials that lead from it to East Marginal Way. East Marginal Way, the six -lane road that runs in front of Plant 2, serves as an urban freeway, providing access for commercial as well as private vehicles throughout the south Seattle industrial areas. Neighborhood streets from the east typically lead to and terminate at East Marginal Way. At the west end of 8th Avenue South, however, there is the recently -developed City of Seattle Gateway Park. Near the intersection of South Michigan Street and East Marginal Way the Duwamish River is crossed by the 1st Avenue South Bridge, which was constructed in 1956 and 1998 and rebuilt in ca. 2001. The 14th Avenue South Bridge that passes through Boeing Plant 2 leads to the commercial center of the Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-_, page 9 South Park neighborhood on the west side of the river. This historic double -leaf bascule bridge, which dates from 1929-1931, is scheduled for replacement in the future. Site Features According to King County Tax Assessor's records, the tax parcel on which the subject buildings are located is 28.65 acres. Other buildings on the same parcel date from 1940 to 1953 and were built primarily as warehouse space. The site is relatively flat. The subject buildings are identified as 2-40 and 2-41, with 2-40 being northeast of 2-41. However, they do nor stand as two distinct structures, and the overall impression is of one large building. The buildings are abutted by, and internally connected to, Buildings 2-31 and 2-25 on the northwest and Building 2-44 on the southeast. An asphalt -paved parking lot is immediately northeast of Building 2-40, and the Duwamish Waterway is southwest of Building 2-41. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 The buildings known as 2-40 and 2-41 form one vast structure, with an overall rectangular footprint of approximately 754' by approximately 1000'. (This area corresponds to column lines A to Q, northwest to southeast, by column lines 1 to 26, northeast to southwest.) The primary facade faces northeast, where it is set back approximately 250' from East Marginal Way South. The portion designated 2-40 is the northeastern (or "front") portion of the building, extending approximately 550' from column line 1 to column line 12. It is also known as the Assembly Building or Final Assembly Building. 2-41 is the southwestern (or "back") portion, extending approximately 450' from column line 12 to column line 26. This is also identified as the Primary Building or Basic Primary Building. Structure and Exterior Constructed in four phases between 1 936 and 1941, the structure is composed a steel frame on concrete footings, with a 6" -thick concrete slab -on -grade foundation. Steel trusses, above riveted steel columns, support a sawtooth roof with northeast -facing windows. The overall building height varies from approximately 42' to 53', with the tallest portion along the southeast. Most of 2-40 is a single story, with a 50' -wide mezzanine running between column lines 11 and 12. An L-shaped second story is located within 2-41, leaving the western corner as a taller single -story space. Where the building extends over the Duwamish Waterway on the southwest side, a 5" -thick structural concrete slab is used between column lines 25 and 26. Original structural drawings none the slab was set on 12x16 creosoted wood beams on creosoted wood pilings, set approximately 10' on -center. A timber bulkhead runs northwest to southeast, below the southwest side of the building. The exterior facades are characterized by industrial steel sash ribbon windows, metal cladding, and seven giant overhead doors along the primary northeast facade. Cladding was noted on original drawings as "ferroclad." As subsequent additions were made, some windows and ferroclad panels from existing exterior walls were salvaged and reused on the new exterior walls. Metal cladding presently in place is a combination of flat panels and corrugated panels, all of it painted a buff beige color. Typical window strips Measure approximately 3'-6" and 5'-2" in height; the are continuous and contain various divided -light glazing patterns—two, three, or four lights tall. Windows along the northeast face of each sawtooth are also steel sash windows set continuously, typically 7'-9" or 8'-7" tall. Each of these Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 10 30 -light (6 across by 5 high) fixed windows contains an operable 8 -light awning section at the top center portion. Numerous doors, of various sizes and types, provide access and egress around the building. The seven overhead doors on the northeast facade range in size from 94' to 100' wide. These oversized doors also contain strip windows, person doors, and several smaller vehicle doors within them. The original drawings note composition roofing; presently there appears to be a combination of composition roofing and asphalt roofing. Interior and Plan Elements The structure was designed to provide as much open -floor area as possible, uninterrupted by partitioned offices, tearooms, or other divided spaces. Building 2-40 consists of a single tall story, measuring approximately 36' from floor to underside of roof trusses. An estimated 37,500 -square -foot mezzanine runs along the full width of the southwest end, between column lines 11 and 12. At the main floor level below the mezzanine, the space is divided into numerous smaller offices and rooms. A concrete wall with large rolling fire doors along column line 12 indicates the transition between Building 2-40 and Building 2-41. Most of 2-41 has two floors; only the west corner of the building—from column lines 22 to 26 and from column lines A to D—is a tall single -story space. "The plant was laid our to be under one roof with no dividing walls [between 2-40 and 2-41]. After it was built the fire underwriters required that it be divided by a fire wall in the middle [along column line 12] on account of the large amount of insurable values within the bldg." This division reportedly modified the original ventilation and lighting design, and a later blackout requirement also affected the ventilation plan. (Boeing News Bureau, p. 5.) The interior space is characterized by its large volume, which is largely unobstructed but for the riveted steel columns; fully exposed structure, including massive steel roof trusses; concrete floor slabs at the first floor and maple flooring at rhe mezzanine (2-40) and second floor (2-41); ample natural light from continuous strip windows along the walls and the sawtooth roof; and restrooms contained in sections that are suspended from the structure above the production floor. These restrooms are accessed by metal stairs. Additional restrooms are situated below the first floor, accessed by stairs. Monorail craneways and large mechanical equipment elements are also distinguishing features of the interior. The cast -in-place concrete fire separation wall at column line 12 between 2-40 and 2-41 contains a series of large openings with sliding fire doors as well as conventionally -sized openings. A Targe concrete - enclosed room is located at both the north and east corners of Building 2-41. These two spaces appear to have had large exhaust ductwork originally, and may have functioned as paint spray rooms. These rooms also have large metal fire doors and fire shutters. The interior face of the northeast and southwest perimeter walls is unfinished, with the structure exposed and the exterior cladding elements visible. On the northwest and southeast sides, Buildings 2-40 and 2- 41 flow into the neighboring buildings Nvithout any wall separation. Beneath the building concrete runnels, approximately 10' to 15' wide and 10' high, provided access and egress for personnel without interrupting work on the floor. A period article notes: "Beneath the factory floor at Plant No. 2 will be 3,000 lineal feet of concrete access tunnels, providing entrance and exit for workers. Large washrooms and locker rooms will be along the access corridors on the basement level" (ST, October 16, 1940). Narrower utility tunnels are reached from the larger access tunnels. There are also utility trenches accessed from openings (covered with metal plates) in the production floor. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 11 Changes over Time The original construction campaigns spanned 1936-1941, with the buildings constructed in phases as described earlier in this report. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are essentially unmodified from their original design and embody architectural integrity, although some various alterations have been made over time. Permit records were not available for review, and the following description of changes made is based primarily on visual observation. Exterior changes include the following: • The earliest portion of the building had massive sliding doors on the primary northeast facade. These were replaced early on with the vertical lift doors, which remain in place today. These overhead doors have had subsequent alterations made to them—two rubber overhead doors have been inserted within the large metal overhead doors, some of the windows within the doors have been replaced with metal panels, and some of the windows in the doors appear to date from the later 1940s or 1950s. o The "Boeing" sign visible in early photographs was removed from the primary northeast facade. Historic photographs indicate this happened during WWII. • The vertical metal panel cladding on the northeast facade replaced or covered original, typical ferroclad panels. The date of this change is unknown. • Some non -original doors have been inserted or have replaced original doors. • Minimal areas of glazing have been replaced with plexiglass or metal panels. • Non -original ducts/vents/exhaust are visible. Interior changes include the following: • Non -original partitions were inserted to create office area below the mezzanine in 2-40. • Some original interior openings in the fire wall at column line 12 have been infilled with concrete masonry units. • On the second floor of Building 2-41, partitioned office space was created. Finishes in this area include gypsum wallboard, carpet, and acoustical drop ceiling. o Some newer mechanical / manufacturing equipment has been installed. Both buildings suffer from some deferred maintenance, particularly 2-41. Areas of water infiltration are visible; the evidence of greatest damage is at the southwest edge of the roof where a section of wood decking is extensively deteriorated. Pigeon infiltration is also evident. Certain areas are cordoned off to prevent access, apparently for safety, within Building 2-41. For the most part, original windows are extant and intact. There are some broken window panes and minimal replacement of original glass with plexi -glass. Some exterior window surfaces are painted, presumably a remnant from World War II blackout requirements, while others are clear. Second -floor office areas in Building 2-41, which were previously altered with contemporary office finishes, have been vacant since the 1990s. Maple flooring at the second floor in 2-41 is undergoing abatement of a substance related to former production work that was done in that area. Building systems—including electrical, fire protection, HVAC, plumbing, and related systems—are aging, and Boeing Company personnel have noted that in many cases these systems are not operational. Piping breaks and resulting failures in rhe underground fire lines have caused extensive flooding in the Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 NABS No. WA-, page 12 runnel areas and this reportedly continues ro be a problem. The power distribution system was last upgraded in 1962. Wood pilings in the Duwamish Waterway, under the southwest edge of the building, show evidence of deterioration, although some repairs were made in the 1980s. Building 2-40 is presently used for facilities and fleet storage and a portion is leased out for historic aircraft restoration. This portion appears to be better -maintained than 2-41, which is vacant. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 13 3. PROJECT INFORMATION Background This HABS document has been prepared at the request of the property owner, The Boeing Company. The report provides historical and architectural information about Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 at the Plant 2 facility located south of Seattle. Research Research for this report was undertaken primarily in April through July 2009. The initial research included examination of available drawing records; tax records; historic maps, photos, company publications, newspaper articles, and internal reports; and site visits to measure the buildings and look at and document remaining original design features, subsequent changes, and current conditions. Research sources included: Historic maps, photos, and company publications from the Boeing Historical Archives Available original design drawings on file in The Boeing Company's Plant Engineering Department Digital collections of the University of Washington Libraries Special Collections and Museum of History and Industry Period newspaper clippings and other publications from the Seattle Public Library's special collections, available at the Central Library's Seattle Room King County Tax Assessor's Property Record Cards from the Puget Sound Regional Archives, located at Bellevue Community College. Prepared by: Susan Boyle, Principal Sonja Sokol Furesz, Historic Preservation Planner Curtis Bigelow, Architect Daryl Bell, Job Captain BOLA Architecture + Planning 159 Western Avenue West, Suite 486 Seattle, WA 98119 Brian Allen, Photographer 4301 2nd Avenue NE Searle, WA 98105 Report Date: October 14, 2009 Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 14 4. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES Air Materiel Command Headquarters, Los Angeles AAF, Procurement Field Office Industrial Planning Section. "Industrial Planning Project: Construction and Production Analysis, Boeing—Seattle, B- 17." May 1946. (Available at Boeing Historical Archives.) "America from the Great Depression to World War II: Black -and -White Photographs from the FSA - OWI, 1935-1945," photograph collection. American Memory, Library of Congress. http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/b?ammem/fsaall:LC-USE6-D-008343:collection=fsa. Boeing Company. A Brief Histog of the Boeing Company. Bellevue, Wash: Boeing Historical Services, 2006. The Boeing Company: Historical Archives. Plant Engineering. "Plant lI History, NAIOP Real Estate Challenge." Powerpoint presentation, January 2004. Boeing News: "Modern Assembly Plant to Rise on New Boeing Site." April 1936. [Cover photo.] June 1939. "New Plant Mushrooms." July 1940. "What Are Airplane Plants Made of?" September 1940. "Camouflage Atop Plant to Come Off." June 27, 1946. Boeing News Bureau. Transcript of notes on meeting July 26, 1943, unpublished. Boyle • Wagoner Architects. "Federal Center South, Building No. 1201, GSA Building No. WA0953KC." Historic Building Preservation Plan, August 1997. Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition. "Superfund Fact Sheet, Fall 2007 Update." (Brochure.) Georgetown Riverview Restoration Project, http://georgetownneighborhoodcom/Riverview.html. Graff, Cory. Images ofAviation— Boeing Field. Charleston, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing, 2008. Greif, Martin. The New Industrial Landscape: The Story of the Austin Company. Clinton, New Jersey: The Main Street Press, 1978. Hansen, David M., Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Boeing Airplane Company Building / Building 105; Red Barn." National Register of Historic Places Nomination Forni, July 1977. King County: Parcel Viewer website. http://www.metrokc.gov/gis/mapportal/PViewer_main.htm. Tax Assessor Property Record Cards. (Available at Puget Sound Regional Archives, Bellevue Community College.) Klingle, Matthew. Emerald City: An Environmental History of Seattle. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2007. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 15 Kroll Map Company. Maps of Seattle, 1912 — 1920, 1940-1960, and ca. 2000. Lacitis, Erik. "This is One of the Places That Won the War." Seattle Tirnes, September 25, 2006. Lentz, Florence K. "Boeing Plant 2: Assessment of Historical Significance." Prepared for The Boeing Company, April 2000. McClure, Robert, and Paul Joseph Brown. "The Duwamish - A River Lost?" Seattle Post Intelligencer, November 26, 27 and 28, 2007. Milbrooke, Anne, Patrick W. Andrus, Jody Cook, and David B. Whipple. Guidelines for Evaluating and DocumentingHistoricAviation Properties. National Register bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places, 1998. Museum of History and Industry. Digital photography collection. http://www.seattlehistory.org/. Myers, Polly M. "Shop traditions: maintaining masculinity at Boeing Aircraft Company during World War 1I." Masters thesis, Western Washington University, 2003. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "Boeing Field Jobs Must Wait, Says Gannon." April 9, 1936. "Airplanes Grow From Curiosity to City's Leading Industry in 38 Years." January 2, 1949, p. DI2. "Top Architect William Bain Sr. Dies in Seattle." January 22, 1985. Seattle Public Library Special Collections. Seattle Collection. Clippings, 46-48 NW uncat. File, Seattle Industry Aircraft. Seattle Times: "Seattle Has Played Big Part in Developing U.S. Aircraft." December 15, 1935. "Huge Plant on 28 Acres Planned by Plane Firm." March 8, 1936. "Plane Firm Signs for Big Project." April 9, 1936. "Boeing to Spend Quarter -Mill for Expansion." March 28, 1937. "Assembly -Line Production of Boeing Bombers Begins." May 31, 1939. "Huge Loan is Negotiated to Finance Boeing." October 26, 1939. "Expansion Depends on War Orders." March 29, 1940. "Boeing to Build $23,000,000 Worth." May 20, 1940. "Boeing to Put in Speed -Up Device." May 22, 1940. "Boeing Million -A -Month Payroll Boosts State." July 28, 1940, p. 15. "15,000 Dance Dedication of Big New Boeing Building." October 13, 1940. "Boeing Expansion Calls for New Workers." October 16, 1940. "25th Birthday." July 27, 1941, special section. "Women in the War Work." October 18, 1942 (series). "Boeing Buys U.S. Share in No. 2 for $7,769,363." July 19, 1943. "How Boeing Plant Would Look to Japanese Bomber." October 16, 1948. "City Has Fight of Life to Keep Boeing Plant." August 21, 1949. "Boeing Plans More Production Buildings." June 15, 1951. "Boeing Plant 2: B17s to Pipe Bumpers." May 4, 1975, p. E1. "G.W. Dennis, Designer of Boeing Camouflage, Dies." February 20, 1982. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 16 Stoff, Joshua. Picture History of World War II American Aircraft Production. New York: Dover Publications, 1993. Twiss, Robert L. "Special Report: Boeing, the First 50 Years." American Aviation, July 1966: pp. 19-30. University of Washington Libraries. Special Collections. Vogt, Bill. °What You Can Do When You Have To." Target, Periodical of the Association for Manufacturing Excellence, vol. 15 no. 1: n.p. Watson, Tom. "The Day Boeing Disappeared." Seattle Weekly. June 10 June 16, 1987. West, H. Oliver. "What is the Multiline System?" Boeing News, March 1943. Wilma, David. "Seattle Neighborhoods: South Park — Thumbnail History (Essay 2985)." February 16, 2001. HistoryLink.org. . "Seattle Neighborhoods: Georgetown — Thumbnail History (Essay 2974)." February 10, 2001. HistoryLink.org. Year by Year: 75 Years of Boeing History, 1916-1991. Seattle: Boeing Historical Archives, 1991. Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 17 5. SUPPLEMENTAL GRAPHICS Note: Some images in this report have been selected from cited sources and repositories. Many of these are copyrighted, and are used with strict permission for use in this document only. Copyright holders do not permit reproduction or reuse for any other purpose. P00 woo 3e* ssert !KN AIRCRAFT COMPANY RANT MO 2* tw ttt+» Wast, Site plan showing Plant 2 in 1939. (Boeing Historical Archives.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 18 Perspective view of Plant 2, from a 1946 document by Air Materiel Command Headquarters. (Boeing Historical Archives.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA page 19 Site plan showing Plant 2 in 1956. Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 are outlined in red. (Boeing Historical Archives.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 20 to` mines rmaa rlags11spa93381 maR:iR.3�gn IaenesaFleeenseerneeaaae surosceo itie AIRP+R,AMM111:4111011E1 i 1111t�1111 uUii�1111 ®!l�Gf11PQElAAl�!1A11-1 to THIS IS A SAMPI L ^'IMT AND MUST BE RETAINED IHE PUBLIC L E;IIREAIIFILE____ The first portion of Building 2-40, view looking south in 1936. (Boeing Historical Archives. 2R1 389.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 NABS No. WA- , page 21 • Aerial view showing the initial portion 01'2-40, 1936. (Boeing Historical Archives, P45685.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 22 I�f • 1.11rnlantintil a Cm"wmsyni4rF 4.1 h i�� runlisa4e, StO ' THIS IS A SAMPLE PRINT ANL) MUST BE RETAINED •; IN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS (JEWS BUREAU FILE. View looking west, showing the expended Building 2-40 in September 1939. (Boeing Historical Archives, P40039.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-___, page 23 This August 1940 photo is overlaid with marking to show the expanding plant, including the first portion of 2-41. (Boeing Historical Archives, 12939B.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 24 An aerial view dating from September 1 I,•194O shows 2-40 and 2-41 with farmland to the southeast. Further expansion of the buildings occurred shortly thereafter. (Boeing Historical Archives, p419.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 25 A December 4, 1940 view shows expansion under construction. (Boeing Historical Archives, Ausrin20B.) - Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 26 ' ' . "-• - ..z4s•-.1s1.--=v314.-ze.:', • - - •- - 1.. — , .....;:---- . „ - -en ', -3,,v-.-P, '.7-1).------,---..÷ :. . - . . . - -.`'' • ' • ;Z'-'1 ("- ' :,, '.,,,y-,:-/. ,64,41S-. , WA 'Uit. - . -•.:..2're, • .• • I.:- 7r4 . _ • . Z:4.1••••••,,,, 10.P. Prf .40 0. - • — . ; :d...'4'.. '-...:•'_'':ZsZ4ittlift i' -'i... '" ' ' • ‘,.- --;'' - ....: ---...—..e.---- ',......-- ,.,,. • ....,-L---04....„. ., -- .7 - ...,............, —.,,..„..z, .....e, ........ ^A - ,1•371., '.e• ":-...7.4,,,,,,, • .s.0 - - •••• ...•••••-- -".62g6. . . - .... '"---7.---.-..?".*Iikti,..44.''' ,,: ,7" • • 7, 7; 1: - • An aerial view from January 1941 shows rhe final phase of the 2-40 and 2-41 expansion under construction. This view is looking west. (Boeing Hisrorical Archives, 15518B.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-_, page 27 . .. . _ • ...- . . t • • I . ., ' • : I ,..' ...., .....; .. r • N -• ' V•2 , ,a1..,....,.. • . • •-.. '"•-• ...,4*,i°'----jr---- _ _ . .:::::.,:: .... 41,,,,,s....,4.,;...; ---:::" 7 ,.....,--•:•,-7.7. - -••'• - '..- - r---- • - , 1 .•-•-••• ,."•_.:„.•r7 1 • *V. `-= 4114 - ' • r1^' • fk ir • A March 1941 aerial photo, view looking east showing 2-40 and 2-41 complete, along with adjacent warehouse structures. (Boeing Historical Archives, P643.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 28 . .ny ti ,i M. 1•—Jell` R4*"�. Itli i ..L.Am„ 1 hili+ •�1 r'� ..,.';.. -;; 6141ti r .1 + a- y..r.-� F! A l�Y s.:‘,1 . �� .1 1. A view looking south across a parking lot toward the buildings in 1941. (Boeing Historical Archives, P982.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 NABS No. WA-, page 29 This 1942 view is looking west into the northeast end of Building 2-40. The vertical lift doors are visible in the upper foreground, partially raised. (Boeing Historical Archives, P1978.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 NABS No. WA- , page 30 • �n �V� aj:iiq► • _L\ hri�r� Arni THIS IS A SAMPLE PRINT AND MUST BE RETAINED IN THE PUBLIC RELATIONS NEWS BUREAU FILE. Interior view looking across Building 2-40, in 1942. (Boeing Historical Archives, P1810.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA- , page 31 38997= B A view looking north from the Duwamish Waterway, July 10, 1943. The southwest facade of Building 2-41 is visible, and the 16th Avenue South Bridge is in the background. (Boeing Historical Archives, 38917B.) Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 32 A shift change, August 1943. A small portion of the northwest facade of I3uilding 2-41 is visible in the upper left corner of the photo. The concrete structure at the upper right is the support for 16th Avenue South. View looking south. (Boeing Historical Archives, P3404 Boeing Plant 2, Buildings 2-40 & 2-41 HABS No. WA-, page 33 A view looking southwest at the partially raised doors and interior space of Building 2-40, October 1945. (Boeing Historical Archives, HS5060.) • GEOENG1NEERS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BOEING PLANT 2/BOILER HOUSE PROJECT 7755 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH SEATTLE, WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 21, 2008 FOR THE BOEING COMPANY nrE0600HCR7fupg:02:0 l 1 1 1 Geotechnical Engineering Services Boeing Plant 2; Boiler House Project 7755 East Marginal W y South Seattle, Washington File No. 0120-25500 November 21, 2008 Prepared for: The Boeing Company Major Projects and Construction Management G-PTMO, MS 1W-08 P.O. Box 3707 Seattle, Washington 98124 Attention: Michael Prittie Prepared by: GeoEngineers, Inc. 8410 154th Avenue NE Redmond, Washington 98052 (425) 861-6000 -q-77„,2-} Timothy D. Bailey, PE Geotechnical Engineer 4. Daniel W. Mageau, PE ✓ Principal TB2:D\VMMM:ja ZD:P:'•0!0120215 O0'Pinals.0I 20255,it0 R.doc Four copies submitted (one copy by email) cc: Robert Gwinn and Luke Showalter The Harris Group (via email) Disclaimer: \m. electronic Corm (acs n:dc >r 33rd copy of the nnamal document Ismail. text. table, and -or iiwure!. it provide;!. ind ':m :machment; are only a copy of the u1 euia1 docun en! I he ”m_mal document i> stored by (icnirtnameers. Inc. and ,rill serve an the of icra! dnctrr.ent o; r• -cord. Copy ii_>htK.'?(lUs hj ! inoi'm..ineers. Inc ,cscr:•ed. Flip No 0/20-255-00 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 1 FIELD EXPLORATIONS 1 LABORATORY TESTING 2 SITE CONDITIONS 2 GEOLOGY 2 1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2 GENERAL 2 1 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING 2 2006 IBC Seismic Design Information 2 Liquefaction and Liquefaction -Induced Settlement 3 AUGERCAST PILES 3 General 3 Axial Pile Capacity 4 Lateral Resistance 4 Construction Considerations 5 STRUCTURAL FLOOR SLAB 5 EARTHWORK 5 Erosion and Sedimentation Control 5 Structural Fill 6 Weather Considerations 7 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES 7 LIMITATIONS 7 1 REFERENCES 8 List of Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan APPENDICES APPENDIX A — FIELD EXPLORATIONS Appendix A Figures Figure A-1 — Key to Exploration Logs Figure A -2...A-3 — Log of Explorations APPENDIX B — LABORATORY ANALYSIS Appendix B Figures Figure B-1 — Sieve Analysis Results APPENDIX C — REPORT LIM;TATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR USE File '2o. 0130-355-00 .1'o, ember 31, 3003 Page 1 GEOENGINEERs t//� GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BOEING PLANT TOILER HOUSE PROJECT 7755 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH SEATTLE, WASHINGTON FOR THE BOEING COMPANY INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of our subsurface explorations and geotechnical evaluation for design of the Boiler House Project at Boeing Plant 2 located at 7755 East Marginal Way South in Seattle, Washington. The project site is shown relative to surrounding physical features on the Vicinity Map (Figure 1) and the Site Plan (Figure 2). GeoEngineers previously provided geotechnical engineering and construction observation services for the nearby buildings 2-80 and 2-85 in 1998 and 2000 and provided preliminary geotechnical recommendations for the current project in our memorandum dated October 24, 2008. The recommendations presented in this report supersede our previous recommendations. Our understanding of the project is based on correspondence and discussions with the project team. We understand that the proposed boiler house building will be located at the south end of the demolished building 2-62. This project consists of a new 3,000 -square -foot building to house two new 20,000 lb/hr boilers and two plant air compressors. The building will include a control area, building utilities, bathrooms and material handling for maintenance of the equipment. The boilers weigh approximately 60 kips and occupy an area of approximately 22 feet by 10 feet. The air compressors weigh approximately 7 kips and occupy an area of approximately 10 feet by 5'/ feet. Our geotechnical engineering services were completed in general accordance with our proposal dated September 24, 2008. Our specific scope of services for the geotechnical engineering services (Phase 2 in the proposal and the subject of this report) included: o Completing two borings for characterizing subsurface conditions; o Completing laboratory testing on selected soil samples obtained from the exploration; and o Preparing this geotechnical engineering report with recommendations for building support and site development. FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD EXPLORATIONS Subsurface conditions were evaluated by completing two soil borings (B-1 and B-2) at the south end of the building slab for the demolished building 2-62. Boring B-1 was completed to a depth of 61'% feet near the southeast corner of the slab, and boring B-2 was completed to a depth of 36'/ feet near the southwest corner of the slab. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site Plan (Figure 2). The subsurface exploration program is described and logs of the borings are included in Appendix A. Although the International Building Code (IBC) typically requires a minimum of three borings per building. , it is our opinion that the subsurface conditions can be adequately evaluated with only two borings because of the known geology at the site and the relatively small building footprint. File No. 0125-255-00 November 21, 2008 1 -A O T OF.Y iF.S T IHG zi samp.es obtained from the borings were transported to our lab: a:cr_ and e-xamir,ed tc confirm or modify field classifications, and to evaluate index and engineering p operties :,r the soil. Representative samples were selected for laboratory testing consisting of moisture content. particle size analyses and percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve tests. The tests were performed in general accordance with test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other applicable procedures. Appendix B includes a brief discussion of the laboratory tests and the test results. GEOLOGY Published geologic information for the project vicinity includes a Map of King County by the Pacific Northwest Center for Geologic Mapping Studies (GeoMapNW) (Booth et al.. 2006). Mapped soils in the project vicinity consist of alluvial deposits consisting of silt and sand deposits in low-lying areas adjacent to the Duwamish River. There are also areas of man-made fill associated with past site development. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Based on the explorations performed at the site, the subsurface conditions generally consist of alluvial deposits. The demolished building 2-62 building concrete slab was 5 inches thick at both boring locations. The alluvial deposits generally consist of loose to medium dense sand extending to the depths explored. Groundwater was encountered in both the explorations at about 12 feet below the existing ground surface. Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate as a result of season, precipitation and the water level of the Duwamish River. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL A summary of the primary geotechnical considerations is provided below. The summary is presented for introductory purposes only and should be used in conjunction with the complete recommendations presented in this report. o The site is designated as seismic Soil Profile Type D per the 2006 IBC. o The vertical loads from the building structure and floor slab should be supported by augercast piles with a length of 60 feet. This length of the augercast piles is required to provide adequate bearing in non -liquefiable soils. o The lateral seismic loads can be resisted by passive resistance from below -grade foundation elements around the perimeter of the building. Our specific geotechnical recommendations are presented in the following sections of this report. EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING 2006 IBC Seismic Design Information We recommend the 2006 IBC parameters for Site Class, short period spectral response acceleration (Ss), one -second period spectral response acceleration (SI) and Seismic Coefficients FA and Fv presented in the following table. File No. 0130-255-00 November 31, 2008 Page 2 GEOENGINEERS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2006 IBC Seismic Parameters 2006 IBC Parameter Recommended Value Site Class 0 154 53 1 1.5 Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss (percent g) 1 -Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Si (percent g) Seismic Coefficient, FA Seismic Coefficient, i=v Liquefaction and Liquefaction -Induced Settlement Liquefaction refers to the condition when vibration or shaking of the ground, usually from earthquake forces, results in the development of excess pore pressures in saturated soils with subsequent loss of strength in the deposit of soil so affected. In general, soils that are susceptible to liquefaction include very loose to medium dense clean to silty sands and some silts that are below the water table. Liquefaction usually results in loss of bearing capacity, resulting in settlement of structures that are supported on foundations within or above the liquefied soils. We evaluated the liquefaction potential of the site using the Simplified Procedure (Youd et al., 2001). The Simplified Procedure is based on comparing the cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) of a soil layer (the cyclic shear stress required to cause liquefaction) to the cyclic stress ratio (CSR) induced by an earthquake. The factor of safety against liquefaction is determined by dividing the CRR by the CSR. Liquefaction hazards, including settlement and related effects, were evaluated when the factor of safety against liquefaction was calculated as less than 1.2. For our analysis, we used a design earthquake with magnitude 7.0 with peak ground acceleration of 0.41 g, which corresponds to the IBC 2 percent in 50 year event scaled down by two-thirds. Based on our liquefaction analysis, it is our opinion that there is potential for liquefaction of the loose and medium dense sands below the groundwater table (depths of 12 to 45 feet below the ground surface) during the design earthquake. These medium dense soils have an average corrected (N160) blow count of 18. We anticipate that liquefaction will result in up to 8 to 10 inches of settlement at the ground surface. The liquefaction -induced soil settlement will result in downdrag loads on deep foundations from the overlying non -liquefied soils and temporary reductions in load capacity. The downdrag loads and temporary reduction in load capacity are accounted for under the seismic capacities presented in our foundation design recommendations below. AUGERCAST PILES General It is our opinion that the proposed boiler house may be supported on augercast piles bearing on the non - liquefiable medium dense to dense sand. Many of the nearby buildings are supported on augercast piles with lengths of approximately 50 feet. There was significant settlement of some pile -supported buildings during the 2001 Nisqually earthquake, including settlement of almost 12 inches at the old Boeing Administration Building. Therefore, we recommend that the piles extend to depths of at least 60 feet below th, ground surface to provide adequate support under seismic loading conditions. We have provided recommendations for 16- and 18 -inch -diameter augercast piles extending_ to depths of 60 feet below the ground surface, which we anticipate will be adequate for vertical support of the anticipated boiler house building loads. File No. 0120-255-00 November 2!, 200: Page 3 GE.^ -Et G,WEERS 7 Axial Pile Capacity Axial pile capacity in compression will be developed from end bearing and from frictional resistance in the medium dense sand under static conditions. Uplift pile capacity will be developed from frictional resistance in these soils, provided that a full-length center bar or reinforcement cage is installed in the piles. Under seismic conditions, the soils from approximately 12 feet to 45 feet will liquefy, causing a loss of support and downdrag on the piles from the non -liquefied crust (soils above the groundwater level). Our recommendations for allowable downward and uplift pile capacities for 16- and 18 -inch -diameter augercast piles are presented in the table below for both static and seismic conditions. We recommend that augercast piles extend at least 10 feet into non -liquefiable soils (pile length of 60 feet). We estimate that foundation total settlements of less than '/2 inch will develop for properly installed augercast piles under static loads. Under seismic conditions, as the soils from 12 to 45 feet liquefy, there will be redistribution of loads into the lower bearing soils, resulting in possible additional settlement on the order of 1 inch. Augercast Pile Allowable Capacities Pile length measured below top of 2-62 building slab. Allowable pile capacities are provided for Allowable Stress Design (ASD), and the allowable capacities are for combined dead plus long-term live loads for static conditions and for dead plus seismic loads for seismic conditions. The allowable capacities are based on the strength of the supporting soils for the depths below the existing ground surface and include a factor of safety of 3 for end bearing and 2 for shaft friction under static conditions. Under seismic conditions, we anticipate a factor of safety of approximately 1.1 to 1.3, increasing with time as pore pressures dissipate and the liquefied soils regain strength. The capacities apply to single piles. If piles are spaced at least six pile diameters on center, as recommended, no reduction of the axial capacity for group action is needed. The structural characteristics of pile materials and structural connections may impose limitations on pile capacities and should be evaluated by the structural engineer. For example, steel reinforcing will be needed for augercast piles subjected to uplift or large bending moments. Additionally, the column/shaft cap and shaft cap/pile connections should be carefully evaluated to confirm that the reinforcing is adequate to resist the significant shears and moments at these connections. Lateral Resistance Lateral resistance can be provided by the passive soil pressure on the face of pile caps and grade beams around the perimeter of the building (ignoring any contribution from interior elements and from the piles). A coefficient of friction between concrete and soil of 0.31 and a passive lateral resistance of 280 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) (triangular distribution) may be used. The friction coefficient and passive lateral resistance are allowable values and include a factor of safety of 1.5 and assume a lateral deflection of 1 inch to develop this level of passive resistance. Base friction on below -grade elements should be ignored because these elements will be pile -supported and may not have full contact with the underlying soil. File No. 0120-255-00 Page 4 November 21, 2008. GEOENGINEERL Pile Size Downward Capacity (kips)- Static Uplift Capacity (kips) - Static Downward Capacity (kips) - Seismic Uplift Capacity (kips) - Seismic 16 -inch Diameter 130 50 80 35 18 -inch Diameter 150 95 95 40 ti�+e Pile length measured below top of 2-62 building slab. Allowable pile capacities are provided for Allowable Stress Design (ASD), and the allowable capacities are for combined dead plus long-term live loads for static conditions and for dead plus seismic loads for seismic conditions. The allowable capacities are based on the strength of the supporting soils for the depths below the existing ground surface and include a factor of safety of 3 for end bearing and 2 for shaft friction under static conditions. Under seismic conditions, we anticipate a factor of safety of approximately 1.1 to 1.3, increasing with time as pore pressures dissipate and the liquefied soils regain strength. The capacities apply to single piles. If piles are spaced at least six pile diameters on center, as recommended, no reduction of the axial capacity for group action is needed. The structural characteristics of pile materials and structural connections may impose limitations on pile capacities and should be evaluated by the structural engineer. For example, steel reinforcing will be needed for augercast piles subjected to uplift or large bending moments. Additionally, the column/shaft cap and shaft cap/pile connections should be carefully evaluated to confirm that the reinforcing is adequate to resist the significant shears and moments at these connections. Lateral Resistance Lateral resistance can be provided by the passive soil pressure on the face of pile caps and grade beams around the perimeter of the building (ignoring any contribution from interior elements and from the piles). A coefficient of friction between concrete and soil of 0.31 and a passive lateral resistance of 280 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) (triangular distribution) may be used. The friction coefficient and passive lateral resistance are allowable values and include a factor of safety of 1.5 and assume a lateral deflection of 1 inch to develop this level of passive resistance. Base friction on below -grade elements should be ignored because these elements will be pile -supported and may not have full contact with the underlying soil. File No. 0120-255-00 Page 4 November 21, 2008. GEOENGINEERL We recommend that the piles include adequate reinforcing to maintain structural integrity under static and seismic loading conditions. We also recommend that the pile caps be structurally tied together with grade beams in accordance with the requirements of the IBC. Construction Considerations Augercast piles are constructed using a continuous -flight, hollow -stem auger attached to a set of leads supported by a crane. As is standard practice, the pile grout must be pumped under pressure through the hollow stem as the auger is withdrawn. Maintenance of adequate grout pressure at the auger tip is critical to reduce the potential for encroachment of adjacent native soils into the grout column. The rate of withdrawal of the auger must remain constant throughout the installation of the piles in order to reduce the potential for necking of the piles. Reinforcing steel for bending and uplift should be placed in the fresh grout column as soon as possible after withdrawal of the auger. Centering devices should be used to provide concrete cover around the reinforcing steel. Grout pumps must be fitted with a volume -measuring device and pressure gauge so that the volume of grout placed in each pile and the pressure head maintained during pumping can be observed. A minimum grout line pressure of 100 pounds per square inch (psi) should be maintained. The rate of auger withdrawal should be controlled during grouting such that the volume of grout pumped is equal to at least 115 percent of the theoretical pile volume. A minimum head of 10 feet of grout should be maintained above the auger tip during withdrawal of the auger to maintain a full column of grout and to prevent hole collapse. We recommend that there be a waiting period of at least 12 hours between the installation of piles spaced closer than six pile diameters, center -to -center. This waiting period is necessary to avoid disturbing the curing concrete in previously cast piles. It should be noted that no direct information regarding the capacity of augercast piles (for example, driving resistance data) can be obtained while this type of pile is being installed. Therefore, it is important that the pile installation operations be monitored by the Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer should observe the drilling operations, monitor grout injection procedures, record the volume of grout placed in each pile relative to the calculated volume of the hole and evaluate the adequacy of individual pile installations. In addition, we understand that the site soils are contaminated, so the design team should consider how to handle contaminated drilling spoils at the site. STRUCTURAL FLOOR SLAB Because of the potential for liquefaction -induced settlement, we recommend that the building be designed with grade beams and a structural floor slab. The capillary break layer below the structural slab should consist of 6 inches of clean crushed gravel, with a maximum particle size of 1 V2 inches and negligible sand or silt. The gravel should be covered with a heavy plastic sheet, such as 10 -mil plastic sheeting, to act as a vapor retarder. It may also be prudent to apply a sealer to the slab to further retard the migration of moisture through the floor. The contractor should be made responsible for maintaining the integrity of the vapor barrier during construction. EARTHWORK Erosion and Sedimentation Control Potential sources or causes of erosion and sedimentation depend upon construction methods, amount of soil exposed and/or disturbed, soil type, construction sequencing and weather. Implementing an erosion and File No. 0120-255-00 November 2/, 2008 Pnae 5 e: lr entation control plan \viii reduce. plan should uld e designed in accordance with applicable c tv. C ou_fty arid/Or State standard Th plain should incorporate basic planning principles, including: Scheduling grading and construction to reduce sot Retaining, existing asphalt wheneler feasible; • Directing runoff away from denuded areas: • Confining sediment to the project site; and ® Inspecting and maintaining control measures frequently. gra=: Dri r >s Temporary erosion protection should be used and maintained in areas with exposed or disturbed soils to help reduce erosion and reduce transport of sediment to adjacent areas and receiving waters. Permanent erosion protection should be provided by paving or landscape planting. Until the permanent erosion protection is established and the site is stabilized, site monitoring should be performed by qualified personnel to evaluate the effectiveness of .the erosion control measures and to repair and/or modify them as appropriate. Provisions for modifications to the erosion control system based on monitoring observations should be included in the erosion and sedimentation control plan. Structural Fill Materials and Imported Soils Materials used to backfill around pile caps to support sidewalks, pavements or other site elements are classified as structural fill for the purpose of this report. At a minimum, structural fill should meet the criteria for common borrow as described in Section 9-03.14(3) of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications. Common borrow will be suitable for use as structural fill during dry weather conditions only. If structural fill is placed during wet weather, the structural fill should meet the criteria of gravel borrow as described in Section 9-03.14(1) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications, with the additional restriction that the fines content be limited to no more than 5 percent. Structural fill placed as crushed surfacing base course below sidewalks and pavements should meet the requirements of Section 9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications. Fill Placement and Compaction Criteria Structural fill should be mechanically compacted to a firm, non -yielding condition. Structural fill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 to 10 inches in thickness. Each lift should be conditioned to the proper moisture content and compacted to the specified density before placing subsequent lifts. Structural fill should be compacted to the following criteria: • Structural fill in new pavement or sidewalk areas, including utility trench backfill, should be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density (MDD) estimated in general accordance with ASTM D 1557, except that the upper 2 feet of fill below final subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the MDD. o Structural fill placed below foundations and around pile caps to develop passive soil resistance should be compacted to 95 percent of the MDD estimated in general accordance with ASTM D 1557. • Structural fill placed as crushed rock base course below pavements should be compacted to 95 percent of the MDD estimated in general. accordance with ASTM D 1557. Fite No. 0120?55-00 Page 6 November 2t, 2008 1 li I'l o Nonstructural fill, such as fill placed in landscape areas, should be compacted to at least 85 percent of the MDD estimated in general accordance with ASTM D 1557. In areas intended for future development, a higher degree of compaction should be considered to reduce the settlement potential of the fill soils. We recommend that a representative from our firm be present during placement of structural fill. ur representative will evaluate the adequacy of the subgrade soils and identify areas needing further wo k, perform in-place moisture -density tests in the fill to evaluate whether the work is being done in accords ce with the compaction specifications, and advise on any modifications to procedure that may be appropria for the prevailing conditions. Weather Considerations The site soils contain a sufficient percentage of fines (silt) and are moisture -sensitive. When the moisture content of these soils is appreciably above the optimum moisture content, these soils become muddy and unstable, operation of equipment on these soils will be difficult, and it will be difficult to meet the required compaction criteria. Additionally, disturbance of these near -surface soils should be expected if earthwork is completed during periods of wet weather. The wet weather season in the Puget Sound region generally begins in October and continues through May; however, periods of wet weather may occur during any month of the year. The optimum earthwork period for these types of soils is typically June through September. If wet weather earthwork is unavoidable, we recommend that the contractor take measures to prevent surface water from collecting in excavations and trenches. RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES Throughout this report, recommendations are provided where we consider additional geotechnical engineering services to be appropriate. These additional services are summarized below: © GeoEngineers should be retained to review the project plans and specifications when complete to confirm that our design recommendations have been implemented as intended. During construction, GeoEngineers should observe the installation of deep foundations and monitor any pile load testing, evaluate the compaction of structural fill, evaluate the condition of temporary erosion control measures and provide a letter summarizing our construction observation services. The purposes of GeoEngineers' construction phase services are to confirm that the subsurface conditions are consistent with those observed in the explorations and for other reasons described in Appendix C, "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use." ' LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of The Boeing Company and other members of the design team for the proposed Boeing Plant 2/Boiler House project to be located at 7755 East Marginal Way South in Seattle, Washington. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in the field of geotechnical engineering in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. File No. 0120-255-Oti ,Vorember 21, 2008 677 a . electronic torm. facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or Figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Please refer to Appendix C titled "Report Limitations and Guidelines fcr Use" for additional information pertaining to use of this report. Booth, D.B. and Troost, K.A. (2006), "Geologic Map of King County" GecMapNW. International Code Council, 2006, "International Building Code." United States Geological Survey — Earthquake Hazards Program — Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, accessed via httpJ/earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/gfaults/wa/vic.html on March 5, 2008. United States Geological Survey, "Earthquake Hazards Program, Interpolated Probabilistic Ground Motion for the Conterminous 48 States by Latitude and Longitude, 2002 data. Washington Administrative Code (WAC), Title 296, Part N, "Excavation, Trenching and Shoring." Washington State Department of Transportation, 2008, "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction." Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., et al., April 2001, "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Volume 127, No. 4, pp. 297-313. File No. 0120-255-00 November 21, 2008 Page 8 GEOENGINEER5Q 1 October 28, 2008 N N d) tY ca 2 E rn < o cD O e SW 1lOth'St rn C) Q i'•ViF5i:u1*_)`1Sf1-Green aft -N-.S Eddy St ....---..__.,___ . .. --S Morgan St - --, - -S-Morgan SI - w -- S Warsaw St....._. I __: > n I S Warsaw 51. o_.;_......._. E _ ....._._.._ - - ---'-' --S Holly St....-.-" L -. l li.___.- • N .,N . 37th rive South Pori, ... _._....... n",tyis S i S Willow St \;; Will°1v St S Fontanelle St I '.S'WebstEr St • 1lb— S -Portland St --- Myrite�`Sr---- -S Othello St- • t -:.1450 AiSSe!•P;avoround —S Myrtle St--G-- U lrl Q• n< • 1 S Webster St Q C Q . -* ' .Otraf!o Piavgroi _ R....- , a_-..__� S Webster St- -S Austin St-, S Austin St -a • NS Chicago•St •'��-S Chlcago'•51 -� Q• - • A _ i ---m ' --$ Kenyon•St'- N T. 9L�,.-----.putvamrs.l.WW'tere,,ay Park Ix rJ';\ --1-----S Southern `St-- " - ------:',:s-•.9\ --S Rose St - pr r - Sr„!.. -----0 .0.,Pa-rh-Playg ound-- -.aria3,igvS m S Cdoverdale:St_ . -•-- > \ — S Donovan St --t• SDo romp S t - ' -'-” _ __S-Trenton•St-- • Westcrdst .D i inn.:1-4,1 i - t: ?:'• ^t r_.. i i -= __..; _ ..--•S�Henderson,St------ rn , • -._5 Director St--•--S•Director St----- S-91st•St � N m in -...4) o y 1 L Q > i :- • _ ,tr' - Q_Q I — St' - . 0. N --5 96thSl-- S 96th St 2'a\ DA; y • S Rase St S Rose St • , 5 Sullivan SI_.. N.: I N s I' re n m N cn m © ( n v L LQ 9 ah L N .m O .,_,5°-� Sprier!: ?!byorourd rq' •-r. cnn^r.:.r, y f' S-Tranton St • S\\ ._.. �\ .,.-i •4th 5, SW 100thSt--.S--� rt _ -S 100th -St --/ti,.--- ,a w 1 r•'/se 1 A .� S 1o1st•St--_`-5: IIIIIIIillililllliiilall(IVII(111111111111111111 ❑ 111111(1 -r- u tS {I 1__ J Ir_r SIJ\ '\N \ \ \ \ t —1 11) \ \ \ \ \ cr ( IIrjA L 1 DE/'OUSHEO 2-63 i I I I ill _I __ 1 _ • u 6-2 4 -- APPROXIMATE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED NEW /// BOILER HOUSE (2-127) UEaOLISIILO 2-62 6-1 J Legend B-1 4- Boring completed try GeoEngineels, 2006 Notes 1. The locations 014 features strum) ere appmxionto. 2. This drawing is inn information purposes. It is Intended to assist 111 shoving features discussed in an attached rincomenl. GonEI,gineerm, Inc can 11011111111111110111110 ocnrmcy and content of electronic files. The master file Is :toted by GeoEngineens, toe. and will solve as lire official record of this communication. B2elemuce: Drawing "Site.dwg" provided by Boeing on 111/281011. 20 0 .10 FEET Site Plan Boeing Plant 2 - New Boiler 1 -lo .Ise (2-127) Seattle, Washington GEOENGaNEER. Figure 2 GEOEMGMEERS FEEL . EXPLO TI • NS APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS GENERAL Subsurface conditions were explored at the site by drilling two borings (B-1 and B-2). The locations of the explorations were estimated in the field by taping from existing site features. The approximate exploration locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. SOIL BORINGS Borings B-1 and B-2 were drilled on October 10, 2008, using a truck -mounted drill rig owned and operated by Holocene Drilling. The borings were advanced to depths of 61'/ feet and 361/2 feet below the existing ground surface, respectively. The borings were continuously monitored by a geotechnical engineer from our firm, who examined and classified the soils encountered, obtained representative soil samples, observed groundwater conditions and prepared detailed logs of the borings. Soils were visually classified in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials —(ASTM) D 2488, which is described in Figure A-1. A key to the boring log symbols is also shown in Figure A-1. The samples were obtained using a 1.4 -inch inside -diameter, split -barrel standard penetration test (SPT) sampler driven into the soil using a 140 -pound hammer free -falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the samplers the last 12 inches or other indicated distances are recorded on the boring logs. Logs of the borings are shown in Figures A-2 and A-3. Observations of groundwater conditions were made during drilling and are presented on the boring logs. Groundwater conditions observed during drilling should be considered approximate because they represent a short-term condition and may or may not be representative of the long-term groundwater conditions at the site. The logs are based on our interpretation of the field and laboratory data and indicate the various types of soils encountered. They also indicate the depths at which these soils or their characteristics change, although the change might actually be gradual. File No. 0120-'55-00 November 21, 2008 no -a r'1-7 EE U Loritraztor ?user n Tctal Depth (ft) 10!1_108 Logae Ev n jer Vertical Datum 4 -inch I.D. riam 1a! { Data autoitammer E?uip^lent SPT Db+ e B-61 61.5 Surface Elevation Level 12 Datun'.i System 0 SAMPLES tQ a > n fl; 6r L a. Eo 10 5 20 25 30 35 15 1 9 14 141 4 14 15 131 9 12_ 1 7 151 13 4 6 Eustirg(x ): Ncrthing(y)- M T ERI. L DESCRIPTION 0 OTHER TESTS AND NOTES SP 5 inch ccncrete slab Brown line sarid with silt (loose, moist) - Brown fine to medium sand with trace silt (loose to medium dense, moist to wet) SP -SM SP -SM - 20 — 26 1 Brown fine to medium sand with silt (loose, wet) Brown in sand with silt (medium dense.. wet) 40 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. 27 "4F-5 %F... 5 SA; %F=6 LOG OF BORING B-1 Project: Boeing Project Location: Seattle, Washington Project Number: 0120-255-00 Figure A-2 Sheet 1 of 2 d 0 40 45 SAMPLES c c G) Cr c O 50 55 60 �j 0 2 1 15 LTi t> E G] G 0 U @ Q) C7 -J MVIATERIAL DESCRIPTION 14 20 20 21 9 10 11 12 SM Brown silty fine sand (medium dense, wet) 3-5 OTHER TESTS AND NOTES 0 31 65 — 70 — 75 — BO — C w BS— o Lrl o _ N C Z , c ir. o▪ Y a SA;%F= 12 %F=25 SA;%F =23 7-_ _ Project: Boeing EO Project Location: Seattle, Washington °3lect Number: 0120-255-00 Figure A-2 iDatr,,s; 1 " C1' • • A.tic.er F • 1,,,,;;etr13:,t• 0 f1 i.0. ••6. 5 ,,,,, ,L ,^.:, f t, ii..T."!/,,:, :,• I ...,' •....,'1.., i urlii,!",:g f'1'7,.. '':...'"F',1 /. ,..;:•'...::,..•••:-:-',M•-i.•': I Dan.27, SLf..sze ; Fk,'‘ratip7 .-, 1 Easzing(x): ! Syster, r, Nor;mngq,y). -......„------.......-- 1 .40 J Note: Sae Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. 9,4 4Reasamemovommrsummemmwommtwomeemomemrsamomtsvarmoomorco:onowtamon• a. 0 OTHER TESTS AND NOTES %F - 11 SA:F= 13 3 0F= 11 LOG OF BORING B-2 GEOENGINEERS Project: Boeing Project Location: Seattle, Washington Project Number: 0120-255-00 Figure A-3 Sheet 1 of 1 r,~~^~-~ Cl. L93 -r----- :6 5 cii MATERAL DESCRIPTION *-1 RecoveredInterval --- �o --_- Blows/foot Sub-S"mp?Sample Number 5 14 11. I, 14 0 8 26 21 16 2 3 . 4 5 6 CC SP -SM SP -SM — 5 inch ,-orcrete slab 9 16 28 28 36 Brown fins to rndiurn sand \vim silt (,ioosemoist IL „,veLt [.” 1- - - _ — ... — — Brown rine to medium sand with silt (loose to i edium dense, wet) _ — _ — 14 16 16 11" I - 17 1 .40 J Note: Sae Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. 9,4 4Reasamemovommrsummemmwommtwomeemomemrsamomtsvarmoomorco:onowtamon• a. 0 OTHER TESTS AND NOTES %F - 11 SA:F= 13 3 0F= 11 LOG OF BORING B-2 GEOENGINEERS Project: Boeing Project Location: Seattle, Washington Project Number: 0120-255-00 Figure A-3 Sheet 1 of 1 tzEOENGINEERS LABORATO PPENDIIX Y Ai V,1 Lysis a'" APPENDIX B LABORA T RY ANALYSIS GENERAL Soil samples obtained from the explorations were transported to our laboratory and examined to confirm or modify field classifications, as well as to evaluate engineering properties of the soil samples. Representative samples were selected for laboratory testing consisting of moisture content determination, percent fines content and particle size analyses. The tests were performed in general accordance with test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other applicable procedures. The results of the moisture content and percent fine determinations are presented on the boring logs at the respective sample depths in Appendix A. The results of the other laboratory tests are presented in Figure B-1. SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS All soil samples obtained from the borings were visually classified in the field and/or in our laboratory using a system based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and ASTM classification methods. ASTM test method D 2488 was used to visually classify the soil samples, and ASTM D 2487 was used to classify the soils based on laboratory tests results. These classification procedures are incorporated in the boring logs shown in Figures A-2 and A-3 in Appendix A. MOISTURE CONTENT TESTING Moisture content tests were completed in general accordance with ASTM D 2216 for representative samples obtained from the borings. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A at the depths at which the samples were obtained. PERCENT PASSING U.S. NO. 200 SIEVE Selected samples were "washed" .through the U.S. No. 200 mesh sieve to determine the relative percentages of coarse- and fine-grained particles in the soil. The percent passing value represents the percentage by weight of the sample finer than the U.S. No. 200 sieve. These tests were conducted to verify field descriptions and to determine the fines content for analysis purposes. The tests were conducted in general accordance with ASTM D 1140. and the results are shown on the boring logs at the respective sample depths. SIEVE ANALYSES Sieve analyses were performed on selected samples obtained from the borings. The analyses were conducted in general accordance with ASTM D 422. The wet sieve analysis method was used to determine the percentage of soil greater than the U.S. No. 200 mesh sieve. The results of the sieve analyses were plotted, were classified in general accordance with the USCS and are presented in Figure B-1. File No. 0120-255-0(1 :\oveinber 21, 2008 Drip' B-+ GsoEIStNsF s 0120-255-00 TB2 : CTS : saw 10-28-08 (Sieve.ppl) -9 321f1OId SJ.1f1S3N SISATdNV 3A3IS PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" 44 810 820 840 1160 4100 11200 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.01 ':.00 COBE3LLS GRAVEL DEPTH ftSOIL CLASSIFICATION SAND B-1 511: t' OR CLA`a' COARSE ! FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SYMBOL EXPLORATION NUMBER DEPTH ftSOIL CLASSIFICATION B-1 25 Brown fine to medium sand with silt (SP -SM) ® B-1 40 Brown fine sand with silt (SP -SM) 0 13-1 55.0 Brown silty fine sand (SM) A 13-2 10.0 Brown silty fine sand (SM) APPENDIX c E GRT LI&eTATIONS AND GUIDELIINES FOR USE APPENDIX REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR USES This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks with respect to the use of this report. EOTECHN1C"., SERVICES Ptac ER''OF:EiED F'Op SPECIFIC PURPOSES, PERSONS AND PROJECTS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of The Boeing Company and other project team members for the Boiler House project at Boeing. Plant 2 located at 7755 East Marginal Way South in Seattle, Washineton. This report may be made available to prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. This report is not intended for use by others, and the information contained herein is not applicable to other sites. GeoEngineers structures our services to meet the specific needs of our clients. For example, a geotechnical or geologic study conducted for a civil engineer or architect may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer or architect that are involved in the same project. Because each geotechnical or geologic study is unique, each geotechnical engineering or geologic report is unique, prepared solely for the specific client and project site. Our report is prepared for the exclusive use of our Client. No other party may rely on the product of our services unless we agree in advance to such reliance in writing. This is to provide our firm with reasonable protection against open-ended liability claims by third parties with which there would otherwise be no contractual limits to their actions. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with our Agreement with the Client and generally accepted geotechnical practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. This report should not be applied for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING OR GEOLOGIC REPORT 8S BASED ON A UNIQUE SET OF PROJECT -SPECIFIC FACTORS This report has been prepared for the Boiler House project at Boeing Plant 2 located at 7755 East Marginal Way South in Seattle, Washington. GeoEngineers considered a number of unique, project - specific factors when establishing the scope of services for this project and report. Unless GeoEngineers specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on this report if it was: o not prepared for you, o not prepared for your project, o not prepared for the specific site explored, or o completed before important project changes were made. For example, changes that can affect the applicability of this report include those that affect: a the function of the proposed structure; o elevation, configuration, location, orientation or weight of the proposed structure; • composition of the design team; or o project ownership. Developed based on material pros. ided by ASFE. Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences: www.asfe.org.. File Vo. 0120-255-00 November 21. 200E Page C-1 CEOE:3GWEERS ///j Orianes are imc tter ti"it sate of flats.'reporl, should ben the opportunity. . to review our interpretations and recommendations and pr•o-\•'ide. rhorlification.s or.confirrnation, as • appropria.te. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conSition.s that e.risted at Me time the stud) was performed. The findings ana conciusions of this report may be affected b),, the passacte of time, by manmade, events such as construction on cr adja.cent to the site. or by natural events such as floods, earfnquakes. slope instability or groundwater fluctuatlons. a),s contact GeoEngineers before applying, a report to determine if it remains applicable. MOST GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGIC FINDINGS ARE PROFESSIONAL OPINIONS Our interpretations of subsurface conditions are based on field observations from widely spaced sampling locations at the site. Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoEngineers reviewed field and laboratory data and then applied our professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from those indicated in this report. Our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT FINAL Do not over -rely on the preliminary construction recommendations included in this report. These recommendations are not final, because they were deveioped principally from GeoEngineers professional judgment and opinion. GeoEngineers' recommendations can be finalized only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. GeoEngineers cannot assume responsibility or liability for this report's recommendations if we do not perform construction observation. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation by GeoEngineers should be provided during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork activities are completed in accordance with our recommendations. Retaining GeoEngineers for construction observation for this project is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING OR GEOLOGIC REPORT COULD BE SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION Misinterpretation of this report by other design team members can result in costly problems. You could lower that risk by having GeoEngineers confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain GeoEngineers to review pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering or geologic report. Reduce that risk by having GeoEngineers participate in pre-bid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. DO NOT REDRAW THE EXPLORATION LOGS Geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring, and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors cr omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering or eeologic report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other File No. 0120-255-00 November 21, 2006 Page C-2 GEoEwG1NEER design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproductions is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. GIVE CONTRACTORS S A COiifiFLETE t`POR T AND. el-II/DANCE Some owners and design professionals believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems. give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering or geologic report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with GeoEngineers and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A pre-bid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might an owner be in a position to give contractors the best information available, while requiring them to at least share the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Further, a contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in your project budget and schedule. CONTRACTORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SITE SAFETY ON THEIR OWN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Our geotechnical recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's procedures, methods, schedule or management of the work site. The contractor is solely responsible for job site safety and for managing construction operations to minimize risks to on-site personnel and to adjacent properties. READ THESE PROVISIONS CLOSELY Some clients, design professionals and contractors may not recognize that the geoscience practices (geotechnical engineering or geology) are far less exact than other engineering and natural science disciplines. This lack of understanding can create unrealistic expectations that could lead to disappointments, claims and disputes. GeoEngineers includes these explanatory "limitations" provisions in our reports to help reduce such risks. Please confer with GeoEngineers if you are unclear how these "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use" apply to your project or site. GEOTECHNICAL, GEOLOGIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS SHOULD NOT BE INTERCHANGED The equipment, techniques and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study and vice versa. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering or geologic report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Similarly, environmental reports are not used to address geotechnical or geologic concerns regarding a specific project. BIOLOGICAL POLLUTANTS GeoEngineers' Scope of Work specifically excludes the investigation, detection, prevention or assessment of the presence of Biological Pollutants. Accordingly, this report does not include any interpretations, recommendations, findings, or conclusions regarding the detecting, assessing, preventing or abating of Biological Pollutants and no conclusions or inferences should be drawn regarding Biological Pollutants, as they may relate to this project. The term "Biological Pollutants" includes, but is not limited to, molds, fungi, spores, bacteria, and viruses, and/or any of their byproducts. If Client desires these specialized services, they should be obtained from a consultant who offers services in this specialized field. File \o. 0!-'0-2»-00 'orember 11, 2008 ?nge C-3 GseENGim_?Rs� BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP PLANT 2 SITE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS SEPA PERMIT LOCATION IN REGION SEPA DRAWING LIST GO - TITLE SHEET C1 - EXISTING SITE PLAN C2 - NEW SPIE PLAN 151 - LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN APPROVED DATE Err VICINITY MAP :IIo off' i a �I`'„ "- 0 IAC, IMERCIAL WATERWAY SOI ♦ 2 1 nl- E r MARGINAL WAY SOUTH `nl ,I; 1 ,1111 • f% PROJECT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF WORK: PROJECT IS TO DEMO THE CENTRAL 2-4X BUBDINGS AND THE ASSOCIATED UITLITITIES. CONSTRUCT A NEW STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WITH WATER QUALITY FEATURES. MAINTAIN FIRE, COLD WATER, SEWER, AND GAS UTILITIES. CONSTRUCT TWO NEW EMPLOYEE PARKING LOTS AND REPAVE THE FACILITY PROPERTY. CONTRACTOR: N/A SITE ADDRESS: 7755 E. MARGINAL WAY S. TUKWILA, WA 98108 OWNER: BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP WEST REGION FACILITIES P.O. BOX 3707, M/S: 19-35 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-2207 ATTENTION: MIKE WHITE SEPA PERMIT 1588458 OED REI 05/01/09 Ss\ 2008108110\ SEPA-plans\CA.d.a 1 Drafter Now IL COROECE 1 Flo Dote. NAR, 24 2010 120..48 1 last Modified Date. NAT 22 2010 1101.40 I Submittal. PRELIMINARY SET gifirod'Avc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PLANT 2 CONSOLIDATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE FOLLOWING LEGAL DESCRIPTION I5 BASED ON TRANSNATION TITLE REPORT ORDER NUMBER 867785, DATED AUGUST 3, 1998. A TRACT OF LAND BETWEEN THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY AS ESTABLISHED BY COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH IN SECTIONS 28, 32 AND 33, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, THENCE SOUTH 88'09'49" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 35.92 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE ON THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 16111 AVENUE SOUTH FROM WHENCE THE CENTER BEARS NORTH 81'09'46" WEST 1960.08 FEET, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN AND SAID CURVE 235.12 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN NORTH 01'57'52" EAST 534.65 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BEING 65 FEET DISTANT FROM, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO, THE CENTERLINE OF SAID EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH ON THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 4752'17" EAST 1189.40 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE SOUTH 88'09'49" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 23.20 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 4752'17" EAST 761.35 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT OF RADIUS 2814.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 1245.10 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 22'32'06" EAST 165.28 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 825 FEET SOUTHERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO, THE NORTH LINE OF THE JOHN BUCKLEY DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 42; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH AND PROCEEDING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 89'12'23" WEST 1385.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID DUWAMISH WATERWAY, SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE FROM WHENCE THE CENTER BEARS SOUTH 53'50'05" WEST 1969.12 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND SAID CURVE 401.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 47'51'36" WEST ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 1068.05 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT 11 FOOT VACATION OF 1 6TH AVENUE SOUTH AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 38, PAGE 455 OF KING COUNTY COUNCIL RECORDS DATED JUNE 24, 1940; THENCE NORTH 13'00'45" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 384.20 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 14'06'06" EAST 303.66 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,900,610 SQUARE FEET OR 66.588 ACRES PROJECT PARCELS 2824049009, 3324049002. 0001600020 ACCEPTABILITY MarcCordite l0 19 OB 10/19/08 10/19/08 IHR 0ESWN M9/01t Dom. CITED TWN we:Im 15 APPROVEDDORMER APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE D. CORMIER REI SpemLE MECHANICAL MASTER TITLE SHEET SEPA PERMIT RECEIVED °SPR 0 0 2211 COITY DEVELOPMENT M1BOL 586456 03/22/10 PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 GO JOB 982179 COMP Na. Den N0. 2 -YD -GO GREEN/DUWAMISH RIVER FLOOD ELEVATION BASE FLOOD ELEVATION (BEE) ON THE DUWAMISH RIVER AT RIVER MILE 4.0 IS CONTROLLED BY BLACKWATER FLOODING DUE TO TIDAL WATER. USAGE ESTIMATED 100 -YEAR TIDE FOR ELUOT BAY IS 12.31 FEET NAVD 1988 (BOEING MAP NGVD 1929 ELEVATION 8.78 FEET) OUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY PROJECT PHASES DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERY/ iERWAY OUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY • _ �'' WOOD p�5 'ost-Cons ruction+ ft o� I - �, 11IInRr V ��Gi ' Pc stem il'' fr �/.'', /1 GENWA affrag �..� rTrr•00.0•000•01100000•004•••••110•00 r�0��MK 1r,s, /v rrr rr,. 1•0.0000_1e0,00.00,00.'�eCT�!•1#A!^•f_�J.-.!•�.lrT7 __.�.' �(II��4a1 UWAMISH COMMERC JORGENSEN EL JORGENSEN STEEL : '01111111m irl ,Q IIIII1111111!Tulli 111 1 J 2-90 2=96 TrnTrrrn 111111111 L111U.AJ_ 2W PPFROVFD DATE m _}�1 •n-TTi 11 ltlli!III iiIIiiiIIIIIi!IijI !T ........I..!...r?? �����I 111111/111 u1'1 �`nY DV' i�it��i%i+"µ1���+�s•��1�af�tfTN`��r��i�-� I„IIr1, 11„1111, �111i�llil�il�„��� 1., 1-T i 111111 11 iiii1111111111 uri1 .n 11111 ■tA11 ' TUKWILA SEPA J1588456-02 DED REI 3/19/10 jpfVIRIf\GTPA-rdnnANl R-0ha-PI AN#.n 1 DreFtar N. 1LC11RIMP 1 Plat Da -ie, 23_imn 14,1207 1 1 IIMA0IPd NUN MAP 21 2910 11202A 1 OANSitnI, PP9CA0S( PRINT g,LAraPzAw. ACCEPTABILITY 1 IiARc CORDICE 10/19/08 1195 OESIDN AND/OR 1%CKLD SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED - APPROVED SY SUBTITLE EXISTING SITE PLAN PHASE 1- BUILDING DEMO 2-41, 2-44, 2-48, 2-49, 2-51 PHASE 2- BUILDING DEMO 2-40 PHASE 3- 2-31 DEMO AND T.I. 1 `` `; 0.2\4 PHASE 4- FINAL SITE DEMO LEGEND OSAN MH o C8 O WMH PN Wv o WM DFH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN WATER MANHOLE POST INDICATOR VALVE WATER VALVE WATER METER FIRE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT RECEIVED t •:, R ®9 MI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 011: M1R1 Moped EnglIno®®Pauugj9 One. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ID7 W,t VNT 10P01 Itrq LAN IG Awn VA SRO m 3 -0D @l111 FM 125D 171-2161 1)0 50 0 100 200 300 G REVISMN 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET STSBOL DATE 03/19/10 DEPT. 001E DAVE DORMIER CHECKED DAVE DORMIER 913 APPROVED 10/19/08 101908 10/19/08 CML MASTER TUKWILA SEPA PLANT 2 YARD IN ANT Cl 586456-02 CORP NO. ONO NO. o _rr 00 a►e 1 1160 A..L x 44 1 ga=4//./ //// ///////////,W// Wi..y /..'lird//////////l./1 oY.' W7/272 JORGENSEN STEEL DUWMOSH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY GREEN/DUWAMISH RIVER FLOOD ELEVATION BASE FLOOD ELEVATION (BEE) ON THE DUWAMISH RIVER AT RNER MILE 4.0 15 CONTROLLED BY BLACKWATER FLOODING DUE TO TIDAL WATER. USAGE ESTIMATED 100 -YEAR 110E FOR EWOT BAY IS 12.31 FEET NAVD 1988 (BOEING MAP NGVD 1929 ELEVATION 8.78 FEET) JORGENSEN STEEL 1111111111111111f • 0 11111111111 M • F'eA 11111111111111111111' -114t.16. rirrrrri"rum icvtry9virrr i ONZ NIT rrrrm-rrm T RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 21:110 COMM DEVELOPPNTY i� LEGEND at; 1111111111111111111111111 11 <r' 1111111111111 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH PARKING COUNT BREAKDOWN (249) PARKING AND BICYCLE PARKING CALCULATIONS +;.µ„ ;,. - T .t J.,.,,,.._.@;,....* i F."4, i. 'BIDC "7• ,. 7`i GS '# a:.Z .,n > P0060IG STAII_UPRD '11E01ARE0 d`x�.�'{I•141) 1''', huiO to t &0692 112 91b6 2=25 §UC 2 3i 91.00'2 80 8L8G f-81 jj BIiG 71LBs r •-.`2-641' 285 8L0�.i 85 -: -L;61tt .� `. SG 126 0.• E 7 'i F BLDG -25{27 . STN.L PER (� 8l1 t PAT06NG., ° - *t .*'SF, l.e sr- .... 93- 1 ` sF.. s"� SF'=- ;SE J sF%.+ , T..• .:SF . , T r , a . ..... 6 . , sF n- `' . } .. ..100 Y; . ! Sc110�. OFEICE�";.r; i ;1, 0 301,452 18.855 2,533 26,561 2,007 0 20,628 20,628 0 339 3.00 1,000 1,179 24 g0J9UFACTUR140;j 1,291 1,279 25,825 42.163 33,222 27,080 4.669 37,043 37,043 00 1.00 1.000 210 4 W00E800S14G} i!,•e 158 2,442 33,851 12,301 14,900 11,939 0 1.113 1,173 00 1.00 2,000 39 1 SUPPORTitT. - 52,415 31,953 0 7,836 14,221 4,180 0 3,702 3,702 4,730 2,937 0.00 1,000 0 0 00N,A051oA6LE.1:';, 9,756 122,144 0 45,138 20,536 25,294 592 20.082 20,062 7100 0.00 1,000 0 0 ioTPL hE UO-G';PARKING sl4IISr'• :._.-21•46:'--... 29 24 1 TOYA P,ARI9NG;9rM1 PRd916ED;7 , , ... ... , ..._ .2197-' ,60'..: -!.-1,,i1..';.f.• C67 C66 C65 C64 C63 C62 C61 C60 C76 C75 C74 C73 C72 C71 C70 C69 C68 C85 C84 C83 C82 C81 C80 C79 C78 C77 C94 C93 C92 C91 C90 C89 C88 C87 C86 KEY PLAN O tu,s Hapset EnallnestrOngj9 One. CONSULTING ENGINDERS/CINL AND STRUCTURAL 199 Vest Valley Rphesy Nortt, 1.!4 101 Mon. VA 98001 TEL 1153, 533-9729 FM 5293,939-D68 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE IN FEET 9Yu OT IPPRD,LO DARE SPLA all TUKWILA SERA 4586456-02 DED RE1 3/19/10 A2009`08110\SEPA-plans\Nee-Slte-PLANJhg I Profter Nano M. CDR ICE I Plot Date. MAR 4 2010 111409 I fast Modified Date, MAR 24 2010 090604 1 Submittal. PERMIT SE7 g)LAU7E7A4G ACCEPTABILITY 1165 DESIGN AND/OR SPECD1G110N 6 APPROVED APPROVED ST DEPT. DATE -DRAWN MARC CORDICE CRICKED UNAN DAVE LDORM1ER DAVE DOR1EER 10/19/08 ERRE NEW -SITE PLAN RREN7 REVISION 586456-02 SYMBOL DATE 3/19/10 RB 10/19/08 10 19 08 10/19/08 TUKWILA SEPA PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER PLANT 2 5N C2 JOB NO. 586456-02 CORP N0. DWG N0. 2.YD-C2 STORM FILTER PLANT SCHEDULE TOM STORM FILTER EA 000400.44 11444E / COIOOR IIlLE SIZE 4010 1IOS3 ICER MAIM 'W043LC / BMW. wnO IOW .14114174 'GMM0FOr / 170000E RM IlA Ca01TA YRIIOSARE / 0170 LE4.1 UD0 00014137.0 1317440 ICC.% / 1.00 MI1149 TWA Rr.113'D®SV' / O®SA QOM CAtba➢OIS 0001413E / 20000 MOM 900.0 00, WARM MU BL0. 44001 EOM 040. 1/A0eu IOR4 000. nue 0.344 000. IAL At 044444 000. RLL At mea 1101M IS1E10'CGmnctn' / 210.08001' IRE 0001344 nmemm 'A4110*0*001004'/130 4410051 4400'mama' 186 MAU ' a' / reC0 mum= 0 s 00613110/2 130100c0• / 1400E 104040 01313 111.0113CA vnux IRE / VAll[Y mE POm 404106 L '0170 1'1110. /0110 WOW/ 1/3007L MMUS 1.01Sl0lrw / PORTA. 10101 SER 0. 01) 1! w0400/41131043 WESER SAWA TAILS ousel. Vona( / 01000 014000 YOr 402.00 00 / 003131 4131.00111 104404 P.T. *4000 / 0018010E 400000111 WOWS t 04404400 VASA 4000010004 2610E56v03D6 / ®a DVI CRASS P00115.11.11.1 A4A11:lr / OWN 100484 CRASS 30.0000 ARCIDsunntm 104-813 / 010110000c DAD IAO 21-2C MT 21•-11• SAIL Er -Er sen 21•-20• Seo 01'-2C SPR. 74. 4. 1700 10144,0 a• at fat Comm 40 0G FULL TOME 40CLD FILL 14411.4. m• DC. ECU MACE W 0.0. ILL MAX 10 0.G O. COMM 40. CLC. CULL 40310E o0. OL 100 IOra. tr DC. 0440 1011x. 30 OD. 011.1 moos. 00 00 24. 00 AC OD 1 0.1- IC DC. ;LTU 10 PO ifs VD LEGEND • 000010 1NSYAK IIA ONES 8000 0407 PAST OF 016 wOEcq 0004440/10 045111 01101/4 AREA f 10 PO % 10 PO i 4 .. f0 PO 12 PO 11 1 1111111111111111114111;C;GiiiiiiC`:=, RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 x44.r99i/20! 2.114117141 /\ I 'I''(I'I'I'I'1'1'I•p11•I'I'I'1'I'I'I'I'1'I'I'I'I'I'I'I'I'I'I'1• r♦• ■ 1 1 I I ,w I I I 1 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 60 30 0 60 SCALE IN FEET 120 240 O N Brumbaugh 8 AssoLiates Lande1OpoArchltecture 600 6 0801 02 58103-4420 1130 Fowl?, rr 206200 067dustano 022 67$ - ' TUKWILA SEPA J/566156-02 DED REI 03/19/10 BOE/N4 ® A2008' 081IO\SEPA-plans\LS-site-needeq 1 Drafter None. 1L CORDIS I Mot )ote, NAR 23 2010 1/21,1 1 L st Modified Dotm NAR 23 2010 1411913 1 Sobnittoh PERMIT S T RC CORDICE LM DATE DAVE DORNIER CLACKED DAVE DORMER 1100004 4/3/340100 10/19/00 LANDSCAPE -SITE PLAN CURROR REvanln 586456-02 DATE 03/19/10 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 TITLE TUKWIIA SEPA PLANT 2 YARD C0.01 IIACTFR 586456-02 BOEING HAGS Buildings 2-40 & 241 BOEINGCOD1Pt\NY East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington 98108 ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING AVEW.SUITE486SEATnswAt811 FAX 206.11 206.112.1110 2-6163 SECOND FLOOR BUILDING 2-40 BUILDING 2-41 BUILDING 2-40 BOEING HABS Buildings 7755 East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington 98108 ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING 159 WESTERN AVEw.SUITE 486SEATTLE wA. s119 TEL 206.111.1110 FA% 206.111.6162 RECEIVED BUILDING 2-41 BUILDING 2-40 DRAW I \ G SCALES A RL RASED ON 224..66 SI I KM'S I'S ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING 3.015 3d015 3.015 3801 3.015 3.018 TEL 306AX 305.11]-6163 QN.61 BUILDING 2-41 BUILDING 2-40 RECEIVED CPR BOEING NABS nick I'I' DRAW I \ G SCALES A RL RASED ON 224..66 SI I KM'S I'S ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING Buildings BOEING COMPANY wESTERN AVE. W. SURE 4 8 6 SEAMS WA 9 3 I 19 7755 Last 'Marginal \\'ay South TEL 306 1 AX 305.11]-6163 Seattle, Washington 98108 RECEIVED CPR Enlarged Ground Floor Plan: North Corner STEEL COLUMN, CONCRETE FLOOR AREA' EXTERIOR MALL MIAMISH WATERWAY Enlarged Ground Floor Plan: l^lest Corner Ob. RUBBER OVERHEAD DOOR BLDG BLDG 2-40 2-44 UTILRY TREi0H BELOW TRENCH COVER C= G CONCRETE FLOOR 0+426 ENI TRANSPORTATION ABLE Enlarged Ground Floor Pian: East Corner A6' = 1'-0 STEEL COLUMN, TTP CONCRETE FLOOR TRANSPORTATION AISLE EXTERIOR WALL EXTBIQJOR WINDOW DM/WISH WATERWAY Enlarged Ground Floor Plan: South Corner Va Mb'=NV r"al -0i1/4A DRAFT DRAWING SCALPS ARI'_ BASED ON 2401 SI1E1A'S ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING TEL 206 44/.040 FAX 206.612.6.62 0 Buildings 2-10 & 2-4 Revision,: Scale: 1/16"= Date: R, 2:,00 A7..21 EN LARGISD PL. ,NS 4-05-16 PANEL OVERHEAD DOOR BLDG BLDG 2-44 2-40 KETAL FILLER PANEL FLAT, INTERLOCKING METAL PANELS FETAL DOOR METAL DOOR WINDOWS METAL FLASHING - FLAT, INTERLOCKIN5 METAL PANEL5 -- METAL DOORS %METAL TRIM r METAL DOOR WINDOWS METAL LADDER - METAL MESH RAILING METAL SUPPORT BRACKETS LIGHT FIXTURE METAL FLASHING FLAT, INTERLOCKING METAL 'APELS METAL DOOR ETAL TRIM METAL DOOR WINDO - SWING ACCESS POOR WITH SPRING RUBBER OVERFEAD DOOR PAINTED ERICK Northeast Exterior Elevation SWINGING METAL DOOR METAL ACCESS DOOR METAL INFILL PANEL IN METAL WINDOW FRAME METAL FILLER PANEL PARKING 516E, BLDG BLDG 2-40 2-25 Northeast Exterior Elevation DR AV ING SCALES ARE BASED ON 2.1:36 SII P.EI'c ARCHITECTURE o PLANNING .4749 FAX 205.447-6462 BOEING HAGS Scale 1/16"=I'-0" NORTH METAL FLASHING COINER EXHAUST BEYOND PIPE METAL RAILING PLATFORM CORRGATED METAL SIDING METAL LADDER CORRGATED METAL SIDING METAL ['AMER METAL PIPING GAP IN SIDING METAL LADDER PV CAGE AWNING WINDOMS METAL PANE_ i soaomarnaoomnil =MoaBIM n1.n3MnnnMn.,1l oiiwGaLu ..24ionna LIiiMo.M..MEM MO MON MMMMMM MM. MMMMM In METAL LADDER METAL PANE_ 3 =WINK MIN 0onnnMIN MEI on_nraPa .nM .41.122••••=.111•11.1111.111111111E oNnn NMI MI= MEM o16ro2000 =Wad o.w MI= MN so MOM .1E.IIM'IN= MMI= CM. IMM=Mm6NMI .151.1in0116 na mmrgnnnjnannnnnzozzrnjnnn SROKEN GLAZING - - FETAL FRAME WINDOWS FLAT PANEL METAL 510ING Y TIGAL PIVOT, METAL FRAME WINDOWS FLAT PANEL METAL SIDING, DELAMINATIN6 VERTICAL WOOD SHEATHING 1111111 111111111 IIIII!I. m. :o: FETAL STAIR AND RAILiNG FLAT PANE_, METAL SIDING METAL BASHING ADJACENT BUILDING CORRUGATED METAL SIDING METAL WINDOWS NU PAINTED GLAZING CONCRETE METAL RAILING AND STAIR METAL LADDER Southeast Exterior Elevation ROOF BASHING METAL FLASHING 06' O I! 11111:II1111:1 of 111111111:111111111 111111.1111f- It 1111 111 111111111 II 1I 1I 11111111111 MMMOMiaooaMWMIM. ao PIPE r RAT PANE., METAL SIDING 00426 1 Southeast Exterior Elevation VI6'=Ib' METAL COVER METAL WINDOWS NU PAINTED GLAZING METAL WINDOM 1 LJ C=) Southeast Exterior Elevation ( 1 m6•r-0' Rio DRAWING SCALPS ARE BASED ON 24..56 SHEETS EI S ADJACENT ABUTTING CONSTRUCTION ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING R evi vans: I'41" Date: ( /et S. 21:1:9 A3.12 SOCTHIasr ELL"ATION 6-0F-16 ANGLED VIEW SouthNest Exterior Elevation WOOD BREAKWATER Southwest Exterior Elevation DRAW NG SC.\LIS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING AVE W. SUITE 4 N 6 SEATTLE WA 9 $ 1 I 9 TEL 206 44/.1710 FAX 20 tale: I/I6"= Ili i{1111111111 / // / . //" / / " / /' // / UNVERIFIED ELEVATION / • simatik _ussokn. ■ n l . TI III i__TTi__TTiT_T_ __ __r_1__r _ 1-T r i I 111 1111II11111111 METAL FRAME WINDOWS FETAL LADDER / ROOF FLASHING METAL WALL PANftS METAL COVER PANE METAL ACCESS LADDER. METAL COVER PANEL DRAIN PIPE 02.4211,1301 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION METAL WINDOWS EXHAUST FROM BLDG 2-41 THROUGH ROOF OF BLDG 2-31 METAL ACCESS LADDER EXHAUST ,/— Northwest Exterior Elevation ma = SURFACE MOUNTED METAL PIPE 2 / 1 T f 1 1--1 1 1 --i IMAMS IEMI J 1 .LJ.11l1 i T r 1 r i 1--_-1- 1 1 1 =i Dui n.m III uu.. mu. 1111111111fI EXHAUST STACKS ISI .1.••• mu. um. Z.... "NO mm own FETAL ROOF FLASHING METAL ACCESS DOOR METAL NALL PANEL ABANDONED METAL MASTHEAD METAL ACCESS LADDER CORRUGATED METAL WALL PANEL BROKEN GLAZING BROKEN GLAZING EXHAUST I ( 1•11n111MINIMM MINI M.111111111111•111.1•11111 INIMIMMIIM-11 MEI RIM IMMI IOW _1 LJL. J LU 1111:111111 o ROOF FLASHING r CORRUGATED METAL WALL_ PANEL SEAM 1- I 1 1 - - H I 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1: 1 1 1 1; 1 1: E H l 1 1 1 1: 1 1 1: I 1' 1 1 1 1 I!1 1 1 1 1 1 11 II I€ 11L11.1 111:1.1111' ' J9 ), 11__1_L1_I_1__l1=1.11 1 IIIIII CONCRETE WALL PU15 B.rKFACE MOUNTED DRAIN FIFE SCUPPER 11:11111:11111111 1111111111111E11111 1111111 1i111111111 '_I.1' 11 111 111 ce-mesal Northwest Exterior Elevation M6'=ra ANGLED VIEW METAL FRAME WINDOW METAL SILL PAINTED BRICK III11111111:111 W Northwest Exterior Elevation l3 DR.\ I'1' DR.\\V!NG SCALPS ARE BASED ON 2436 sI I r.rj's ADJACENT ABUTTING CONSTRUCTION ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING 5 TEL 204 44,4140 FAX 206.4 N evision,: Scale: 1/I6"=1Vr Date: (,o 0. 21.9 A3.14 \C)RTI I\C'P_i'r S -0F -IG RECEIVED 9 C? I -so LONER DOOR SEGTION I6-4" UPPER DOOR SECTION 0 . ......... r,; • r---- . ............... . I5'-6" LONER DOOR SECTION LONER DOOR SECTION 11'-0" UPPER DOOR SECTION '-2 UPPER DOOR SECTION 5'-2" 5.-10" 3'-6" / as g ......... 1 a 11 1 11 0 R 7.1 , 4 Z....0. — D.,...A. r. BOHNIGHAI3S Buildings 2-40 & 2.-41 T Fl E 130 E1N G COM_ PANTY 7755 East Marginal \Val, South Seattle, Washington 98108 ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING 5 9 WESTERNAVE.W. SUITE 4 8 6 SEATTLE WA 9 8 I 1 9 TEL 206 44/-4119 FAX 206.141-6,62 , 7 .•,,, , .... z . : tic.. ,-. ...... ,./. 1 ECEIVED Wit 5 5 Ailf61 6.1P1 7-iLV.If-TI' 0 0 "11'_2" 0 0 0 METAL LOWERS METAL SLEEVE THROUGH CONCRETE 0 12 -----111-q1111101 IIIIIIIII IIII�I�I1 1l1lll1 111111 illlllllli�llllllltllllll,il(11111 111111111 11111l 111 11 lllltll I IiI,I,I�I;I,I,I,I;1;I;IJ,I;I,l;l,l,l i '11'1'1'1'1'1' 11'1'11.1.1'1'1 1111111111111111 1111111 I 11111111 111111111111111 i 11 1 1 1111111 11 il11111111iliIii 111111111111 Enlarged Southeast Exterior Elevation V4' = I'-0' 0 ED Enlarged Southeast Exterior Elevation cr6 DR.\I '1 DRAW IN SCALPS ARE BASED ON 24,36 SII EFTS ADJACENT AeurnNE. CONSTRUCTION ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING TEL 206.442,745 FAX 206.4 C/) CD 4 O P4 ;Ti L z`n00 e."- 0— �j'=c c 7 o _' C t� r -v% Recivinns: Scalc: \'.\RIES Date: (i:l n. 2,00 A3022 SOCfIII'..\ST ELEVATION u F -I6 /- STRUCTURE BEYOND 0 ASPHALT ROOFING —'- METAL FRAMEWORK DAMAGED SNOW STOP - METAL GUTTER CORRUGATED METAL SIDING - METAL FRAME WINDOM BENT METAL WINDOW SILL CORRUGATED METAL SIDING METAL FRAME WINDOWS - BENT METAL WINDOW SILL CORRUGATED METAL SIDING -, PIVOT METAL FRAME WINDOWS - FIXED METAL FRAME WINDOM BENT METAL WINDOW{ SILL PAINTED BRICK \ �- CONCRETE EDGE WOOD EALKHFAD Enlarged Southwest Ext rior Elevation V4' . METAL GUTTER CORRUGATED METAL SIDING METAL FRAME WINDOWS BENT METAL WINDOW SILL ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING DAMAGED ROOFING DAMAGED ROOF STRUCTURE DAMAGED SNOW STOP CORRUGATED METAL SIDING METAL FRAME MNDOW9- BENT METAL WINDOW SILL CORRUGATED METAL SIDING PHOT KETAL FRAME WtlND0W5 FIXED METAL FRAME MI DONS BENT METAL WINDOW SILL - \ PAINTED BRICK CONCRETE EDGE WOOD Et .KtEAD - - I CREOSOTE -COVERED WOOD PILINGS WOOD BREAKWATER APPROXIMATE WATERWAY BBD - CRE050TE-COVERED WOOD PILINGS WOOD BREAKWATER - APPROXIMATE WATERWAY BED 11I'I111�1 III IIII' 'IIIIII�l�l�l1 III ''I'll 1111 111111111111111 1 1I 1l 111111111 III III 1111111111111111 I II 111.1'I11'Ilji 111' 1111 1�1111 111111 1 1'1 I I,1Y'I,'1111; mil, R, li liljl 1 !n m 1'!IIIIIII "111 ll II HI I'I I I11 I I I I I'I 1 i 1 1111111111111 11111111 I,11111111111'll 111'1 I l' I'I,I ' I I I '1'1'1'1'1'1 Ilik1111111, 11111 11111 1'I :I 1 1 1 1 1,1 1 1 11'1,11 IIIIIIIIIIIIII!lll11'll I I 111I1l1 11'1IllI'I'Il1'1 I I'I 1 1 1 1 1'111'I 1'111 I'I1l 111X:1 Iil,111,1111lil1111111I III' 11111111 III11111 IIII I I I I1 I I 1 1111111 111111 111 f l .t. I I I Iilll�l 1111111 1111'18 I I ,Ili',l II 111111 10111111! 11 Iii 111 ,Ii1 111 111 1111111111:111' I IJ 111 ISI III IIII 1 I•I'I 1 11,1.1 111 1 Ii1'1111111 111 1'1'1 11,1 1111111 1 1.1d I 1'111 'IIII II I I `� 11111 I m , ( I I i III1I�-SII:1�1�IlI'I�IIII11'11�111111111111111111111111111111111I1i1111111I11111111111111111 I III II I,II IIII I I 1 Ni,III 11 1111111 lull -i11111111 1111111 \II1111111 I1I111111111111 1111111 I I I III11111111111 I11111111IIIIli1 \ 1 1 1 1 1 I I II III I I 111 II I IIII IIII 111111 111111111111111 -1 1.11111111111 IIIIIII11111IIIIII'IIII IIIIIIIIIIl1111 / Il; 11 11111111 I',•I ' I I I I III 1i11 11111111 11' 11 1 I 11111 11111111'1111111111111 I1'I l l l l l l I IIIIIIIIIIlIIl11111Illlil11111 ill I11 IIII 1 N ill I Ii�l I' 11.11 II I IIII II I . 1 I I I IIIIII11111 I1�1,�1�1�1.111(�II�II�I1111 II1�111/111/li1ilililil ( II I 1 1 1' 1 11 1 1 HI 111lilil 'III I IIIIIIIIIlIII I 11'111 I ISI 11111 1 I1 I'11 I II Ijl iii I Ijljljl 1 11iii llll1'lllllll111i1 �11!�1ililil .. 111 I! 1111111 I, 11111111 1ililjlllililil 11 .1.1 11 1�1�1 (111111 1�1 11111 11 111—ljljl 1111 I 1�1�1 11111 I X11 IIII ( I1: in \� 1117111 'IIII I ,1111 it I I I''I'I I` ' ' 'I! I 111111 1111111111111111,1,1 .1111 1111111111I1,1 III.II 111.1 1 � 1 I 'I` 111 �,1 1'1111111 111 11 Vlllllilllilllll 1111.111111111111 1.1.1.1.111 1.1:1 I"`I II 1 11 illi Il IIII ;1, 1;1 "1 1 Ii1 1 111 lllllll ill 111111 i 1 I, 1:1:1 1�1 II 1 1 Iii) I 111111 111 1 I I I I ill I: 1111111 1111111,11 11111 I 1.1.1 111 ISI 1. i 1111 111 111 1:111:111;1: t' 'I II I I I 1 1, Illll it I(Illl. III(ill II1� 1 I ICI III II I i I III III 1.1 I'I Il I'I I 11.1 I III I I ICI 1;11111 lllllll m 111 ,1111 111111 1.1.1 11.1 1 1.1.1 \ / �ill1111'11 Illi ii in 11 I I 1 I1�h1'l :s `: -. r- IIII - ., __ \ �- CONCRETE EDGE WOOD EALKHFAD Enlarged Southwest Ext rior Elevation V4' . METAL GUTTER CORRUGATED METAL SIDING METAL FRAME WINDOWS BENT METAL WINDOW SILL ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING DAMAGED ROOFING DAMAGED ROOF STRUCTURE DAMAGED SNOW STOP CORRUGATED METAL SIDING METAL FRAME MNDOW9- BENT METAL WINDOW SILL CORRUGATED METAL SIDING PHOT KETAL FRAME WtlND0W5 FIXED METAL FRAME MI DONS BENT METAL WINDOW SILL - \ PAINTED BRICK CONCRETE EDGE WOOD Et .KtEAD - - I CREOSOTE -COVERED WOOD PILINGS WOOD BREAKWATER APPROXIMATE WATERWAY BBD - CRE050TE-COVERED WOOD PILINGS WOOD BREAKWATER - APPROXIMATE WATERWAY BED 11I'I111�1 III II1I i1 1 1I ,I 1 1'l'11 IIII111I1I1I1 IIII1I1.i11' II 'IIiI'Idd IJ, '11�111111111i111 11 '1,iIiIdiII,II1I1I1 1�1111 111111 1 1'1 I I,1Y'I,'1111; mil, R, i !n 1'1'1'1'1`111 I I I I ll' I I I I l i I 1 IIll1H11 1'!IIIIIII "111 ll II HI I'I I I11 I I I I I'I 1 i 1 1111111111111 11111111 I,11111111111'll 111'1 I l' I'I,I ' I I I '1'1'1'1'1'1 Ilik1111111, 111111 '1 1111111 I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1111111/1 11111 1'I :I 1 1 1 1 1,1 1 1 11'1,11 IIIIIIIIIIIIII!lll11'll I I 111I1l1 11'1IllI'I'Il1'1 I I'I 1 1 1 1 1'111'I 1'111 I'I1l 111X:1 Iil,111,1111lil1111111I 1 1 1 1 1 I'I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,I'I'I'I'1'lllll 1':IIII III I I 1'1.1'1.1.1 I I 1 1 11'1 1 1 1 Ii1,111iIiiil1li 1111111 1'1'1'1' '11 1'1 � Illy/ l l l i *l*1 11 '111 I Ililil1 1111,1,1 m , ( I I i III1I�-SII:1�1�IlI'I�IIII11'11�111111111111111111111111111111111I1i1111111I11111111111111111 I III II I,II IIII I I 1 Ni,III 11 1111111 lull -i11111111 1111111 \II1111111 I1I111111111111 1111111 I I I III11111111111 I11111111IIIIli1 I 1 Ili 1111111 1111111 1 1 1 1 1 I I II III I I 111 II I IIII IIII 111111 111111111111111 -1 1.11111111111 IIIIIII11111IIIIII'IIII IIIIIIIIIIl1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 11111111111111111�1�11IIiIIi. I I II I I III I I I lllllll lllllll 111111 1111111 1111111 IliI1l1 IIIA; 1111111 1 v IiIN IIII-- -- _ _ .IIII -- -- - --- - I _ v N i 11 Enlarged Southwest Exterior Elevation DR.\ FT DILA\\ ING SCALES .\ R 1: R.\ SCO ON 24.36 SI I BENS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING Y 5 i TEL 20b 441.4740 FA%206.447.6462 Rcvis;nns: Scalc: 1/4'•= 1.4r U:uc•: l)c1 N. '_1111) A3.23 SOL TI IR IST 114W-16 TT 0 METAL ACCESS LADDER ROOF TRIM i- CORRUGATED METAL WALL PANELS 0 03470 MCA METAL BASE PAINTED METAL 511. PAINTED BRICK METAL GORIER GUARD FOUR SECTION VERTICAL LIFT DOOR Enlarged Northwest Exterior Elevation DR ‘FT DR.\\CI\C SCALES .\R[. BASED ON 24,36 SI I LITS ARCHITECTURE a PLANNING TEL 206.447.4 4X FAX Revisions: Scalc: 1/4..= 1)a[c: nn n. 2r1 /9 A3.24 \I IRTII\CESI' [ L E\'.\TIO\ 11 -1)F -IG VANd 5EAf1 (IIII' 1'1'1'111 11.1.411*+M I111,1i11111!11111� 11 I,il 111+ •'•I I! I I I I t '1,'I' ' 1 1•1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I I'. I I I' 11 1i1,1 11 I,I I I I'I I I ill 111111.;1 METAL FRAME WINDOW PIPE PIPE SUPPORT 1; 1 )1 i I 1 I 1 I ( 111111 I'I;I 1 1 1 =11111.11111111 IT . t' I I'I 1 1111111 'III' 1 1 I'I I 11 1•1111°1+11 L I! I I 11111. 1111111111111 _ 111111'11 11111 11111111 111•111 • 11111111111111 lIIlllll!ill 111 1 II'IIIIIIIIIII4.111 LIIIII!I'II IIII II,I ill '111'111 IIII IIIIIIIIiIII Ili 1111111 1!111111 1111111 II 1111i11111111'11111111111 11111111' 11III11'11111 iIIIIIII!l llli11111111111 11111111111111111111(Ii1 111111 1111111 l I I'I 1'1'1'1'1'1'1 I Iii 1 1 1 ii 1 1 1.1-1. •1•1. 1 1 111' 11'1 °r II IIIII 111,111 IIII II1111111111 i111!I1111 1 , 11111 11111111(1111111 11111111111111111111 IIII 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I' I I I I I I I 1 1, I I I`I' Ili 111111 11111riIII11I,I Iii I —111111 111111 I i I III' 11111111 ill 111.•'.11 1111111 I I I 1 (I' I 1 1111illill IIIII 1.1111,11111'11 11111I11111I I'I I I I 1 IIL;IIIlilli '1 '°.'11111 I'I'lll 111 I I I,1i, , 1 111111111111 111111;1;1111'III IIIIII1111 I I.IIIII.I 1.1' I I I I I.I I 1111111111!1111 11111111 I {111111111111111111111 I'1111111'fiI 11111 1111,1 IIIII1111I1111111111111111111I11111I1111111 I I I`I`I 1111i11111I1IIIII'11111i111 11i11111UI111111�1I111I 11111111 ,II111!1.1 111 1111111;1 111111'IIIIIil1111I1111!11I1111111111111111111l111 11111111111111 I I.I.I 11.1 I I I I I I I I I I I.I.I..I I I I.I I I I 1 I.I I -I ,.I.1 I.I 'PPP' I I 1 I I I I 1 1 1.1.1 I.1 I I I ..I ( 1 1.1 1 1 .I I I IIi1I I.I.I. 1111111 1iiiili .I I I 11111111111111 III11I1111111' 1 1 1 1 1 : I;I;CIII;i lilil;I;Iilili!,I,F I1l;I,l{ ;I,Ii1;lil I; I; I; Ii 1111111 iii i�I;I;I;I;I;I;I II;I;III:I�Iiid 11,I;I;IlIiIII;III:I1I;III, I;III�I;IiI IIIIII,1,1 11,I;I;Ililil �Lllliiii,1,1,1,1j I ! I ill IIjIIIII!'1llllillIIII I } I I I""' 111111 — I I1I111 , III INT. In 1.11111;.1.11. 1iliili1111 I 1 1 1 1'1 I I I I 1111111 III 111 11 11.11.11.11: 'XIII :1:1:1: i111!;Ii1ili1 :III I. :1:1:111 Ili 11111 111:11111 :1Ii1::1:1:1: II: ii; '1'111'1;1; 1 1 1 1,, 1111111 1 1'1'1'. III 111'111 1'1 1 iI Hill IIII I ;r 1111111 11'1 lilili 1 !ILL .111111 1111111,1!illlll ' 11111,11 I'I1I1i1!11111111111111�i1,11I ',I'MI Tlil 1111 i! :l 111 9-1 ii vo,ADED 11 PAr�� 1 I1111111!i! 1+111 1•111111111 11'11111 I II�l I 111'll1- �1�1�1 11111 11111 ISI 1 I.11 Ili 1111,..1.. 1111 I I 11.111. •1111.11, 1 1 1 1'1 III IIII 1 yi�l�ll! I Till 1' 111 I 11 I1 II IIIII 1111111111111111 1J IIIc .r } }' I'lll1 1 11 l'j I'I"I'I VIII 1111 11- II I II 1111 11111,1111'1 i 11111.1 1111111III;I!I 1111 111:1 1 11111! I 1111 11 11111.11111111111 IIII I!!I II III I I I I,I 1'I 1 1 I I 1 ill I I I 11111111'11, 1111 IIIIIll'1II' ili1 ( III I ' 11' 1 =,I I I 11111 11 1 I I' 1 1 1 1 1 Ill i 11 I .1+ 1 .• 1 1 11111111,.mofI •1'I 'I' 1 1111l1rS-1, l Y 1II1I11I11I1l 111111 11 111I 111Id I1 I iI 1 I 111111 IIIIII1I1I 11111I I'll! mr ill III I I I IIIA 11111111111 1 1 111111 SOLID ME METAL METAL TWO -SECTION VERTICAL LIFT DOOR 12'-1" SLIDING METAL DOOR 480'-0" / 1 METAL TRIM J GLAZING BOLLARD INTEGRAL PULL INTEGRAL SWING DOOR PIFE SOLID PANEL GLAZING METAL TRIM NFTAI C./IP. F GUARD 03470 MCA METAL BASE PAINTED METAL 511. PAINTED BRICK METAL GORIER GUARD FOUR SECTION VERTICAL LIFT DOOR Enlarged Northwest Exterior Elevation DR ‘FT DR.\\CI\C SCALES .\R[. BASED ON 24,36 SI I LITS ARCHITECTURE a PLANNING TEL 206.447.4 4X FAX Revisions: Scalc: 1/4..= 1)a[c: nn n. 2r1 /9 A3.24 \I IRTII\CESI' [ L E\'.\TIO\ 11 -1)F -IG 3 RETAINING WALL RIPRAP CONCRETE FOOTING PILING Building Section Looking NW a Gridline P 16'=r-0• 25'-0° BUILT -IR ROOFING INSULATION 2x WOOD GARDEGKING 6x12 POOP PIRLIN — STEEL ANGLE TRI55 25'-0" STEEL W BEAM STEEL FRAME AWNING PCNDOW STS ANGLE TRUSS BUILT-UP ROOFING INSULATION bx12 WOOD PURLIN 2x GARDECXJN6 ROOFLIiN GOOD EG STEEL. BASE PLATE Building Section Looking NW at Gridline P 1,16' ° 1'-0' Building Section Looking NW at Gridline P UI6' • I'-0 cD— Building Section Looking NW at Gridline P 0 cr DR.\ r1' DR.\\\ 1\G SCA LIS ARI. BASED ON 24..;( SHELLS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING 6 N 6 O Ravi inn.: Scale: C.1RILS Date: (In K, 2, le, A4.11 BCfLDI\G srcno' 13 -1)F -1a ASPHALT ROOFING RIGID INSULATION 6x12 W000 PURLIN 2x WOOD GARDEGKING METAL FLASHING 2x FASCIA 4x NAILER METAL SIDING STEEL GHANNEt. STEEL GHANFEL HEAD STEEL ANGLE WINDOW STOP SINGLE PANE STEEL FRAME WINDOW STEEL ANGLE WINDOW STOP METAL FLASHING METAL SIDING -� 6x12 11000 RRLIN 2x WOOD GARDECKING RIGID INSULATION ASPHALT R00FING METAL FLASHING 2x FASCIA STEEL WIDE FLANGE BEAM SSTEEL ANGLE INGLE PANE STEEL FRAME WINDOW STEEL ANGLE TRLE CHORD J y� STEEL ANGLE COLUMN WINDOW FRAME BEYOND 5TEE1. ANGLE TRUSS STEEL GUSSET PLATE - STEEL ANGLE BOTTOM CHORD STEEL WIDE FLANGE COLUMN STEEL CHANNEL 2x WOOD STOP - 4x WOOD NAILER /-- STEEL ANGLE STEEL WIPE FLANGE BEAM FINISH FLOORING 2x WOOD GARDEGKING 5x20 BEAM METAL HANGER STEEL WIDE FLANGE COLUMN SINGLE PANE STEEL --..„...,71 FRAME WINDOW STEEL ANGLE WINDOW STOP METAL FLASHING - am new iI APPROXIMATE HIGFI WATER LEVEL DOUBLE WYIHE, C01+105 BOND BRICK WALL 6x16 WOOD RIM JOIST 6x16 WOOD JOIST CONCRETE SLAB CREOSOTED PILING 3x12 WOOD BREAKWATER APPROXIMATE GRADE Wall Section @ Gridline 26 O 12 r -o. STEEL ANGLE TRUSS CHORD STEEL GUSSET PLATE STEEL ANGLE TRUSS STEEL ANGLE 11000 SIDING CANT STRIP 6x12 RIRLIN R1610 INSULATION /- ASPHALTT ROOFING STEEL ANGLE LEDGER STEEL ANGLE TRUSS STEEL WIDE FLANGE COLUMN FINISH FLOORING 2x W00D GARDEGKING 8x20 BEAM METAL HANG STEEL ANGLE TRUSS 6x16 11000 JOIST J GONGRETE PLINTH APPROXIMATE HIGH WATER LEVEL APPROXIMATE GRADE RIPRAP FILL- 6x12 WOOD PURLIN 2x 1100D GARDECKING RIGID ULEAILATION ASPHALT -ROOFING STEEL ANGLE TRUSS CHORD STEEL ANGLE COLUMN WINDOW FRAME BEYO X"--.....„..........- 6' CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE 6x16 WOOD BEAM 3x12 RETAINING WALL 4x4 WOOD NAILER 4xI2 RETAINING WALL 7 FLAT 2x4 51UD -� STEEL ANGLE TRUSS STEEL WIDE FLANGE BEAM METAL FLASHING 2x FASCIA STEEL WIDE FLANGE BEAM STEEL ANGLE SINGLE PANE STEEL IV- FRAME WINDOW STEEL ANGLE 11000 SIDING GANT STRIP 6x12 FURIJN 515)1?RON ASPHALTALT ROOOFING STEEL ANGLE LEDGER RAILIF6 FINISH FLOORING 2x WOOD 0415050 LNG 8x20 WOOD BEAM - STEEL WIDE FLANGE BEAM \\ ` COIGRETE FOOTING COLUMN BASE PLATE- BEYOND PILING 6' CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE Wall Section @ Gridline 25 O mam 6Y1 I!1' • I'4' STEEL ANGLE TRUSS BUILT-UP ANGLE GOLUISN BEYOND BUILT-UP 001244 LACING BEYOND STEEL WIDE FLANGE COLUMN 004.20 ESN Wall Section @ Gridline II - . 7,T — 2.4 u _ 6 1� 1"�" r _ - �' ' BOEING NABS Buildings 2-11 LC 2 -Fl TH L 130 ENG C0lIPANY C 1 155 East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington 98108 F '- x a '7. _ - =_: I 'J = - P ARCHITECTURE a PLANNING I i) W6TFRN AVE W. SUITE 4 i{ (SFA77tE WA )FII 7 TEL 206 111-1119 FAX 206 111.6962 RECEIVED ED 'RR OVNI (►;t�1.1!1i. 1y STEEL ANGLE TRUSS ASPHALT ROOFING RIGID INSULATION 2x WOOD CARDECKING METAL FLASHING 2x FASCIA 0"c 2x NAILER STEEL CHANNEL STEEL COLUMN METAL CLADDING STEEL GHANIEL 2x NAILER STEEL CHANNEL STEEL CHANNEL STEEL COVER PLATE �- METAL CLAD PILASTER BEYOND VERTICAL LIFT DOOR VERTICAL LIFT DOOR —1\/ - VERTICAL LIFT DOOR DOOR TRACK BEYOND METAL FLASHING BEYOND METAL CLAD PILASTER BEYOND STEEL CORNER GUARD AT BRICK HALFWALL BEYOND CONCRETE GRADE Wall Section ©6rid'ine 1 EID r, / COLUMN AND RESTROOM CONFIGURATION VARY 4' CONCRETE SLAB I -I/2' m STEEL RAILING %- 10' STEEL CHANNEL 12' STEEL CHANNEL 6' STEEL COLUMN CONCRETE FILLED 10' CHANNEL TREADS 10' STEEL CHANNEL STINGER O in 06.121011331 Typical Stair to Elevated Toilet Room GonFiguration Varies 17•ro' I'-0" RAIL SPLAYS 5' TYPICAL ROOFING AND STRUCTURE ,0* METAL FLASHING SOLID WOOD PANEL STEEL RAIL g'A 5TEEL RUNS TYPICAL ROOFING AND STRUCTURE T pica' Roof Ladder CD, V2' • 1-0' RECEIVE A rLSuo BOEING HAGS DRA IT DRAWING SCALES AR1. BASED 11 24.36 SI 1IlIS ARCHITECTURE a PLANNING Iflgs 2-401 & 2-41 c v r ^ ' u t� _ T1-1E13Of INGCOMPANY 7755 East Marginal Way South 159 WESTERN AVE w.SUITE 4HLsEATTTPwA,g119 TEL z"" 440.114" FAX 206 .00.,.402 • Seattle, Washington 98.108 RECEIVE PAINTED TRIM FIFE SURFACE MOUNTED B'Ii-�T6e4GY LIGHTING ELECTRICAL CONDUIT PFULL STRAP STRAP HINGE PAINTED Ix4 WOOD 716 PAINTED WOOD DOOR PAINTED &LAZING PAINTED TRIM .4221 LameSwing laootSlI PAINTED HOOD Ix4 T46 METAL KICK PLATE m 8 METAL PALEY GABLE METAL PANELS METALTRLGK - METAL TRACK METAL 11E BACK 3'-6" 4'-4" 01,45 Fire Shutter aro• = ro' ri 11 I II I i7 II I II CONCRETE WALL STEEL C.rJLUMA! RELIEVING BRACKET GMU WALL IIEILL NON-ORI6INAL METAL FRAI1E DOOR LATCH PADDED SUPPORT POST 0542D WI METAL BAND WITH BOLTS - METAL PANEL WOOD GUARD RAIL Sliding Fire Door 3/e• = r - roo-'<,,11 STEEL TRU55 1 O I METAL LADED COLUMN Columns it Truss Elevation : Gridlines G D Tuo-cn DRAFT DRA\c-INC SCALLS ARE BASED ON 2-1s36 SI 1 ED'S ARCHITECTURE i PLANNING Revisions: Scn1c: \'\RIES Date: ( Ict 8,20(1/ A5011 INTERIOR LLLC.\'rl1N 16 -0F -Ib BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP PLANT 2 SITE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS SEPA PERMIT LOCATION IN REGION ISSAOUAH PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP off/ 52 gl, : L 41/ /raw,_. fil IQ 11khr AMERCIAI WATERWAY SOUTH„ � 2 = I' r E _ Y f MARGINAL, WA SOUTH gg N ��----- 2. RIMING...,......., II . 1; i LP I W IIIJ• 1=% PROJECT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF WORK: PROJECT IS TO DEMO THE CENTRAL 2-4X BUILDINGS AND THE ASSOCIATED UTILITITIES. CONSTRUCT A NEW STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WITH WATER QUALNY FEATURES. MAINTAIN FIRE, COW WATER, SEWER, AND GAS UTIUTIES. CONSTRUCT TWO NEW EMPLOYEE PARKING LOTS AND REPAVE THE FACIUTY PROPERTY. CONTRACTOR: N/A SITE ADDRESS: 7755 E. MARGINAL WAY S. TUKWILA, WA 98108 OWNER: BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP WEST REGION FACILITIES P.O. BOX 3707, M/S: 19-35 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-2207 ATTENTION: MIKE PRITTIE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PLANT 2 CONSOLIDATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE FOLLOWING LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS BASED ON TRANSNATION TITLE REPORT ORDER NUMBER 867785, DATED AUGUST 3, 1998. A TRACT OF LAND BETWEEN THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY AS ESTABLISHED BY COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON . AND EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH IN SECTIONS 28, 32 AND 33, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, THENCE SOUTH 88'09'49" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 35.92 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE ON THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 1 6TH AVENUE SOUTH FROM WHENCE THE CENTER BEARS NORTH 81'09'46" WEST 1960.08 FEET, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN AND SAID CURVE 235.12 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN NORTH 01'57'52" EAST 534.65 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BEING 65 FEET DISTANT FROM, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO, THE CENTERLINE OF SAID EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH ON THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 4752'17" EAST 1189.40 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE SOUTH 88'09'49" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 23.20 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 4752'17" EAST 761.35 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT OF RADIUS 2814.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 1245.10 FEET TO THE POINT. OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 22'32'06" EAST 165.28 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 825 FEET SOUTHERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT • ANGLES TO, THE NORTH LINE OF THE JOHN BUCKLEY DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 42; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH AND PROCEEDING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 89'12'23" . WEST 1385.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID DUWAMISH WATERWAY, SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE FROM WHENCE THE CENTER BEARS SOUTH 53'50'05" WEST 1969.12 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND SAID CURVE 401.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 4751'36" WEST ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 1068.05 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT 11 FOOT VACATION OF 16TH AVENUE SOUTH AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 38, PAGE 455 OF KING. COUNTY COUNCIL RECORDS DATED JUNE 24, 1940; THENCE NORTH 13'00'45" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 384.20 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 14'06'06" EAST 303.66 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,900,610 SQUARE FEET OR 66.588 ACRES PROJECT PARCELS 2824049009, 3324049002, 0001600020 RECEIVED /APR 0 9 2010. CDEEVE OPMMENT m Br APPROVED con STu REWSION SEPA PERIN J1586456 DED REI 05/01/09 ,0\2008'08110\SEPA-plans\60d.O 1 Drafter Nene, R CORDICE 1 Pio Dote, MAR 22 2010 105418 1 Last Modified Date, MAR ?2 2010 095209 I Submittal, PRELIMINARY SET ci_4717E171,G* DRAWN ACCEPTABILITY Marc Cordite THIS DESIGN AND/OR.LCKED SPECIFICATION IS APPROVE'CHD. DORMER ENGINEER APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE D. DORMIER CHECKEDC DAIL 10/19/08 10/19/08 TITLE SHEET CURRENT REVISION 586456 SYMBOL DATE 03/22/10 10/19/08 APPROVED APPROVED MECHANICAL MASTER SEPA PERMIT PLANT 2 YARD • PLANT 2 SNEET GO JOB 982179 COUP No 2 -YD -GO IIVUGA VI U V VV ITN% ) . W N DRAWING NO. SHEET NO. DRAWING TITLE REV DATE W N - DRAWING NO. SHEET NO. DRAWING TITLE REV DATE W N -' DRAWING NO. SHEET NO. DRAWING TITLE REV DATE ' YARD—ELECTRICAL YARD—STRUCTURAL . . GENERAL . • 2 -YD -GO GO COVER SHEET - 03.22.10 • RTN-YD-GI . G1 INDEX OF DRAWINGS - 03.22.10 • 2 -YD -G2 G2 2-4X DEMO DWG KEY PLAN - 05.01.09 . • 2 -YD -G4 G4 GENERAL NOTES - 05.01.09 YARD—CIVIL • 2 -YD -C3 C3 . CONSTRUCTION NOTES - 05.01.09 2-25 ELECTRICAL . • 2-YD-C80A C80A SITE PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-CB1A C81A SITE PLAN _. 05.01.09 I I I I I • 2-YD-C82A C82A SITE PLAN - 05.01.09 2-31 ARCHITECTURAL • 2-YD-C83A C83A SITE PLAN - 05.01.09 YARD MECHANICAL • 2-YD-C220A C220A PAVING PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31-AOa AOD GENERAL NOTES/ABBREVIATIONS/SYMBOLS . - 04.05.09 • 2-YD-C221A C221A PAVING PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31 EXITING EXITING EXITING/OCCUPANCY PLAN - 04.05.09 • 2-YD-M290A M290A FIRE AND COLD WATER PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-C222A C222A PAVING PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31-A62 A62 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A 04.05.09 • 2-YD-M291A M291A FIRE AND COLD WATER PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-C223A C223A PAVING PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31-A63 A63 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A 04.05.09 • 2-YD-M292A M292A FIRE AND COLD WATER PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-C294A C294A SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31-1A13 1A13 PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN F 04.05.09 • 2-YD-M293A M293A . FIRE AND COLD WATER PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-C295A C295A SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN . - 05.01.09 • 2-31-1A14 1A14 PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN J 04.05.09 • 2-YD-C296A C296A SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31-1A16 1A16 PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN . F 04.05.09 • 2 -YD -M553 M553 STANDARD DETAILS A 05.01.09 • 2-YD-C297A C297A SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-31-1A17 1A17 PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN . . C 04.05.09 • 2 -YD -M554 M554 STANDARD DETAILS A 05.01.09 • 2-31-RFA153 RFA153 OVERALL BUILDING ROOF PLAN . A 04.05.09 • 2 -YD -0556 C556 SECTIONS AND DETAILS. A 05.01.09 • 2-31-RFA163 RFA163 ROOF PLAN A 04.05.09 • 2-31-RFA164 RFA164 ROOF PLAN A 04.05.09 • 2 -YD -C640 C640 SECTIONS AND DETAILS - 05.01.09 • 2-31-RFA166 RFA166 ROOF PLAN A 04.05.09 • 2-31-RFA167 RFA167 ROOF PLAN - 04.05.09 • 2-31-A111 A111 BUILDING SECTIONS A 04.05.09 • 2-31-A201 A201 WALL SECTIONS - 04.05.09 • 2-31-A351 . A351 DOOR SCHEDULE, FINISH SCHEDULE A 04.05.09 • 2-31-A507 • A507 MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS - 04.05.09 • 2-31-A508 A508 MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS - 04.05.09 • 102-031-1059 A-9 MONITOR & WALL SECTIONS = STEEL WAREHOUSE R - YARD—ELECTRICAL . • 2 -YD -1E2 1E2 13.8KV POWER MAIN FEEDERS & 480Y/277V POWER - 05.01.09 • 2 -YD -1E3 1E3 208Y/120 VOLT POWER . - 05.01.09 2—.31 STRUCTURAL • 2-YD-1E8o 1E8a LIGHTING SITE PLAN. - 05.01.09. • 2 -YD- I Ebb 1 Ebb LIGHTING SITE PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-1E8c 1E8c . UGHTING SITE PLAN - 05.01.09 . • 2-YD-1E8d 1E8d UGHTING SITE PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-E213A • E213A CMCS PLAN A 05.01.09 YARD—LANDSCAPE • 2-YD-E215A E215A CMCS PLAN A 05.01.09 • 2-YD-E230A E230A CMCS PLAN A 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS80 LS80 LANDSCAPE PLAN • - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-E232A E232A • -CMCS PLAN . A 05.01.09 • 2 -YD -E504 E504 DETAILS - 05.01.09 • 2 -YD -L582- LS82 LANDSCAPE PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS83 Lei LANDSCAPE PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2 -YD -E572 E572 ELECTRICAL DETAILS AND GENERAL NOTES A 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS801 1S801 IRRIGATION PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2 -YD -L6821 LS821 IRRIGATION PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS831 LS831 IRRIGATION PLAN - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS110 LS110 LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE AND DETAILS - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS210 LS210 IRRIGATION SCHEDULE AND DETAILS - - 05.01.09 • 2-YD-LS460 LS460 IRRIGATION SITE PLAN R 09.07.07 YARD—STRUCTURAL NOT YET ISSUED O PREVIOUSLY ISSUED, NOT IN THIS RELEASE IN THIS ISSUE . NFC FRO ORIG A PREL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR REFERENCE ONLY ORIGINAL ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION OR FOR PERMIT DRAWING REVISION - SEE SPECIFIC DRAWING FOR NATURE OF REVISION ' - PRELIMINARY RECEIVED 'APR 092010 DEVELOPMENT Rupert Engineering, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL ANO STRUCTURAL 619 Vest Volley Rpheny North, SJte 111 AA ,,. VA 92001 11). (253) 833-7776 FAX (253) 939-2168 REVISION SEPA PERMIT J1586456 01 REI APPROVED DATE 5991 RENSIDN ar APPROVED DED 03/22/10 MIMES MN ACCEPTABILITY . DBS DESIGN AND/OR . SPECFICAI)ON IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN DAVE CHECKED N4WEtN SUBTITLE INDEX OF DRAWINGS CURRENT REV5(0N 586456-02 SVMROt DATE 03/22/10 CHEERED APPROVED APPROVED TITLE GENERAL MASTER SEPA PERMIT RENTON SITE SHEET G1 JOD N0. COMP N0. RENTON DND NO• • RTN-YD-G1 .� I■ I■I IN ■1 ■I■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ . • ■ JORGENSEN SEL ■I ■ ■I I I.I■I■I DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERS •I I■ ■ ■I■I■I■I■ ■1 I■I ■ I. ■ .I ■I T - - - ■ ■ DUWAMtSH COMMERC TERWAY ■ • • • DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY 1■ ■1 DUWAABSH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY t' ■i 1f4.+.}.t.tlt.ia4 li±II1-U tUi i1ft■I.11f ■I 1 +fif+■Itlli9IFI TN.i ■+18.1!+.1 .+f1 N ■+.i S69A SLAB i S71A SLAB • 863 SLAB z 2S69A M : 2871A MEZ JORGQOEN Stm / ,1I 11111hi III III 14IILIIIilllllllll; BRE PLAN ! 1A sroRM_r .AN !r = 5A SANITARY PLAN 111A HVAC/PLUMBING immix' 111 1A HVAC/PLUMBING 91A /COLD WA1EA 480Y/277V + 208Y/120V �I LIGHTING PLAN_M 5A CMGs ULAN • iI■1■I■I■1.I.I.I.I.I.min I.Imini .1aim I.I. lint. ism .I.l.l.l.l.l.l.l.l.l■1.1.1+•1 ■ • 1 . I.I*I■1■I■I.1■I.I.I.I� . S68A SLAB 870A SLAB 2S68A MEZ 2870A MEZ - 1762 31..AB• I■1.1■I.I.1.1.1■i11■I■I■I■I■I■1■1■1■I■I■I:I.I■1.1.1.1.1.1.1■I■I■I■1.1. II...I 2S62A MEZ ■ i • S65A BLAB : S67A BLAB . i • iI■I■I■I■1.1■l.I.I■i� ■ i • i ■ ■ �I■I■I■I■I■1■I■I■I■I■I■I■LI■LLLLLLI�LLLI■I■LI■LI■1.1■1.1.1.1.1.1.1■I ■ • S61A SLAB - 2-4X DEMO _A 3A HVAC/PLUMBQN 93A FIRE/COLD WATER 3A 480Y/277V + 208Y 120 ■ • S64A SLAB : S66A SLAB �▪ LI�Irtlrlln�T�aa.�n'rtlrin'ntiTir'•1•Inln�Inlrtir�n'I� n'rtlr�:mrr�I�InIrtI.1.1� I 1 C294A sANrrARY PLAN 1.286 LANDSCAPING PLAN L8801 IRRIGATION PLAN UGM110A HVAC/PLUMBING M110A I-NAC/PLUMB NQ M290A FIRE/coup wp€RR E110A 48OY/277V -#4OSY/120V IE8A uc>fm,(LLAN/cMcs E213A • :_ .I IUI I.IUtL_tl•�■I■I�\ LU 11.1.1■iUI_U IU I_■ ■ . ilI ;II iil Ii ;li; - 61 ~I• ' AI: I _ ;II.t� ��II�.I�, Il�,iltll II 1.. X1 jia" a �A �In �' "s> 1111111 1,1.111 4.4II.rl I iTIT -...rawm.r I i l l i l l l l l l l Hi I fl'(I11((11'((11T111 1'I;. 1'I l l'I 11'191111T1 :T I'I'I'''I''I'I'11' '1161E011111:11 Mb ■ AV. I1,1D war Ir— i ately/ / + 208Y/120V 2304 CMcs P1 APJ • 111■1■1■1■I■1■1■I■I■i■1■1■I■1■1■1■I■i■I■I■1■1■I■i.1■1.1■I■I•i11■1■1■1■I■I■1■I.I.1■1■I■I■i■I.i■I■I■1.1■1■1■1■1.1■1.1■I■111■1■1■1■1■111■I■I■1■1-111■1■I■L■I■I■111■I■1■1■1■1■I■I■1■1■1■1.1.1■1■1■1•1.1■1.1.1.1U11 11.I.I.1.I 11.E362Ai.i. I.I..1.1..r.I%1.1.1.1! 4586456-02 05/01/09 BOE//VG® DRAWN MARC CORDICE CHECKED 10/19/08 RECEIVED PAPR092010 COMMU IDEVELOPNMEN- nuano 4 C wgBnserIng9 Ouuc�o CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 199 Vest Valley Muse North. Sane IN PARA V6 91001 TEL CEO 0L-7776 fu 0D 939-2161 KEY PLAN 100 50 0 100 200 300 2-4X DEMO DWG KEY PLAN APPROVED BY /A200\0.lI0\9CSICN OVGSVET-Dlons\2-6-63.4.4 I 9rarter Non. N ORRICE I t 2099. 679 39 2009 133967 Lost Node d Dot APR 27 2099 092946 1 Sdaittob PROGRESS PRINT APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 oEMPLABUILDINGS OF 2 YARD CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET DATE 05/01/09 CML MASTER PI ANT 9 586456-02 7 Vrl-YY CORP N0. VLIVLI\ML 19 l/ I LJ. 1. ALL WORK MATERIALS SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA UTILITY DEPARTMENT AND THE LATEST EDITION OF THE WSDOT/APWA STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. A SET OF APPROVED PLANS SHALL BE KEPT ON SITE AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION. 2. THE HOURS OF WORK IN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE UNITED TO 8:30 AM TO 3:30 PM ON WEEKDAYS UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. ALL STREET CLOSURES, PARTIAL OR FULL, SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BOEING AND TUKWILA FIRE DEPARTMENTS, AND 911 SHALL BE NOTIFIED 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE. 3. ALL LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY THE TRUE AND CORRECT LOCATION SO AS TO AVOID DAMAGE OR DISTURBANCE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL FIELD UTILITY LOCATION SERVICES AND VERIFY ALL UTIUTY LOCATIONS WITH THE PROPER BOEING FACILITIES PERSONNEL PRIOR TO THE START OF EXCAVATION WORK. FOR WORK LOCATED ON THE CITY OF TUKWILLA PROPERTY, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT UTILITY LOCATE AT 1-800-424-5555. 4. A PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. A MIN OF 3 (THREE) WORKING DAYS NOTICE IS REQUIRED FOR SCHEDULING. TWENTY-FOUR HOUR NOTICE WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO STARTING NEW CONSTRUCTION. 5. SEE BOEING FOR PERMITTING FROM THE CITY OF TUKWILA IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILTY TO SECURE ALL OTHER PERMITS PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION. 6. FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUIREMENTS SEE CITY OF TUKWILA AND WSDOT STDS. 7. CONTRACTOR IS TO HAVE UTIUTY LOCATOR SERVICE LOCATE UTIUTIES AND SHOW THEM ON CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY PLANT 11 FACIUTIES SHUTDOWN COMMITTEE PRIOR TO SAWCUTTING AND EXCAVATION. 8. ALL UNDERGROUND PIPING, EXCEPT OFFICE AREA AND IRRIGATION SPRINKLER PIPING, SHALL BE IDENTIFIED BY THE USE OF SURFACE LOCATED MARKERS, PER TYPICAL DETAIL. MARKERS SHALL BE LOCATED AT MAXIMUM INTERVALS OF 150 FT, AT ALL CHANGES OF DIRECTION , WITHIN 5 FT OF A WALL, AT ALL MANHOLES AND VALVE BOXES, AND ADJACENT TO ROADS. MARKERS SHOULD INDICATE SERVICE, PIPE SIZE, DIRECTION OF FLOW, PIPE MATERIAL AND PIPE DEPTH. MARKER INSTALLATION LOCATIONS SHALL BE INDICATED ON THE CONTRACTOR PROVIDED AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN THE FORM OF RED -MARKED DRAWINGS. 9. EXISTING MONITORING WELLS SHALL BE PROTECTED UNLESS NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS. DO NOT DISTURB MONITORING WELLS WITHOUT WRITTEN DIRECTION FROM BOEING SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS (425)891-7724. DISTURBED SHALL BE REPLACED AT THE DIRECTION OF BOEING SHEA. ALL WELLS THAT WILL BE DISTURBED SHALL BE ABANDONED BY BOEING SHEA. THREE MONTHS NOTICE SHALL BE GIVEN TO BOEING SHEA PRIOR TO DISTURBING THE WELL. GENERAL NOTES EXCAVATION: 10. PRIOR TO ANY BACKFILLING OF NEW PIPE, IT SHALL BE INSPECTED BY A BOEING REPRESENTATIVE TO INSURE THAT CONFORMS TO THE PROJECT STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE BOEING REPRESENTATIVE 24 HRS IN ADVANCE OF BACKFILUNG ALL CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN THE FORM OF RED -MARKED DRAWINGS TO THE ENGINEER. 11. ASPHALT AND CONCRETE STREET PAVING TO BE REMOVED" SHALL BE SAWCUT TO A MIN. DEPTH OF TWO INCHES. ALL SURFACE CONCRETE, PAVEMENT, SIDEWALKS. CURBS, GUTTERS, AND DRIVEWAY APPROACHES SHALL EE SAWCUT TO A MIN. DEPTH OF TWO INCHES OR REMOVED TO AN EXISTING EXPANSION JOINT. 12. PERMANENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT PATCH: AFTER THE SUBGRADE HAS BEEN PREPARED, PATCH WITH CLASS A (3/4") NR -ENTRAINED PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE WITH DOWELING AND REINFORCEMENT PER CONCRETE. PLACE IN KIND AND TO THE THICKNESS OF THE EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT. ALL JOINTS SHALL BE SEALED WITH A JOINT FILLER PER WSDOT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 9-04.2(1). AREAS WHERE AN ASPHALT OVERLAY EXISTS OVER CONCRETE PAVEMENT, AN ASPHALT OVERLAY SHALL BE PLACED OVER THE NEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT PATCH IN KIND AND IN THICKNESS OF THE EXISTING ASPHALT OVERLAY. 13. PERMANENT ASPHALT PAVEMENT PATCH: AFTER THE SUBGRADE HAS BEEN PREPARED ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT CLASS B SHALL BE PLACED IN KIND AND TO THE THICKNESS OF THE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT OR TO A MIN. DEPTH OF THREE INCHES, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. THE EDGES OF- THE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENTS AND CASTINGS SHALL BE PAINTED WITH HOT ASPHALT CEMENT OR ASPHALT EMULSION IMMEDIATELY BEFORE PLACING THE ASPHALT PATCHING MATERIAL. THE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT SHALL THEN BE PLACED, LEVELED AND COMPACTED TO CONFORM TO THE ADJACENT PAVED SURFACE. IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER ALL JOINTS BETWEEN THE NEW AND ORIGINAL ASPHALT PAVEMENT SHALL BE PAINTED WITH HOT ASPHALT OR ASPHALT EMULSION AND BE COVERED WITH DRY PAVING SAND BEFORE THE ASPHALT SOLIDIFIES. THE MATERIAL FOR TACKING THE BOTTOM AND SIDES OF PATCHES FOR ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SHALL BE AN EMULSIFIED ASPHALT PER SPEC. FOR SEALING THE EDGES AFTER PLACING THE ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PATCH, LISE A LIGHT CUTBACK CALLED RC -70, AND SAND THE SURFACE TO PREVENT TRACKING. • GTHE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND OTHER GOVERNING AGENCIES FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN 15. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE OWNER IF CONTAMINATED SOIL OR GROUNDWATER IS ENCOUNTERED DURING THE WORK. SEE CONTRACT SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR REQUIRED DIRECTION. 16. ALL EXCAVATED TRENCH MATERIAL SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AT AN APPROVED BOEING LOCATION. SOIL MATERIAL USED TO BACKFILL VAULT WALLS AND PIPE TRENCH SHALL COMPLY WITH "BACKFILL" MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED IN WSDOT SPECIFICATION 17. EXCAVATIONS ARE TO HAVE SLOPED SIDES TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES HAVING JURISDICTION AND WASHINGTON STATE REGULATIONS (WISHA). PROVIDE SHORING AND BRACING WHERE SLOPING IS NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF SPACE RESTRICTIONS, STABILITY OF MATERIAL EXCAVATED, OR TRENCH DEPTH IS GREATER THAN 4'-0". 18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE, AT NO EXPENSE TO BOEING, ANY STRUCTURES, PAVEMENT, OR OTHER ITEMS DESIGNATED TO REMAIN THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING REMOVAL OPERATIONS. 19. DEWATERING AND EXCAVATED SOIL MAY BE HAULED AND DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE PER CONTRACT SPECIAL CONDITIONS WITH BOEING APPROVAL. FOR SOIL DISPOSAL APPROVAL AND REQUIREMENTS, CONTACT BOEING SHEA AT (206)544-2393. FOR DEWATERING DISPOSAL APPROVAL AND PERMITS,CONTACT BOEING SHEA AT (206)544-2393. ALL HAULING OF MATERIAL OFF SITE SHALL HAVE A CRY OF TUKWILA HAULING PERMIT. 20. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PREVENT ANY SILTS, SEDIMENTS, OR OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIALS FROM ENTERING THE DRAINAGE COURSE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT. MINIMUM STANDARD EROSION CONTROL METHODS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT ARE AS FOLLOWS: • SILT FENCING ALONG THE SHORE LINES OR IN AREAS WHERE LARGE EXPOSED SOIL SURFACE AREA RUNOFF PRESENTS CONCERNS. • FILTER FABRIC BAG SEDIMENT TRAPS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT ALL CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES. CONTINUOUS INSPECTION SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE PROPER FUNCTIONING. • STRAW WATTLES SHALL BE INSTALLED AROUND INLET GRATES WHEN SILT LADEN RUNOFF CONDITIONS BECOME TOO HEAVY FOR EFFECTIVE USE OF FILTER FABRIC SEDIMENT TRAPS AND SILT FENCING. • EXCAVATED SOIL STOCKPILES WHICH ARE TO 8E STAGED ON PAVED SURFACES TO SEGREGATE CONTAMINATED FROM NON -CONTAMINATED MATERIALS AS IDENTIFIED BY EHS STAFF, SHALL BE STORED IN LINED CONTAINMENT AREAS SUCH THAT STORM WATER RUNOFF WNHIN THE CONTAINMENT AREA CAN BE MONITORED PRIOR TO DISCHARGE. ADDITIONALLY, THE SOIL STOCKPILES ARE TO BE FULLY COVERED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH RAINFALL • DISTURBED AREAS THAT ARE TO BE- EXPOSED FOR OVER ONE WEEK SHALL BE STABILIZED AND COVERED WITH STRAW AT A RATE OF 2-3 BALES PER 1000 SQUARE FEET (APPROX. 2 INCHES THICK) TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH RAINFALL • ALL ENTRANCES FROM EXPOSED SOIL TO PAVEMENT SHALL BE COVERED WITH GRAVEL OR CRUSHED CONCRETE TO MINIMIZE "DRAG OUT" OF SOIL GENERAL NOTES FIRE AND COLD WATER: 21. ALL WATER MAIN PIPE SHALL BE CEMENT UNED DUCTILE IRON PIPE CONFORMING TO AWWA C110 AND C111, LATEST REV., THICKNESS CLASS 52 OR AS NOTED ON DRAWINGS. CEMENT MORTAR UNING AND SEAL COATING SHALL CONFORM TO AWWA C104 LATEST REVISION. PIPE JOINTS SHALL BE MON JOINT, OR AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS. 22. DUCTILE IRON FDTINGS SHALL BE CEMENT LINED, PRESSURE RATED AS NOTED ON PLANS, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10-82. CEMENT UNING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/AWWA C104/A21.4-84. IF FITTINGS ARE 3 INCHES TO 12 INCHES IN DIA AND HAVE MECH. JOINTS, THE FITTINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH EITHER ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10-82 OR ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53-84. 3 -IN. TO 12 -IN. DIA FITTINGS WHICH HAVE MECH. JOINTS AND/OR FLANGED JOINTS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/AWWA CI10/A21.10.82 OR A COMBINATION OF ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10.82 AND ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53-84 SUCH THAT THE PORTION OF THE FITTING WITH A MECHANICAL JOINT(S) MAY 8E IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53-84 AND THAT PORTION OF THE FITTING WITH FLANGED JOINT(S) SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10-82. IF FITTINGS ARE 4 INCHES TO 12 INCHES IN DIAMETER AND HAVE MON JOINTS, THE FITTINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53-84. ACCEPTANCE TESTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 53-5.3 OF ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53-84 OR WITH SECTION 10-4.3 OF ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10-82 SHALL BE OBTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND TRANSMITTED TO THE OWNER. 23. GATE VALVES SHALL CONFORM TO AWWA C509 AND SHALL BE N.R.S. RESIDENT SEAT. VALVES SHALL- BE DESIGNED FOR A MINIMUM WATER OPERATING PRESSURE OF 200 PSI. GATE VALVES SHALL BE MUELLER CO. NO A-2074 AND A-2075 OR APPROVED. ALL VALVES SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS. 24. ALL FIRE WATER MAINS SHALL BE AT A MIN. OF 54 INCHES BELOW GRADE. ALL COLD WATER MAINS SHALL BE AT A MINIMUM OF 36 INCHES BELOW GRADE. WHERE UTILITY CONFLICTS OCCUR, WATER MAINS ARE TO 8E LOWERED TO CLEAR. ALL PIPE SHALL BE LAID BY OPEN CUT TRENCH UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. 25. CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN ALL NEW WATER MAINS SIX (6) INCHES IN DIAMETER AND LARGER WITH • PIPE CLEANING "PIGS" PRIOR TO DISINFECTION WHERE VISUAL PIPE INSPECTION CAN NOT TAKE PLACE. "PIGS" SHALL BE INSERTED INTO THE PIPE DURING PIPE INSTALLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FURNISHING AND OPERATING ALL TAPS, FLANGES, PUMPS, GUAGES, PLUGS, SADDLES, CORPORATION STOPS, MISC. HOSE, PIPING, AND OTHER EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO "PIG" THE LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A DETAILED PLAN FOR CLEANING THE WATER MAINS AND HAVE IT APPROVED BY THE OWNER BEFORE BEGINNING EXCAVATION WORK. SEE SEQUENCING PLANS FOR PIGGING STATION LOCATIONS. 26. ALL NEW FIRE AND COLD WATER MAINS AND SERVICES SHALL BE PRESSURE TESTED TO A MIN OF 250 PSI IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND THE WASHINGTON STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT. ALL PRESSURE TESTING SHALL BE DONE IN THE PRESENCE OF A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BOEING COMPANY OR THE CITY OF TUKWILA. 27. ALL NEW FIRE MAINS SHALL BE DISINFECTED BY AWWA STANDARD C651 SEC 5.3 SLUG METHOD. NEW COLD WATER AND SERVICES SHALL BE DISINFECTED BY THE INJECTION OF A 50 PPM (MIN. CONCENTRATION) CHLORINE/WATER SOLUTION. DRY CALCIUM HYPOCHLORITE SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN THE PIPE AS LAID. CHLORINE SHALL BE METERED/INJECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS. 28. CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING MAINS SHALL NOT BE MADE UNTIL THE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS & TIME SCHEDULES HAVE BEEN ARRANGED WITH THE OWNER. ALL VALVE SHUT DOWNS AND OPENING OF EXISTING UNES TO ACCOMPLISH NEW WATER MAIN CONNECTION SHALL BE DONE BY BOEING MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL ONLY UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED. 29. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PLUGS AND TEMPORARY BLOW -OFF ASSEMBLIES FOR TESTING AND PURITY ACCEPTANCE PRIOR TO FINAL TIE-IN. 30. ALL MON JOINT PIPE AND FITTING BELL GASKETS SHALL BE U.S. PIPE "FIELD LOK" GASKET FOR JOINT RESTRAINT. ALL MECHANICAL PIPE AND FITTING JOINT FOLLOWER GLANDS SHALL BE SERIES 1100 MEGALUG RESTRAINT MECHANISM MANUFACTURED BY EBAA IRON SALES. AFTER INSTALLATION ALL MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINT MATERIALS SHALL BE COATED WITH COAL TAR EPDXY BY METHODS PRESCRIBED BY AWWA C203. 31. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF EXISTING WATER MAINS TO BE TAPPED BEFORE BEGINNING WORK AND NOTIFY THE PROPER BOEING FACILITIES PERSONNEL OF EACH LOCATION. USE OF A LOCATOR SERVICE PRIOR TO EXCAVATION IS REQUIRED. 32. ALL PIPING SHALL BE RESTRAINED PER DETAILS AND NOTE 30 THIS SHEET. 33. THE PIPING AND EQUIPMENT TO BE INSTALLED IN A VAULT THAT DOES NOT HAVE FACTORY APPLIED PAINT SHALL BE GIVEN A COMPLETE COAT OF FOREST PAINT 985 SERIES PRIMER OR APPROVED EQUAL. TWO FINISHED COATS OF FOREST PAINT 195 SERIES EPDXY, OR APPROVED EQUAL, SHALL BE APPLIED OVER THE FIELD COATED PRIMER.' • 34. UNDERGROUND PIPE IDENTIFICATION MARKERS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED 81 THE INSTALLER OF UNDERGROUND PIPING. ANY DISTURBED MARKERS SHALL BE REPLACED. GENERAL NOTES STORM AND SANITARY SEWER 35. ALL STORM WATER PIPE SHALL BE ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEM ADS N-12 HDPE PIPE WITH ADS SERIES 35 COUPUNGS AND FITTINGS. 36. CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STORM WATER SYSTEM SHALL NOT BE MADE UNTIL THE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS AND TIME SCHEDULES HAVE BEEN ARRANGED WITH THE OWNER. 37. PRIOR TO ANY BACKFILUNG OF NEW PIPE, IT SHALL BE INSPECTED BY A BOEING REPRESENTATIVE TO INSURE THAT IT CONFORMS TO THE PROJECT STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE BOEING REPRESENTATIVE 24 HRS IN ADVANCE OF BACKFILUNG ALL CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN THE FORM OF RED -MARKED DRAWINGS TO THE ENGINEER. 38. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF EXISTING STORM WATER TO BE TAPPED BEFORE BEGINNING WORK AND NOTIFY THE PROPER BOEING FACIUTIES PERSONNEL OF EACH LOCATION. USE OF A LOCATOR SERVICE PRIOR TO EXCAVATION IS REQUIRED. 39. EXCAVATIONS ARE TO HAVE SLOPED SIDES TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES HAVING JURISDICTION AND WISHA CHAPTER 296-155 WAC. PROVIDE SHORING AND BRACING WHERE SLOPING 15 NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF SPACE RESTRICTIONS, STABILITY OF MATERIAL EXCAVATED, OR TRENCH DEPTH IS GREATER THAN 4'-0". 40. ALL DEWATERING & EXCAVATED SOIL SHALL BE STAGED ON PAVED SURFACES TO COMPLY WITH THE CSWGP & SWPPP. SEGREGATE CONTAMINATED FROM NON -CONTAMINATED MATERIALS AS IDENTIFIED BY EHS STAFF & HAULED & DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE AS REO PER CONTRACT SPECIAL CONDITIONS. WATER EXCEEDING THE TURBIDITY OR PH STANDARD SHALL NOT ENTER THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM. 41. ALL NEW PIPE AND DRAINAGE STRUCTURES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WORK. THEY SHALL BE CLEANED BY FLUSHING, RODDING, OR WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE UNOBSTRUCTED DRAINAGE. ALL CATCH BASIN SUMPS, MANHOLES, INLET AND OUTLET STRUCTURES, AND DEBRIS RACKS SHALL BE FREED OF ALL DIRT, ROCK, AND DEBRIS. 42. ALL SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE SDR -35 PVC CONFORMING TO ASTM D-3034. 43. ALL SANITARY SEWER PRESSURE PIPE 2"0 AND SMALLER SHALL BE SCHEDULE 81 C. ALL SANITARY SEWER PRESSURE PIPE 3 0 AND LARGER SHALL BE CLASS 350 DUCTILE IRON PIPE CONFORSHEET C2. 44. PRIOR TO PERMITTING EMPLOYEES TO START DEMOUTION OPERATIONS, AN ENGINEERING SURVEY SHALL 8E MADE, BY A COMPETENT PERSON, OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AND THE POSSIBIUTY OF UNPLANNED COLLAPSE OF ANY PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE. ANY ADJACENT STRUCTURE WHERE EMPLOYEES MAY BE EXPOSED SHALL ALSO BE SIMILARLY CHECKED. THE EMPLOYER SHALL HAVE IN WRITING, EVIDENCE THAT SUCH A SURVEY HAS BEEN PERFORMED. 45.- A COPY OF THE SURVEY REPORT AND OF THE PLANS AND/OR METHODS OF OPERATIONS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT THE JOB SITE FOR THE DURATION OF THE DEMOLITION OPERATION. 46. ANY DEVICE OR EQUIPMENT SUCH AS SCAFFOLDS, LADDERS, DERRICKS, HOISTS, ETC.. USED IN CONNECTION WITH DEMOLITION WORK SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED, INSTALLED, INSPECTED, MAINTAINED AND OPERATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CONSTRUCTION, INSTALIATION, INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF SUCH DEVICE OR EQUIPMENT AS SPECIFIED IN OTHER PARTS OF THIS CHAPTER. 47. FEDERAL AND STATE CODES, SAFETY STANDARDS, RULES, REGULATIONS, AND ORDINANCES GOVERNING ANY AND ALL PHASES OF DEMOLINON WORK SHALL BE OBSERVED AT ALL TIMES. 48. DEMOLIDON OF ALL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES SHALL BE CONDUCTED UNDER COMPETENT SUPERVISION, AND SAFE WORKING CONDITIONS SHALL BE AFFORDED THE EMPLOYEES. 49. WHEN EMPLOYEES ARE REQUIRED TO WORK WITHIN A STRUCTURE TO BE DEMOLISHED WHICH HAS BEEN DAMAGED BY FIRE, FLOOD, EXPLOSION, OR OTHER CAUSE, THE WALLS OR FLOOR SHALL 8E SHORED OR BRACED. 50. ALL ELECTRIC, GAS, WATER, STEAM, SEWER, AND OTHER SERVICE ONES SHALL BE SHUT OFF, CAPPED, OR OTHERWISE CONTROLLED, OUTSIDE THE BUILDING UNE BEFORE DEMOLITION WORK IS STARTED. IN EACH CASE, ANY UTILITY COMPANY WHICH IS INVOLVED SHALL BE NOTIFIED IN ADVANCE. 51. IF IT IS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN ANY POWER, WATER OR OTHER UTILITIES DURING DEMOLITION, SUCH ONES SHALL BE TEMPORARILY RELOCATED, AS NECESSARY, AND PROTECTED. 52. IT SHALL BE DETERMINED WHETHER ASBESTOS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS, GASES, EXPLOSIVES, FLAMMABLE MATERIALS, OR SIMILARLY DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES ARE PRESENT AT THE WORK SITE. WHEN THE PRESENCE OF ANY SUCH SUBSTANCE IS APPARENT OR SUSPECTED, TESTING AND REMOVAL OR PURGING SHALL BE PERFORMED AND THE HAZARD ELIMINATED BEFORE DEMOLITION IS STARTED. REMOVAL OF SUCH SUBSTANCES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REOUIREMENTS OF CHAPTERS 296-62 AND 296-65 WAC. 53. WHERE A HAZARD EXISTS FROM FRAGMENTATION OF GLASS, SUCH HAZARDS SHALL BE REMOVED. 54. WHERE A HAZARD EXISTS TO EMPLOYEES FALUNG THROUGH WALL OPENINGS, THE OPENING SHALL BE PROTECTED TO A HEIGHT OF BETWEEN THIRTY-SIX AND FORTY-TWO INCHES. 55. WHEN DEBRIS IS DROPPED WITHOUT THE USE OF CHUTES, THE AREA ONTO WHICH THE MATERIAL IS DROPPED SHALL BE COMPLETELY ENCLOSED WITH BARRICADES NOT LESS THAN FORTY-TWO INCHES HIGH AND NOT LESS THAN TWENTY FEET BACK FROM THE PROJECTED EDGE OF THE OPENING ABOVE. SIGNS, WARNING OF THE HAZARD OF FALLING MATERIALS, SHALL BE POSTED AT EACH LEVEL REMOVAL SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED IN THIS LOWER AREA UNTIL DEBRIS HANDLING CEASES ABOVE. 56. ALL FLOOR OPENINGS, NOT USED AS MATERIAL DROPS, SHALL BE COVERED OVER WITH MATERIAL SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THE WEIGHT OF ANY LOAD WHICH MAY BE IMPOSED. SUCH MATERIAL SHALL BE PROPERLY SECURED TO PREVENT ITS ACCIDENTAL MOVEMENT. 57. EXCEPT FOR THE CUTTING OF HOLES IN FLOORS FOR CHUTES, HOLES THROUGH WHICH TO DROP MATERIALS, PREPARATION OF STORAGE SPACE, AND SIMILAR NECESSARY PREPARATORY WORK, THE DEMOLITION OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND FLOOR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEGIN AT THE TOP OF THE STRUCTURE AND PROCEED DOWNWARD. EACH STORY OF EXTERIOR WALL AND FLOOR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE REMOVED AND DROPPED INTO THE STORAGE SPACE BEFORE COMMENCING THE REMOVAL OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND FLOORS IN THE STORY NEXT BELOW. 58. WORKERS SHALL NOT BE PERMUTED TO CARRY ON A DEMOLITION OPERATION WHICH WILL EXPOSE PERSONS WORKING ON A LOWER LEVEL TO DANGER. 59, EMPLOYEE ENTRANCES TO MULTISTORY STRUCTURES BEING DEMOUSHED SHALL BE COMPLETELY PROTECTED BY SIDEWALK SHEDS OR CANOPIES, OR BOTH, PROVIDING PROTECTION FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING FOR A MINIMUM OF EIGHT FEET. ALL SUCH CANOPIES SHALL BE AT LEAST TWO FEET WIDER THAN THE BUILDING ENTRANCES OR OPENINGS (ONE FOOT WIDER ON EACH SIDE THEREOF), AND SHALL BE CAPABLE OF SUSTAINING A LOAD OF ONE HUNDRED FIFTY POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT. 60. PROTRUDING NAILS IN BOARDS, PLANKS AND TIMBER SHALL BE WITHDRAWN, DRIVEN IN OR BENT OVER AS SOON AS THE SAME IS REMOVED FROM THE STRUCTURE BEING DEMOLISHED. 61. ANY MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED WHICH WILL CAUSE DUST TO BE FORMED, SHALL BE SPRINKLED WITH WATER TO LAY THE DUST INCIDENTAL TO ITS REMOVAL NEW CRUSHED CONCRETE BASE MATERIAL PREPARATION 62. THE NEW CRUSHED CONCRETE COVERING THE SITES AND NEWLY EXPOSED BASE SHALL BE PROOFROLLED USING A SMOOTH WHEEL OR DRUM ROLLER. CRUSHED CONCRETE SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% OF ITS MAXIMUM UNIT WEIGHT. TAKE CARE TO NOT OVER WET AND OVER COMPACT THE CRUSHED CONCRETE. 63. IF SOFT SPOTS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING PROOFROLLING OF THE CRUSHED CONCRETE AND EXISTING BASE SURFACES, THE SUBGRADE SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO REMOVE THE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL TO A REASONABLE DEPTH AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. FILL THE EXCAVATION WITH AN APPROVED BACKFILL MATERIAL. TRENCHING & SHORING 64. RECOMMENDED TRENCHING SIDE SLOPE IS 2 TO 1. CONFIGURATION OF SLOPING OR BENCHING TRENCH SYSTEMS SHALL BE SELECTED AND CONSTRUCTED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR CONTRACTOR'S DESIGNEE, AND SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF WAC 296-155-657 PART N EXCAVATION, TRENCHING, AND SHORING. 65. THE SELECTION AND DESIGN OF SHORING SUPPORT SYSTEMS, SHIELD SYSTEMS, AND OTHER PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS SHALL BE SELECTED AND CONSTRUCTED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR CONTRACTOR'S DESIGNEE AND SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF WAC 296-155-657 PART N EXCAVATION, TRENCHING. AND SHORING. 66. CONTRACTOR SHALL EMPLOY ALL MEASURES NECESSARY TO MINIMIZE GROUNDWATER IMPACTS ON UTILITY INSTALLATIONS AND DEMOLITION AND ALL MEASURES NECESSARY TO INSURE A SAFE WORK PLACE. THE SELECTION AND DESIGN OF THE DEWATER SYSTEM SHALL BE SELECTED AND DESIGNED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR CONTRACTOR'S DESIGNEE BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS AND THE DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS OF WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY. RECEIVED APR 021 Inctopera I Ov86t1®®PButigq 0180'. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vett Valley 1Aihte7 North, 04te 101 AOA-. V+ W M TO. (2537 633-1776 TA+ QST 979-21613 I7r AMMO DATE SMI BY APPROVED DATE 2-41( DEMO 566456-02 DED RD 05/01/09 ACCEPTABILITY 7185 DESIGN AND OR SPEO71CA710N 6 D DEPT. DATE 9713Th E ODA APPRO40 CML MASTER GENERAL NOTES DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD YARD CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 SYMBOL DAT 05/01/09 PLANT SHEET G4 01300. 972198 COMP Na p13 ND' 2 -YD -G4 8 ALL REMOVAL DRAWINGS REMOVE VALVE. CAP TEE RUN BRANCH. BLOCK TEE RUN. © REMOVE 5 FEET OF PIPE FROM TEE RUN. PLUG AND BLOCK TEE RUN. REMOVE VALVE. ® REMOVE FIRE LINE ENTERING BUILDING. REMOVE FIRE RISER AND ALL FIRE SPRINKLER HEADERS, LATERALS, AND ALL APPARATUS © REMOVE FIRE UNE CAP FIRE UNE AT COLUMN UNE 24 ® TEMPORARILY PLUG RISER PENETRATION AT FLOOR LEVEL FOR FUTURE WORK. REMOVE 5 FEET OF ARE UNE. TEMPORARILY CAP AND BLOCK EAST UVE END OF 10' ARE MAIN. PLUG ABANDONED WEST END OF PIPE. REMOVE FIRE HYDRANT APPARATUS AND FOOT VALVE. PLUG ABANDONED PIPE LATERAL END. REMOVE TEE. REMOVE UNE WEST OF TEE RUN. REMOVE TEE. INSTALL 10' DIP SLEEVE AND TWO ROMAC COUPUNGS (DIP X GIP) FIELD VERIFY CIP OD. REMOVE FIRE LINE AT CONNECTION POINTS. PLUG ABBANDONED PIPE ENDS WITH NON -SHRINK GROUT. ® REMOVE VALVE, PLUG AND BLOCK TEE RUN TURN - OFF METER AND LOCK. CONTACT WATER PURVEYOR TO PERFORM WORK. ® REMOVE VALVE, PLUG AND BLOCK EAST MAIN END. © REMOVE PIPE 15 FEET OUT FROM BUILDING, PLUG AND BLOCK EAST MAIN END. REMOVE 5 FEET OF COLD WATER MAIN ENTERING BUILDING. REMOVE COLD WATER MAIN. ® CAP COLD WATER MAIN WITH VICTAULIC CAP. BLOW -OFF PER CITY OF TUKWILA STD DTL WS -09. ® PATCH DEMO PIPE PENETRATION W/NON-SHRINK GROUT. ® REMOVE SANITARY METER, CAP SANITARY UNE AT FLOOR W/CDF. ® PROTECT STORM UNE. ® REMOVE DOWN SPOUT DRAIN FROM ROOF TO UNDER GROUND ELBOW. ® REMOVE STORM DRAIN PIPING © REMOVE FLOOR DRAIN OR EQUIPMENT DRAIN ® CAP WEST END OF STORM PIPE AT COLUMN LINE 24 WITH A ROMAC COUPUNG CAP OR INFLATABLE PIPE PLUG BAG. ® PLUG DOWN SPOUT AT CONCRETE SLAB ELEVATION WITH NON SHRINK GROUT. PLUG DOWNSPOUT LATERAL WITH NON -SHRINK GROUT. CUT STORM LINE AND PLUG EAST STORM UNE WITH NON -SHRINK GROUT. ® DEMO BY OTHERS ALL REMOVAL DRAWINGS ® REMOVE ASPHALT PVMT AND CRUSH ASPHALT PER WSDOT STD 9-03.21(2) MEETING THE GRADATION OF WSDOT STD 9-03.9(3) BASE COARSE. BLEND WITH CRUSHED CONCRETE AT A MAX RATE OF 10% BY WEIGHT. ® REMOVE CURB ISLAND, LIGHT POLE AND LANDSCAPING. PULL CONDUCTORS BACK TO PULL BOX. REMOVE 6 FEET OF SIDEWALK IF DISCOVERED UNDERGROUND REMOVE TRAIN WELL RETAINING WALLS AND CONCRETE FOUNDATIONS. © REMOVE PIV. ® PROTECT EXISTING MONITORING WELLS FROM DAMAGE. ® REMOVE PAINT STRIPPING ® CAP SEWER MAIN IN TUNNEL AT NEAREST SUPPORT TO COLUMN UNE WJ. CAP UNE WITH ROMAC 501 END CAP COUPUNG. ® REMOVE 5 FEET OF SANITARY DRAIN UNE. CAP AND INSTALL CLEANOUT PER TYPICAL DETAIL. PLUG ABANDONED END. REMOVE 5 FEET OF SANITARY DRAIN UNE. PLUG ABANDONED ENDS.' REMOVE SANITARY DRAIN UNE PIPING. REMOVE SANITARY PUMP, PIT AND ALL ASSOCIATED PIPING. REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AND SLABS. CRUSH CONCRETE PER WSDOT STD 9-03.21(3) MEETING THE GRADATION OF WSDOT STD 9-03.9(3) BASE COARSE. ® REMOVE CONCRETE DECK REMOVE RAISED NETWORK FLOORING ® REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF WOOD FLOORING DECK AND STRUCTURE ® REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL OFFICE AREA SHEET ROCK, PANEL, FLOORING, CARPET, UGHTING, HANGING CEUNGS, ETC. ® REMOVE LOADING DOCK PLATFORM, GRADE BEAM, AND PILE CAP. SEE REFERENCE DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS. END OF LOADING DOCK GRADE BEAM REMOVAL ® REMOVE SPANDREL BEAM • ® REMOVE PILE CAP AND GRADE BEAMS ® REMOVE: 5 CONCRETE FLOOR TO LIMITS OF SLAB REMOVAL 3 FEET WEST OF COLUMN LINE 11. REMOVE EQUIPMENT STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION PAD. SEE REFERENCE DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS. ® BUILDING 2 - 31 STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOLISHED AND DISPOSED OF AT A BOEING APPROVED DISPOSAL SITE. SEE THE ELECTRONIC FILE PDF REFERENCE DRAWINGS OF THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONAL REFERENCE DRAWINGS EXIST IN BOEING'S ARCHIVES AND ARE AVAILABLE AS NEEDED FOR DEMOLITION PLANNING. THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF REFERENCE DRAWINGS PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT SET DO NOT EXCUSE THE CONTRACTOR FROM FULLY UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWING ALL DETAILS REQUIRED FOR THE SAFE DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING. THE CONTRACTOR'S WALKING OF THE BUILDING WITH BOEING PRIOR TO BID IS CONSIDERED THE CONTRACTOR'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE ENTIRE SCOPE OF WORK. PRIOR TO ANY ITEMS BEING SOLD OR RECYCLED THOSE MATERIALS SHALL BE LISTED FOR BOEINGS APPROVAL. ADDITIONALLY THE CONTRACT OR SHALL FULLY UNDERSTAND BOEINGS GOOD FAITH SURVEY OF THE BUILDING FOR INSIDE ABATEMENT REQUIREMENTS IF ANY. ALL METHODS OF WORK SHALL FOLLOW AND MEET DIE WASHINGTON STATE LABOR AND INDUSTRIES SAFETY STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK PART 'S' DEMOLITION (WAC 295 - 155) AND ALL OTHER APPUCABLE RULES AND STANDARDS. REVISION 2-4X DEMO J1586456 • et DED APPROVED DATE SCM ISOM ay 1/4A IIN1.3 W1i11V1V INV 1BJ TUTS. ALL REMOVAL DRAWINGS ® REMOVE 6" CONCRETE FLOOR ® REMOVE ELEVATOR PIT FOOTING, SLABS AND WALLS ONLY AFTER BOEING ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AHS INSPECTED THE PIT FOR OILS AND CONTAMINATES. ® BUILDING 2-49 STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOUSHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE 56. ® BUILDING 2-44 STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOUSHED PER THE REQUIREMENT'S OF CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE 56. © BUILDING 2-41 STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE 56. ® REMOVE CONCRETE WALL ® REMOVE 5 CONCRETE FLOOR ® REMOVE UTILITY TRENCH AND COVER ® BUILDING 2-40 STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE 56. ® REMOVE TUNNEL PILE CAPS AND GRADE BEAMS WITH PILE CAPS AND GRADE BEAMS LOCATED ON 16.67 FOOT CENTERS OFF OF EACH COLUMN LINE. SEE REFERENCE DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS. REMOVE CONCRETE SLABS, WALLS COLUMNS, TUNNEL ROOF BEAMS AND TUNNEL ROOF SLAB. ® REMOVE STAIR WELL ® REMOVE BATHROOM, ALL ASSOCIATED PLUMBING, AND PLUMBING PIPE TRENCHES. SEE REFERENCE DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS. ® REMOVE ELECTRICAL VAULT ROOMS. ® NEW CONCRETE CLOSURE.WAU_ (SEE DWG 2.43-S536) PROTECT PILE CAP FOR RE -USE IN 2-31 TRANSPORTATION ISLE SUPPORT DATE REI 05/01/09 LUNN i KUL:1 1UN NUas FOR ALL SITE, GRADING AND PAVING PLAN DRAWINGS (UNLESS NOTED) ® MATCH NEW ASPHALT TO EXISTING GRADE ® NEW 1) ASPHALT PAVEMENT SURFACING PER TYP DTL 10/SHT C640 ® NEW 3" ASPHALT PAVEMENT SURFACING PER TYP DTL 9/SHT C640 ® NEW 4' ASPHALT ROADWAY PAVEMENT SURFACING . GRAVEL MAINTENANCE ROAD PER TYP DTL 3/SHT C640 ® TYPICAL PVMT. PATCH PER DTL 11 SHT C640. NEW PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING PER LANDSCAPING PLANS ® CONNECT TO EXISTING 10' CAST IRON FIRE MAIN ® INSTALL NEW 10' DIP CLASS 52 FIRE MAIN ® INSTALL CURB RAMP PER DTL 1/SHT C556 & SIM. TO CITY OF TUKWILA DR RS -12. ® DETECTABLE WARNING PATTERN STRIP PER CITY OF TUKWLA DR RS -12 ® REMOVE EXISTING MHT -1 STRUCTURE FROM AROUND EXISTING CONDUIT AND CABLES. INSTALL TWO (2) UTILITY VAULT 6070 TRENCH VAULTS (20 FEET LONG x 7 FEET DEEP) AROUND EXISTING DUCTS AND CABLES. CONNECT UP TO NEW VAULT 5 NEW DUCTS FROM 2-31. ® NEW J BOX IN 2 - 31 TRANSPORTATION ISLE CEIUNG ® NEW DUCT BANK NEW UTILITY VAULT 38Y -612 -TCA MANHOLE WITH SUMP PUMP. ® INSTALL FITTING AS CALLED OUT ON PLANS. ® CONNECT 10- DIP TO EXG PIV. ® INSTALL FIRE HYDRANT PER TYPICAL DETAIL ® NEW 2 SCH 80 PVC WATER LINE FOR IRRIGATION. CONNECT TO EXG 4' COLD WATER MAIN ® IRRIGATION DDCV AND CONNECTION PER TYP DTL 2/SHT C640. ® HANDICAP STALLS AND SIGNS PER TYP DETAIL DWG 2.YD-0556 ® COLUMBIA CASCADE TIMBER FORM EVER -GREEN PALOMER BENCH MODEL 2645-6 ® COLUMBIA CASCADE TIMBER FORM EVER -GREEN TABLE AND FOUR SWIVEL CHAIRS MODEL 2924-0036-P AND 2941 -20 -MP PROVIDE 6' BUMPER CURBS STAKED WITH TWO g4 X 2 FOOT LONG DOWELS. PAINT 4' WIDE SOUD WHITE PARKING ONES. F_ ->-PAINT 4' WIDE SOUD WHITE of CONSTRUCT EXTRUDED CONCRETE CURBING PER TYP DR 9/SHT C640. E>.CONSTRUCT CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE CURB PER TYP DTL 7/ SHT C640 os PAINT 8' WIDE SOLID WHITE STOP BAR 5' LONG X 24" WIDE SOLID WHITE PAINTED CROSSWALK 0 48e O.C. DRAWN Mare ConSce D. DORMER • GRED CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR ALL SITE, GRADING AND PAVING PLAN DRAWINGS (UNLESS NOTED) D7 PAINT 4' WIDE SOUD YELLOW LANE DIVIDING UNE PAINT e WIDE SOLID YELLOW LINES. INSTALL NEW CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER TIP DR 7/SHT C556. E:> -INSTALL NEW PIPE BOLLARDS PER TYP DTI. 8/SHT C640. SOUD WHITE PAINTED TEXT TO BOEING STENCIL SIZE STANDARD ® SOUD WHITE PAINTED DIRECTIONAL ARROW TO BOEING STENCIL SIZE STANDARD r>.INSTALL STOP SIGN PER M.U.T.C.D. STANDARD R1-1 t4 INSTALL CROSSING SIGN PER M.U.T.C.D. STANDARD W11A-2 is INSTALL 7 FOOT HIGH 3 STRAND BARB WIRE FOREST GREEN 7 MIL VINYL COATED STEEL FABRIC 2 INCH MESH 6 GAUGE CHAIN LINK WITH 21i INCH SCHEDULE 40 LINE POSTS. PERFORM WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLFMI STANDARDS. t6 INSTALL 4 FOOT HIGH FOREST GREEN 7 MIL VINYL. COATED STEEL FABRIC 2 INCH MESH 6 GAUGE CHAIN LINK WITH SCHEDULE 40 LINE POSTS. PERFORM WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLFMI STANDARDS. FOREST GREEN 7 MIL VINYL COATED 20 FOOT DOUBLE GATE WITH 3 STRAND BARB WIRE PER WSDOT STD. PLAN 1-30.10.00 to INSTALL ACO S100K POWERDRAIN TRENCH SYSTEM DRAIN. E:>.INSTALL ACO 610 CATCH BASIN. 20 ADJUST FRAME & GRATE TO NEW GRADE ELEVATION. ® NISTALL SCH 80 PVC SANITARY PRESSURE MAIN PER TYP DTL 4 SHT C640. 22 SCH 80 PVC WYE. ® PVC SCH 80 CLEANOUT W/THREADED PRESSURE PLUG SIM TO C.U. DR SHT C640. 24 WSDOT MOUNTABLE CURB PER STD PLAN DTL F-10.12-00. 25 CONNECT 3" PVC PRESSURE MAIN TO EXG SANITARY MANHOLE W/DOWN TURN ELBOW. ALL PENETRATION W/NON-SHRINK GROUT. 26 ADD & ROUTE CMCS CONTROL CONDUCTORS FOR ALL PUMPS, FLOATS & ACTUATORS AS REQUIRED PER PLAN DETAILS. - INSTALL HAND HOLE PER DR 3/SHT E572. PROVIDE C (CMCS) x 4' PVC SDR -35 DRAIN PIPE TO 9X TELEPHONE MANHOLE VAULT. 28 PLUG TEE RUN & BLOCK. CAP PIPE RUN & BLOCK. I> BLOW -OFF PER CITY OF TUKWILA STD DTL WS -09. CONNECT CONDUCTORS TO EXISTING HAND HOLE. RECEIVED 'APR 092010 COMMUNITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES PARKING LOT 15, 16 &17 RENTON SITE . Rivera EwgBne®Qbug9 One. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Nat Valley IEghen,• Nerlh. Sale 101 Auburn. EA 98001 TEL (253) 833-7776 FAC (253) 959-2158 PLANT 2 CARREM REASON SYMBOL 586456-02 — 05/01/09 C3 JOB ND. 586456 COUP NO. DWG NO. 2.YD-C3 9910649/CML/C 13HFAWC 1IX13 / 12.13.99 DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY 1 MORAN Q PL2-444A \ \ \! rT TrnT rT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 vJ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I Ij I I I. I I I t -•-}--•1-•-r -h••+ fi 1-•1- -V•-h•-7 •• 11 •1 I I I 1 1 II 11 2110 I I I I •t'+ ( I I I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • + • + • + • + • • + • + • + • + • + • + • + I I I 1_I V11- I I I II I .1 1 I I 12-101 1 1 1 1 11 11111 I -1- •+-+•+•+-+•+-+-+-+-+-x4 I 1 1 j j j 1 1 1 1 j, iii I I 1 1 i 1 I I ISI' I I •-P--I--±•-I--•±-±-+-+--1-•+•-I--+•+ 1 1 1 1 1 1 X11 I I I 111111 1 I. 1 1 1 1 y'1 11 1 I I LL I 1 1 I, { t I A/tl, i tP it y it it ,J I I L2,._,,_,i.1.L,CL12 F' -,>,,._‘,L\_,\_%.\._11_.,_,_,__,_ I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a o 191110 1.‘0 10 0 0 116-t1 _SLI .lIIIlLJ IIS I n I I I ISI 00000 11011111111111, SYN A 2-4X DEMO sr J1586456-02 .DED APPROVED RE1 DUE 05/01/09 STIA REVISION OY APPROVED DATE ]01110111 L1\DFCIGN nVfl\CITF s\Now Uta -PI AN\Nov-Clip-PI AN4n 17)44 I I nc/ MnAFI1d l%liei MAY 01 2nnq 1015 JR I Cl4- iinli PERMIT CFT ce;LAinctezAw. RAwm MARC RDICE MEM scrE 10/19/08 SUBTITLE 2-15 w V 1..)1 1 \\)1_, 1 !VII IV\J 1 LJ SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FIAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY .CIEVELOP LEGE OSAN MH o CB O WMH PN WV O WM oFH • SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE. CATCH BASIN WATER MANHOLE POST INDICATOR VALVE WATER VALVE WATER METER ARE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C67 C66 C65 C62 C61 C60 C76 C75 C74 C73 C70 C69 C68 C85 C84 C83 C82 C81 C80 C79 C78 C77 C94 C93 C92 C91 C90 C89 C88 C87 C86 KEYPLAN MUsWN rii opeara EsnglIQtteedgigy he. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vest Volley l00'.n North. Salt 101 /dram VA 98001 IOL (253) 033-71X6 FAX (253) 939-068 40 20 0 40 80 120 SITE PLAN SCALE IN FEET MIRROR REVISION SYMBOL A A 586456-02 GATE 05/01/09 LN LL DAVE 009910R CHECKED DAVE DORMIER APPROVED APPROVEED- 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 TRL0 CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD 541E C80A JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. PLANT 2 000 110. 2.YD-XX 4 � � c / ,M1� 1 1°1 1 1 1 + t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HI -11-1 1 1 1- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1101 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 SDI 0 0 1,11,Wait LTA • ......... &A. MM. 0 ::,,,:III r immeili11 .TrtJ�mny.7�11A®1� i IMMO @. MILD . mei NMI Immo -1I =111111 ! E1 rmine A„yAblm, m71 4,1 OZ 0 0 4 4 0 NINE nI • 1.1'. Q • 0 0 0 • 0 • 0 0 05 APPROVED DATE 5114 REVISION er APPROVED DATE A 2-49 DEMO J1586456-02 DEO REI 05/01/09 OR\ARII 1\9FCIf48 I(VIC6CITF nlnnc N Cit, -PI AMN..-Cit,-R ANden R nFter Nn,,.. M ff1R1 WE 1 Pent RAN.ARC.P1.28YPR 2 �89� 9 175016 •I !act 1444I0I.1 0.144 APR PR 2009 1'1,41,57 1 4A ,,494.1, PFRNI RFT gl_4747EZAW ® ACCEPTABILITY TH6 DE90N AND 06 9P000ICA110N R WED APPROVED Er DEPT. DATE DRAWN COME 10/19/08 CHW(ED Wtan DAVE DORMIat CHECKED DAVE DORMER APPPROVED APPROVED COWTRIE SITE PLAN I;UN3I KUL I IUN NU I LS R>SEE DRAWING 2.YO-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET.. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED APR 092010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND C76 C85 O SAN MH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE o CB CATCH BASIN O WMH WATER MANHOLE t PIV POST INDICATOR VALVE ® NN WATER VALVE a WM WATER METER 0 FH FIRE HYDRANT ® ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C67 C75 CB4 C83 C82 C64 C72 C81 C63 C71 C80 C62 C70 C79 C61 C69 C78 C60 C68 C77 C94 C93 C92 C91 C90 C89 C88 C87 C86 KEY PUN Haveu 4 lEnglat© Ong9 Ones CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTDRAL DI! vest Valley (Halley Wells Lat. 1. Warn. vA 980. TU 270 933-7775 443 (2731 939-2168 40 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET CURRENT REV15104 MINX 586456-02 A DATE 05/01/09 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 TDA DEM PLAGOF 2-4X S NT 2 YARD _ CML MASTER SHEET C81 A JOS H0. 586456-02 COMP NO. PLANT 2 0" tu. 2.YD-K% ly • 4.1 as • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 111111111111 1 i 1 1 j L1JJ_� LLDIIJJ_I_1_ I 1 1 I rrrr-r T�-1-rrTT-j _ '! I I I I L 1 I 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 I > ,a1 1 1, 1, 1 1 1 um= .;:-Clibiginireirob.c4mon. 1 1 1 1 I I I IRT 6. 3a b sniff .it CC�,�-�+�tWIL' �`���►� 4` .' CLL\►►r. 146 r PALM 3i III 'IIIIII SL,1 �a Nc a e.7 t- me `' s. c: ��,1� 34 �f IIIIIIIIIIII �" �,`,in � m:o � s ilii r'\. 4,1 �,�� �� ` ��� rarlarr41111111finain '''‘' nj--140:km 410116k*VIAMilt gllat mi. .11'1 N I N a Mat Illiil.\ nDOD fluffingi 1/ 'I.1 1 I 1 p I II 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I I, I I I I I p I I I I I 1 I t-F-I-I-1-{-+-1-4-+-1--1-T-I-I-i-a-+-F--1-1-1-1-4--I-1 11 I I I 1 1 I/I I 11°1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •1.1'1•f•,•I',•1•,•1.1'r%"/ •I•10,•I•I•I•I•I•,• I•I.1•,•1.1•I•I.1.1•,. I- 1,1, EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH CONSTRUCTION NOTES SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. 132' WIDE VAN ACCESSIBLE STALL RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND O SAN MH D CB O WMH PIV ®WV o WM ®H SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN WATER MANHOLE POST INDICATOR VALVE WATER VALVE WATER METER FIRE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C67 C66 C76 C75 C74 C85 C84 C83 C94 C93 C92 C65 C64 C63 C73 C72 C71 C82 C91 C62 C61 C60 C70 C69 C68 C79 C78 C77 C88 C87 C86 KEY PLAN I Mv®Pt EGLgOrm®®Plutg9 11ff1LCw', CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1319 Vest VoDei UaSn North. kite 101 Auburn, VA 9W01 TO. (253) 633-7776 263 (2501 939-2168 40 20 0 40 • 80 SCALE IN FEET 12C A 2-4% DEMO J9586456-02 05/01/09 Dt2006\0(IIO'LESKN 10551SI1E AonsVies Site-RNIWt-5Ite-PLNOlvo I Orsiter N CO218CE 1 Plat Do PR 292009 Lost Modified Date, APR 08 2069 134187 I SWHlta9 PERNIT SCT g)LArzwz.vc® ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED MARC CORDICE LHLCKLU ENDINELH DAVE DORMIER CHECKED DAVE DORMER APPROVED R 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 TIRE SITE PLAN DEMOLDION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 SK�EE 05/01/09 CIVIL MASTER PI ANT 7 586456-02 7 Vn-YY -J1 -_ 0 ION NMI NEMim 3iL 11111 000® =1 1101 fhb =I r1 �I .m r /O vj MOW" 8 T% 00001110110010000100000000; 00 0!_ m.—�y[�ym ___(<.:11iAs At 0 a a a 0 10 ‘)1 a D I111111111111111111111111111111111111101111111 111111111111111111111111101111611111111111 1 1--1--+44-1-1-1-41,-4-÷ - -1-44 -1-1-1-1 4 -1--1-1-1-1-++ -1--1-T-1-++4-1-1-T-4- +-I 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 - --=-4--1--1--1--=-4-- -1--I--L-4--1--1--1--4- I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 111111111111111111111111111 11111111111 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH UUINJ I KM, I IUIN INU I LJ SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND C76 C85 C94 O SAN MH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE o CB CATCH BASIN O WMH WATER MANHOLE PIV POST INDICATOR VALVE WV WATER VALVE o WM WATER METER a FH FIRE HYDRANT ® ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C67 C66 C65 C75 C74 C73 184 C93 C64 C72 C81 C90 KEY PUN C63 C71 C80 C89 C62 C70 C79 C88 C61 C69 C78 C87 C60 C68 C77 C86 Gimp®P4 Enight®®vBTg, One. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vest Volley Itpliesy * tls Sete 101 tsars. Vs 901101 at. USD BrS-m6 SAX BD 979-2118 0 20 0 40 80 120 A 2-4X DENO Jj586456-02 05/01/09 ]0RVIRICI\I9CIr,1 50rc\c1TE ns\N }o -PI AN\Ns -cit,-PT ANA ICF 1 Pint Rntst APR PR 21109 17:57:19 1 1 nst Mndl4V.4 9,1 APR PR P809 17, ti57. 1 ACCEPTABILITY WRC CORDICE ,NIS 06100 A101/0R CiiECq.0 SPECff1CA110N 5 APPROVED APPROVED 00 DEPT. DATE DAVE DORAOER CHECKED DAVE 000MIER RA ROVED APPROVLD 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 TATE SITE PLAN DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER PLANT 2 SCALE IN FEET PARENT REVISION SYMBOL 586456-02 SHEET JOBC83A 586456-02 2.YD-XX DATE 05/01/09 COMP N0. m ' A 2-4X DEMO DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY RY._.(N/LY///WIX/I//H_ICK�'iY/E6V/_(��/_OIC id, i� r raril%/1/®AAa%1�'JAiWO'�/ ilAy/a=7.7,..,/,4;71 H///..:I: /iariAriffir 44 iV/pX�/.ir12112i1�eASErP.:'. /r.4%E..IgAfEI///=. . rr7r.� oJ.:�� Imo® 24 rakW(DiV PROPERTY ME t 1 'P " i D I I I 1 I II I I I t.t.t t.t - •t t.t'_ 2 -DSI 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 •�� 1.1 I I I II 1 I 2110 I I r� I I •t•t• I •t• • I t t•_ I I I GJ ---- ,__a_ 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12.101 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f I \\ I I I E 1 I r— •t t t t •+ T • — • +' / \\ \\\ 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41P/ I ii 1 1 I I I 'I I \\ \L.L I I I \ I\ \ \ LI- \ \ o\` '...\ 'J I I 1 r'^ , ��\_L, 4586456-02 100\ORIf9\OFSI0,N DVA,f\PAVING PI ANG-noeAINonnvAl\NGV PAVING! GRAD err DED NC R ANTI* APPROVED REI 1 DrnFtor DATE 05/01/09 Nnnm M 00119 4 REVISION APPROVED DATE ACCEPTABILITY DDS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION LS APPROVED 1 Pint Mtm NO RI 7019 I101k.10 I 1 Act NndOFI4H 11414, NAI 01 TORO 1015,99 1 4fi.Itfnl: PERNRT RFT DEPT. DATE UHAWN MARC CORDICE CHECKED 11ATE 10/19/08 SUBDRLE 2-08.3(1) SUBCRADE FOR SURFACING IN PREPARING 1HE ROADBED FOR 91PFA0NG, 11E CONTRACTOR 01A0_ L RENI0K FROV DIE ROADBED. 00EOAIE.Y BEFORE RACING SURFACING MATERIALS ALL BUST. 'WEEDS. KO 1411101. GRASS. AND ODER COM 2 09PO% OF ALL DEBRIS AS DE ENGNEER MMES. 1 DRAIN WATER FROM ALL LOW SOT 0R 5113. 4. SHAPE DE ENTIRE =GRADE TO A INIF001 MACE SID6TIC REASONABLY 1514 10 THE GNC CRAOC AND GROSS-SECIIOAS SEARED 5. F NECESSARY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROCESS THE 9W94ABE 11 CUT MEAS 70 ROME MATERIALS TOD COARSE FOR 8ECNMOCAL TWANG AND RECOUP/C701 6. COMPACT 1H 9189440E TOA OEM OF 6 ROTS. COPACDW 91ALL ACHIEVE 95 PERCD47 RF THE =MLR ONSET DEEMED ODER THE TESTS COCKED R SECTION 2-111.3(14» F DE ODDi1Mc MATERIAL IS TDD SOFT 10 PERMIT PROPER 00140/04 OF DE 5UBGADE, DE CCHIRACTOR SHALL LOOSEN. AERATE (OR EXCAVATE ARD REMOK), AND =PACT THE 91BGRAOE Milt THE TCP LAYER CAN BECOPAC1E0 A5 REWIRED. 7. REMOVE EXCESS MARTIAL THAT 00E5 NOT 9441 10 LOW SPOTS DURING =ANC AND SHAPING. DE =TRACTOR SHALL DEPOSE OF THIS MESS 8Y RACI4G IT WERE DE 0J884ADE LAOS MATERIAL OR 87 RASING R. AS DE ENGINEER OSECIS Q ADD MATERIALS AS DE ENGINEER OREC1S WERE DE SUBLRA02 NEEDS MOPE 10 BRING T IP TO GRACE THE CCHIRACICR STALL WATER AND COLPACT MESE ADDED MATERIALS AS NEEDED TO PRODUCE: A 180E FRD9® SUBGIN)E F DE CONTRACT MIRES A 1H00M0 RACINE. 11 SHALT I. MARTAN 11E GRACE MD TRANSVERSE 0.OPE AUTOMATICALLY D001144 9745045 THAT RFSPOD TO REFERENCE DIES CN BOTH EDGES OF EACH ROADWAY. 2. CREATE A 910011. 16WOt1 SURFACE FREE FROM 041T1ER AND ISRES. 2-06.3(2) SUBORADE FOR PAVEMENT BEFORE ART PANIC 5 RACED. 111E COTRACTOR SHALL BRING DE 916GRA0E 10 MOORED LI{ GRADE. AND CROSS -SECTOR THE CONTRACTOR STALL CORACT DE SU86RABE TO A DEPTH OF 6 NOES TO 95 PERCENT STANDARD DENSITY AS 0E1ERYNEO BY DE COMPACTION COVIRCI. TESTS FOR GRANULAR 4A1ERIALS. THE CO1PAC100 AREA SHALL BE WOE E110ID11 70 LET PANG MACHINES OPERATE NIHO71 WINE 061081NOV OF SWFAONG MATERIAL THE CW10401OR 9WL 4NNTA04 THE SOX:RADE R DE REQUIRED C00 0051 UNTIL THE PAVEME111 6 RACED. 11E CODRAC10t MAY MIME MATERIAL NST BOOS PA181041 F THE PLANS REIAflM 00071 AREAS OF PAKIENT. £ONSTR1C00N NOTE SIE MARRO 290-C1 FON ALL CE S1RUCDa MC Nom ON THIS SHEET. FOR N1101415 SEE 91EET 2.110-44 FOR 06TALIADCH O NEW STOW MANAGE SYSTEM SEE 0402-41 OROS SET IN WIT BECK LEGEND CONCRETE PAVEMENT ®/ 4' ASPHALT PAVEMENT 3� ASRALT PAVEMENT 1 I/2 ASPHALT PAVEMENT ® LANDSCAPE RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C67 C66 C76 C75 C74 C6j(.�,� / C62 C7.T , 70 C61 C60 C69 C68 CB5 C84 C83 C82 C81 C80 C79 C78 C77 C94 C93 C92 C91 C90 CB9 C88 C87 C80 KEY PLAN G mo®Q4 Em gaw®®iU ISI oo ca CONSULTNO ENGINEERS/CINE AND STRUCTURAL DO Vert Wary 15Vheay North, SML 10 NA,. VA NOM TEL (61 633-7776 FAX TM) 939-2166 40 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET PAVING & GRADING PLAN RENT RENSION 586456-02 SYMBOL DA 05/01/09 DAVE CORMIER 'CHECKED DAVE DORMIER APPROVED REI APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 1MF DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS CNIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD PI AM 7 SHEET. C220A 008 NO 586456-02 COMP ND. DWG NO. 7 VIN -6.77r111 :idea; • ,., .. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f I \\ I I I E 1 I r— •t t t t •+ T • — • +' / \\ \\\ 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41P/ I ii 1 1 I I I 'I I \\ \L.L I I I \ I\ \ \ LI- \ \ o\` '...\ 'J I I 1 r'^ , ��\_L, 4586456-02 100\ORIf9\OFSI0,N DVA,f\PAVING PI ANG-noeAINonnvAl\NGV PAVING! GRAD err DED NC R ANTI* APPROVED REI 1 DrnFtor DATE 05/01/09 Nnnm M 00119 4 REVISION APPROVED DATE ACCEPTABILITY DDS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION LS APPROVED 1 Pint Mtm NO RI 7019 I101k.10 I 1 Act NndOFI4H 11414, NAI 01 TORO 1015,99 1 4fi.Itfnl: PERNRT RFT DEPT. DATE UHAWN MARC CORDICE CHECKED 11ATE 10/19/08 SUBDRLE 2-08.3(1) SUBCRADE FOR SURFACING IN PREPARING 1HE ROADBED FOR 91PFA0NG, 11E CONTRACTOR 01A0_ L RENI0K FROV DIE ROADBED. 00EOAIE.Y BEFORE RACING SURFACING MATERIALS ALL BUST. 'WEEDS. KO 1411101. GRASS. AND ODER COM 2 09PO% OF ALL DEBRIS AS DE ENGNEER MMES. 1 DRAIN WATER FROM ALL LOW SOT 0R 5113. 4. SHAPE DE ENTIRE =GRADE TO A INIF001 MACE SID6TIC REASONABLY 1514 10 THE GNC CRAOC AND GROSS-SECIIOAS SEARED 5. F NECESSARY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROCESS THE 9W94ABE 11 CUT MEAS 70 ROME MATERIALS TOD COARSE FOR 8ECNMOCAL TWANG AND RECOUP/C701 6. COMPACT 1H 9189440E TOA OEM OF 6 ROTS. COPACDW 91ALL ACHIEVE 95 PERCD47 RF THE =MLR ONSET DEEMED ODER THE TESTS COCKED R SECTION 2-111.3(14» F DE ODDi1Mc MATERIAL IS TDD SOFT 10 PERMIT PROPER 00140/04 OF DE 5UBGADE, DE CCHIRACTOR SHALL LOOSEN. AERATE (OR EXCAVATE ARD REMOK), AND =PACT THE 91BGRAOE Milt THE TCP LAYER CAN BECOPAC1E0 A5 REWIRED. 7. REMOVE EXCESS MARTIAL THAT 00E5 NOT 9441 10 LOW SPOTS DURING =ANC AND SHAPING. DE =TRACTOR SHALL DEPOSE OF THIS MESS 8Y RACI4G IT WERE DE 0J884ADE LAOS MATERIAL OR 87 RASING R. AS DE ENGINEER OSECIS Q ADD MATERIALS AS DE ENGINEER OREC1S WERE DE SUBLRA02 NEEDS MOPE 10 BRING T IP TO GRACE THE CCHIRACICR STALL WATER AND COLPACT MESE ADDED MATERIALS AS NEEDED TO PRODUCE: A 180E FRD9® SUBGIN)E F DE CONTRACT MIRES A 1H00M0 RACINE. 11 SHALT I. MARTAN 11E GRACE MD TRANSVERSE 0.OPE AUTOMATICALLY D001144 9745045 THAT RFSPOD TO REFERENCE DIES CN BOTH EDGES OF EACH ROADWAY. 2. CREATE A 910011. 16WOt1 SURFACE FREE FROM 041T1ER AND ISRES. 2-06.3(2) SUBORADE FOR PAVEMENT BEFORE ART PANIC 5 RACED. 111E COTRACTOR SHALL BRING DE 916GRA0E 10 MOORED LI{ GRADE. AND CROSS -SECTOR THE CONTRACTOR STALL CORACT DE SU86RABE TO A DEPTH OF 6 NOES TO 95 PERCENT STANDARD DENSITY AS 0E1ERYNEO BY DE COMPACTION COVIRCI. TESTS FOR GRANULAR 4A1ERIALS. THE CO1PAC100 AREA SHALL BE WOE E110ID11 70 LET PANG MACHINES OPERATE NIHO71 WINE 061081NOV OF SWFAONG MATERIAL THE CW10401OR 9WL 4NNTA04 THE SOX:RADE R DE REQUIRED C00 0051 UNTIL THE PAVEME111 6 RACED. 11E CODRAC10t MAY MIME MATERIAL NST BOOS PA181041 F THE PLANS REIAflM 00071 AREAS OF PAKIENT. £ONSTR1C00N NOTE SIE MARRO 290-C1 FON ALL CE S1RUCDa MC Nom ON THIS SHEET. FOR N1101415 SEE 91EET 2.110-44 FOR 06TALIADCH O NEW STOW MANAGE SYSTEM SEE 0402-41 OROS SET IN WIT BECK LEGEND CONCRETE PAVEMENT ®/ 4' ASPHALT PAVEMENT 3� ASRALT PAVEMENT 1 I/2 ASPHALT PAVEMENT ® LANDSCAPE RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C67 C66 C76 C75 C74 C6j(.�,� / C62 C7.T , 70 C61 C60 C69 C68 CB5 C84 C83 C82 C81 C80 C79 C78 C77 C94 C93 C92 C91 C90 CB9 C88 C87 C80 KEY PLAN G mo®Q4 Em gaw®®iU ISI oo ca CONSULTNO ENGINEERS/CINE AND STRUCTURAL DO Vert Wary 15Vheay North, SML 10 NA,. VA NOM TEL (61 633-7776 FAX TM) 939-2166 40 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET PAVING & GRADING PLAN RENT RENSION 586456-02 SYMBOL DA 05/01/09 DAVE CORMIER 'CHECKED DAVE DORMIER APPROVED REI APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 1MF DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS CNIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD PI AM 7 SHEET. C220A 008 NO 586456-02 COMP ND. DWG NO. 7 VIN -6.77r111 b W J z EaMEI Lai C'_k1 ij U U U tJ C4 0 U U U U ma 0 U U co CO U 6 cso U U ci U U U Iri U V O N O co a SCALE IN FEET O ?2)) H;\\\Z \ N\NN\s\ N O lu N PAVING & GRADING PLAN 0 N CO 11-1 N CC CC LO 3 '333 a a O 2 • • • di rade-' �e� c �:, , f° - .Is, ,- -- s e - - iil -. fon reg -+1St! �•'� �! 41.iC LQa.Y,lfq Fil;r,�;�ypWNIPVH:WLiaR r,T. SSl7!'A1i�Mal�lZlln r�i��Y 1'�r11toi4 MINS, NO immuk.. r�� siWahi��unrsottiastaili :Irmir/�isy■ ISI; m�i'f/iillGiminism. Ot t• VAS �s \ 11;=W=.=-• �'111111113107111111111 y.. �I' ►iii �r�r.�i s.+ � � 1OL�1111111310 111111III�� !! 1 � a 8 a 0 \At it 2.YD-C221A 0- d co 6 2 irwnnvnl\NGV PAVINGS AIIING PIANA.N t p1p\ON1111\IKCII.N IIVI.\ SRA ?t? '0/.1—I- / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I Ili 1 i I LdJJ_CLLDIIJ!_I_1 1 1 iii i T� i q rTT j- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1, 1 1 1 1 \ •I•t• .1'I'1.1'1'1.1'I'I'1'1'I'1 .1.1.1 10:3 ii 1 1 1 1 1 1 IN I I I I I I I I 1 1 I 1-1 +-4-1-1-1 Mk -1 -I -1-+-1-1-1-1-i +-I -I 11° 1 1 1 1 1 11E11 1.96 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1.1.1.1.1.1. •)SEI• .I.1.1.1.I•I.I.I.I.1. 1.1.1.1 IE 10.60 RIM 13.0 — Iv, 11_619 6-U0.411 SUN06W1[ 0106 0UIOAUNiii N PREPARING IBE ROADBED FOR 91RFAC010, 040 C0I1RACTM SMALL I. REMOVE EROSE IRE ROADBED. 101FOIAIELY DEFOfE PLACING ' 51RFAO 0 MADRAS. ALL 5094 NEEDS. 1EGETA00L CRASS. AND OBER DENS 2. DISPOSE OF ALL BEERS AS DE 00040 4 DIRECTS 1 ORAN RATER FROM ALL LOW SPOT M RO15. 4. SHAPE RIE ENURE SUMAC( TOA 1A✓W= SURFACE PUNTING 6FASSNABLY 1*E 10 10E UNE. CRAZE AND CROSS-SECRMAS STAKED. 5 F NECESSARY. THE =TRACER SNAIL PROCESS INE 9RQUDE N WT AREAS TO REMOVE MATERIALS 100 COARSE FOR MEDWICAL 1400E NW RECWPACORL 6. =PACT TE S10GRABE 10 A DEPTH OF 5 INCHES. COPACOM SNAIL ACHEW 95 PERCENT OF DE 1/Al01UM 00191Y DETERMINED NEEP DIE TESTS DEQ N SEC1%N 2-013(4)11 F RE UNDOEMG MATERIAL IS 100 SOFT TO PERMIT PROPER CNACRON CF 148E 91D01ME. THE =TRACTOR 5491 LOOSEN AERATE (OR EXCAVATE AND REMOVE), A!D COMPACT 1HE SU6fRADE UNIT DE TOP LATER CAN BECDIPACIID AS REWIRED. 7. RFy041) EXCESS NATURAL 11109 DOES NOT SIFT TO LON SPOTS WRING GRADING NO SOAPING. THE CNI1RAC102 SNAIL DISPOSE OF DIES EXCESS BY PLACING IT *ERE THE SUBGRAOE LACKS MAIFRW CR BY WASTING IT. A5 RIE FRCNEER DIRECTS. T ADD MADRAS AS THE ENGINEER DIRECTS *MERE THE SUBCRADE NEEDS MOE TO EMIR R 1P 10 GRAM NNE ON1RACTOR SAIL WATER AND COMPACT DEE AWED MONERANS AS NEEDED TO PRCOUCE A IRE FUSED 9ROLADE F TE CCNIRACI REQUIRES A IRBNNG MACHINE, IT SNAIL 1. RARITA01 1M GRADE AND 1RMNMRSE SLOPE AUTO/ARC/1LT 04044101 SENSORS THAT RESPOND TO REFERENCE LINES 01 BOTH EDGES CF EA01 ROADWAY. 2. CREATE A 410011. UNIFORM SURFACE FREE FROM MATER AND RIPPLES 2-06.3(2) SUBORADE FOR PAVEMENT BEFORE ANT PARC 15 PLACED. DE CMIRACIDIR SHALL BRD1G DIE 91BGRADE 70 BE44A)E0 UAE, GRADE AND CROSS-SECRON. THE OONIRAD1OR SHALL COMPACT DE =GRACE 10 A CEP111 OF 6 NOES TO 95 PERCENT STANDARD DENSITY AS 0E1EIDDIED BY DE CROMLECH CMRIOL TESTS FOR GRANAAR MATFNAL4 DE COPACIED AREA SNAIL BE WE ENOUGH TO NET PAVING MOINES (EERIE MIME 0004111(00090) OF SURFACING MENTAL • INE CONTRACTOR S4ML MNIAN THE SUBGRADE N DE WOUND 090411 N UNTIL DE PAVEMENT IS RACED. DE CON1RACTOt MT IE1OE MATERIAL .6157 BEFORE PAVEMENT F THE PLANS (ERNE DICIER AREAS CF PROEM. ralIBLICERIDIE SEE DRA12410 2ND -C3 FOR ALL MNSIRUC1ION FUG NOTES ON DRS SHEET. ZIEFIALIMES FOR GENERAL NOES SE %FET LTD -64 FOR NSTAILAOM OF NEN 51ON ONOPUGE SISTER SEE DEMO 2-41( 06CS SET BY RW BEC6. LEGEND CONCRETE PAVEMENT /' 4' ASPWILT PAVE0IENT r ASPHALT PAVEMENT 1 I/2' ASPHALT PAVEMENT P ® LANDSCAPE RECEIVED ;APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C67 C66 C65 C64 C63 C62 C61 C60 C76 C75 C74 C73 C72 C71 c70 C69 C68 C85 C84 C83 C94 C93 C92 C8 / i C79 C9 j,i1V7288 C78 C77 C87 C86 KEY PLAN O R<<9p®P4 C611g8h©) IPBQ11e9 One. CONSULTONO ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vest Velle9 90Aao7 North Soh 10 Worn, VA 9000 TO. OD 011-7776 FAT OSD 939-2160 40 20 0 40 • 80 12 REVLSDN A 2-4X DENO Jj586456-02 6Y DED APPROVED RB DATE 5YM REVISION BT APPROVED CAE 05/01/09 \2008\QUD\OESIFN 0VES\PAVING PLANS-ne.LrenovoIDEV PAVING& GRADING PLMLbe 1 Drafter .r. N WRDICL L Plot Date, APR 20 7109 15(0022 1 Lest Modified Dote, APR 20 2009 14QBE 1 Sb0ttab PF1101 SET gLAnsrAv.G ACCEPTABILITY 196 DESIGN AN0/0R SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE MARC CORDICE DA.E 10/19/08 SUBTITLE PAVING & GRADING PLAN SCALE IN FEET CURRENT 6EM5IDN SYMBOL 586456-02 A DATE 05/01/09 4 ENONLUDAVE DORMIER CHECKED DAVE DORMIER APPROVED REI APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 - CML MASTER DEMOLITION BUILDINGS OF 2 YARD 5„EET C222A Joe Na 586456-02 COMP N0. PLANT 2 DWG Na 2.YD-C222A . 7111111 - 0111(4 min/'1.., 111.1(Rp -111p1�E1RR /. �/i1{1111.i� 1,II :•• r .fiI1RIS V�11k?: *�11~ 7/ /%%j% %/IFI///q,51R 4T(/L43% (y ASf/JIYIiSS(/D//////////IV //.'Y/�JD'/ zar.(///y/ AMOW./SWAT N///1711/CW//OCAPr KIIALIIX5'/7/01/7/ILLY/%////ZMNIZYIAf //Imf////YAMPAW///.I /D'/.f OMVISI IE S II///%F//AMOOMOOWAR //A5CdR6./IS:S.IIXSCF1 IE 10.65 2-4i RIM 133+ IE 10. s7a� I 1 s. C812 RIM 1 IE 11.03 CA13 v RIM IM 1 . 'FF -1-1--1--L-1-4-1B-L1-1B-1-J--LTJ--L--L-i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 111111111111111:__ + -1- � �- -1 -1-I-1-1-1- � 4- -1-1- 1- -14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ai 11 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ RIM 4134 1 1 1 1 I 10.941 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 ~� 1^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 r4-1-1 4 i -1-I i 1 i -I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CA191 1 1 1 1:LA RIM 13.2 IE 10.85 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I CA 0 1 I 1 13.0 1 1 11E110.8B 11 1 1 I NB12 RIM 12.7 IE 10.83 1•�� /1���IW�II\iXw��t�1\��/ 11r611lE1-==wY1111iYi 1 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH A 2-4x DEMO 4586456-02 05/01/09 g,LArzzezAv.a. 018? P8 P009 15:99:77 1 1 KKt Nn8tI .1 1(4. ADR 7A 7009 14070411 1 C 1414h11 PFIMIT SPT -DNAWN ACCEPTABILITY MARC CORDICE THIS DESIGN AND/0R .1101RED SPECIFICATION IS APPR0VE0 rruGINLEN APPROVED BY 10/19/08 PAVING & GRADING PLAN 6-uo.a(4A au0MILNIL run aunrALINLL N PREPARING 11E ROADBED FOR SURFACING THE C8I101121 R SIAL 1. ROME FB011 THE ROADBED. 11100AIELY BEFONE RACING =ACING 11 S A ATERI Ll BUSH. REEDS. 1ECETATIOA GRASS. AND OBER DEERS 2 010005E OF ALL DEBRIS AS TE ENGINEER =ECM 1 WAW WATER FACIA Ail IAB SPOT 0R R01S 4. SHAPE THE ENTRE 8190081E ID A WORD SURFACE R106YWG REASONABLY 180E TD 111E IRE. WADE RID CROSS-SECTIONAS STAID. S 0 NECESSARY. 111E CODAACFOR RIAU PROCESS THE =GRADE W WT AREAS TO REMOVE 11AIFOALS T00 COARSE FOR =WEAL VOWS AND RECOIPACTm11 6 =PACT THE =GRADE 10 A DEPTH Cr 6 WOES COIIPACTW SNAIL 11000.0 95 PERCENT 6 DE DAMN =STY DEEMED RIDER ATE TESTS DESCRIBED W SECTION 2-013(14¢ 0 THE OmEISY5IG MATERIAL IS 100 RST TO PERMIT PRDPER COIAGIIN OF 11E 5U80IADE, THE CMIRACIOR SHALL LOOSEN. AERATE (M EttAVATE AND REMOVE). AND WYPACT TIE 100004 E UNT6 THE TOP LATER CA11 BEC0PAC110 AS REWIRED. 7. MEN EXCESS MATERIAL THAT D06 NOT DRIFT 10 L066 SPOTS DUPMG GRADING AND SWING. THE CW1RAC10R 111ALL DEMI OF 105 EXCESS BY PLACING IT WERE TE REMADE TAMS HATEAA OR BY WASTER R. A5 THE ENONFF0 ORECIS 6 ADD MAMMALS AS TEE FIRMER DIRECTS WERE THE 5IIB0R81E WEDS 11E TO BRING 11IP TO MACE 5E CWIRACTM SHALL WATER AND COPACI THESE ADDED 160II74INS A5 MEM TO P100111 E A IRE EIMISED RRERADE F DE CWIOACT RE0A05 A MAIM LA0400. 11 SHALL: 1. ww144 114 MADE AND IBMiSVLRSE ROPE AUTcRAi1CILLY MomW 5ENR91s THAT Ra8PD10 TO REFER= 101E5 W 6051 EDGES CF EACH ROADWAY. 1. MATE A SM00T. 000056 0IRFACR FREE ER0M MARTA AND NORRES 2-06.3(2) SURORADE FOR PAVEMENT BER NE ANY PARR 15 PLAMO. THE CONTRACTOR 0V11 BRING TIE 980181E TO REWIRED IRE. WADE, AND moss -scam THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COUPACT ME REMADE TOA DEPTH C4 6 NOES TO 95 PERCENT STANDARD DUSTY A5 001001NED BY THE C0IPACTRN =TRU. TESTS FW GRANULAR MAIDIALS 11E 01MPAL110 AREA SNAIL BE WOE ENOl01 ID LET RAMC MA011E5 (MATE 0111011 61050 05/01108 OF =FACING MATERIA. 114E CONTRACTOR SNAIL RARITAN 11E SUBMATE NTE MOIMER COICANN INTI THE PAVEMENT 8 PLACED. 11E CONTRACTOR 1.1A1 REMOVE MATERIAL XST BEFORE PAVEMENT IF THE PLANS Mull THICKER AREAS Or PAYMENT. 0 1141RUC110N NONE RE DRAN➢0. 2Y1 -C3 FOR AL CONSIR00W FLAG NOTES W Ills 1EE1. 041EBeL 84TFT FOR GENERA 11016 SEE SHEET 219-14 FOR 0ST111ATIEN 6 NEB STORY DRAINAGE 5051FM SEE 8110 2-40 D4G5 SET BY RB BERL LEGEND riff CONCRETE PAVEMENT 4' A5114AL1 PAVEMENT 3• ASPHALT PAVEMENT 1 1/2- ASPHALT PAVEMENT ® LANDSCAPE 20 10 0 APR, 0 940201060 seftIVIMUNITY C227�C5 C224 C223 C222 C221 220 C236 C235 '2234 C233 C232 C231 C230 C229 C228 0245 C244 C243 C242 C241 C240 C239 C238 C237 C254 C253 C252 C251 C250 C249 C248 C247 C246 KEY SWE: NOWQ Epi(©Qil C wvIw®seing9 One. CONSULTNO ENGINEERS/CIVIL ANO STRUCTURAL 019 11nt Volley 110..y Marti, SMte 101 Aup.4. MA 98001 TEL ODD 933.7716 FAX ODD 933-2168 =DENT REV1I0N 566456-02 5YM801 0.41E 05/01/09 DEPT DATE DAVE DORMER CHECKED DAVE DORMIER REND APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 SHEET C223A NO 586456-02 COMP NO. 01)0 N0. 2.YD-C223A 1 DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY 1 ,w0 100 '-1— —1— 1 1 111- 50000300 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I° 11 1 L I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2-09 T I,VINJIKULIIUIV IVUILJ SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. i 1 t 1 1 11 1 t t ;•P ,i1 1 f ,sf o l l l l l l II I I I I I I I r.t t•t t.t'f • t.t•+ t.t.t t.- 1 ,1111-a_ •-i I I I I I II I I 2'° I I I I .- LL11 I_I_L i i_I_LL 1 6 G9 i �- I- •1- • t -•I{ j-• 1- +' t ' t + I I I I I I I1 I I I I I� r� 11 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 GJ 1 � I I 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1• 1 1 C1 11 I 1 I �. I I I I I I I 'LAM RIM 13.5 A21 .IM 12.9 E 10.54 • I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 11 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1.2_101.- 1 1 1 1 ° 1 1 II I. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 —rrr±•-I—'+-•+•4-•t'4-•-i-•-I--•+ •-f-._}-.--I-.+._ \ II \\ \J 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 ;A23 ,IM 12.9 E 10.87 0 of NBA RIM 1 .0 I. 9.2 TI11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 `1 1 1 1 1 l 11'R. ,11 Lii \ J 1 r LL1 \ 1 F'%—rr-7 C, V I L 00 "A25 RIM 12.9 F 11147 RFS RIM 3. IE 9. 3 RI IE 9.6 I —I�I_1-1_1_1_1-_111-1-u_1_11_1�__1 U1111111111 iouuuoa00009ao6 ItHhl I1T1 T1T I I I1I I I rnT1 I 10 9.65 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \IY. \ p i 080080 . 2-30 REVISOR APPROVED DATE STU 0___AsrawfArc. )oir APR 29 0999 05:4813 lost WOO NIA APR 25 2009 1510E8 1 Sitaillot PERM' SET ACCEPTABILITY MS DESCH AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED RI PATE MARC CORDICE 10/10/08 DAVE DOWER 10/19/08 CHALKAD DAVE DORMIER APPROVED ApPRowo 10/19/08 10/19/08 SUBTITLE V• L3 1.4 4\\ \\� 7'7'7'7 gra \ \ \ \ g'0 1 ' . 16�0�mm 2-15 RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND O SAN MH o CB O WMH s PIV 01 WV 0 WM o FTI SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN WATER MANHOLE POST INDICATOR VALVE WATER VALVE WATER METER FIRE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C67 C66 C76 C75 C74 085 C84 C65 C64 C73 C72 C82 C63 C62 C6) C60 C71 C70 C69 C68 C77 C94 C93 C87 KEY Pl../114 1519 Sal Wag 11.01.0 Nal, Sub 101 /WAN= WWI (253) 833-7770 40 20 0 NEW SANITARY PLAN FAX (253) 939-2115 40 80 12C iitRAEFFT RENS. 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET DATE A 05/01/09 CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 JOE1 NO. 586456 02 COSP DWG 0. RIM 12.8 INV W,E 24', : 68 INV NW, 12', 19 0 INV SE, 8', 10.0 I W, 8', 16. • - • • CB (FXIST)- . • . . FL SE 1.2 {EXIST . rR.sm n• •• INv a s.o(NEW) 13IM'13. DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY IM 12.1 IE =9.15 DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DUNS I KUC I ION NOTES Z SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. • RIM 4.9 IE OUT 0.97 �A• ` C1IEIM RIM 13.8 • • • �"� • INy 01JT•W 24;,•1 3' sal 80 PVC GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RIM 13. IE 8.61 SE 6', 10.56 IE 8.75 IE 9.09 CB18 RIM 12.9 IE 9.88 Cpl � CA4 CA2M1 9 12 RIM 212.9 i IM 1 .9 RI. IE 10.54 IE 8.96 IE 10.54 RIM 12.6 ± NW 6', 10.3 INV SW 24', 2.73 (EXIST) INV NE 2.20 (E4IST) CB4 �RIM 2.9 n 1 IE 10.87 O SAN MH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE o CB CATCH BASIN O WMH WATER MANHOLE /6 PT/ POST INDICATOR VALVE WV WATER VALVE 0 WM WATER METER O FH FIRE HYDRANT ® ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT S5 RIM 12.1 IE (NE) 8' DI V 9.82 IE 10.05 C65 1 C64 C73 1 C72 RIM 12.1 IE (NW) 81:11=10.13 • IE 10.07 CA 6 4 . :11L 1411! KEY PLAN Rup®P4 GwgBut®®POwg9 t1wco CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL RIM 12.9 IE 9.75 40 20 0 40 80 12C SCALE IN FEET m A 2-4X 0040 J+586456-02 05/01/09 0;LAinisrzArc. ACCEPTABILITY 1140 DESIGN AND/00 SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 10/19/08 10/19/08 NEW SANITARY PLAN 586456-02 05/01/09 DEMOLHION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD C295A 586456-02 B\2006\ISII0\6ES1Di RES \ STORY a SIN donASTOF,TI SDI DIa\92 910 son e.9 1 D,D* H*, IL ,X11 CE 1 Rd >AA APR 29 009 004977 1 lest I9o1fied Too APR 26 2009 16:1026 I Sb,91± PERM SET CML MASTER PLANT 2 2.Yn-xx 1r A \• •� 1 w -1u p.1/ raw.0 11.1 ,J 7. U CI�11 oI .1 . T ; --T1—I 11111111111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I l 1 1 I 1 I j L1JJ_LLL011J!_L-1 1 i 1 1 • - l 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 I iiIl1 1 I 1, 1 4 1111111 I 1, 1 1 7 M 12.9 10.75 \ 00001100091191100 I-�I—Y�1�1--111 I I I i u w i w u u I u w d 7 1IIn linnnr1T1r -an Il_ HT L B� IE 10.78 ■r, �I A . _W _111/11411 10111111111118 iiiiiiiii QI NB I 12. T 11 Ic lnaa .414 IE 10.57 •1• • •1.1.1•lA1.1•I•fi-I •I.1.1.1.1•I.1•I.1.1•I.1• 1 '. •1.1.1 •10:3 1 I I a, . 1 1 I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 INA1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lel - -F-14 I- 'f- -I-1-1 -i- 1--I--1--I-1-1 IM-I-4-1--F-I-I-LF-1-4--F-I I I I 1 I 1 11-i 1 1 1131 1 1 1 1 1IEI 1h.96 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1.1.1.1.1.1• 1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. .1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1.1.1.1 R M 12.6 / i� 10.73 TT ... c. •1•1,,•i -F•1•1•1•1 I•f6M•V .. •1.1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1•-•1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1 „° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1E11 9: 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 it 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (NE PS) RIM 13.2 INV N 9.1 INV NE 8.2 INV W 7.9 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH / / Ta UM n0 -D lei O. KIN 2-4X DEMO J1586456-02 05/01/09 BOE/AW a\2000\15110\IIE9CM 05S\SIO 1 10 SIR 010as\S1CRO k SAN rmd192 NOW widen 1 0 Per Nome IL ARDICE 1 Rd 1032,09 1 fast ILAS0 Ods I,AT 01 2169 103135 1 Sublalat PEM01 SEI ACCEPTABILITY 1H15 DESCH ANO/0R SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED DEPT. DATE APPROVED 8T RAWN MARC CORDICE DRUMM 100119/08 SUOIDIE 1,VI1JI F\VI.IRAN INV' CJ SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND O SAN MH o CB O WMH PIV WV o WM o FH D SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN WATER MANHOLE POST INDICATOR VALVE WATER VALVE WATER METER FIRE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C57 C66 C76 C75 C74 C85 C84 C83 C94 C93 C92 C656/0 C73C82C91 C63 C71 C62 C61 C60 C70 C69 C68 C79 C78 C77 C88 C87 C86 KEY PLA G mg®P4 C neauteeelo , Bac. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL ANO STRUCTURAL 1510 Out Vde9 SON, lam. 51.212 101 IM..n, 00 00001 m (211) 073-TT/6 TAA (24 910-2160 40 20 0 40 80 12C CURREN! REVISION NEW SANITARY PLAN 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET STUDOL A CATE • 05/01/09 DORMIER 'CHECKED DAVE DORMIER APPROVED REI. 10/19/08 10/19/08 12/_2(11_8 - CIVIL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD sHEEr . C296A JOS NO. COUP NO. 586456-02 - PLANT 2 000 "0. 2.YD-XX 8 RIM 12.7 IE 9.91 00000 1. IE 10.40 C 1 IE 10.75 IE 10.08 CA7 RIM 12,E RIM 712.9 IE 9.96 / IE 10.75 C 5 RIM 12.9 IE 10.93 1 IE 10.25 CB7 RIM 13.1 IE 10.41 CB27 RIM 12.7 IE 11.05 S9 RIM 12.65 I IE 10.58 21 I S8 M12t RIM1. 10.5 IE 10.58 fIEl.27)_ CA8CI 1.IM 12.9 I10.61 IE 10.29 /7.61 IE 10.73 RIM 13.6 IC 11.00 1 IE 10.79 RIM 1 .2 IE 10.49 _IE 10.99 - P 3661iu^-!431®8518®286PINSTIVI!MPERS:lE18111 i3EVI:7arslaRNili • :jJlOOFmMOMMUNI11_...........:811e!e 6� N81 IM 1 IE 10.83 1 e,.IE 11.03 1 I 11 1 I I 1 1, I I 1 § I I I I 1 I I I I I I` -I I CA1 IM 1 .3 II'FIM 1_4_3--C-4_ _t_ a _u L_18.4 _1 _ 1 _.!__1-_4 _1-F 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 -��r:rzYa I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I Ltd I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.. , I I I .. q'L°�"'f I i --t 1-�4ILI-11-- -1--1-�I-4-4-4-4-I-I-I-4-+44 ++--1--F- 1111111111111111111 11111111 11111 1111111111111111111 11111111 1111 CA14 1 RI 13.2 IE 10.94 CA20 IE 1P � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IRIM I30 I I �.•1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I A I I I I 1 I l 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11EI10.88 1 1 I I I I �•1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH DUNS I RUC I ION NO I LS SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMDEEVELOPNITY NT LEGEND O SAN MH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE o CB CATCH BASIN O WMH WATER MANHOLE S PIV POST INDICATOR VALVE WV WATER VALVE - 0 WM WATER METER D FH FIRE HYDRANT ® ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT C67 C66 C76 C75 C74 C85 C84 C83 C94 C93 C92 C65 Cfi4 C82 C91 C63 C62 C61 C60 C73 C72 C71 C70 C69 C68 C79 C78 C77 C88 C87 C86 KEY PLAN Q nmI®v4 lEnglin®®PBuw9 Ono. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1516 Vel Vmq 11 .q NM S8. 191 616nR 6A 96001 NL 12511 675.2216 PAT (211) 68-2166 40 20 0 40 80 12C SCALE IN FEET 0104 - REV9R1 A 2-4% DEM0 J1586456-02 05/01/09 11_4747EZAW ACCEPTABILITY MARC CORDICE 1105 DESIGN AN0//0R s1E0RED SPECF1CA1)0N IS APAAOIED tRtaRt- APPROVED F7r DEPT. DATE DAVE DORWER CiliCNED DAVE DORMIER 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 NEW SANITARY PLAN DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD 586456-02 05/01/09 SH EET C297A OC90R 1• 51011 6 5111 .. 510Ru 6 5O1 r . .2 Walled APR 28 2009 16:1025 SubI18tat PERMIT SET CML MASTER PLANT 2 DWG 586456-02 2.YD-XX C556 TYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK DETAIL rn SCALE: NO SCALE 2" LAYER OF 5/8" MINUS CRUSHED ROCK 15-0" (TYP) 5-0" 5 a5 a5 a� C556 TOP OF CURB AT DRIVEWAY 3/8" WIDE x 1" DEE' SCORE JOINT EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 15 3/8" x 3.5" EXPANSION JOINT SECTION n SCALE: NO SCALE C556 18" TYPICAL CURB DETAIL SCALE: NO SCALE CC56 SYu et DATE 6171 VAN" ACCESSIBLE SIGN 96" MIN 60" MIN 132" MIN 132" MIN 60" MIN 96" MIN 0 "c 24° WIDE SOLID WHITE PAINTED CROSSWALK 0 4' O.C. UNIVERSAL PARKING SPACE DESIGN DETAIL n SCALE: NO SCALE C556 8' (TYP) 4" THICK CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK BY 2" LAYER OF 5/8" MINUS MINUS CRUSHED ROCK SECTION rTh SCALE: NO SCALE C556 VERIFY MIN. 1'-0" w PARKING ONLY 11 VAN ACCESSIBI 1" CONC. . WASH APPROVED T11 -1111.11:=111=r117- ee II—I I "•'11-11 I=1 —II1E-7 1111-1 1 Lill - 2. I -III- DATE 3/8° FULL DEPTH EXPANSION JOINT CONT. . STAINLESS STEEL FASTENERS. PATTERN (TYP) TYPICAL NANDI SEE DETAIL. 1=1 C556 SIGN C556 CONCRETE CURB SEE TYPICAL DETAIL THIS SHEET WHITE LETTERS & SYMBOL ON BLUE BACKGROUND. METAL SIGN, BOLT TO STL. PIPE POST (OR TO BUILDING WALL, SEE SD -1 & BLDG. ELEV'S.) ADDITIONAL SIGN AT VAN ACCESSABLE PARKING SPACES ONLY 1 1/4" GALV. SCHD. 40 STL. PIPE W/CAP, PAINT (2) COATS ENAMEL (WHITE) GRADE 8" DIA. CONC. FOOTING NOTES: 1. SIGN TO BE PER LOCAL JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS. VERIFY SIZE, SHAPE & VERBAGE 2. PROVIDE SIGN AT EACH HANDICAPPED PARKING HANDICAP SIGN ( STALL. SCALE: NO SCALE f C556 DRAWING OF RECORD J/972197 HGI/OED 1.08.01 A 2-4X DEMO J566456-02 DED R0 05/01/09 SAMARA MTIW INUVETALf{NSWE9Ad.e 1 WINN Naa A OWRQ 1 Rat Bate, A111 NOW 1 t MNkd Aln 0009 SPA, 1 Suk.11tv IENOI TET 12" MIN. FREEBOARD WATERLINE— --- SAWCUT EXISTING PAVEMENT THROUGH JOINT PAVEMENT -10 12:1 MAX SLOPE 3 —0°MIN SCORE UNE (TYP) CW 2'-0" DETECTABLE WARNING PATTERN SECTION CURB MONOUTHIC WITH RAMP. NEW PAVEMENT BLOCKED OUT FULL DEPTH. EXISTING PAVEMENT REMOVED AT FACE OF CURB LIMITS OF TEXTURED SURFACE SAWCUT WHERE NEEDED. THROUGH JOINT REQUIRED ADJACENT TO CONCRETE SURFACES. SEE NOTE 1 AX SCORE LINE DETECTABLE WARNING PATTERN (TYP) NEW CURB CURB NOTES: 1. CURB RAMPS SHALL BE ISOLATED FROM ALL OTHER CONCRETE BY THROUGH JOINTS. 2. RAMPS SHALL HAVE A COARSE TEXTURED SURFACE OBTAINED WITH A 3/4" 9-11 FLATTENED EXPANDED METAL MESH BEING PRESSED INTO THE STILL FRESH CONCRETE. THE LONG AXIS OF THE DIAMOND PATTERN SHALL BE ALIGNED WITH THE SLOPE OF THE RAMP. 3. ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK PAVING MAY BE NECESSARY IN THE PLANTING STRIP OR AT THE BACK OF SIDEWALK TO ACCOMODATE ACCESS TO THE RAMP. A MINIMUM 3'-0"x5'-0" 2X MAX. GRADE LANDING SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE TOP OF RAMP. 4. THE SIDEWALK THICKENED EDGE SHALL BE CONTINUED THROUGH BOTH WINGS. 5. THE WINGS SHALL HAVE A SLIGHTLY BRUSHED FINISH PARALLEL TO THE CURB. 6. MIN LATERAL CLEARANCE FROM INLETS. POLES, HYDRANTS AND OTHER ABOVE GROUND OBSTACLES SHALL BE 1'-0" FROM THE SCORED PORTION OF THE CURB RAMP. CURB RAMP DETAIL( SCALE: NO SCALE C556 FLOTATION BALLAST POCKET DEBRIS BOOM DETAIL( SCALE: NO SCALE Cv56 ACCEPTABILITYDRAWN G. SUTHERLAND DA325.98 TI105 DESIGN AN0/06 CHECKED SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED S. FRANKUN 4.13.98 NWNLUI DEPT. DATE D. DORMIER 4.13.98 CHECKED T. THRAMER 5.22.98 UC t�e1 6.3.98 APPROVED BY APPROVED R. MCNIESH 6.3.98 TITLE RECEIVED ' APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SECTIONS & DETAILS DETECTABLE WARNING PATTERN AREA SHALL BE YELLOW, IN COMPLIANCE WITH STD. SPEC. A MIN. MAX. A 1 5/8" 2 3/8" B 5/8" 1 1/2" C 7/16" 3/4" D 7/8" 1 7/16" t ELEVATION TRUNCATED DOMES DETECTABLE WARNING PATTERN C556 SCALE: NO SCALE Hai it REINek©I I? IIJ9 Owe" CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 199 Vest Valley NWMq North. Site IM Warn, VA 99001 TEL GSD 020-7706 FAX 02530 9294149 -CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL 586456-02 DATE 05/01/09 TINE CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 7 C556 JOB 000. 972197 COMP N0. DWG NO. 7—vn—f.5.5R 11 a E 3 a 1 1 STM 8'0 ID CAST IRON RING & COVER 3000. PSI CONCRETE COLLAR. THREADED PWG 2'-0' SQUARE FIBER JOINT PACKING ����9p4+moi, i����/��i >^ �y/„SEWER PIPE 3000 PSI ENCASEMENT . MIN 4' THICKNESS SEWER PIPE PLUGGED- END (IF END OF UNE) SEWER PIPE WYE n TYPICAL CLEANOUT ,•:1940 NTS ASPHALT PAVEMENT PER PLAN SUBGRADE ASPHALT PAVEMENT Oi PAVEMENT PATCH (SEE TYPICAL DETAILS) BACKFILL MATERIAL AND COMPACTION PER MASCOT STD SPEC 7-08.3 (3) DETECTOR TAPE WSDOT 9-03.12_(3) ERU D O- PIASTIC PIPE BEDDING COMPACTED TO 95x OF ITS MAX UNIT WI AS DETERMINED BY ASTM 01557 TRENCH PUt WSDWIDE SPLC 2-09.4.4 D TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION FOR FLEXIBLE PIPE MOUND CONCRETE 6'0 SCH 40 PIPE FILLED WITH CONCRETE PAINT WITH ONE COAT OF PRESERVATNE PAINT. PRIMER SERIES 28-54 AND ONE FINISH COAT OF PRESERVATNE PANT SERIES 10 (SAFETY YELLOW) EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT OR CONCRETE 14'0 MN n BOLLARD DETAIL 4640 NTS CONCRETE BENSON A 2-4% 0(60 J1586456-02 err DED AWR M) DME STM ANGLE VALVE SHUT OFF PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE CITY APPROVED VAULT W/ LID DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY INSTALL PLUGS IN TEST COCKS (TYP.) QUICK COUPLING VALVE • 2' SERVICE LINE 43 xa LDRAIN ROCK MIN. 12- DEPTH SEE SHEET RLN -YD -C130 FOR CONTINUATION DETECTOR TAPE 1511 PIPE 0.D. ( 11119.) O.D. TRENCH MINI 2-09.4 ot'1:22 $ %A. LDRAIN ROCK MIN. 12' DEPTH L�9 D POINT OF CONNECTION ASPHAL1 PAVEMENT PER PUN SUBGRADE BACKFILL MATERIAL AND COMPAC00N PER 19500T STD SPEC 7-08.3 (3) W5DOT 9-03.12 (3 RIGID PIPE COMPACTED TO 95% OF ITS MAX UNIT WE AS DETERMINED BY /51M D1557 n TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION FOR RIGID PIPE ds640 I•=1'-0• 2,0-1395E COMPACTION PROCEDURE 1. EXCAVATE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE BOTTOM OF THE BASE COURSE ROCK. 2. COMPACT EXISTING SUBGRADE SOL 10 9511 MIN. 3. PROOF -ROLL THE 0951ING 51X. TO VERIFY A MINIMUM CBR OF 10. 4. ANY SOFT SPOTS ENCOUNTERED SHALL BE OVER -EXCAVATED AT LEAST 12 INCHES. FILL TIRE EXCAVATION WITH CLASS 'A' GRAVEL (LESS THAN 5% FINES). COMPACT 101 FII .TO 95x MNNU6. 5. PROOF -ROLL THE F11190 SOFT SPOTS TO VERIFY A 60111909 180 OF 10. EXTRUDED CON. CURB 1/2 5 1/2' 1/2' 3' CUSS 'B' A. PARING N.PL 4 D • GRADE 1 DOWN FROM TOP OF CURB. SUBGRADE SOL 4' BASE COURSE SEE 601E COMPACTED TO 9511 PROCTOR TYPICAL CURB & 3" PAVING SECTION .9640 NIS 2' TREADED CAP e'o�o4; off; gpt� 'o • 1� AA5HT0-920 TRAFFIC RATED UD PROVIDE 48 -INCH $ - Ape: •.� BONDING STRAPei* 1/1011/111 4:1/1/1/111/bilt 11;Jr:I � ( DRAIN ROCK MIN. 12' DEPTH BRASS 'L' BOLTS. & NUTS IN DIAGONAL CORNERS NOTE I. SET HANDHOLE ON 9' DEEP GRAVEL BASE EXTENDING 6' MIN BEYOND EACH SIDE. SET FLUSH WITH FINISHED GRADE. ti OPEN BOTTOM TYPICAL HANDHOLE DETAIL 640 NTS SUB -BASE COMPACTION PROCEDURE I. EXCAVATE TO THE ELEVATION OF 1HE BOTTOM OF THE BASE COURSE ROCK 2. COMPACT EXISTING SUBGRADE 50L TO 9511 MIN. 3. PROOF -ROLL TME EXISTING SOD. TO VER1FY A MINIMUM CBR OF 10. 4. ANY SOFT SPOTS ENCOUNTERED SHALL BE OVER -EXCAVATED AT LEAST 12 INCHES FILL THE EXCAVATION 9119 CLASS 'A' GRAVEL (LESS THAN 5% FINES). COMPACT THE FILL TO 9511 MINIMUM. 5. PROOF -ROLL 111E FILED SOFT SPOTS TO VERIFY A 11114114110 CBR OF 10. • 1 1/2' A. PAVING OVIDE 1'-0' LEVEL SLOP AREA WHERE GRADE SLOPES DOWNWARD OUTSIDE PAVING GRADE 1' DOWN FROM TOP OF CUTIN. 2' LEVELING TOP COURSE COMPACTED TO 9511 PROCTOR 60 APPROVED TWE REI 05/01/09 SUBGRADE SOIL 4' BASE COURSE SEE NOTE CGJPACTED TO 9516 PROCTOR 10 TYPICAL CURB & 1 1/2" PAVING SECTION JC640 NTS OVIDE 1'-0' LEVEL AREA WHERE GRADE SLOPES DOWNWARD OUTSIDE OF PAVING 2 IEVEUNG TOP COURSE COMPACTED TO 9511 PROCTOR el__AFIZEZAW. CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR CONCRETE PATH 1. DOWEL ADHESIVE: THE AMOK FOR BONING REINFORCEMENT • 60 THREADED RODS TO EDSING CONCRETE SHALL 8E HR ID -150 ADHESIVE AS MANUFACTURED BY 60.R 106119NG SYSTEMS. 0861 HOLES AND INSTALL AOHE5NE AND OOWEIS 00 THREADED ROD IN ACCORDANCE 0NI 111E ADHESIVE MANUFACTURERS _ RECOMMENDATIONS. 2. JOINT SEALANTS FOR SAWED CONSTRUCTION NUM JOINT SEALANTS BOLL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF AA5HT0 6173 CONCRETE JOINT SEALER. SELL TIGHT SAFE SEAL 3405. • 3. JOINT SEALANT FOR OTHER CONCRETE CONTROL JOINTS: JDN0S SHALL HAVE A 3/4' THICK PRE1OLDED FILTER CONFORMING 10 THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR 'PREFORMED EXPANSON JOINT FOR CONCRETE PAVING AND STRUCTURE CONSIRUCTWN' MSI90 M213 EXCEPTING THE REOIAREIIENT FOR NATER ABSORPTION, 101101 6 DELETED. THE JOINT ABOVE THE FILLER SHALL BE SEALED YRTH A TWO -PMT URETHANE JOINT SEALER C9NF0111010 TO A51M 1920 FOR USE N VD000E TRAFFIC AREA 001ENS0)6 OF SEALER SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 111E SEALER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 4. CLASS A (3/41 AIR ENT919198 D PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE WRH COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 300D P51 WTHIN 4 DAYS SEE TYPICAL. CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION THI5 SHEET FOR REINFORCEMENT. ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN ANO OR SPECEICANO4 5 APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 2' OF 5/B' MINUS TOP COURSE PER WSDOT STD 9-03.9(3) COMPACTED TO 9511 OF ITS MAX DRY UNIT WE AS DETERMINED BY AS111 D1557. 4' ASPHALT SURFACE COARSE PLACED N TWO LAYERS 6' AGGREGATE BASE COMPACTED TO 9511 OF ITS MAX DRY UNIT WT AS DETERMINED BY OSTIA 01557 COMPACT SUBBASE TO DENSE AND YIELDING CONDITION (-3- TYPICAL 4" ASPHALT PAVEMENT :640 NTS PAVING PER PLAN CAST -IN-PLACE CONCRETE CURB N' CHAMIER TYP. COMPACTED SUBGRADE - CONCRETE SHALL HAVE 78 -DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3000 P9 AND 511 AR ENTRAINMENT - RENFOR010 SHALL BE PER A519 A-615, GRADE 60 I=II=IT (2 .4 CONT. f LECTINV 'APR 0 9 20 DEVELOPMEN n CONCRETE CURB (CAST -IN-PLACE) C5161940 NTS CLASS A (3/41 - AIR -ENTRAINED PORTLAND CEMENT CONC WITH COMPRESSNE STRENGTH OF 3000 P51 W111161 4 DAYS MATCH DEPTH OF COSTING CONCRETE PAVING. STEEL REDIF (SEE TABLE BELOW) MATCH EXIST ASPHALT TALK 0/ CLASS B A5PWLT CONC PA0040 (WIN. 4' TUCK RUBBER ASPHALT FRIER EXIST ASHNLT JOINT 5FAIANT PER TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS STEEL DOWEL (A3T11 A615. GRADE 40) FOR DOWEL 520 AND SPACING SEE CHART BELOW, FILL WITH HIR 'WT HY-150'. P BACKFILL MATEUAI PER SPECIFICATIONS COMPAC1ED TO 9511 OF NS MIS UNIT WEIGHT DIST CONC PAVING, DEPTH VARIES DAM NMI BASE MATERIAL 2' TOP COURSE. 4' BASE COURSE PER SPECIFICATIONS COMPACTED TO 9511 OF ITS ILA% UNR W'0GHT CONCRETE CONTRACTION JOINTS ALONG WIDTH OF PATCH AIME MATCH DOSING CONCRETE J06415. SAWCUT GROOVE AND FILLED 61111 JOINT SEALANT. REINFORCEMENT, DOWEL SIZE AND SPACING SUB DEPTH .0 News) DOWEL IOMETER (INCHES) TOTAL DOWEL LENGTH (NCHE5) D0W'E1 SPACING CENTER 10 CENTER (INCHES) maw HOLE SQE (INCHES) SIM REINFORCEMENT 5-6 7-8 9-11 3/4 1 1 1/4 2'-0' 2'-0' 2'-0' 12 12 - 12 7/8 1 1/8 1 3/8 13 O 10' OC EW p4 O 12' OC EW 14 0 10' OC EW (51 TYPICAL PATCH FOR CONCRETE OR ASPHALT PAVEMENT Raven (L L5FI�� 640 NTS Wng8611®®Pdate, Me. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ILCORDCE CHEMEDIENCIREERD DATE 4-15-08 SOMME SECTIONS & DETAILS 4519 Vol *by 109AVay N>10. 54.101 Wan. 4 90001 TEL (253) 03-7704 FAX (251) 939-2160 PARENT REMAIN SYMBOL 586456-02 A 05/01/09 4-15-08 CHECKED AMP90VFD CML MASTER PARKING LOT 17 EXPANSION PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 C®40 JOB ND COMP N0. DMI N0 2 -YD -C638 DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WAT J�O�O%000� °WAO IS .6 Oma. OOi.7i _ _-'_'_/ 47dV: 20c,47,7 O' I 67 APPROVED DTE 2-40 0E00 4586456-02 glAraw,Afig- ACCEPTABLITY 1146 DESIGN AND/0R SPECDfCA11DN 6 APPROVED APPROVED E1Y DEPT. DATE DU611,701! tdeWY- 1 knfter War IT.0129111i Pot D6161 moi 1 LW 1h/68d Dale ffT 41 moi 00644 1 k64tt6b PM= PM DRAWN MARC CORDLCE CHECKED DAVE DORMER CHECDAVE KED RAPIER R0 APPROVED 10/19/08 SUIEGITIE 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 LANDSCAPE PLAN RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOP GENERAL NOTES: FT> CONIFER TREE PLANTING (1 1 SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 r> ON GRADE TREE PLANTING ( L \ SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 1 3> SHRUB PLANTING SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 r> GROUNDCOVER SPACING 4 SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 TYPICAL PLANTER SECTION cj SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 • CONSTRUCTION NOTES: INSTALL PLANTINGS AS SHOWN LS87 386 1565 LS96 (595 LS94 1593 LS105 0.7 LS11n (599 5109 108 .S1o4.51O.S1o215101 5114 LS113.511 215111 LS110 1582 LS81 L580 LS90 LS89 LS88 LS98 1597 51075106 SWE6 RUM 1661171111 03661163101. ea KEY .66 O Brumbaugh & Associates LondacopeArchltecture 600 Worth 65th Start .SUN. 1e2 TSoot., arWA66103-3626 106 762 3650 fa.. 306 761 3675 40 20 0 40 80 120 CURRENT 607010N 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET SAWA A ONE 2/16/09 n11E DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER PLANT 2 5J1EE1 LS80 J00 NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG NM 2.YD—XX RECEIVED 'APR092010 CONII DEEVELOPM NT GENERAL NOTES: CONIFER TREE PLANTING SEE DETAIL' LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 2 > ON GRADE TREE PLANTING SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 SHRUB PLANTING 3 SEE DETAIL 1380 LS82 LS83 LS110 ® GROUNDCOVER SPACING 4 SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 I 5.> TYPICAL PLANTER SECTION SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: INSTALL PLANTINGS AS SHOWN 1111 - tans 10111111151111111111 INIIMME11•111111.111111X00.1111111111111111111.• MEM IMMIENNIMIEMEHMIMEN • DPD ILL U u r IULL111 .w rrnrrriniir 1111111,0000 •1.1 P1 1.1.1.1.1.1•1•1.f.1.1. 1111111 1 11 LS87 1586 LS85 LS84 LS83 LS82 LS81 LS80 LS96 LS95 LS94 LS89 LS88 LS105 5104 S103 LSI 0.'L•]_J.�r' LS99 LS98 LS97 LS114 LS113 _SII 21511 IOBLS LEY PIAN W �rQ I07L5 106 Brumbaugh B Associates 40 20 0 LandecapeArchttacture a@/WA YSwt. Slt•SastIse.1@ Ta4pbenr 2011 3:07 Iaeb6P '216 7@ 3615 40 BO 120 gi_AraPzAe.g. DEMOLNION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD FADMIgAZIDI MIAMI phmtlY6 9!D-RNNY6 91rfUMCrA I trete” &Ay IL CO= Rot >m IC • tae MOD I Lat IYWIY6 61m IC a PDIB COW 1 9JIA14b MEWS PmR 586456-02 CML MASTER PLANT 2 2.YD—XX TT. rte) j1 __rNms w wn¢ssril Ims( 0 • 'T rso I rN35.0 030 1/2030 37. DOD•s1 (4J 10011032 r m¢.04 Y3Ims( C.0 OmrsO 20 Yra P1 }m, moon 4, (30364— naT '-1-Ina w I r�--4'KvsO 14 3_J ON.") W— 44 0/2 000000800008 000 90080090 0.44 .;... •7 0'000 17,11: %.4.4 igk: w aw 7u �J e3_° '.'•'.�-o°aiuer°4oa°O°ii _'! ~� -111 011111110111 �t�ttt�tttttt�N tt�ttt�t�� � v•or.�>.u� RECEIVE IAPR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GENERAL NOTES: I- 1 > CONIFER TREE PLANTING SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LLLSS110 SHRUB PLANTING / J SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS110 P > GROUNDCOVER SPACING SEE DETAIL LSBO LS82 LS83 LSLS110 TYPICAL PLANTER SECTION (5 \ SEE DETAIL LS80 LS82 LS83 LS1110 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: INSTALL PLANTINGS AS SHOWN L596 LS87 1586 LS85 1593 L51051S 311 44511 0014 A REVISION 00 APPROVED DOE m REVISION 02 APPR06ID DATE 2-4X DEMO J1586456-02 SK MB 2/16/09 D+Mf1=E WlMyye 1 Drafty. N6Rn POcomzE Plot 6b DC el 909 1 L4,6 Nol9YW tea IIL OL 909 00604 1 Pallid FCM833 Pelf BOE/AIG® ACCEPTABILJTY 1005 DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED DRAWN ROICE A DAVE DORMIER DAVE CHECKED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. DATE 10/19/08 51113071.5 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN 10/19/08 10/19/08 APPROVED APPROVED 10/19/08 TOLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 LS84 L592 1583 LS91 LS1013100 1103_5109 L582 L590 1599 L581 LS89 L598 1580 LS88 LS97 LS1OBLS10715106 KEY PLAN O m s Bru nob augh & Associates LandscopeArchII•eture 300 03030W 111063-3020 3•16666.6 3•16666.6Ame Wei 3630 reest le 20e 782 ,teas 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET 571450E LS83 A DATE 2/16/09 ISD ND. 586456-02 COMP NO. DNC N0. 2.YD-XX 1,66791 1 1 1 1 1 _I 1 I J I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 — — — — ----J — J n 11 111_1_1_1_I_i_� �-I_I1I_1_I_1_I1I-I I LI I I I I 1-I L l 1 ll IJ rl 1.1 CI l7 11&":°.i 7 1/0•7 94851. RECEMED lAPR 0 9 2010 COMMUNIT Y DEVELOPMENT co GENERAL NOTES: SLEEVING DETAIL SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS83I LS210 TRENCHING DETAIL 3 SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS831 LS210 ® POP-UP HEAD DETAIL `1 SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS831 LS210 5> REMOTE CONTROL VALVE SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821. LS831 LS210 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: INSTALL 2-1/2' SCHEDULE 40 PVC MAINLINE SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211 INSTALL (1) SCHEDULE 80 PVC SLEEVE © FOR EVERY MAINLINE AND LATERAL CROSSING UNDER PAVING. SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET 13211. INSTALL (1) 2 SCHEDULE 80 PVC SLEEVE © FOR VALVE WIRE CROSSING UNDER PAVING SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET 15211 IS87 1585 LS85 1596 LS95 L594 1593 LSI05 LS10415 10315 LS114 L.511 315112 LS11 Z4.4 0215101 LS1t.5r 1S99 iS110 IS82 1.590 1581 1580 L589 LS88 LS98 LS97 109 S108 510715106 KEY s56 O Brumbaugh K As,oriJtes LandscapeArchitecture m 55.800.6. 00* mor 121 5*610a. 206 752 1650 i,otN. Ras 152 3675 40 20 0 40 80 120 51M 21 APPROVED DUE m REVS= 01 APPROVED DUE A 2-4X DOJO 4586456-02 SK MB 2/16/09 45001 91®1 IMMIX aer6VMs P9. J/INMN*-RAKb6 19nHa Kap 11 <17✓>E I Rat Otto EC It In PD'® I last Kom96d It* OFC 0 1909 080904 1 D60tttt ME EM Ralf ce;LArdmzisw. ACCEPTABILITY 1X15 06109 10 OR SPEafl0A10N 6 MMARCN CORDICE 10/19/08 5U8111tE wtLxLO IRRIGATION PLAN 586456-02 A W` 2/16/09 APPROVED 60 DEPT. DATE DAVEDORMER 10/19/08 DAAVE DDRMIER 10/19/08 RD ROVED 10/19/08 APPROVED NILE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER PLANT 2 WET LS801 JOB NO. 586456-02 01117 110. ONO NO. 2.YD-XX RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GENERAL NOTES: POINT OF CONNECTION I SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821 LS210 2 > SLEEVING DETAIL SEE DETAIL LS801, LSB21, LS831 LS210 1==> TRENCHING DETAIL • SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS831 LS210 ® POP-UP HEAD DETAIL `+ SEE DETAIL LS801. LS821, LS831 LS210 E> REMOTE CONTROL VALVE SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS831 LS210 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: INSTALL 2-1/2 SCHEDULE 40 PVC MAINLINE SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211 INSTALL (1) SCHEDULE 80 PVC SLEEVE FOR EVERY MAINLINE AND LATERAL CROSSING UNDER PAVING. SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211. INSTALL (1) 2- SCHEDULE 80 PVC SLEEVE © FOR VALVE WIRE CROSSING UNDER PAVING SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211 .ii.S Is MEMMENWOMMENMEMME amain .. 71,E minizio, mnitui -NAN-1 ili�� e T -1-71_i rVTTT-T-1-11-i '1 i i; ; I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i j LJJJ_LLLDIIJJ_I_ L_ I l l 1 1 TIrrTT��-I-r , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 I I I I 1 711 I WWII LI 1111 LI 1 I I_1_141- M I I I H 111 i 1 i i i:, % rr, IIIA 111=0•11111MAte! auNEM ■- ■ Itc 8-4urA11111u1111111111111111 .t.1.1. .1.1.1. .1.1. .1. 1 . I I I 1 I I I I -1`1- H1- 1-4 +-+-1.-1-1-1-1-}-++4-1-1-1- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1°1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1.1.1. 1.1.1.1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1•1•,•1•1•,•,•1•1 /,, •1•1Pj.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.1'.i.i.I•.•1.1•,•1. 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 11 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH EAST MARGINAL WAY ° 1.596 LS87 LS95 IS10515 S114 1586 1594 1041.5 LS11 1.565 LS84 1583 103LS 3.S112 10 1.511 LS82 LS90 LS99 LS81 LS89 1598 1081.5 • KEY PIAN Q w ec 40 20 0 107 L580 LS88 L597 L5106 Brumhaugh0 Associates LandacapeArohilecture 800 Nolo es5A 12s str10 .. 3 102 Uselle.T.s... 752 X550e FOCAla. 105 7.2 3575 40 80 SCALE IN FEET 120 DATE A 2 J1586455-02 SK MB 2/16/09 OLBOE/A/G® ACCEPTABILITY DRS DESIGN AND/CR 5PE°fICA11QN 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. MARC COROICE 52iECIFD DATE plr3M1Il 35 91M90F rirr.MYs RMNYn-941-ILM1/12 1 ls?W Mar K =ZEE9 Ret Ids IC M ale 15.M) 1 Wt MAIN Rt. EC 012012 00601 1 9ai0tW Rab Roo DAVE DORMER BIER APPROVED APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 DEMOUIION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD - CML MASTER PLANT 2 050 06 586456-02 2.YD-XX IL+sNvsl W o (300650---4;09 :• .(16PS0w rt, ISA D0,9) Wer/� ..4m,'0) IN P• -D 1'4,0,59 TO 6.61,0,6✓ A 6A 13001.1 0'A 1,0,9) ►: RbZ "-I1,b /WA -:SI Bil IP5^261a GSIP!tiR4A3FaWM Cif !'rlfl'.711S981ENS®*Off • ---1-3--L-1--1--1-1--I-- -I--1-.J--I--1-.0-1- 'ra I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 III I I I I " n s 121 r t 1 1 1 1 1 \I 1 I F EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH 5YM A REVISION EN APPROVED DATE STM 2-45 DENO J1586456-02 SK MB 2/16/09 Ig ORDTMIDEN 821910 S.M. 8t.1 JNln-9MrHN16O 1 MPor Ilanp M MICE Net WE IC el 8109 LSQ'Q! L Ws* 16dFOd Mtn EEL m !m6 1MM 1 9416hb RAS LIMIT gLirawArc. ACCEPTABILITY MS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED MARC 006010E Lrrulu, 019/08 RECEIVED APR 092010i EDEVE OP E T GENERAL NOTES: 2 > SLEEVING DETAIL SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS831 LS210 13 > TRENCHING DETAIL SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821. LS831 LS210 fai POP—UP HEAD DETAIL t SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821, LS831 LS210 L S > REMOTE CONTROL VALVE SEE DETAIL LS801, LS821. LS831 LS210 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: INSTALL 2-1/2- SCHEDULE 40 PVC MAINLINE SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211 INSTALL (1) SCHEDULE 80 PVC SLEEVE FOR EVERY MAINLINE AND LATERAL CROSSING UNDER PAVING. SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211. INSTALL (1) 2- SCHEDULE 80 PVC SLEEVE © FOR VALVE WIRE CROSSING UNDER PAVING • SEE TYPICAL DETAIL ON SHEET LS211 CONNECT TO EXISTING 1-1/2' MAINLINE NORTH OF EXISTING CONTROL VALVES V12 AND V17 LS87 1586 L585 LS84 L583 LS82 LS81 LS80 LS96 1595 LS94 LS105151 S114 SUE 6 661306 1660,19) LS93 LS92 LS101 511 =MI 1661 110 1S91 5100 LS109 KEY PLAN LS90 1599 LS89 LS98 510815107 L588 1597 ,5106 Brumbaugh B Associates Lan dscop eArc hitacture 600 /66661 seam. X00 60103-311602 T.Ise... 206 161 2650 TmMM 206 1026 3615 40 20 0 40 80 12( IRRIGATION PLAN APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE IN /AN DAVE DOWER DAKAI VE DORMER APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 REI 10/19/08 APPROVED 101E CML MASTER DEMOLRION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 ' SCALE IN FEET CURRENT REV610N 586456-02 ,BOL LS83I A DATE 2/16/09 JOB NO. 586456-02 coMP No. 000 60. 2.YD—XX new 11111E -111111E1 111111=111111E11111 iiiim- EDB=min=1 OP. =111111=111111 1111-111111=11111==111111._ 111111=111111=11111111111=111111=1 NOTE DIAMETER 1. PLANT TREES HIGH ENOUGH TO ALLOW POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM ROOT BALL CONIFER TREE IN PLANTER NOT TO SCALE SECURE TRUNK WITH DOUBLE STRAND OF 14 GAUGE GALV. WIRE WRAPPED IN CLEAR VINYL TWIST TIGHT 2' DIA "BVC" LODGEPOLE PINE TREE STAKES WITH 6" CONICAL POINT REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP. REMOVE WIRE BASKETS 2" BARK MULCH BACKFILL PIT WITH 50R TOPSOIL AND 505 NATIVE SOIL ADD SPECIFIED AMMENDMENTS AND FERTIUZER TO MIX. SHRUB PLANTING NOT TO SCALE LS80I, LSS\j 110 SET CROWN AT NURSERY HEIGHT BARK MULCH PER SPECS BACKFILL TO CONSIST OF TOPSOIL PER SPECS. ADD FERTIUZER PER SPECS. SCARIFY ROOTBALL ON CONTAINER MATERIAL REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP ON B&B MATERIAL LS80I, LS82I L 110 PIT TO BE TWICE THE ROOTBALL 016. ON GRADE TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE 2 STRANDS 14 GAUGE GALV. WIRE WITH CLEAR VINYL HOSE. 2" DIA "BVC" LODGEPOLE PINE TREE STAKES WITH 6" CONICAL POINT. TREE WRAP (IF SPECIFIED) 36" DIA. TREE WELLS IN LAWN AREAS. FILL WITH 2" OF SPECIFIED MULCH. REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP. LOOSEN WIRE BASKETS. BACKFILL PIT WITH 505 TOPSOIL AND 505 NATIVE SOIL ADD SPECIFIED FERTIUZER TO MIX. 2 LS80I, LS82I LS110 CURB OR HEADER NOTE: SPACING FOR GROUNDCOVER TO BE TRIANGULAR PER DISTANCE SHOWN ON PLANT SCHEDULE. GROUNDCOVER SPACING NOT TO SCALE 4 LS80I, LS82I LS 110 PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAME SIZE NOTES i� TREES ACER RUBRUM 'BOWHALL' / BOWHALL MAPLE 2' CAL B&B, MATCHED FORM4�� , /41-1, PYRUS CALLERYANA 'CHANTICLEER' / FLOWERING PEAR 2" CAL B&B, MATCHED FORM ��I0 TWA CORDATA 'GREENSPIRE' / LITTLE LEAF LINDEN CHAMAECYPARIS OBTUSA 'GRACILIS' / HINOKI CYPRESS 2" CAL 6' HT. B&B, MATCHED FORM B&8, FULL & BUSHY O THUJA PLICATA 'EXSELSA' / EXSELSA CEDAR 6' HT. B&B, FULL & BUSHY •' CALOCEDRUS DECURRENS / INCENCE CEDAR 6' HT. B&B, FULL & BUSHY J SHRUBS BT BERBERIS THUNBERGII 'ATROPURPUREA NANA'/RED BARBERRY 18"-21" HT. FULL FOLIAGE, 36" 0.C. EA EUONYMOUS ALATA 'COMPACTA' / WINGED EUONYMOUS 21-24" SPR. FULL FOLIAGE, 48" 0.C. MA MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 'COMPACTA' / MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 21"-24" SPR. FULL FOLIAGE, 36" 0.C. PV PIERIS JAPONICA 'VALLEY FIRE' / VALLEY FIRE PIERIS 21"-24" SPR. FULL FOLIAGE, 48" 0.C. PO PRUNUS L 'OTTO LUYKEN /OTTO LUYKEN LAUREL 21"-24" SPR. FULL FOLIAGE, 36" 0.C. PL PRUNUS LUSITANICA / PORTUGAL LAUREL 21"-24" HT. FULL FOLIAGE. 48" 0.C. SA SPIRAEA B. 'ANTHONY WATERER'/ANTHONY WATERER SPIREA 21.-24" HT. FULL FOLIAGE. 36" 0.C. TM TAXUS CUSPIDATA 'MONLOO' / EMERALD SPREADER YEW 21"-24" HT. FULL FOLIAGE, 36" 0.C. VD VIBURNUM DAVID!! / DAVID'S VIBURNUM 21"-24" SPR. FULL FOLIAGE, 36" 0.C. VM VIBURNUM P.T. 'MARIESII' / DOUBLEFILE VIBURNUM 24" HT. FULL FOLIAGE, 48" O.C. PERENNIALS & ORNAMENTAL GRASSES HSB HEUCTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS / BLUE OAT GRASS 1 GAL 24" 0.C. PAH PENNISETUM A. 'HAMELN' / DWARF FOUNTAIN GRASS 1 GAL. 30" 0.C. GROUNDCOVER / ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA—URSI / KINNIKINNICK 1 GAL 24" 0.C. SOD LAWN F CONCRETE CURB ASPHALT PAVNG VARIES REMOVE ADDOIONAL ASPHALT AS REW5ED TO INSIALI IRRIGATION HEADS ADJACENT TO CURB IS SPECIFIED [51010101 CROWN AS INDICATED SOD OR MULCH PER RAN 8II 1 SOD -0" SPORT TOPSOIL AS SPECIFIED / DEPTH DEIEIUNffD BY WIDTH AND SLOPE REMOJE ASPHALT, CRUSHED TOP COURSE AS INDICATED. SCARIFY E16SlNG SUBGRADE TO DEPTH OF 6" AND WO011L YWM SPORT TOPSOIL PER SPEC61CA710NS • CRUSHED TW COURSE TYPICAL PLANTER SECTION NOT TO SCALE 5 LS80I, LS82I LS110 LANDSCAPE NOTES ECE!VED APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS ARE BASED ON THE SITE PIANS PREPARED BY RUPURT ENGNEERS, INC. IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY FIELD CHANGES TO THE SITE PLANS WHICH MAY REQUIRE ADJUSTMENT OF DESIGN. 2. REFER TO CML ENGINEERING DRAWINGS FOR GRADING AND DRAINAGE INFORMATION. IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY ADVERSE DRAINAGE CONDIDONS WHICH MAY AFFECT THE HEALTH OF PLANT MATERIAL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR STRUCTURAL PLANTER DIMENSIONS AND RELATED INFORMATION. 3. NO PRE—EMERGENT HERBICIDES TO BE USED ON THE PROJECT SITE DURING THE FIRST YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD. LS87 LS86 LS85 1584 1583 LS82 LS81 1580 LS96 L595 LS94 1593 LS92 1591 LS90 LS89 1.588 LS105 3104.5 103 LS1021S10 115100 LS99 LS98 LS97 S11 4!$113 L5112 LS111 LS11 0.5109 3108 LS107LS106 ORE Or 911.6111 =MED ,170- COMMSE 19 K2,PLAN O Brum6 au yh 6 Associates LandseapeArchitscture soa RAW. ran sr.x . saw Eat S.Wt+.N~iurDA20s31126 7@ 36 Fmba. 201 762 2573 40 20 0 40 80 IM APROMD 007E ODA REVISION BY APPROVED 611E A 2-4X DEMO - J1586456-02 SK MB 2/16/09 WT03111 F> 911MS1'0 IAr911Ys I MHe Mr* M Rat SELR as e 60V9 Lss4 11dO►d INS. MX 01! IIOE94 1 & MOLW FWD= ROME c6S___Ainsr.E7Avc. ACCEPTABILITY Tib DESIGN AND/OR SPECFX'A7106 5 APPROVED DRAWN0180 CORDICE MOTO 1019/08 SUBTITLE LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE AND DETAILS SCALE IN FEET 1.1AatENT REVISION SMOGS , 586456-02 A 001E 2/16/09 APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DAVE DORMER CHEDIED DAVE DORMER 10/19/08 10/19/08 APPROVED APPROWD 10/19/08 ,ITE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD — CML MASTER mu' LS110 'OB 586456-02 M. CON" PLANT 2 owo 90. 2.YD—XX — INSTALL PL IGi IN TEST COCKS P.) DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY CITY APPROVED VAULT W/ UD _ OUICK COUPLING VALVE — PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE — MASTER VALVE MIN. 2" SERVICE UNE .q 4oe.0..: MINS. 4012 P DEPTH SGTAULV. PIIPTE FROM METER POINT OF CONNECTION :191 IvIV8IttaTZT:itordre'fi 1 NOT TO SCALE LS801, LS821,LS83 210 NOTE: BACKFILL TO BE FREE OF ROCK OR DEBRIS LARGER THAN 1" DIA. ABSOLUTELY NO ROCK OR DEBRIS SHALL BE PLACED DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO ANY PIPE. ACCURATELY NOTE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL SLEEVES ON IRRIGATION DRAWING. I;Y.a!i'1`;,. TRENCHING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE LS80I, LS821,LS831 4.210 11, ^9Nfi "v.�4dB$4 o. 1 MIN.N12" DEOR�C1( PTH COMPACT SUBGRADE PER BACKFILL & TRENCHING SPECIFICATIONS PAVING 11E11 = E SLEEVING DETAIL PVC SCH. 80 SLEEVING MIN. 2X DIAMETER OF ENCLOSED PIPE 2" PVC SCH. 80 WIRE SLEEVE NOT TO SCALE • LS80I, LS821,LS831 L 210 INSTALL POP-UP SPRINKLER HEADS 3" ABOVE GRADE AND ADJUST TO FINISH GRADE. SEE PLAN FOR MODEL AND BRAND. FINISH GRADE II— IIIII II III PVC LATERAL LINE POP—UP HEAD / FUNNY PIPE NOT TO SCALE LS80I, LS821,LS831 lL210 SCH 80 PVC THREADED NIPPLE MIN. 8" LENGTH (3) MARLEX STREET ELLS PVC SCH. 40 ELL (OR TEE). 4 1/2" IN LAWN AREAS 2 IN BED AREAS FINISH GRADE &L R40*& GPn Os s • 1v b® 4. 5RANBIRD no ( .l2 6.0 60 RA 5IRO 1806 -SAM -15F, 6' POP -U' SPRAY RAM1806-SA11-15TQ 6' POP-UP SPRAY RANBIRD 1806 -SAM -I5µ 6' POP-UP SPRAY RANBIRD 1806-SA11-15Q 6' POP-UP SPRAY 1806-5AM-I5YAN b' POP-UP SPRAY RANSIRD 1606 -SAM -12F, b' POP-UP SPRAY RANBIRD 1806-SAM-I2F 6' POP-UP SPRAY R4NBIRD 1806-541-1i{�, 6' POP-UP 5FR.4Y RAINBIRD 1806-541-124 6' POP-UP SPRAY RANBIRD 1806-5411-12VAN, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 15' 5' 5' 5' 5' 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' 3.1 25 155 0.93 032 260 195 130 0.65 055 010 RAINBIRD 1806-5AM-10F, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 10' 151 GOO RANBIRD 1806-541-1040, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 10' 0.15 b. KS RAINBIRD 1806-5AM-10Q, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 10' 035 s to RANBIRD 1806-S41-10VAN, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 10' 0.15 Q e RANBIRD 1806-5411-0', 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 8' 105 c a RANBIRD 1806-541-814, 6' POP-UP SPRAT 30 8' 052 L o R4NBIRD 1806-5AM-8Q, 6' POP-UP SPRAT 30 8' 016 4. a RAINBIRD 1806-5401-SVAN, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 8' 0.12 o RCB RANBIRD 1806-541-5RCS, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 4'X5' OAS o LCS RANBIRD 1806-501-15LST, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 47(15' 0.45 0 SST RANBIRD 1806-5411-555T, 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 4'X30' 121 • ./...3 RANBIRD 1806-5401-541 b' POP-UP SPRAY 30 5' 010 B. s RANBIRD 1806-541-50. 6' POP-UP SPRAY 30 5' 0.10 ® RANBIRD 1404 BUBBLER FULL CIRCLE, UMBRELLA PATTER180 - I ZONE NIHBER 1 40 MAX GPM Da R4N81 ) 150 -FEB, I-1/2' REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ►a a= RANBIRD 100-PEB, 1' REMOTE CONTROL VALVE 1-1a' FEBCO 850, DOUBLE CNECK VALVE ASSET BLY WITH RANBIRD 50-PEB,1-1/2' MASTER VALVE RAINBIRD 44RC, I' QUICK COUPLING VALVE C CONTROLLER - RANBIRD ESPI6LM9, MULTI-PROCoR4M HYBRID CONTROLLER 0 RAINBIRD 44RC, I' QUICK COUPLING VALVE SCHEDULE 40 PVC 2-1/2" MAINLINE SCNEDILE 40 PVC LATERAL LINE (SIZE A5 NOTED/ __-- SCHEDULE 40 PVC SLEEVING (TWICE SIZE CF INTERIOR PIPE/ PIPE SIZING TABLE PIPE 1311E MAXPIJI'I GALLONS PR MINUTE (GPM) 3/4' CLASS 200 UP TO 10 GPM I' CLASS 200 UP TO 5 GPM I -I/4' CLASS 200 UP TO 26 GPM I-1/2' CLASS 200 UB' TO 32 GPM 2' CLASS 200 UP TO 55 GPM PROVIDE FOR A 24" LOOP OF EXCESS WIRE WATERPROOF WIRE CONNECTORS 10" CARSON VALVE BOX (2) SPIRAL BARB FITTINGS PEA GRAVEL REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ELECTRIC CONTROL VALVE PVC SCH. 80 NIPPLE PVC SoS 90' PVC SCH. 80 NIPPLE I-- SCH. 40 PVC MAINLINE TEE MAINUNE NOT TO SCALE Svu 00 APPROVE) DAR A 2-4X OEM0 J1586456-02 5K 118 2/16/09 'NWS1111=6 A111= i.o'J6s 111a-NN11rw-9b#AM6p 1 ioPtr IYH,P Kann Poet 1.W E K MOS 00'Q! 1 1.st SAW 1sb 1Q • mee 61004 1 864006 "mess Pima BOE//VG® ACCEPTABIUTY T105 DLS1GN AND/OR SPEOFEA11014 6 APPROVED o LS80I, LS821,LS831 L 210 WRC CORDICE CHECKED 10/19/08 RECEIVED !APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4.587 LS86 LS85 LS84 LS83 LS82 L581 LS96 LS95 LS94 LS93 LS92 LS91 LS90 LS89 LS88 LS105S 104 5103151021LS101 1.5100 LS99 LS98 LS97 LS114 S11 3.511 213111 LSI1 01.5109 5108_510715106 IRRIGATION SCHEDULE AND DETAILS ' KEY PUN Brumbaugh & Associates Londsco8eArchlt.cture ...A m00IA mos HED T.sb. 206 710 Y!0 R... RP MA ACED 40 80 SCALE 114 FEET. REKSION 586456-02 A DA 2/16/09 APPROVED ST DATE DAVE DORMER CHECICED DAVE DORMER APPROVED REI 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 APPROVED CML MASTER DEMOLRION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 LS210 'SS No.586456-02 COMP Ra °"D N0. 2.YD-XX REMOVE EXISTING SPRINKLER HEAD AND TRANSMISSION LINE. © CAP IRRIGATION BRANCH. czn u 0 i G2O04 ��VI nill® i®mu-®m®nntm_._ ._ gvilse 4a RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND • SCRUB HEAD W+M 100 SERIES. O LAWN HEAD W+M 500 SERIES STANDARD ON NO. 33 (POP—UP) • SCRUB HEAD W=M 500 SERIES ON NO. 36p (POP—UP) W/ NO. 97 & 73 ADOPTORS. O SCRUB HEAD W=M 500 SERIES ON N0. 37p (POP—UP) W/ N0. 97 & 73 ADOPTORS. Q SL W+M 512-3 Q SL W+M 512-3 LATERAL UNE (CLASS 200 P.V.C.) ===4' SCHEDULE 40 Al 5 SLEEVES UNDER CONCRETE: INSTALLED BY GENERAL CONTRACTOR O BED SPRAY NOZZLE W+M NO. 105 W/ POP UP (12) ASSEMBLE. BEV DVAL - ORIGINAL ISSUE A PERMIT SET R 2-42 DEMO 4170514-00 09.07.07 10.02.07 BOE/NG® 0.1E D DONOVAN IRRIGATION PLAN DEMO 2-45 AND REPLACE WITH PARKING CML MASTER 2 -YD YARD PLANT2, WA 4170514-00 12.27.09 LS460 °W0 ND. ° 2—YD—LS460 • (1)12. 90' BEND (ILIUM) (2)12• NIPPLES (1)12. SOLID SLEEVES (1)12•x10• REDUCER (YJaYJ) (1)10• NIPPLES (1)10.R VECFYCOOA 0 (FIELDI.. !11141 $120 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I � 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I`I I I I I •••, •', \ L I 1 1 1 'I 1 1 1 1 1 1) - a \ I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I \ I 1 1 I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ \I 1 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \\ �� \ \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1- -I \--.- �� \ \ 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I°_ - \ \ LI 1 I I I 1 I Lls_1_I_1 h \� \ I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 r \-' . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \\ \ I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 111 J-- \� \ , \\ 1 \-' - \ \ \�' ..... \ Gni \ 0 ` o 2-10 as ua u LuMu.Lu 1 uLu 0)11• R YAC C9UPIIIU F ELL VE107 0.0 3)1 • NPPIES \ (3)1 • GROUND GATE Ra61 (J) 91/VALVE BOX • 1 ik )1 • 4 )1 1 114 k114 kTAVAi 1011' 3 toor6W—'—•— t� EL% :1'1141MIZ9R1e01 141. ;141 iI`I`` OMR, onoouDrnIng1 ;, X71 --rah rF, 7 -`S7 -,-T4 11 :-4-----77----7—ro—n•r-7 rr - e�. / / I II / / / / / / 0 .I 11 / rr�r , / 1 u I—I r r r ..6 mho / "�+i' j\'i /,' ll• 0 , f CONS I KUC I ION NOTES l © SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 61117 6116 M126 M125 6124 M135 /4134 6133 :A 6132 6131 6130 112 1.1111 6110 120 6119 6118 M129 6128 M127 6144 6143 6142 6141 6140 6139 6138 6137 6136 KEY PIAN 0 Equil®Q4 C neneeQBwg, Bum. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vert Volley 149',.^0 kr.. S14 1S 90.• VA 9001 TEL 9331921-7719 992 QST 939-2169 40 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET 10/19/08 FIRE & COLD WATER PLAN 2-4% DEMO J/586456-02 05/01/09 10/19/06 10/19/08 10/19/08 DEM PLABUILDINGS OF 2 YARD 05/01/09 sNEE7 M290A CML MASTER PLANT 2 • 586456-02 COMP "O - 2.YD-M290A I-i'rls 4iiiv viclil�u ?.:Ea REC APR 09200 IVE EVELO NiTY mon 000000u600ao CONSTRUCTION NOTES Havant CEniO bODWOwj9 Owe. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL Dic.sEE DRAWING 2.YD—C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2—YD—G4. KEY PUN SCALE IN FEET ' © 1E1,EIpR 8i IPFNGJEED PMEin Ell 2-4% DEMO J5586456-02 DED RD 05/01/09 - II. ill MI IIIII IIII MI ��uliiul�it !w�\s111•I:I L`IT•R9\•Il, 11i•P11 17• • INIEININVIIMMIN MARC CORDICE 10 19 08 FIRE & COLD WATER PLAN DAVE DORMIER 10 19 08 10 19 08 10 19 08 DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS' PLANT 2 YARD 586456-02 05/01/09 M291A J5 NO. 586456-02 CML MASTER 2.YD—M291A GATE 4• WATER DETER SERVICE 10380 WATER METER SERVICE 97905 CONSTRUCTION NOTES B>SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES 6125 6124 M123 6134 M133 M132 6143 6142 m^ 0< a GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. A 2-49 DEMO 4586456-02 05/01/09 sci____AwarkriAfc 3A2008\09IIBt1ESICN DVSS\PUDDING TAens\PLIBIBIN6 Final \PLUMBING RAN-1E1/4e0 I 2 -after NA C TERRELL I at Mtn APR 29 2079 50938 , Last 9odFIe8 Sate. APR 27 2389 151229 I Sub1tt°u PERMIT SE ACCEPTABILITY MARC CORDICE 11U5 DESIGN AND/DR ZRECRED SPECIFICARON IS APPROVED ie10R ,, 010/19/08 SUBTR,E FIRE & COLD WATER PLAN KEY PLAN SOLI Hmp®Q4 Encene®QBwg, Ono. CONSULTING EN 3INEERS/CINE AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Mut Volley NONA Worn VA 990V1 TEL 0531 833-7776 CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 Nortl. Late MI 269 125E 939-1168 40 80 12C SCALE IN FEET, SYMBOL DATE A 05/01/09 APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DAVE DORMER DAVE ORMIER EIROVED APPROVED 10/19/06 10/19/08 10/19/08 TITLE CML MASTER DEMPLLABUILDINGS NT 2 YARD PLANT 2 SKEET JOSND. M292A 586456-02 COMP NO. DWG NO. 2.YD-M292A -, 0 a 0 0 0 000000000 0000000000000 . E965.s7Jl431111110➢®11i*RI aialai6 MEW lREairtlr rli:7�C3�1299®��II o --4_J__4_4._4__L_l-1-1-J--L-4-4--4_ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11111 I EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH LJ az to 1 N ^0 CONSTRUCTION NOTES SEE DRAWING 2.YD—C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2—YD—G4. 9126 9135 9144 M117 9125 9116 9124 9115 M123 9114 14122 M14� ,y�� 141 914 140 9113 9121 9130 9139 9112 11120 M129 9138 9111 9119 M128 M137 M110 M118 MI27 9136 Hmp®Ir4 Enghts®Qlwv9 Ow6. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 VAst Wary NY.99 Nr*N. Lib 101 hiarA VA 98001 RL MP 1133-7776 (AI MP 919-2168 40 20 0 40 8C 120 2-4X 0E00 4586456-02 05/01/09 g)LAtirt7EZAW 0RANN MARC cORDICE 171ELKLD DAVE DORMIER YAI\N11f1\RFCIFJJ RVFC\PI IIMRINf1 tle <\PI MAW PAIN' P111141119/11 PI AN.,IffV Ann 1 DrnFtPr Nn 1_ 1 Ant Det., APP 79 APPROVED 140/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 FIRE & COLD WATER PLAN TOE OEMOLITION. OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD RPASION SYMBOL 586456-02 SHEET 05/01/09 MIL MASTER 01 AMT n J08 N0. Ow0 N0. 586456-02 rn TIE RODS. SEE JOINT RESTRAINT NOTES THIS SHEET 2 TURNBUCKLES THREAD 6" N /- UNDISTURBED SOIL S CONCRETE • TYPE 'A' BLOCKING FOR 11 1/4', 22 /2', 30' VERTICAL BENDS FITTING SIZES PRESSURE (PSI) B 11 1/4' BEND 5 0 L PPE SIZE I DIAMETER(IN) TEST PRESSURE PSI) VERTICAL BEND (DEGREES) NO. OF CU. FT. OF CONC. BLKG. SIDE OF CUBE (FEET) La J DEPTH OF RODS IN CONC. (Fr.) 66 GJ^ U NU Lit_`'' oo 4" 300 111/f 8. 2.0 5/8 1.5 2.0 8" 221/7 11 2.2 5/8 2.0 2.0 12" 30' 17 2.6 5/8 2.0 6" 300 111/f 11 2.2 5/8 2A 221/7 25 2.9 5/8 2.0 30• 41 3.5 5/8 2.0 8" 300 111/f 16 2.5 5/B 2.0 21117 47 3.6 5/8 20 30' 70 4.1 3/4 2.5 12" 250 111/1' 32 3.2 5/8 2.0 221/7 88 '4.5 7/8 3.0 30• 132 5.1 7/8 3.0 4 TURNBUCKLES THREAD 6" /- UNDISTURBED SOIL S CONCRETE TYPE 'B' BLOCKING FOR 45' VERTICAL BENDS FITTING SIZES PRESSURE (PSI) D 11 1/4' BEND S D L PIPE SIZE DIAMETER (IN) TEST PRESSURE (P51) VERTICAL BEND (DEGREES) NO. OF CU. FT. OF CONC. BLKG. SIDE OF CUBE (FEET) DIA. OF CKLE ROD (INCHES) DEPTH OF RODS IN CONC. (FT.) 4" 300 45' 30 3.1 5/8" 2.0 6' 250 45' 68 4.1 5/8" 2.0 8" 250 45' 123 5.0 5/8" 2.0 12" 250 45' 232 6.1 3/4 2.5 HORIZONTAL FITTING (PER PLANS) WATER UNE (PER PLANS) °LAMM, N., REWUMLU run inftual BLOCKING. SEE TABLE 2 FOR BLOCKING BEARING AREA (SQ. FT.) 6" MIN. SPECIFIED BEDDING UNDISTURBED SOIL FORM SIDE OF THRUST BLOCK TYPICAL THRUST BLOCK AT HORIZONTAL FITTINGS NOT TO SCALE FORM THRUST BLOCK TO CENTERLINE OF FITTING HORIZONTAL FITTING (PER PLANS) WATER LINE (SIZE PER PLANS) UNDISTURBED SOIL 3000 PSI CONC LEAVE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR REMOVAL OF BOLTS, FITTINGS, ETC. FORM SIDES OF THRUST BLOCK CONC. THRUST BLOCK SEE APPUCABLE 'TABLE 2 OF THRUST BLOCK BEARING AREAS" TYPICAL BLOCKING FOR HORIZONTAL FITTINGS OR VERTICAL UP BENDS NOT TO SCALE BLOCKING FOR VERTICAL BEND. SEE TABLES FOR TYPE "A" OR TYPE "8" BLOCKING THIS SHEET DEPENDING ON "ANGLE" OF TEE. 2- 3/4"0 TIE ROD LOOPS (ONE SHOWN) 44i -P W/ TURN BUCKLES _ II`1- I° NT- 61 "ANLL INSTALL BLOCKING FOR VERTICAL BEND PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE HORIZONTAL THRUST BLOCK HORIZONTAL THRUST BLOCK HORIXONTAL THRUST BLOCK TO VERTICAL THRUST BLOCK CONCRETE POUR UNE UNDISTURBED SOIL TYPICAL THRUST BLOCK AT ANGLED TEE NOT TO SCALE TABLE 2 FITTING SIZES PRESSURE (PSI) REQUIRED THRUST BLOCK BEARING AREAS (SQ. FT) FOR WATER FITTINGS 0 280 PSI 11 1/4' BEND 22 1 /2' BEND 45' BEND 90' BEND TEES & PLUGS 4" & 6" 260 1 2 3 '6 4 8" 280 2 3 6 10 7 10" 280 2 4 8 16 11 12" 280 3 6 12 22 16 10' DATE STM BEARING AREA REQUIRED FOR HORIZONTAL TEE THRUST BLOCK. SEE TABLE 2 FOR BLOCK BEARING AREA (SQ. FT.) SEE TYPICAL BLOCKING FOR HORIZONTAL FITTING DETAIL MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) TRIM MON DUCTILE IRON BEND WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET HORIZONTAL BEND JOINT RESTRAINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE MECHANICAL JOINT VALVE WITH 1100 MEGALUG FOLLOWER GLANDS BOTH SIDES MJ PLUG OR D.I. PIPING MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) HORIZONTAL VALVE JOINT RESTRAINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE SEE TYPICAL BLOCKING FOR HORIZONTAL FITTING MECHANICAL PIPE AND PLUG . MON JOINT PIPE W/ U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) i�liij Y , HORIZONTAL DEADEND JOINT RESTRAINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE TABLE 3 MAXIMUM DEFLECTION FULL LENGTH MECHANICAL JOINT PIPE SIZEPE F FLENGTH) DEFFLLECTI N MAXIMUM DEFLECTION APPROX RADIUS OF CURVE PRODUCED BY SUCCESSION OF JOINTS 18-11 20-Ff LENGT) 18 -FT LENG H) LENGTH) 4" 4'-09" ' 15.5" 17.5" 250' .280' 6" 3'-33" 13.5" 15" • 290' 320' 8" 7-40" 10" 11" 390' 440' 7-40" 10" 11" 390' 440' 12" 7-40" 10" 11" 390' 440' DRAWING OF RECORD J/972179 HGI/DED 1.08.01 A 2-4X DEMO J1586456-02 DED RD 05/01/09 1RJ10.1111PFSVOI OWOMFTAI RfJVII DAM Awn 1 Dntllm N"mw TFRRR 1 PINDalc APR 24711R1, RAA 11 ad NM "Inger APR79 7(119 IM 1 &AMO *PFRMIT RFT L Muv L Mal MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) MECHANICAL TEE WITH 1100 MEGALUG FOLLOWER GLANDS AT ALL JOINTS OR TRIM MON TEE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET AT ALL JOINTS. SEE TYPICAL BLOCKING FOR HORIZONTAL FITTING DETAIL MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) HORIZONTAL TEE JOINT RESTRAINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE i 1 MECHANICAL REDUCER OR SOUD SLEEVE WITH 1100 MEGALUG FOLLOWER GLAND BOTH SIDES MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) HORIZONTAL REDUCER OR SOLID SLEEVE JOINT RESTRAINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) TRIM MON DUCTILE IRON BENDS WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET MON JOINT PIPE WITH U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET (CONTINUES) SEE TYPICAL DETAIL FOR TYPE "A" AND B" BLOCKING FOR VERTICAL BENDS SEE TYPICAL BLOCKING FOR HORIZONTAL FITTINGS OR VERTICAL UP BENDS ce;LAirArm7Aw. VERTICAL DOWN BEND AND OFFSET NOT TO SCALE ACCEPTABILITY 1105 DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BT DEPT. DATE !lore Cordice 10/19/08 D Dornier 10/19/08 ENGALFA D. DOWER 10/19/08 DcNED IDormier 10/19/08 ru APPROVED RO 10/19/08 STANDARD DETAILS LEGEND GENERAL NOTES JOINT RESTRAINT NOTES 1. ALL MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINT DEVICES SHALL BE SERIES 1100 MEGALUG FOLLOWER GLAND RESTRAINT MECHANISM MANUFACTURED BY IBM IRON SALES INC. EACH SERIES 1100 MEGALUG SHALL 8E LISTED AND STAMPED BY UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES, INC., CATEGORY HJKF "FITTING RETAINER TYPE" WITH A DEFLECTION ANGLE OF FIVE DEG. (3" THROUGH 12"). EACH SERIES 1100 MEGALUG SHALL BE APPROVED & STAMPED BY FACTORY MUTUAL (3' THROUGH 12"). 2. ALL CLASS 52 MON JOINT PIPE SHALL HAVE A U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET AT EACH BELL. 3. ALL TRIM MON DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS SHALL HAVE U.S. PIPE FIELD LOK GASKET AT ALL BELLS. 4. FOR VALVES, JOINT RESTRAINT SHALL BE SAME AS A DEADEND. REFERENCE DRAWINGS CONSTRUCTION NOTES RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Rupert Ewgaw®®QBwg, One. CONSULTING ENG1NEERS/CML AND STRUCTURAL unw-T6----t*N1 A aWMWOI mPsnmrm name .= 4TIRRENT NEWSOM 586456-02 SYMBOL wff 05/01/09 TIRE MECHANICAL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 SHEET M553 JOB NO. 972198' NO. 2 -YD -M553 5' STORTZ CUBIC YARD CRUSHED STONE HYDRANT DRAINAGE CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK PER TABLE 2 SEE FIRE HYDRANT NOTES THIS SHEET 10'x6" TEE (MJxMJxFL) ASPHALT PAVEMENT — 'MIN. 10' MAX. 6" DI CL 52 PIPE (MJ) W/ MEGALUG RESTRAINTS (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) - AROUNDLE RUSHED%\\\\ STONE \ \ > 2-3/4" ASPHALT C STEEL SHACKLE RODS /\/ / MULLER A-2074-16 (FIxMJ) 6" MINIMUM COMPACTED BEDDING CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK PER TABLE 2 3—WAY FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NEW PIPE SYSTEM TO BE PIGGED, PRESSURE TESTED, CHLORINATED, AND FLUSHED. TEMPORARY MEGALUG RESTRAINT TEMPORARY MJ CROSS IN VERTICAL POSITION 3 EACH MJ PLUGS W/ ONE TAPPED FOR TESTING. Viiii ll.- -- Illill AO r'ioiiilp - -- pl�11iii I BLOCKING NEW LINE JUST BROUGHT INTO SERVICE TEMPORARY MJ CAP & MEGALUG. NEW UNE ALL READY TESTED AND IN SERVICE. TESTING NEW D.I.P. W/ MON JOINT AND FIELD LOK GASKET 3 NEW SOLID SLEEVE W/ MEGALUGS NEW LINE ALL READY TESTED AND IN SERVICE IN SERVICE TYPICAL PLAIN END PIPE PIGGING, PRESSURE TESTING, CLORINATION, FLUSHING AND FINAL TIE—IN SERVICE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 8Y A DRAWING OF RECORD 2-4% DE/I0 J/982179 J1586456-02 7971/DED OED DATE 1.08.01 05/01/09 Sri MUELLER ADJUSTABLE TYPE INDICATOR POST A-20800 BURY UNE TO MATCH GRADE 1" BURY \\i MUELLER GATE VALUE A-2075 W/ STUFFING BOX SIZE PER PLAN w 0 U Z CC POST INDICATOR VALVE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NEW PIPE SYSTEM TO BE PIGGED, PRESSURE TESTED, CHLORINATED, AND FLUSHED. TEMPORARY MEGALUG RESTRAINT TEMPORARY MJ CROSS IN VERTICAL POSITION 3 EACH MJ PLUGS W/ ONE TAPPED FOR TESTING. ' , •4- affix ,d I. --r—. Mill r�i����� rgirr �,l _ r-- III1'!'II ii�a BLOCKING TEMPORARY MJ PLUG NEW UNE ALL READY TESTED AND IN SERVICE NEW UNE JUST BROUGHT INTO SERVICE TESTING NEW SOLID SLEEVE W/ MEGALUGS lel// .1'I I , AO 4 IM111111IIf-Ir "4 NEW D.I.P. NIPPLE MEGALUG NEW UNE ALL READY TESTED AND IN SERVICE IN SERVICE TYPICAL MECHANICAL JOINT PIGGING, PRESSURE TESTING, CLORINATION, FLUSHING AND FINAL TIE—IN SERVICE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE VALVE EXTENSION REQUIRED WHEN VALVE NUT IS 3' BELOW FINISHED GRADE. (SEE DETAIL) ■ TWO-PIECE CAST IRON VALVE BOX, RICH VALUE CO., STANDARD 8" TOP SECTION WITH REGULAR BASE SECTION. LENGTH TO FIT. MUELLER GATE VALVE A-2074 SIZE PER PLAN GATE VALVE W/VALVE BOX DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 4 1/4"A, 1/8" MIN THK 1/8" MIN THK Yr.2' SQUARE 1' METAL STOCK AS REQUIRED 3/8' SET SCREW 2 1/4" INSIDE MEASUREMENT 2 1/4" DEPTH STEEL PLATE FOR TEMPORARY PLUG BLOCKING. STEEL PLATE TO BE REMOVED WHEN UNE IS ABANDONED VALVE OPERATION NUT EXTENSION NOTE: EXTENSIONS ARE REQUIRED WHEN THE VALVE NUT 15 MORE THAN THREE (3) FEET BELOW FINISHED GRADE. EXTENSIONS ARE TO BE A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) FOOT LONG, ONLY ONE EXTENSION TO BE USED PER VALVE. NOTE: ALL EXTENSIONS ARE TO BE MADE OF STEEL SIZED AS NOTED, AND PAINTED WITH TWO COATS OF CARBON ELASTIC (ATCO #2221) AS SPECIFIED BY PRESERVATIVE PAINT CO. OR AN APPROVED EQUAL VALVE NUT EXTENSION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE TOP OF EXISTING GRADE FIRE HYDRANT NOTES' 1. HYDRANTS SHALL BE MUELLER UL/FM gA-423 OR CLOW MEDALLION UL/FM OF -2545. 2. HYDRANTS SHALL CONFORM TO AWWA SPECIFICATIONS C502-54, BE UL/FM APPROVED, SHALL BE COMPRESSION TYPE AND SHALL HAVE TWO PIECE BREAKING FLANGE WITH BREAKING THIMBLE AT THE GROUND LINE OR STEM; SHALL HAVE A SELF OILING DRY BONNET WITH FACTORY FILLED RESERVOIR HOLDING APPROXIMATELY 8 OUNCES OF OIL OIL RESERVOIR SHALL BE SO DESIGNED AS TO GIVE A COMPLETE LUBRICATION OF STEM EACH TIME THE HYDRANT IS OPERATED. THE UPPER STEM SHALL HAVE A BRASS SLEEVE. 3. HYDRANT SHALL BE EQUIPED WITH TWO 2 1/2' N.S.T. HOSE PORTS AND ONE 5' STORTZ PUMPER DISCHARGE PORT, AND SHALL HAVE A 1 1/4" PENTAGON OPEN - LIFT OPERATING NUT. HYDRANTS SHALL HAVE A 6" MJ BOTTOM CONNECTION AND 5 1/4" MAIN VALVE OPENING, AND SHALL HAVE 18' ABOVE GRADE LEVEL TO THE CENTER OF THE PUMPER DISCHARGE PORT. 4. HYDRANT INSTALLATINS TO BE PER THE CITY OF TUKWILA STANDARD PLAN WS -4 AND REQUIREMENTS OF TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE 14.24 AND CITY ORDINANCE. STAMP WITH 1/4" MINIMUM 20 SQ. FT. OF STEEL LETTERING PLATE SOIL BEARING AREA "COLD WATER" OR "FIRE WATER' PLUG DEAD END OF EXISTING PIPE WITH CONCRETE EXISTING 10' CAST IRON FIRE MAIN 0.D 11.60t (CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION) ROMAC STYLE 'EC 501' END CAP COUPLING TYPICAL EXISTING WATER MAIN CUT, CAP, AND PLUG DETAIL FOR CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING NOT TO SCALE 8Y S: R 009 5: 7:1 os Modiled Dale• APR 28 2009 1040:42 I SobmYlak PER 111 SET BOE/AW * ACCEPTABIUTY DVS DESEN AND/OR SPECIF1CADOR 6 APPROVED APPROVED 8Y DEPT. More ConSce D. Domner D. DORMIER APPROVED APPPPROVED 10 19 SUHrtRE 08 10 19 O8 10 19 08 6 1 2' RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAMP WITH 1/4" LETTERING SEC. XXX' SEE BOEING FOR VALVE NUMBER STANDARD DETAILS VALVE BOX UD 5 7/8" I.D. 4"x4" 0.05' THICK ANODIZED ALUMINUM PLATE (4) 1/8" RIVET TYPICAL VALVE NAME PLATE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE limp®v4 Engfl U I B [Inas CONSULTING ENOIIaEERS/CINE AND STRUCTURAL 1515 Y Volq Ifp.q RAM Sub 101 ANNA WA MI 10.1251) 511-725 FAX 053) 510-2111 REVISION 55450E 586456-02 MECHANICAL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD PLANT 2 YARD M554 1E 05/01/09 JOS N0. 972198 COW N0. DMS NO. 2 -YD -M554 I 1 > 02-127-1E6 02-127-1E110 F A3/32,34.36 A U5$4R 1HP 1E2 E554 CONDUIT TO BE CONCRETE ENCASED IN DUCTBANK. REFER TO SHT. E360A AND E361A AND DUCTBANK DETAILS. PROVIDE (1) 2-C FROM HH -8 TO COMMUNICATION VAULT. © PROVIDE CONNECTION TO BREAKERS IN PANEL A3 PROVIDED IN BUILDING 02-127. SEE PANEL SCHEDULE. WORK. PROVIDE iON i0 CHCS PAN€t PROVIDED 7N iT[DG-02=tti— WORK. I •p C © PROVIDE PILOT RELAY PANEL ADJACENT TO CMCS PANEL. 1-C-318+1100 ( •.1-C-6114 (PRP), 8114 (CMCS DAMEN 000010111. A3 32,34,36 1 -C -318+110C (480V) • 1-C-318+1106 (4 1-C-6/14 (PRP), 8114 (CMCS) I C-6114 (PRP), 8114 (C CS) 1HP _1E2 E554 \1-14-1 I+H+i+l+i+i \ 1 11111111111 1111.111111111 iii I+I+I+I+IH H 11111 1E2 E554 S. P UMP 1HP 4-C-3/85/100 (480V) 4'C-18/114 (PRP), 24114 (CMOS) I =I= =1= =1— z 1 -C -318+110G (4805) 1-C-6114 (CHCS) 4 -C -318+110G (480V) 4'C-12114 (PRP), 16114 (CMOS) 4C-3:8+ 10G 4-C-6114 (PRP), 8114 (CMGs) • (TMP) A)11�A 0R Q Q N. AP PUMP 1HP 1E2 E554 1E2 E554 7r1H' 43/32,34,36 C. T 1 PUMP 2HP 1E2 E554 1119111111 —1= =1= =1= C11=.1=11=1— G —I= =1-0 =I= =I= =1=� 1E2 0552 PU P SHP �a'C-318+110G (4805) $C-18114 (PRP), 30114 (CHCS) ¶ (SPARE) I CRY UGHT SUBSTATION 6000KVA 30 UNIT 11BM411/P703 PUM 1HP 1-C-318+1106 (460V) 1-C-6114 (CHCS) S. PUMP STATION PANEL 1E2 E553 (43/31,33,35) 1/--1-2T-316+1100 (480V) 2T-18114 (PRP). 36114 (CMTS) 2 (SPARE) 1 IT ij ITITI T1 1TT Fr LL LLWLuL}I IT ITIT1 n n r-1"-1 TTrr !milli !III I mil ill 2-2-C-412/0,112 1'C-4112 (EMERG) 43/31,33,35,32,34,36 t 2 C-618+21106 (4805) 2T (SPARE) 2T-42114 TO CMCS PANEL 2T-18114 TO PRP PM. WJ3-11 1E2 E556 S PU P 3HP 1 DUCT 3-2 C SPARE,1-4-C-31350,1-4-C SPARE L01ISTING 1 UCT -1 C�1-4-C-31350 313/0 4-C-314/0 (DISC IN PLACE) VAULT14 • 11111111W11111111111111111111111111110 i rfl:rrrrrrrl ilTln I lin-11f al Ij:', .LLI.I.LLI—I.ITiTI.I.I.I 11 iLGI.I �.LL—i.1 L • mom il •• :,.�� .. SOWN SOUNI BOEING 'N ��II►v""D- C1, SE PUMP sranoN vANvla, E1 L•���— (A3/31,33,35) 1E2 E553 1-C-3 18+1100 (�r, ,} I 1-C-6114 (CHCS) NEW DU 2 C(SPARp,1-4-(ACIIVE),1-4-C(SPAR I1 . • .7 6 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" = too' 0 A DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING 586456-02 glAiratirEZAW 586456-02 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 13.8K VOLT POWER MAIN FEEDERS AND 480Y/277 VOLT POWER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 Engineering and Construction SeMcet Sazan Group, Inc. 720 Olive, Suite 1525 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 267-1700 100 50 0 50 100 200 SCALE 1' = 100' CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 SHEET DATE • 05.01.09 ELECTRICAL MASTER PLANT2, WA MONO. 586456-02 2YD-112 ni m SYM .....,.aIl.vvITvIl INAJII-J PROVIDE CONDUCTORS IN 4' POWER CONDUIT IN DUCTBANK. REFER TO SHT. E360A, E361A, E600, E601, E602 AND E603. I> REFER TO DWGS. 02-31-1E64 AND 02-31-1E214 FOR CMCS & LIGHTING CONTROL PANELS WIRING REQUIREMENTS. © PROVIDE PILOT RELAY PANEL IN NEMA 1 ENCLOSURE AS ALSO NOTED ON SHT. 1E214. EXISTING RECEPTACLE/CIRCUIT IN MH-T9A. EXTEND CIRCUIT TO DUPLEX RECEPTACLES IN MH-T9B. PROVIDE (7) 912 CONDUCTORS IN EXISTING CONDUIT. © PROVIDE CONDUCTORS AND CONDUIT FROM J -BOX TO RELAY PANEL. PROVIDE NEMA 5-20R, WP, GEC! DUPLEX RECEPTACLE INSIDE MANHOLE FOR SUMP PUMP. SEE DETAILS ON SHTS. E600, E601, E602 AND E603. I LI I 11111111 1 1F • 1'C-21110+1106. 7112 4 h 3/4'C-7/1 1,' 1C3-1/30 4•C-2110+1106, 5112 SEE SKI E503 FOR MECH. E UIPMENI SCHEDU (1YP) FL-MI1C3 1/30 1 11111III111III1:1111111111111111 N11111111111111111111121111111111110111111191,1 II II I1 ITT T1 n ITT FT i IT FTm Tl n rri T1 ff II11111111111 !IIIIIII I' I rll:rim rrl hill - 1 11.1.I.1.1.1I.I.I.I.IT 11111 REVISCN BY APPROVED IMi SYM or N rn� A DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUD= 586456-02 SAZAN/MN PF 05.01.09 rei_4510E,AW SITE PLAN SCALE: 1' = 100' RECEIVED 'APR 0920101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACCEPTABILITY 1195 DESIGN AND/OR SPEOFYA1gN IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DA CHECKED RUMBLE O 586456-02 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 208Y1120 VOLT POWER Englneertng and Construction Services Sazan Group, Inc. 720 olive, Suite 1525 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 267-1700 100 50 0 50 100 200 SCALE: 1 • = 100' CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 BAWL DATE 05.01.09 ' CHECKED APPROVED ELECTRICAL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 PIANT2, WA SHEET 1E3 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. ONO NO. 2YD-1 E3 DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WP.TERWAY 1_...1 1 \' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I° I 1 \. I I II_10 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I� I I \I I I I I I 11 1 \ \I , 1 1 1 i 1 1 , 1 \ \ \ \ \\ \\ 1 I I 1 I I I \ L I I I I I I I I I I I I HH -3E1 2' 1 DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WA I 1 1 1?1 1 1 1 6 CJ I I I 1 :1 I I 1 I I IeJ ----- 1'C-218+p10G 1 C-3S8+110G 1'C-218+4 00 4W�H'S1E8c E504 ('YP' 1 -C -418+810G 1'C-3/8+R10G 1C -2/8+110G • \ �rr-r-l-rrr� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1'C-4#8+1100 1 y1 +1 11 1111 \LLg 7 I I I 1 \ \, \ Y \ W \-1-\ \ LY I 1 1 I\ \ V.3\ \ \\ \ \ �f� \O 1 ILL,. C, \L\_i,_�ll IP 111 12 L 1'2. \ \ \\ a 1'C -2j8+1 OG —1'C-318+51OG 0000000 'C-4fl8+#10 1 1'CI 3 81 10 L1 -3#8+10G 5c'-11 3 1000 PILOT RELAY P CMCS PANEL 2-40 DEMO 1'C-2�8+�tOG 1'C-38+�10G 1"C-8j8+#10G f,. 11 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n. I J1586456-02 BY SAZAN MN APPROVED P0 DATE 04.03.09 STY LTG E505 CO TACTOR EL APPROVED BY SUBRRE LIGHTING SITE PLAN DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS ELECTRICAL MASTER . PLANT 2 LEGEND RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY GENERAL NOTEO 1. CONDUIT TO BE 1/2' EMT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, WIRE IS STRANDED COPPER, TYPE XHHW INSULATION, #12 FOR POWER & #14 AWG FOR CONTROL 3. THE FOLLOWING COLOR CODING OF CONDUCTORS SHALL BE OBSERVED ON ALL CIRCUITS 600 -VOLTS OR LESS. LARGE SIZE CONDUCTORS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED WITH COLORED TAPE WHEREVER VISIBLE: 208Y/120V 480Y/277V 'A' 0 (LEFT BUS IN PNL) BLACK BROWN 'B' 0 (CENTER BUS IN PNL) RED ORANGE 'C" 0 (RIGHT BUS IN PNL) BLUE YELLOW NEUTRAL WHITE GREY EQUIPMENT GROUND GREEN GREEN 4. PERMANENTLY LABEL ALL RECEPTACLES, JUNCTION BOXES, SWITCHES, ETC., WITH PANEL AND CIRCUIT IDENTIFICATION. 5. INSTALL NEW OR REVISED PANEL SCHEDULES UPON COMPLETION OF JOB. REFERENCE DRAWINGS. ED:. SEE SHT. E503 FOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE CONSTRUCTION NOTES 0 586456-02 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 Engineering and Conshuctlon Services Suzan Group, Inc. 720 Olive. Suite 1525 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 267-1700 1E8 r_. 1EBc — 1E8c 40 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET COMM REVISION 586456-02 SYMBOL DAIE 05.01.09 SUES 1 E8a JOB N0 586456-02 COMP NO. 05.01.09 Na 2YD-1E8a �� ice•---* .ar 0 1"C 248+103 1 Al (BM �W H S 1 E8b E504 CrYP) (TYP 1"C 2j8+1106 TP) 1"C 218+1106 1"C 2O8+#10G 00000/0000 REVISION DATE 1 T RDAS= g)t_4977E7Af HH -4 ACCEPTABILITY spECDTDA IWS DnoN E9CNs 'A OR DEPT. DATE DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DAR i91ECNtD CHECKED su9RDE APPROVED APPROVED ELECTRICAL MASTER N LIGHTING SITE PLAN DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 LEGEND GENERAL NOTES RECEIVED IAPR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. CONDUIT TO BE 1/2" EMT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, WIRE IS STRANDED COPPER, TYPE XHHW INSULATION, #12 FOR POWER & #14 AWG FOR CONTROL 3. THE FOLLOWING COLOR CODING OF CONDUCTORS SHALL BE OBSERVED ON ALL CIRCUITS 600 -VOLTS OR LESS. LARGE SIZE CONDUCTORS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED WITH COLORED TAPE WHEREVER VISIBLE: 208Y/120V 480Y/277V "A" 0 (LEFT BUS IN PNL) BLACK BROWN "B" 0 (CENTER BUS IN PNL) RED ORANGE 0 (RIGHT BUS IN PNL) BLUE YELLOW NEUTRAL WHITE GREY EQUIPMENT GROUND GREEN GREEN 4. PERMANENTLY LABEL ALL RECEPTACLES, JUNCTION BOXES, SWITCHES, ETC., WITH PANEL AND CIRCUIT IDENTIFICATION. - 5. INSTALL NEW OR REVISED PANEL SCHEDULES UPON COMPLETION OF JOB. REFERENCE DRAWINGS E> SEE SHT. E503 FOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE CONSTRUCTION NOTES 0 586456-02 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 Engineering and Constiuctlon Services Sazan Group, Inc. 720 OINe. sure 1525 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 267-1700 IMF . 1E8c - 1E8c 11 a 40 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET RREHY Rfl15ON 586456-02 511180E 05.01.09 PLANT2, WA 1 E8b .Ws NQ 586456-02 COUP DWG NO. 2YD-1E8b IHARRIKUINUNKNI °11CLI_mot 3 .1(0010000 N L MCS PANEL • • 1'C -3#8+#10G 1'C -898+j100 • \. • ILZ 1E8...1904 'C-4#8+# OG 1-1-1-r "1-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LJJJ_LL1 1'C -2#8+g10 1'C -3#8+#10G rrrT-r-r-1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1'C -4#8+#10G • • 0000000000000 J3-1 1,3,5,7,9,11 'C-818+jBG ;RUmnmll 1 C -418+110G---/1 PNL WJ3-1 LEGEND RECEIVED (APR 0 9 2010 COMA/UNrTy GENERAL NOTES DEVELOPSENT 1. CONDUIT TO BE 1/2' EMT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, WIRE IS STRANDED COPPER, TYPE XHHW INSULATION, #12 FOR POWER & #14 AWG FOR CONTROL 3. THE FOLLOWING COLOR CODING OF CONDUCTORS SHALL BE OBSERVED ON ALL CIRCUITS 600 -VOLTS OR LESS. LARGE SIZE CONDUCTORS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED WITH COLORED TAPE WHEREVER VISIBLE: 208Y/120V 480Y/277V 'A' 0 (LEFT BUS IN PNL) BLACK BROWN 'B' 0 (CENTER BUS IN PNL) RED ORANGE 'C' 0 (RIGHT BUS IN PNL) BLUE YELLOW NEUTRAL WHITE GREY EQUIPMENT GROUND GREEN GREEN 4. PERMANENTLY LABEL ALL RECEPTACLES, JUNCTION BOXES, SWITCHES, ETC., WITH PANEL AND CIRCUIT IDENTIFICATION. 5. INSTALL NEW OR REVISED PANEL SCHEDULES UPON COMPLETION OF JOB. REFERENCE DRAWINGS LL ,> SEE SHT. E503 FOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE OREM I- 'I'l'I'l'I'l•I•I'i"I'1•1 *1 'I•I•1•1•(•1•1•1•1•1•1•1• I'I'I 'I'1'I•I'I I I 1 1.1. 6 I I I 1 III 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1-• +4-1 -1-1- 4-1- 4 -4-+4--4-1-1-I-4-+4-I-1-4-I-1-1-I-I-1-+-4-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 101 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. .1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. .1.1. 1.1.1.1 'c CONSTRUCTION NOTES PROVIDE LIGHTING CONTACTOR, SQUARE 0 CAT. 0LO80 WTFH H -O -A SELECTOR SWITCH IN NEMA I ENCLOSURE. .,.1.,.,,•,.1.,. ° 1 II I I 1 1 1 1 I I b �. 1 1 I III I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, 1 1'1 � 1 1 2-25 GARAGE BELOW GROUND 586456-02 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 Engineering and Construction SeMces Suzan Group, Inc. EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH APPROVED DDE 2-4X DEMO 4586456-02 SALW/MN PT " 05.01.09 0 gLBOE//VG® ACCEPTABILJTY 1115 OESGN ANDA/ 0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. DATE DRAWN wt SUEMT E LIGHTING SITE PLAN 720 ave. Suite 1525 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206)267-1700 Irwl4 x,1141) 40 20 0 40 80 120 CURRENT RDADON 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET sUBOL DATE 05.01.09 CHECKED APPROVED ELECTRICAL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLAN 2 PLANT2, WA WEE!' 1 E8c J08 N0. 586456-02 COUP NO. DNC NO. 2YD-1E8c ■ • i®■ II■ ■ ■ 111®■ 0000 IN I �■ ■ ■ ■ III ■ e ,a II ° • it + ` IY•i1� ■I 8 (ISP) 0000 Ili Ifi i ii 0 1 0000011 10000000_ IIMI T ■ 1 IIII I1 E. II! 1 IIM; 1 4 i1 1aji !ti a_iikvol1I:v�1 io96�l1l — ■. ii ,�oI I "ppp ,lloy.I I I I I I 1 I I I 0000000 HH -7 00010100000 LIGHTING CONTACTOR PNL A3-1 4COMM. VAULT' (SEE 02 -12T -1E6) O O H-8 I 4Ul WLHPS ' E503 () 10C 2j8+fl10G ". IL. 0-0 1"C 2#8+#10G PNL A3 -1/7o VW LTG. CONTACTOR 10C-418+1100 f9 —+— : vl 1iH NNW IMP OIMIL ®>i7lH�il�',7IE!!!!!lYIlL6�'3� .:.:1\\• LEGEND RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 GENERAL NOTES coMMUN(nr DEVELOPMENT 1. CONDUIT TO BE 1/2" EMT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, WIRE IS STRANDED COPPER, TYPE XHHW INSULATION, #12 FOR POWER & #14 AWG FOR CONTROL 3. THE FOLLOWING COLOR CODING OF CONDUCTORS SHALL BE OBSERVED ON ALL CIRCUITS 600 -VOLTS OR LESS. LARGE SIZE CONDUCTORS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED WITH COLORED TAPE WHEREVER VISIBLE: 208Y/120V 480Y/277V "A" 0 (LEFT BUS IN PNL) BLACK BROWN "B" 0 (CENTER BUS IN PNL) RED ORANGE "C' 0 (RIGHT BUS IN PNL) BLUE YELLOW NEUTRAL WHITE GREY EQUIPMENT GROUND GREEN GREEN 4. PERMANENTLY LABEL ALL RECEPTACLES, JUNCTION BOXES, SWITCHES, ETC., WITH PANEL AND CIRCUIT IDENTIFICATION. 5. INSTALL NEW OR REVISED PANEL SCHEDULES UPON COMPLETION OF JOB. REFERENCE DRAWINGS I 1 > 02-127-1.E10, 02-127-1E110, 02-127-E507 1 2 > SEE SHT. E503 FOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE CONSTRUCTION NOTES CONNECT TO SPARE CONTACT OF OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONTACTOR. © PROVIDE 1P/20A CIRCUIT BREAKER IN PNL A3 -1/7o TO FEED LIGHTING CIRCUIT. © REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING LIGHT POLE AND . LUMINAIRE RE -USE EXISTING CIRCUIT. PROVIDE NEW CONCRETE LIGHT POLE BASE. -14 IIIIIII,IIIIi 0 C H 111--fI I I iiiai ii iiov3 Y.T4.1 0 a r ,-1 I 1 I \I 1 EAST MARGINAL WAY 80 Y TH EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH ACCEPTABILITY MS DESIGN M10/OR SPECDICAION 5 AP APPROVED of DEPT. DATE SWORE LIGHTING SITE PLAN 586456-02 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 Engineering and Construction Services Sazan Group, Inc. 720 OIve, Suite 1525 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 267-1700 1E8b 0IE8a 1E8c P 40 20 0 40 80 120 CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 SCALE IN FEET SAIROL DATE 05.01.09 APPROVED APPROVED ELECTRICAL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 PLANT2, WA SHEET 1 E8d JOS NO. 586456-02 CWP N0. DRO N0. 2YD- 1E8d .1. 000000000000D00D000 2-4X DEMO J1586456-02 05/01/09 eiLATL7EZAIG* RRAI T)stn\PMR\ORIIO\OFCIF,N DUf.0\TF1 FF11M14-nlnnc\I4 .-rMr0-Cite-PI AN firm I Drnftn.- 11 TFRRF 1 I Ont Unto, MAY 01 20119 10:29:17 1 1 nn$ MndIFIP4 11ntot APR ill 7009 10779 7 I G _n1, PROGRESS PRINT ACCEPTABILITY MARC COROICE 1/19/08 THIS DESIGN AND/0R GRECRED SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED — — APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DAVE DORMIER 10/19/08 DAVEDDORMIER 10/19/08 APPROVED REI 10/19/08 APPRCVLD SUBTITLE CMCS PLAN CONS I RUC HON NOTES SEE DRAWING 2.YD—C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2—YD—G4. RECEIVED 'APR 092011P DCOOPN EVEL LEGEND O SAN MH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE o CB CATCH BASIN O WMH WATER MANHOLE PN POST INDICATOR VALVE ES WV WATER VALVE 0 WM WATER METER O FH FIRE HYDRANT ® ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT [226 E235 E244 E22 �.� � r �� . E21 [234 E243 E233 E242 4 22 E232 E231 E241 E240 E213 E221 E230 E239 KEY PIAN 6wE :KM E212 [220 E229 E238 [211 E219 E228 E237 E210 E218 E227 E236 20 10 0 20 40 60 SCALE IN FEET I mP®P1 °Ewiaw®®Qawg, °IMO. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vest Volley Ityioay Barth. Stitt IN A .0. VA 9859 10. 12591 80-7116 FAR 253) 919-2169 20 0 40 80 120 SCALE IN FEET CURRENT REAS10N SYMBOL A 586456-02 SHEET E215A DATE 05/01/09 TRUE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER PI ANT 2 JOB NO. 586456-02 CON? N0. OVIO NO. 9 vn—YY 344 • ''/° 7-11-rrT T1 -1�11- 1 I 1 I 1 1 1111111111111 1 l l'j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i LiJ1 LLLDl1J!_L1_ I 1 1 1 1 T1 n 4 rTT j- 1 I 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 I I 1 I i I I I I 0 LLI 1 IWI I I I n_1_1_1JJ 1_1_1_1 I III """"H"o 11 n n n l l l l Ilm--1-1 n n tes 111 ‘'''N‘Lreat ►,r►\1okve- j _.�� �•I�w�1��ala D fid' � ��.� �i►•�,`�i*-,=�,'`: III ����\` ��w� ;���t�! . 1.1.1.1.1•I.1•I•I•I.1•i•I•I•I•I•I.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1•I. 1•I•I 1.1.1.1• 1 1 1 II �1 1 I)/ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I t4-4-1-°1- ++ -�f +4 -I -I -1 -H{ -++4-I-1-1-1 11111111,111 11°111111111111111111111 !.1.I.1.1.1.1.1,1.1..1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. ▪ •I);;I�•1 1 l•.•�•.•I•p Il•l•l•l•I•I•I•I•I.I?•1 I•I•i•l•l• P I 1l1I 1 im—f ANNUM ■■�'IWOI Amu MEM °I IEEE MEM DI it r EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH g5,___ArzsEzisfc. ACCEPTABILITY •IMS 0E5ION AND/0R SPECIflGIION IS APPROVED APPROVED Sr DEPT. DATE 7112008\770 =DICE 1 Plot Beta APR 2009 150] 1 Le -DRAWN MARC CORDICE CHECKED 1-NDINEEN DAVE DOWER CHECKED DAVE DORMIER APPROVED APPROVED 1019/08 CONS I RUCTION NOTES SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -G4. RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGEND O CBSAN MH SANITARY SEER MANHOLE O H BASIN WMH • WATER MANHOLE PN POST INDICATOR VALVE ® WV WATER VALVE 0 WM 0 FH 0 WATER METER FIRE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT 2217 2216 2215 E214 2213 2212 [211 2210 E226 2235 2244 E225 2234 2243 2224 2233 2242 2223 E222 E24 2221 2220 29 38 KEY PLAN 006 N 20 10 0 20 40 (219 2228 2237 2218 2227 2236 60 SCALE IN FEET Haop®Q4 EngOnesolov9 Ono. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vnt Wiley NBhny North, LIN RI Aibr, VA 98001 1 . 12533 833-7776 EAS ¢33) 839-2168 40 20 0 40 80 SWORE 10/19/08 _12/_2&D 10/19/08 CMCS PLAN TTIIE DEMOLNION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD - CIVIL MASTER 12C SCALE IN FEET CIIRREN7 REVISION 501X01 586456-02 A 5x227 E230A JOB 80. 586456-02 PLANT 2 °"7 N0. 2 YO -YY 6YM A 100\0011 2-40 DEMO ;0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 000000000000 00000 e"'+"'".."111447— . 1: �61az1>za®�alsaaPaNacEZPs1a:xElIr lFlt:7�eiaQF39t3iii 111 1111111 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 11 1 I IIT(Ili III .IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1o1II111I11 1111111111111111111111111101111b1111111111111111 F-+L+4-1--1-1-Hfl-Ht t I ++-I-1-I-1-1-1--I-.I--I-I-1- +4-1-1-1-1- ++-+-1-1-++-1-1 1 I IItIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1 1 t. t 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0. 1 1 �., ` 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '- 1111111111111111111111111111���1111111111111 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH RENSON 4586456-02 7\OFCIF4I RVFC\TF1 FF@91-Mnnc\Na.-tAA -City-PI ANd n 1 Ili OED itrn Nnne RE1 M 1010111/0 DUE 05/01/09 1011+0 m AA APR 30 ?000 14:5319 I 1 nct MndiFlnd Dnfm APR 10 MA 14150(7 00 1 C1ihnlTf L PFRNIT CF DUE ACCEPTABILITY NZ DE= AtOt/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BT DEPT. GATE DRAWN MARC ED RDICE 10 19/08 CMCS PLAN CONS I RUC I ION NOTES EC>SEE DRAWING 2.YD-C3 FOR AU. CONSTRUCTION FLAG NOTE ON THIS SHEET. GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES SEE SHEET 2 -YD -04. RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010' LEGEND O SAN MH o CB O WMH PN WV o WM O 111 D 0226 0235 0244 COMMUNITY SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN WATER MANHOLE POST INDICATOR VALVE WATER VALVE WATER METER ARE HYDRANT ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE VAULT [217 E216 0215 [223 0214 0222 E23 E24 31 40 .121311212 1221 0230 0239 KEY PUN 914E :.tet 0220 0229 0238 [211 [219 0228 0237 0210 0218 0227 0236 20 10 0 20 40 60 SCALE IN FEET Ru p®Q4 Engline®Qawa, [Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vest Volley 111ansty No -0K LAte I0 Mt,, VA 9900 TEL 0D 87726 FAX 0T 939.2168 0 20 0 40 BO 120 SCALE IN FEET KEY PLAN CURRENT RD/610N 586456-02 SYMBOL A DATE 05/01/09 CO DRMIER CHECXED DAVE DORI,OER AOR APPROVED 10/19/08 10/19/08 10/19/08 DILE CNIL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-40 BUILDINGS PLANT 2 YARD JOSND. E232A , 586456-02 CORP N0. PLANT 2 000 Na 2.YD-XX RECEIVED APR 0920101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 586456-02 ISSUE FOR. CONSTRUCTION 05.01.09 WIDTH HOUSEKEEPING PAD FINISH FLOOR LEVEL ANCHOR BOLT (4 PLACES) FRONT ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION TRANSFORMER MOUNTING DETAIL SCALE: NONE 1E2 E504 WALL RENS MI re APPROVED aTE SYR CHAMFER ALL EXPOSED EDGES CONDUIT J (9) #5 REBAR EQUALLY SPACED #4 REBAR HOOPS 12' OC. POLE 1' NOM NON -SHRINK GROUT 11111211111 I�1a' ni 3 #4 REBAR HOOPS r OC. ANCHOR BOLTS BY POLE MANUFACTURER IIII 111 il 1111 •� 3' ANCHOR BOLT CIRCLE + 6' POLE BASE DETAIL 8 SCALE: NONE 1E8a,b,cd E504 OEMOUDON OF 2-4X BUBDNG 586456-02 SAZAN/NN PT 05.01.09 gLArdrEAsec. CHAMFER AU. EXPOSED EDGES POLE 1' NOM NON -SHRINK GROUT CONDUIT !dl lib I MIME (6) $5 REBAR EQUALLY SPACED #4 REBAR HOOPS 12' OC. 3 #4 REBAR HOOPS 3' OC. ANCHOR BOLTS BY POLE MANUFACTURER GRADE AUGER HOLE POUR CONCRETE AGAINST UN -DISTURBED SOIL a• I 1 ANCHOR BOLT CIRCLE + 6' POLE BASE DETAIL SCALE: NONE ACCEPTABILITY 7H5 DE51GN AND/OR SPECJFlUSON 15 APPROVED 0T. 00,7E TE CHECKED GRIME DETAILS Engineering and Construction Services Sazan Group, Inc. GOOREN0 REVISION 566456-02 720 Olive. Suite 1525 Seattle. Washington 98101 (206) 267-1700 5000/ OATE 05.01.09 CHECKED APPROVED APPROVED DEMOU11ON OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 ELECTRICAL MASTER PLANT2, WA SHEET E504 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG NO. 2YD-E504 PROVIDE BACKFILL PER NOTES 13,18 AND 29. EXISTING GRADE (8) #4 C TEL DUCTS 4 REBAR (SEE NOTE 28) SIDE OF TRENCH PLASTIC SPACER SECTION USE 5" SPACER FOR 5" CONDUIT (TYP.) PEA GRAVEL' AGGREGATE GRAVEL BORROW (SEE NOTE 13) FINISHED GRADE OR SLAB REPAIR PVMT. TO MATCH EXISTING 3° 7 1/2" 7 1/2" 7 1/2" SECURELY TIE 2° CONDUIT IN 4° SPACERS -(TYP. FOR SMALLER CONDUIT) LENGTH OF DUCTBANK. TIE TO GROUND ROD IN MANHOLES. 16" 7 1/2" 5" (4) #4 C POWER DUCTS '1��!l�4 DISTURBED\ D GRADE %`!�;'! DUCTBANK SECTION SCALE: NONE 1 I a E572 CONDUIT CONTINUED OVERHEAD SPARE CONDUIT IN FLOOR SHALL TERMINATE WITH PLUGGED COUPLING FLUSH WITH FINISHED SLAB. ,44 VS UNDISTURBEss14 4" SUB GRADE \� R=36" (MIN.) U.N.O. PVC TO RGS CONDUIT TRANSITION COUPLING PVC CONDUIT, SIZE AS NOTED. OiED CONDUIT RISER INSTALLATION DETAIL SCALE: NONE RGS CONDUIT, SIZE AS NOTED. COVER WITH 2 COATS OF BITUMASTIC. NEW 36"0 D.I. SOLID MANHOLE FRAME AND COVE rTh E572 Galvanized "CChannel, 2'-0" Lg. 1 Each Side, 4 Sides UIvuLI\VI\UUIVU UUIVUUII ULINtS.PL NU I LJ 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND INTERFERENCES INCLUDING PIPING, ELECTRICAL, AND CIVIL INSTALLATIONS WHICH MAY NOT BE SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS AND MAY OVERLAP WITH FINAL ROUTING OF DUCT BANKS AND/OR LOCATION OF MANHOLES. ANY DAMAGE TO SUCH EXISTING INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. 2. CONDUIT STUB UPS SHALL BE PER THE EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER'S DIMENSIONS AND PER THE CONTRACTOR'S APPROVED CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION DRAWINGS. STUB UP LOCATIONS SHALL 8E PER THE PLAN DRAWING SET. (REF. DETAIL 2 THIS SHT. FOR STUB UP CONSTRUCTION.) 3. EXCAVATION, TRENCHING, SAW CUTTING, MATERIAL REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL, VAULT PLACEMENT, SHORING, DEWATERING, AND ROAD RESURFACING SHALL CONFORM TO EARTHWORK, TRENCHING AND PAVING SPECIFICATIONS SECTIONS 02210, 02310, 02513, AND 02514. 4. FIELD VERIFY ALL MEASURED QUANTITIES TO ENSURE FUNCTION AND FIT. 5. VERIFY MANHOLE ELEVATIONS AND DUCT ARRANGEMENT PRIOR TO PLACEMENT TO ENSURE PROPER COORDINATION WITH DUCT BANK ELEVATION, CROSS-SECTIONS, AND THE PREMANUFACTURED CONDUIT KNOCKOUTS. THE CONTRACTOR MAY USE MANUFACTURER'S STANDARD DESIGN KNOCKOUTS OR CUSTOM DESIGNED KNOCKOUTS AS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE THE DUCT BANK PROFILES AND CROSS SECTIONS INDICATED. (REF. DETAIL 1, THIS SHT. FOR GENERAL DUCTBANK CONSTRUCTION.) 6. NEW MANHOLES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH SUFFICIENT WEIGHT TO OVERCOME FLOTATION DUE TO HIGH WATER TABLE. WATER TABLE LEVEL IS APPROXIMATELY 60" BELOW FINISHED GRADE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY. UTILITY VAULT 444 -LA E572 I `Y EEv72 7. NEW MANHOLES INSTALLED IN LOCATIONS WITH SOFT OR WET SOIL SHALL HAVE AN 18' TO 24" DEEP PREPARED BASE CONSISTING OF 7' TO 9" DIAMETER OUARRY ROCK AND 3" OF PEA GRAVEL TOPPING. 8. ADD RISERS AS NECESSARY TO BRING MANHOLE OPENING TO GRADE. MANHOLE COVER SHALL BE 1° ABOVE FINISH GRADE AND SLOPED TO PREVENT WATER ENTRY. 9. ALL SEAMS IN RISER AND MANHOLES SHALL BE GROUTED WITH QUICK PLUG OR EQUIVALENT PER UTILITY VAULT SPECIFICATIONS. 10. MINIMUM COVER OF 30" FROM TOP OF MANHOLE TO GRADE, EXCLUDING RISER AND COVER, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, OR INDICATED ON PROFILE DRAWINGS. . 11. CONDUIT TERMINATIONS AT MANHOLES SHALL ENTER THROUGH PRE-SET KNOCKOUTS ONLY AND NOT TO EXTEND MORE THAN 3/4' BEYOND THE INSIDE WALL DO NOT SAW OR DRILL THROUGH CONCRETE WALLS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. INSTALL END BELLS ON ALL CONDUITS AT MANHOLE. PROVIDE 1/2" x 18" SHEAR PIN AT EACH CORNER OF DUCT BANK ENTRY INTO MANHOLE. 12. ALL MANHOLES SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH 7/8" PULLING IRONS, . LADDERS, AND STANDARD TELCO RACKING PACKAGE PER UTILITY VAULT CO., BOEING AND (WHERE APPUCABLE), BTSMP SPECIFICATIONS. 13. FOR DUCTBANK INSTALLATION, IF SOIL IS SOFT OR WET, REMOVE IT 12" BELOW CONCRETE ENCASEMENT. BACKFILL WITH GRAVEL BORROW AND COMPACT TO 95% DENSITY PER ASTM 01557. 14. CARLON BASE AND INTERMEDIATE DUCT SPACERS (OR EQUIVALENT) SHALL BE PLACED 12" FROM EACH JOINT AND ON 5'-0" CENTERS THROUGHOUT DUCT RUN. 15. TIE CONDUITS TO SPACERS TO PREVENT HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT (ie. 2" CONDUIT, 4" SPACER OPENING). 16. All CONDUITS (NOT PRESENTLY USED) IN MANHOLES SHALL BE PLUGGED UTILIZING EXPANDABLE RUBBER PLUGS. 17. A MINIMUM 3' ENVELOPE OF RED CONCRETE SHALL BE PLACED AROUND ALL CONDUITS 'AND SPACERS. CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE SHALL BE PER SPECIFICATION SECTION 03300. 18. SELECT BACKFILL MATERIAL FOR TRENCHES AND DUCTBANKS SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% DENSITY, RELATIVE TO IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING UNDISTURBED SOIL PER ASTM D1557 AND ASTM D2049. SEE UTILITY VAULT COMPANY (206)839-3500 STANDARD VAULT DRAWINGS FOR - INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS AND KNOCKOUT LOCATIONS. 6" PEA GRAVEL 12" 6x8 QUARRY SPALLS UNDISTURBED OR RECOMPACTED SOIL 4' PVC SDR 35 TO TEL VAULT Optional Galvanized Pulling Iron 1 Each Corner HAND HOLE SCALE: NTS E360A,E361A E572 VAULT 444 -LA - DRAWING OF A 2-4X DEMO RECORD . ' 972198 J1586456 HGI/SDB 05/01/09 se)LAKCEZAW APPROVED BY SUM= .O0 MAIf®NpwmtW 1 11. ter N F CIR. 1 M •tr Mw IO BM 1.81 I i,n*WIN a.n 21 w..1 I ILL.. IS 111m R.LONG 12.15.97 2.12.98 212.98 2.16.98 2.16.98 2.16.98 nE 19. UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN, PITCH CONDUITS TOWARD MANHOLES FOR DRAINAGE. SLOPE SHALL BE 0.5 PERCENT MINIMUM UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS. WHERE UNANTICIPATED INTERFERENCES REQUIRE FIELD ADJUSTMENTS TO THE DUCTBANK PROFILES INDICATED 014 THE PLANS, DIRECTION OF SLOPE SHALL NOT BE REVERSED. AT DUCTBANK TRANSITIONS TO FIT MANHOLE OR OTHER DUCTBANK CONNECTIONS, MAINTAIN CONDUIT SLOPE IN SAME DIRECTION AS INDICATED FOR THAT SECTION OF DUCTBANK. 20. MINIMUM 15-0" BENDING RADIUS REQUIRED ON CONDUIT SECTIONS OF 400' OR MORE. 21. MINIMUM 3'-0" BENDING RADIUS REQUIRED ON NON -COMMUNICATIONS CONDUIT SECTIONS ENTERING BUILDINGS. SEE DETAIL 2, THIS SHEET. 22. CONCRETE FOR DUCT ENCASEMENT SHALL BE PEA GRAVEL AGGREGATE TO ALLOW FOR PROPER FLOW BETWEEN CONDUITS. 23. MAINTAIN 12° MINIMUM EDGE -TO -EDGE SEPARATION BETWEEN POWER CONDUIT AND COMMUNICATIONS CONDUIT IN CONCRETE OR IN EARTH. 24. MAINTAIN MINIMUM 12" SEPARATION BETWEEN DUCT BANK AND UTILIDOR OR EXPOSED MECHANICAL PIPING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 25. ALL CONDUITS SHALL BE PROVEN SUITABLE FOR CABLE PLACEMENT BY PULLING THROUGH A MANDREL 1/4" LESS THAN THE DIAMETER OF THE CONDUIT FOLLOWED BY A WIRE BRUSH 1/4" GREATER THAN THE DIAMETER OF THE CONDUIT. ALL CONDUITS SIIALL BE EQUIPPED WITH 1/2" CONDUX MEASURING TAPE OR EQUIVALENT, RATED AT 1,500 POUNDS PULLING STRENGTH. 26. A STRIPE OF SAFETY ORANGE (FSC -12246) SHALL BE PAINTED ON OUTSIDE PAVING AND BUILDING FLOORS (AND WALLS) TO DESIGNATE WHERE ELECTRICAL CONDUIT CARRYING CIRCUITS OF MORE THAN 600 VOLTS ARE BURIED OR OTHERWISE CONCEALED. PAINT STRIPE SHALL BE 12° WIDE. THE LEGEND "13,800 VOLTS' AND/OR "26,000 VOLTS" SHALL BE STENCILED IN GLOSS BLACK (FSC -17038) AT INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 50'-0". 27. ANCHOR CONDUITS WITH REBAR AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT FLOTATION DUE TO HIGH WATER TABLE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 28. DUCT BANKS IN ROADWAY SHALL BE REINFORCED WITH #4. REBAR. HORIZONTAL BAR THE FULL LENGTH OF THE DUCT BANK SHALL BE EVENLY SPACED ON BOTH TOP AND BOTTOM, AS INDICATED WITH A 2"-0" LAP AT SPUCES. A REBAR LOOP AROUND THE DUCT BANK CROSS SECTION SHALL BE SPACED 5'-0' O.0 THE FULL LENGTH OF THE DUCT BANK AS INDICATED. REBAR SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 1-1/2" CONCRETE COVER. 29. INSTALL RED PVC WARNING TAPE ABOVE DUCT BANK AND BURIED 12" BELOW FINISHED GRADE TO INDICATE PROXIMITY OF CONCRETE ENCASEMENT. THE TAPE SHALL BE OF A 8" WIDE BY 4 MIL THICK CONSTRUCTION. 30. ALL TELEPHONE CONDUIT INCLUDING BENDS TO BE PVC TELEPHONE DUCT, TYPE C FOR 4 -INCH SIZE AND TYPED FOR 2 -INCH, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN. 31. BENDING RADII FOR TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION CONDUIT RUNS SHALL BE 15 -FEET MINIMUM WHERE POSSIBLE FOR HORIZONAL BENDS AND 4 -FEET MINIMUM FOR VERTICAL, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN 014 THE PLANS. STUB -UPS TO BE BITUMASTIC WRAPPED RIGID. 32. ALL ELECTRICAL POWER CONDUIT TO BE UL 651, SCHEDULE 40, RIGID POLYVINYL CHLORIDE TYPE. PVC ELBOWS ARE NOT PERMITTED. FORM FIELD BENDS ONLY WITH MANUFACTURER'S HEATER. PENETRATIONS THROUGH FLOOR: RIGID STEEL STUB -UPS: RIGID STEEL ELBOWS. SNB -UPS AND FLOOR PENETRATION THROUGH ENDS SHALL BE THREADED. CAP UNUSED CONDUITS WITH THREADED CAPS. FOR BENDS IN PVC RUNS OF LESS THAN 15 FT. RADIUS, USE SCHEDULE 40 RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL. 33. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF BENDS IN ANY COMMUNICATIONS GIVEN RUN SHALL NOT EXCEED 180 -DEGREES (I.E.: TWO 45 -DEGREE AND ONE 90 -DEGREE OR FOUR 45 -DEGREE BENDS) UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS. ELECTRICAL DETAILS AND GENERAL NOTES RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Rjper/ E nlgH n esuing9 Mc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL 1519 Vest Valley Highway North, Suite 101 Auburn, VA 98001 TEL (253) 833-7776 FAX (253) 939-2168 CURRENT REVISION 586456 51E0 05/01/09 PLANT 2 YARD 586456 ELECTRICAL MASTER PLANT 2 7 -Y(1 -F57 cvii mist/a) amiswzni • ® O LUO E0 a 0 i 2 1, -VP ' gl 1.5 g • 1 , • b 'd "• 8 •"' g 1 Hi lg0a Rel !• i 5 G7 g F 08c��i 1b �� �� �g��i �' S �' 8 $ 2 y5 v o �L^ BC . $ 2 go °¢ F g gwg"� �. 9Ll �4 x ; `� � � 60 to � � g: • W� . �z � � � hI!I �C¢,� `' a . dHdb p�p IZL:pe� 1i$ �` LSA €3 � � �& 2214 r � 8 $ � Nz � � i� Z F �� 5�y��yi �`.' �0�eJ �F� � FE N o��� � 4! "�1 di rn :11 d <� rF.i t1 R' ��,ti :j gd .Hp� 'dSlczoiz9iog}� Ym ��i`3<��d "��$ �4cm8rc'�' � 8� �o, ill ao N ri. u+ m n ad d I z' 1 1111 bz c tL ��' !ilJ - C C :; " `i Uhl o o"� > 'ng'. ran rt.8n8i 9 a• V �. g ' 1118 c 12 �g �� ��3� 1 � Ym k' 08 � o i 2' 01 1 1 o4 S 1 ao R o �� 4 gil $ G7 FRo .2 . gS k $ d S GGII S Sg x 1 Y1. � � i5 oily ill: F 'W gal • !di Ai - 814 P��:3 0 °d �b �j 3R � �gp+��� ! ! �"�" �no� � QQG CG o $ Z . IDI Yl Ps � E F-8 ����� 1�.� � � 1 $� I��� � ��5�� �Sa� &1.. �N,a 0`1��9J � �g�� "g *5' `57F1 ` 0 . �1Q"'`[j���`ii� � � � o � y, 6 °hi -Ig iw• 0it lg Fi a511i! �� ���� �O= �eQi��! �i0�� ��CZ��� �~� 11 b iiW 1 oOlu 1ih FIg Z g o� 33 001f�`51 <Pa g' GG11 i �d�� i�e X88 o3$d N rS O. W •d ti . g• ' 8$ ili o"Al e-. 01 � �3 6dhi n8�. 4 • � a g� j?5 o�Jigl� p;( a is g Q- 3V Ct 7D:n i 3 �. gl e �� �F���� ���� �8.I33 7 orsogl ' �C l �{y3�5�wG x;U g 1 oil ilk . {{a ry r n 11ThE • • DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS • BUILDING 231 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER PLANT 2 gi• • • 1% / t 11 11 g ss 6 8 - 8a . 8C(�.��.TH go !Val; i vo.-.1g �4 auk 52 5I !• it lgil913 H ihIlii111/i1 1di i il. hil liN la igil 1 iiiil Sl 7 l ff li .e, � g p p �j h�+ b q c� �t gg : .2 -,8 J'Sd� 5gg4ggg§g25�s z2`te'2:g 3o 86g da aw` �df OPEfiR � ..d.H2$ .Dth GfAB, LIGG�i �nGG RFAMO � 5558 i aa3,%a gz g • Zg5. $2 g3 $ t� l i i li5liN IhhhIIItIl ibkh LPI"ll ii!I ilgJh gnk ihk t1 § .880S5adggw888888 :0000gao�o8$ ",6ataad 18at3$6 ,?. a w efSgEm wz 3i86O4l8'Rl 25 89 k 410 a . 4 T a 1 . � ••1 1 1$ g .g 1 1 g 1 1.11k i .1121 it' 1 ! c g 1 I- g g .g g g g 11 i a i l .o 2 g .• i . I g :1 Iv papa u �: ... � : o. 4. . W • i (2) s .111 • _ 1 1 le 1' 1 a 80 .... � O 0 5 __� ' l�a� �5 ui.i il i V I 1 " -'.8. • : ':.6- o e..• �'.a 1�..� ® O~ d� a •: •s 1 T IIIIII� ral *h?IIIIIII IiIIII'IIIl 'III!"Wm" 110011 �II IIIIIi�! STORAGE AREA 8,572 SF = 29 O CUPANTS 1T - 10 OCCU O 0 O 0 O LEGEND: T4' INDICATES OOT PATH AND DISTANCE E---- OF TRAVEL FROM FURTHEST POINT. 'DOT POSIED DOT SIGN. 5EE ELECTRICAL GENERAL NOTES: 1. GRIDS ARE TYPICALLY 25' 0.C. FACH WAY. EXITING/OCCUPANCY PLAN Q SCALE N.T.S. DEMOLISH 2-4X BU DPXS 586456-02 BOE//VGO ACCEPTABILITY YOFST014 MN/0R SPECOINa 01105 6 MPROYID APPROVED SY DEPT. DATE' EC ROLLUDA ENGINEER MR 12.12.05 SLHIIRE PARTIAL EXITING/OCCUPANCY PLAN ORE DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS APPROVED APPROVED . BUILDING 2-31 RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010! COMMUNITY' DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL WA-WF/10-14 PLANT 2 CURRENT PENSION 511180L 586456-02 — sum EXITING 'OS NO..586456-02 DWG NO. Mrt 05.01.09 COUP NO. 2-31-EXmNG 4 T.O. CLERESTORY PARAPET 23'-6� T.O. LOWER ROOF PARAPET if FINISH FLOOR 1'. 28'-0' IV 1.-0" c -N SIM. A62 A507 SIDING 13 E 2 1 � 1 A62 A508 ' SIDING 13 . SIDING it SOUTH ELEVATION (GRID 7 TO GRID 11) SCALE 1/8'=1'-0' 14'-0' X 14'-0' HIGH OVERHEAD DOOR . A62 A62 'STEEL FRAME CANOPY NOTE: FOR ALL HEAD, JAMB AND. SILL DETAILS AT OVERHEAD DOORS, AND MAN DOORS, SEE DETAILS ON SHEET A351. . SIDING TYPES. SIDING #1 - AEP SPAN 'HR -36' SIDING #2 - AEP SPAN 'PRESTIGE • • SIDING #3 - AEP SPAN 'NU -WAVE CORRUGATED' SIDING #2 SIDING #3. SIDING 12 12 FLASHING. BAND • $.T.0: CLERESTORY PARAPET FINISH FLOOR 3'-0''X 7'-0' DOOR SIDING $1 6'-0r X 7'-0" DOOR X 14'-0' HIGH OVERHEAD DOOR STEEL FRAME CANOPY SOUTH ELEVATION (GRID 3 TO GRID 7) SCALE 1/8'=1'-0' n A62 A62 I- STEEL FRAME .CANOPY 009 REVISION DATE .REVISION BT APPROVED DALE A DE}EOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS . 586456-02 :C/ROLLUOP 05.01.09 BOE/A/6® ACCEPTABILITY MIS 0ESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 1127:08 DRAWN EC/ROLLUOA NUNLEN CHECKED 14'-0' X 14'-0' HIGH OVERHEAD DOOR STEEL FRAME CANOPY EPDXY FILL (4) FORMER PENETRATIONS AT CONCRETE WALL. PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING ADJACENT SURFACE. NEW STAIR PER DETAIL ON A507 AND PER STRUCTURAL -0' X 7'-0' DOOR RECEIVED 'APR .092010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION SUBRRE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS CURfFNT REVISION MIME 586456-02 A DATE 05.01.09 APPROVED APPROVED TTRE DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS ' ARCHITECTURAL MASTER BUILDING 2.31 PLANT 2 SHET A62 JOB NO.586456-02 COMP NO. 2.31-A62 31'-6" U EXISTING CONCRETE METAL F. IDING 12" FLASHING BAN • A62 A62 12" FLASHING BAND 23'-6"23'-6" T.O. LOWER ROOF PARAPET $ T.O. LOWER ROOF PARAPET METAL SIDING $1 • NEW 24"W X 121H LOWER PER MECHANICAL 15' A.F.F. — CONCRETE CURB BASE SOUTH ELEVATION (GRID 1 TO GRID 3) A SCALE 1/8"=1'-0' A62 A62 METAL SIDING #2 (W D T.O. CLERESTORY PARAPET 23'-6" 12" FLASHING BAND T.O. LOWER ROOF PARAPET . • • 71, FINISH FLOOR A62 A62 • METAL SIDING $1 STEEL CANOPY FRAME . FINISH FLOOR FINISH FLOOR • NOTE: FOR ALL HEAD, JAMB AND SILL DETAILS AT OVERHEAD DOORS, AND MAN DOORS, SEE DETAILS ON SHEET A351. SIDING TYPES' . SIDING $1 - AEP SPAN. "HR -36" SIDING #2 - AEP SPAN "PRESTIGE SIDING #3 - AEP SPAN "NU -WAVE CORRUGATED" PRE -FINISHED METAL PARAPET CAP METAL SIDING /2 1 NEW 3'-0" X 7'-0" HM DOOR AND FRAME CONCRETE CURB BASE NEW 14'-0" X 14'-0" OVERHEAD DOOR EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" B A6.3_12,,63 A62 METAL SIDING #1 A DEMOLISH 2-48 BUILDINGS • 586456-02 3'-0" X 7'-0" DOOR NEW STEEL FRAME CANOPY PER DETAIL ?/A507. BT .0/Rouuor APPROVED WEST ELEVATION A SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" LAX REVISER , ay APPROVED • 611E 05.01.09 A631A63 7\1 3'-0" 'X 7'-0" DOOR 3'-0" X 7'-0" DOOR • NEW STEEL FRAME CANOPY NEW STEEL FRAME CANOPY PER DETAIL ?/A507. PER DETAIL ?/A507. BOE/AW ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND 001 SPECOGADON 15 APPRMID APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 0RAYM EC ROLLUDA DATE 10.27.08 ENGINtE9 ZFIECKED APPROVED APPROVED RECEIVED APR 0 9 20141 coramautiny Esemorionnr ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 000001E SOUTH AND (PARTIAL) EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS• TOLE DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS ARCHITECTURAL MASTER BUILDING 2.25 CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 rnea A 05.01.09 A63 JOB NO., 586456-02 COIR NO. PLANT 2 PY6 ND 2.25-A63 ERIC: 04/07/09 13:47 25'-0" • 1r --0T5 .25'-0" •10 25'-0" 25'-0" 25'-0" 25'-0" 23'-1" i.v 26'-11" 1�1 x 71_3>E.0.72 ( N15 ) 12' GATE . 21'-3" EDGE OF LOADING DOCK ri-o 6 11 6 C 6 C 6 C g Fi 6 = 6 C 6 • 9,-6" n 1A13 5532 ( N17 FAMO x x x 3 WALL OF TUNNEL BELOW (15C8 FAMO 1n 0 6 -11 EXIST— LADDER 15'-0" PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"0 FOR CONTINUATION SEE SHEET 1A14 (14C8 I 17 7 14C6 MATCHUNE LEGEND = EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION ® NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION GENERAL NOTES VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDTNONS IN FIELD PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. BRING ANY DISCREPANCIES. TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION. PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING WILL BE OCCUPIED DURING CONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE ALL WORK TO AVOID AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, ANY INCONVENIENCE TO BUILDING OCCUPANTS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR SAFETY, ACCESS AND EGRESS DURING THE PROJECT WORK. FULLY SCREEN OFF AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY TEMPORARY SCREENS OR PARTITIONS AS NECESSARY TO OMIT DUST, DIRT, NOISE, FUMES OR ODORS FROM ENTERING OCCUPIED AREAS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS FOR PALLET RACK SCHEDULE SEE DWG. 2.31-5518. CONSTRUCTION NOTES NEW FRAME WALL AT COLUMN UNE 11 AT EXISTING TRANSPORTATION AISLE PER SECTION C/A201. © NEW 3'-O" X 7'-O" HM DOOR AND FRAME SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A351. © CLEAN AND PAINT EXISTING SILLL COLUMN. RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2011 O COMMUNITY 8' D WSLODMENT I ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION KEY PLAN SCALE NONE 4' 0 4' 8' 16' SCALE: 1/8"=1'-O" m DOE rn I64NOJED DYE NENE CRANE CREW J, 120255-04 RW8 10.31.02 D UPGRADE HALLNAY 672027-00 BB WAIL 04.30.98 RELOCATE NARY TEC95 150512-00 J. BURT 3.25.05 PROVIDE POWER TO EOUIPYENT D82F1310 80116 07.16.98 K RELOCATE MARY TECHS 150512-00 30101 BURT 5/11/05 REPLACE BI -FOLD DOORS BB 11.10.00 DEYO1J91 2-4X BUILDINGS .586456-02 :c/RO LUDP 05.01.09 G EARTHQUAKE OFFICE REBUILD 310960-00 RSA 12.04.01 H C&J & PRONE POWER NOW 120255-00 RWB 10.31.02 ce;LAtiroz.vc. ACCEPTABIUTY 1685 0ES1641 AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN W. L SHFARN LHCCKED R. G ADNEY MP al• J. BURT CHECKED ZW APPROVE➢ DAIS 6.26.84 1.8.90 1.2.90 1.2.90 SUBTIDE 181E • PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 C0RREIR REVISION 586456-02 SnxBOL 05.01.09 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER • COL WA-WF/7-11 PLANT 2 SHEET 1A13 .LOB NO. 586456-02 COUP H0. DWG HO. 2.31-1A13 • 25'-0" • CONFERENCE • ' ROOM 111WF101 •GCU HOLD AREA 111WHI01 C. g RAMP CONFERENCE ROOM 112WF951 r 12WF9S1 9 :RAMP 25'-0" • 25'-0" UNE — SEE 1A13 FOR CONTINUATION 25-0" 23'-10' OPEN 0 C 111WF951 n � START SYSTEM C 0 OPEN OFFICE 111WF81 NEW RAMP 1:20 SLCPE� DN CEIUNG IN THIS CORNER 26'-11" MEETING & LUNCH ROOM " \J 0 LEGEND o EXISDNG WALL CONSTRUCTION ® NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES 1. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS IN FIELD PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. BRING ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION. 2. PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING WILL BE OCCUPIED DURING CONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE ALL WORK TO AVOID AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, ANY INCONVENIENCE TO BUILDING OCCUPANTS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR SAFETY, ACCESS AND EGRESS DURING THE PROJECT WORK. FULLY SCREEN OFF AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY TEMPORARY SCREENS OR PARTITIONS AS NECESSARY TO OMIT DUST, DIRT, NOISE, FUMES OR ODORS. FROM ENTERING OCCUPIED AREAS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS 1. FOR PALLET RACK SCHEDULE SEE DWG. 2.31—S518. 1A14 501 PLAN VIEW SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0" SYM A B C 0 E REV61011 RELOCATE STORES ADO PALLET RACKS J+ 972127-00 4972273-00 RELOCATE DOORS 4972273-00 CAD CONVERSION DBT/PRIME POWER/DBM MOVE TO 2-31 J1902028-00 BY WIN BB WM KZ PJG FSI 8B IFPROYED : BOE 10.15.97 11.26.97 12.04.97 03.10.98 01.18.01 Sri AS BUILT 4902028-00 DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS 586456-02 Br BOYS EC/R011UD) APPROVED 0810 01.22.02 05.01.09 cA_AFAFE7ArG. ACCEPTABILITY DBS DISxi1 AND/OR SPECB1CATIDN IS APPROVED WL SHEARN 08.24.64 CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1� NEW FRAME WALL AND COLUMN UNE. AT EXISTING TRANSPORTATION AISLE PER SECTION AJA201._ NEW FRAME WALL PER B/A201. SEE STRUCTURAL © NEW 3'-0' X 7'-0" HM DOOR AND FRAME SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A351. ® CLEAN AND PAINT EXISTING STEEL .COLUMN. NEW .14.-0" X 14'-0" OVERHEAD DOOR. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON 'SHEET A351. NEW STAIR TO EXISTING TUNNEL BELOW. SEE STRUCTURAL SHEETS S536 AND S537. PROVIDE GUARDRAIL AROUND STAIR PER DETAIL A/A508. NEW FRAME WALL AT COLUMN UNE 11 AT EXISTING TRANSPORTATION AISLE PER SEC ION. C/A201. NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL ECEIVED `APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION (.NECKED CHECKED APPROVED APPROVED 181E ELECTRICAL MASTER PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN DEMOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 COL WF—WA/7-10 OP KEY PLAN SCALE NONE 8' 4' 0 4' 8' .16' SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" CURRENT REVBON 0 000 586456-02 F DATE 05.01.09 PLANT2, WA 1A14 .K9 Na 586456-02 0011P N0. DWG N0. 2.31-1A14 FRIG 04/13/09 14:31 U.J 1A,N11 175'-0" 25'-0° 25'-O° 25'-0" 25'-0" PIPE COLUMNS SIMULATOR F� LADDER NETWORKS CONTRa, CENTEF FOR CONTINUATION SEE SHEET 1A15 SWITCH BOARD omCLE 3G6 OFFICE ( CORRIDOR 2G6 WORK ROOM ( 1G5 1F5 ) < G6 > BATTERY CURB -1-4 X 8 3/4"A.C. SHEET OF PLYWOOD • AT WEST WALL . DIST FRAME I I 1 FLFN. CHANGE TYP. TELEPHONE . SWITCHROOM P]DF 1H6 _CONTINUOUS 4-X 8 SHEETS OF 3/4° A.C. ARE TREATED PLYWOOD ALONG '1 EAST WALL OF ROOM 52. DEME ( 2H5 ) (1H5) OFFICE FE < 115 ) FIC j MATCHUNE 1F4.> F-1 u, V F-1 ( 114 ) PLANT PAGING OFFICE OFFICE ( 110 ) <1116> AIRLOCK 10'-0" 7'-6" <111A)G • STORAGE 2'-0' 1A16 A201 A 2'-6 ` A 1 1A16A 01 1A16 A111 7'-0" EXIT CORRIDOR < S5 s,-6" 111WJ51 B 1A161A201 4 STORAGE 111WJ4 I my PLAN VIEW SCALE 1/8' = 1'-0" APPROVED DATE sTU REVISION er APPROVED DATE CAD CONVERSION A DBT, PRIDE POWER AND.CBM MOVE J9902028-00 B EARTHQUAKE OFFICE REBUILD . AS BURS JI310960-00 4902028-00 UMW 88 RSA 11.19.96 01.18.01 12.04.01 01.22.02 OE110LISH 2-4X BUILDINGS 586456-02 SIC/ROLLUD9 05.01.09 gLAstisr.LF,Arc !NN G151EIiED STATE10911E OF M N ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN MID/0R SPEGTF1C 11011 IS APPROVED Ef/ DEPT. DATE PRwm AP DRAWN 7'-0" eerL LEGEND o EXISRNG WALL CONSTRUCTION . ® NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES 1. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS IN FIELD PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. BRING ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION. 2. PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING WILL BE OCCUPIED DURING ' CONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE ALL WORK TO AVOID AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, ANY INCONVENIENCE TO BUILDING OCCUPANTS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR SAFETY, ACCESS AND EGRESS DURING THE PROJECT WORK. FULLY SCREEN OFF AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY TEMPORARY SCREENS OR PARTITIONS AS . NECESSARY TO LIMIT DUST, DIRT, NOISE, FUMES OR ODORS FROM ENTERING OCCUPIED AREAS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS 1. FOR PALLET RACK SCHEDULE SEE DWG. 2.31-S518. CONSTRUCTION NOTES NEW FRAME WALL AND COLUMN UNE AT EXISTING TRANSPORTATION AISLE PER SECTION A/A201. 2� NEW FRAME WALL PER B/A201. SEE STRUCTURAL © NEW 3'-0"'X 7'-0" HM DOOR AND FRAME CLEAN AND PAINT EXISTING S1ELL COLUMN. NEW 14.-0' X 14'-0" OVERHEAD DOOR. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A351. CONSTRUCT NEW .1 -HOUR WALL FROM SLAB TO STRUCTURE ABOVE PER D/A201. NEW 6'-0' X 7'-0" HM DOUBLE DOOR AND FRAME PER DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A351. RE -USE DOOR HARDWARE REMOVED IN DEMO PHASE. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A351. NEW 10'-0' X 12'-0° OVERHEAD DOOR. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A351. ® OMITTED NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL 12. FIRESTOP ALL PENETRATIONS INTO 1 -HR CORRIDOR SPACE FOR 60 MIN. RATING. RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 1A17 SCALE NONE KEY PLAN Q 8' 4' 0 4' 8' 16' MI MI 1=MINM SCALE: 1/8•=1'-0" SUUIDEE PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN CURRENT REV61M SYMBOL 586456-02 C EWE 05.01.09 CHECKED APPROVED T"EE DEMOLISH 2-4X -BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL WF-WJ/3.5-7 1A16 'OS N0. 586456-02 C°uP NO' °W6 N0' PLANT2, WA 2-31-1A16 ERIC 04/07/09 1215 LEGEND EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES 1. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDfNONS IN FIELD PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. BRING ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE :ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION. 2. PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING WILL BE OCCUPIED DURING CONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE ALL WORK TO AVOID AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, ANY INCONVENIENCE TO BUILDING OCCUPANTS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR SAFETY, ACCESS AND EGRESS DURING THE PROJECT WORK. FULLY SCREEN OFF AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY TEMPORARY SCREENS OR PAKIII IONS AS NECESSARY TO LIMIT DUST, DIRT, NOISE, FUMES OR ODORS FROM ENTERING OCCUPIED AREAS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS CONSTRUCTION NOTES NEW FRAME WALL AND COLUMN UNE AT EXISTING TRANSPORTATION AISLE PER SECTION A/A201. CONSTRUCT NEW 1 -HOUR WALL FROM SLAB TO STRUCTURE ABOVE PER D/A201. © NEW 3'-O X 7'-O' HM DOOR AND FRAME NEW 14'-0' X 14'-0' OVERHEAD DOOR. SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON SHEET A350. © CLEAN AND PAINT EXISTING STEEL COLUMN. OMITTED NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL 8. ' FIRESTOP ALL PENETRATIONS. INTO 1 -HR CORRIDOR SPACE FOR 60 MIN. RATING. RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 n OPI�ilT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 1A1 7 NONEKEY PLAN - N 8' 4' 0 4' 8' ---- SCALE: 1/8'=1'-0' 16' m 'APPROVED DALE RLYSON A DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS' 586456-02 EC/ROLLUDf 05.01.09 gifirtir74E7AW ACCEPTABILITY 1SUS DESIGN AND/OR ' SPECD1CA10N IS APPROVED APPROVED HY DEPT. DATE DRAWN Li1CCKCU SUBTITLE PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN CURRENT REVISION . 586456-02 STYROL A 05.01.09 CHECKED DEMOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL. WJ-WK/1 -3.5 PLANT2, WA SHEET 1A17 XS 586456-02 m P ' DWG NO. 2-31-1A17 • APPROXIMATE AREA OF WORK FOR NEW . ROOFING. TO MATCH EXISITNG IN TYPE AND SLOPE. OVERALL PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1/16• = RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION RFA164 RFA165 RFA166 RFA167 KEY PLAN SCALE: NONE N 0 8' 16' 25'-0• '- 25'-0' 25'-0' 25'-0' 25'-0" EXISTING ROOF DRAIN CLERESTORY MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET RFA164 FOR CONTINUATION. PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" N LEGEND APPROXIMATE AREA OF WORK FOR NEW ROOFING. TO MATCH EXISITNG IN TYPE AND SLOPE. GENERAL NOTES. 1. MAINTAIN 1/2' PER 1r SLOPE AT ROOFING AND 1/4" PER 12' SLOPE AT CRICKETS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS CONSTRUCTIONNOTES ATCH AND REPAIR DUSTING LOCATED AT AREA HATCHED ED (APPROXIMATEING WHERE NEW E)/ PARAPET5 SEE DETAILS ON SHEET A507. PROVIDE CRICKET TO MAINTAIN POSITIVE SLOPE TO DRAIN. © NEW PARAPET FLASHING. SEE DETAIL C/A507 3 NEW. ROOF DRAIN PER MECHANICAL SEE DETAIL B/A507. © PROVIDE FLASHING AT ROOF TO CLERESTORY TRANSITION PER DETAIL A/0507 (SIM.). MODIFY/EXTEND EXISTING GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT AT • CLERESTORY AS REQUIRED FOR DRAINAGE OF UPPER ROOF TO LOWER ROOF. © SCUPPER PER DETAIL B/A507. ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION RECEIVED APR 092010% COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 8' 4' 0 4' 8' 16' SCALE 1/8•=1'-0" fir ARMED DUN CNA CAD COMMON ' • CADDNW 01.19.98 A DDIOLSH 2-4X BUILDINGS • '586456-02 EC/ROILUD/ '05.01.09 BOE/A/G® ' ACCEPTABILITY 7105 00509 ND/OR SPOWIC IIO9 6 APPROVED APPRDVED Br OEPM. BALE NATE CNECIUD ROOF PLAN CURREN/ REve0N 586456-02 SYMBOL A 05.01.09 3. DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS • BUILDING 2-31 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL WA-WF/7-1I PLANT 2 :RFA163 •. 586456-02 COUP NO. OWO Ro. 2.31'-RFA163 0 II 25'-0° ' LEGEND MATCHIJNE — SEE SHEET RFA163 FOR CONTINUATION EXISTING GUTTER 10"X8' EXHAUST DUCT APPROXIMATE AREA OF WORK FOR NEW ROOFING. TO MATCH EXISITNG IN TYPE AND SLOPE. GENERAL NOTES. 1. MAINTAIN 1/2" PER 12" SLOPE AT ROOFING AND 1/4° PER 1Y SLOPE AT CRICKETS. COMP. ROOFING ON 1/2° INSULATION ON 2" T&G REFERENCE DRAWINGS LOWER ROOF EXISTING GUTTER N . COMP. ROOFING ON _1/.' INSULATION ON Y T&G CLERESTORY SLOPE 1/4" PER 12 01.19.98 A DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS .586456-02 C/ROLLU5e BOEL4 ACCEPTABILITY 1015 DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 'DRAWN wL SHEARN TAB. 04.05.89 CHECKED CONSTRUCTION NOTES Ltd PATCH AND REPAIR EXISTING ROOFING WHERE NEW WALL/ PARAPET IS LOCATED AT AREA HATCHED (APPROXIMATE). SEE DETAILS ON .SHEET A507. PROVIDE CRICKET TO MAINTAIN POSITNE SLOPE TO DRAIN. ©' NEW PARAPET FLASHING. SEE DETAIL C/A507 NEW ROOF DRAIN PER MECHANICAL SEE DETAIL 6/A507. © PPROVIDE ER DETAIL AHHING AT (S ROOF TO CLERESTORY TRANSNION © MODIFY/EXTEND EXISTING GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT AT CLERESTORY AS REQUIRED FOR DRAINAGE OF UPPER ROOF TO LOWER ROOF. SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT PER DETAIL B/A507. P PROVIDE SPASH BLOCK AT ALL DOWNSOUTS IN AREA OF WORK. REMOVE, CLEAN, PAINT AND REINSTALL LADDER. ® REINSTALL SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT. MAINTAIN EXISTING CRICKET AND SLOPE FOR NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION. WJ RECEIVED APR ®92010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION ROOF PLAN RFA163 MG RFA165 RFAI66 RF1A67 KEY PLAN SCALE Nora N 4'. 0 4' 8' SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0° DRUM' REVISION 586456-02 SYMBOL A DATE 16' 05.01.09 ENODDlt CHECKED • APPROVLD URI DEMOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 RFA164 Jon NO.596456-02 COMP NO. ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL WF—WK/7-11 PLANT 2 NOG KD. 2.31—RFA164 25'-0" 25'—O" 25'-0" • 25'-0" MATCHUNE — SEE SHEET RFA165 FOR CONTINUATION COMP. ROOFING ON 1 2" INSULATION ON 2" T&G UNE OF 2-25 BUILDING ADJACENT LOWER ROOF PATCH AND REPAIR ROOFING IN THIS AREA AS REQUIRED BY REMOVAL OF DUCTWORK SUPPORT STRUCTURES. TOP OF PARAPET' EL 59'-9" COMP. ROOFING 0 1/2" INSULATION ON 2" T& LEGEND APPROXIMATE AREA OF WORK FOR NEW ROOFING. TO MATCH EXISITNG IN TYPE AND SLOPE. GENERAL NOTES 1. MAINTAIN 1/2' PER 12' SLOPE AT ROOFING AND 1/4' PER 12" SLOPE AT. CRICKETS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS CONSTRUCTION NOTES CLERESTORY 111111111111 RIM WANWAY,17_144W ._#710,W40,7 -1, -AW SLOPE 1/4" PER 12" PATCH AND REPAIR EXISTING ROOFING WHERE NEW WALL/ PARAPET IS LOCATED AT AREA HATCHED (APPROXIMATE). SEE DETAILS ON SHEET A507. PROVIDE CRICKET TO MAINTAIN POSITIVE SLOPE TO DRAIN. NEW PARAPET FLASHING. SEE DETAIL C/A507 NEW ROOF DRAIN PER MECHANICAL SEE DETAIL B/A507. PROVIDE FLASHING AT ROOF TO CLERESTORY TRANSITION PER DETAIL A/A507 (SIM.). MODIFY/EXTEND EXISTING GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT AT CLERESTORY AS REQUIRED FOR DRAINAGE' OF UPPER ROOF TO LOWER ROOF. SCUPPER PER DETAIL B/A507. PROVIDE SPASH BLOCK AT ALL DOWNSOUTS IN AREA OF WORK. REMOVE, CLEAN, PAINT AND REINSTALL LADDER. NEW WALL AT SOUTH FACE OF ELECTRICAL PENTHOUSE PER DETAIL D/A507. BUILDING EXPANSION JOINT DETAIL PER F/A507 WHERE LARGE DUCT HAS BEEN REMOVED, PROVIDE INFILL FRAMING TO MATCH EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. PROVIDE SHEATHING AND METAL SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING PROFILE AND COLOR. APPROXIMATELY 25 S.F. PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 t�IIE� ` • ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION RFA164 • RFA167 KEY PLAN O SCALE: NONE N 8' 4' 0 4' 8' 16' SCALE: 1/8"=1'—or or DME CAD CONVERSION CAOONW 01.19.98 A 0EU0119! 2-40 BUILDINGS 586456-02 EC/R01LUDI 05.01.09 el_4717LFFAW* ACCEPTABILITY 7W5 OE9cx1 018) OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. DATE • WN W.L SHEARN DAit 04.05.89 CHECKED MEER . CHECKED APPROVED APPROVED SOMME ROOF PLAN CURRENT AZASION 586456-02 sNIDOL A DATE 05.01.09 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER DEMOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 COL WF—WK/3.5-7 PLANT 2 SHEET • RFA166 ''D N0. 596456-02 COMP NO. DM NO. 2.31—RFA166 UNEOF. 2-25' BUILDING ADJACENT W� o r� SLOPE 1/4' PER 12'Afe.." SLAdir OPE 1/4' PER 12 SLOPE 1/4' PER.12' SLOPE 1/4' PER 12' AVIV/AIIIIM I////// t?r#AJAJ PLAN VIEW SCALE:1/8' = 1.-0', 01.0209 LEGEND APPROXIMATE AREA OF WORK FOR NEW ROOFING. TO MATCH EXISITNG IN TYPE AND SLOPE. GENERAL NOTES. 1. MAINTAIN 1/2' PER 12' SLOPE AT ROOFING AND 1/4' PER 12' SLOPE AT CRICKETS. REFERENCE DRAWINGS CONSTRUCTION NOTES PATCH AND REPAIR EXISTING ROOFING WHERE NEW WALL/ PARAPET IS LOCATED AT AREA HATCHED (APPROXIMATE). SEE DETAILS ON SHEET A507. 2• PROVIDE CRICKET TO MAINTAIN POSITIVE SLOPE TO DRAIN. © NEW PARAPET FLASHING. SEE DETAIL C/A507 ® NEW ROOF DRAIN PER MECHANICAL SEE DETAIL B/A507. PROVIDE FLASHING AT LOW ROOF TO 2-25 TRANSRION PER DETAIL G/A508. © SCUPPER PER DETAIL B/A507. - ' . © NEW ROOF ACCESS STAIR PER DETAIL E/A507. RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 QQMMUNITY EifiVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION A DEMOLISH 2-411 BUILDINGS 586456-02 T/ROLll161 el___AgrokwzAw ROOF PLAN DEMOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2-31 RFA163 4 9 RFA165 RFA164 RFA166 " RFA167 KEY PLAN ® SCALE: NONE • 8' 4' 0 4' 8' • 16' E -- - SCALE: 1/8'=1'-0' CURREN, REVISION • 586456-02 05.01.09 IIRFA167 596456=02 APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL WK-WJ/1-3.5 PLANT 2 ONC ND. 2.31-RFA167 SLOPE 1/4°: 12' T.O. DECK °(CLERESTORY) SLOPE 1/4': 12* . SLOPE 1/4': 12' SLOPE 1/4': 12 A111 A201 A111 A201 SECTION AT COLUMN LINE 6 LOOKING WEST (COL. WK -WE) SCALE: 1/r = 1'-0' BUILDING 2-31 (A1 1A16 A111 SLOPE 1/4': 12' (JV D SLOPE 1 /4':` 12 /MP% \ SECTION AT COLUMN LINE .6 LOOKING WEST (COL. WE -WA) A SCALE: 1/8* = 1* -0` BUILDING 2-31 1A16 A111 A OE}IOUSH 2-40 BUILDINGS 586456-02=C/ROLLUO/ gi_ArawAswe ACCEPTABILITY RA al EC ROLLUDA1027.08 THIS DESIGN AND/0R m0 9'EpFlGnDN R APPROVED TRIMMED - APPROVED DY DEPT. DATE RECEIVED APR 0 9 200' wirutorin ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION ARCHITECTURAL MASTER BUILDING SECTIONS DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2.31 CURRENT. REVISION 586456-02 05.01.09 PLANT 2 110. 586456-02 0NC 2.31-A111 VVF\ :' 1'_10° SLOPE'• - (1.1115 T.O. DECK (LOW .ROOF) ..NEW SIDEWALK PER CML 0'-O. FIN: FLOOR -. NEW 22. GA- PARAPET FLASHING RUN NEW ROOFING UP BEHIND METAL. SIDING'• • NEW T & G DECKING AND SUPPORT . PER STRUCTURAL D/S534. TAPERED • CRICKET BUILT-UP.ROOFING • • A201 S534 DDSNNG 2' T & G DECKING EXISTING 6' X 14" PURUN .. EXISTING STEEL BEAM EXISFENG COLUMN NEW 22GA CORRUGATED MTL SIDING • 7/8' HORIZONTAL. . HAT CHANNELS 0 4'-0' 0.C. VERT. METAL STUD WALL : PER STRUCTURAL STORAGE " 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING.. 5/8' GWB NEW R-19 BATT INSULATION RUBBER CLOSURE MTL BASE FLASH'G. NEW CONC. CURB PER. STRUCTURAL NEW CONCRETE SLAB PER STRUCTURAL SECTION SCALE 3/4'=1'-0" A1121901 1A14 1A16 1A17 vU • SLOPE NEW 22 GA. PARAPET FLASHING NEW• 22GA METAL SIDING HORIZONTAL HAT CHANNEL' - 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING BLOCKING AS REO'D 28'-0" T.O. DECK (CLERESTORY) SLOPE NEW 22GA CORRUGATED MTL SIDING 1/2' PLYWOOD SHEATHING 7/8' HORIZONTAL HAT CHANNELS 0 4'-0' O.C. VERT. #15 BUILDING PAPER RUN NEW ROOFING UP B METAL SIDING NEW CANT STRIP BUILT-UP ROOFING EXISTING 2' T &' G DECK! NEW STEEL BEAM PER ST EXISTING COLUMN NEW R-19 BATT INSULAR I4 RUBBER CLOSURE MTL DRIP FLASH'G. I EXISTING STEEL BEAM EXISTING 6'X 14' PURUN STORAGE 5/8' GWB OVER 1/2' PLYWOOD SHEATHING 4' HIGH 5/8' PLYWOOD WAINSCOT D'-0° FIN. FLOOR A201 S534 NEW CANT STRIP METAL STUD WALL PER STRUCTURAL • 5/8° GWB NEW CONC. CURB PER STRUCTURAL EXISITNG CONC. SLAB SECTION SCALE 3/4"=1'-0" EXIST. CONC. FOUND. WALL Al 01 1A14 1A16 1AI7 . SLOPE iNOVE°R• ' -IIND : n }� L c---•:-.... Z NEI H01 • 1/: RUI ME • NEI • DUI 'VARIES T.O. DECK. / 20 31'-6" AT HIGH 'ROOF •'-6" AT LOW ROOF G G & tr (CLERESTORY) . ' ( IG EXIT UCTURAL EMI co! Mb A201 S534 N NEI ce MR 3 0 •7/f HAI ace s 0 MEI PEF STORAGE •5/E 1/i NEI RUI • NEW SIDEWALK MR PER CML NEI STP •.- • • $ • i• EXT' FIN. FLOOR SECTION SCALE: 3/4"=1'-O' c LL tP rAMArtl tU Ilnli 22GA METAL SIDING ON 7/8' IZONTAL HAT CHANNELS OVER PLYWOOD SHEATHING • • I NEW ROOFING UP BEHIND AL SIDING E CANT STRIP LT -UP ROOFING • NG 2' T & G DECKING NG 8' X 14' PURUN NG TRUSS 22GA CORRUGATED SIDING I" HORIZONTAL. CHANNELS'® 0' O.C. VERT. • AL STUD WALL STRUCTURAL.. ° GYP BRD. • i1 PLYWOOD SHEATHING R-19 BATT INSULATION BER CLOSURE BASE FLASH'G. CONC.. CURB PER • . UCTURAL . T. CONCRETE SLAB 1A13 01 IV FIN. FLOOR EXISTING 2" T & G DECKING STORAGE 2"X3"METAL ' FLASHING. PAINT TO MATCH WALL ,1/2' PLYWOOD DECKING NEW 8' X 18GA METAL STUDS 0 24" O.C. 2 LAYERS 5/8' TYPE 'X' GWB 5/8' TYPE 'X' GWB 4' HIGH 5/8' PLYWOOD WAINSCOT NEW 6' X 20GA METAL STUDS 0 16° 0.C. 1 -HR. CORRIDOR 1 -HR WALL PER UL DESIGN NO. U419 1 -HR CEIUNG PER UL DESIGN NO. 1.524 NEW 4' R. BASE NEW OR EXIST. CONCRETE SLAB C SECTION AT 1 -HR CORRIDOR � RECEIVED SCALLE:3/4'=1'-O' APR 0 9 2010" m 81 /PROVED DQE SIM REVISION DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS. 586456-02 x/ROLLUDP 05.01.09 BOE/41/G• ACCEPTABILITY nes DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED EC/ROLLUDA DATE 10.24.08 SU 4sr,I_- - 1A1�A201 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION CTIONS CURRENT REVISION 586456-02 SYMBOL 05.01.09 . APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL MASTER DEMOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2.31 COL WA-WJ/3.5-20 PLT 2 SNEE6 . A201 ae 586456-02 COMP N0. ?? 818080. 2.31-A20 • DOOR SCHEDULE DOOR ' MARK DOOR SIZE • • TYPE MAIL FINISH RATING FRAME MAIL FRAME FINISH GROUP Gr DETAILS • NOTES HEAD JAMB SILL W1 - 3'-0''X 7-0' • A HM PT. . - . HM PT. 1 3/A351 2/A351 W2 .'' 3'-0' X 7-0' A HM PT. - HM PT. . 1 3/A351 2/A351 W3 ' 3'-0' X 7-0' A HM' PT.' - • HM • PT. 1 3/A351 2/A351 Si . 14'-0' X 14'-0' '' C ' VNL - STL - • 4/A351 4/A351 ' S2 ' 3',0` X 7'-O' A HM ' PT.'' -' HM PT. 1 3/A351 2/A351' 107 '14'-0' X 14'-0' C VNL . - STL - 5/A351 6/A351 108 '14'-0' X 14'-0' C VNL. . - . . .STL - 5/A351 . 6/A351 110 . 3'-0' X 7'-0' ' '. A HM PT. - HM PT. EXIST. 2/A351 ' 2/A351' RE -USE EXISTING HARDWARE 111 .10'-0' X 14'-0' C' :VNL - SIL. - 5/A351 ' 6/A351 . 11.18 3'-O'. X 7'-O' PAIR B HM PT: - HM PT.. EXIST. 2/A351 • 2/A351 RE -USE EXISTING HARDWARE S3 14'-0''X 14'-0' C 519 - STL. - 4/A351 ' '5/A351 S4 3'-0' X 7'-0' ' ' A HM PT.' - • HM PT.' 1 •3/A351 2/A351 112 3'-0' X:7'-0' PAR B HM PT. - HM PT., . EXIST. 2/A351 2/A351 RE -USE EXISTING HARDWARE 113 • ' 3'-0' X 7'-O'' PAIR :: B' HM PT. 20 HM ' PT. EXIST. 2/A351 2/A351 RE -USE EXISTING HARDWARE S5 3'-0' X 7-0' PAIR B HM PT. . - HM PT. 2 3/A351 2/A351 S6 14'-O' X 12'-0' C VNL. - . STL . - 4/A351 5/A351 S7 " 3'-0''X 7'-0' A ' ' HM PT. - .. HM PT. 1 • 3/A351 2/A351 S8 3'-0' X 7-0' A HM PT. - HM PT. 3 3/A351 2/A351 El 3'-0' X 7-0' . A HM PT. - HM PT: 1 3/A351 • 2/A351 E2 • 14'-0' X 14'-O' ' 'C SIL - STL - 4/A351 5/A351 DOOR TYPES • SCALE: '1/8'=1'-O' B C. FLUSH HIGH-SPEED COIUNG 103.11ES SAME (NTS) AS TYPE 'A' - - NOTE : ALL GLASS UTES SHALL BE 1/4" WIRE GLASS EXTERIOR FINISH' LEGEND ' METAL SIDING SIDING 51 AEP SPAN 'HR -36' 'COOL FOREST GREEN' SIDING 52 AEP SPAN 'PRESTIGE' .: 'COOL ZINC GREY SIDING +3 AEP SPAN 'NU -WAVE CORRUGATED' 'COOL PARCHMENT' 'PARAPET COPING/TRIM BAND - 'DARK BRONZE' . 'DOORS/FRAMES, LADDERS • MATCH AEP SPAN 'DARK BRONZE' • STAIRS/RAIUNGS • USE ICI COLOR SELECTION. • NOTE ALL'PRE-FINISHED METAL COLORS ARE FROM AEP SPAN DURATECH COLORS. • INTERIOR FINISH LEGEND HARDWARE GROUPS. ' GROUP '1 HINGES STANLEY FBB179 X.4.5 X 4.5 X US26D LOCKSET YALE 5401LN AU 619 ' DOORSEALS PEMKO S88D X 17' DOOR SWEEP PEMKO PEM-P210AV36 CLOSER YALE 4400 X 689 THRESHOLD PEMKO '. . , .. PEM-P171A36 5/8" TAN FA NUL R-19 BATT INSULATION SIL STUDS AT 16' 0.C. PER STRUCTURAL 18 GA HM FRAME GROUT SOLID • HM DOOR H.M. DOOR JAMB IN INTERIOR (1 WALL, HEAD -SIMILAR A3511A351 SCALE: 1 1/2' _ 1-0' R-19 BATT IMSUTAI1ON 5/8' GYM ROLL -UP. DOOR AND TRACK BEYOND NOTE INSTALL DOOR PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. MOUNTING HARDWARE AND ANGLES PER MANUFATURER'S RECOMMENDATION 4 OVERHEAD DOOR HEAD AT EXTERIOR WALL 1/2' PLYWOOD SHEATHING STEEL STUDS PER STRUCTURAL PRE -FINISHED METAL SIDING 15/ BUILDING PAPER 7/8' HAT CHANNEL AT 48' OC. HORIZONATALLY PRE -FINISHED METAL DRIP 0/0 6140 R-19 BATT INSULATION • STL STUDS AT 16' 0.C. PER STRUCTURAL METAL SIDING ON 7/8' _ HAT CHANNEL ON 15 BUILDING PAPER METAL TRIM • 18 GA. 111 FRAME GROUT SOLID 101 DOOR • H.M. DOOR JAMB IN EXT. WALL A3511A351 SCALE: 3' -1'-0' A3511A351 0/0 ono R-19 BATT INSULATION S1L STUDS AT 16' 0.C. PER STRUCTURAL METAL SIDING ON 7/8' HAT CHANNEL ON 15 BUILDING PAPER METAL DRIP FIASONG SEALANT. 18 GA. 101 FRAIIE .. GROUT SOLJD . . HM DOOR 3 H.M. DOOR HEAD IN EXT. WALL ROLL -UP DOOR STEEL•FRAME PER STRUCRIRAL ' A3511A351 • GROUP 2 . HINGES STANLEY FB6179.X4.5 X 4.5 X US26D EXIT DEVICE . YALE 2100-36'x LHR x 635F x 630 2110-36'x RHR x 635F x 630 DOORSEALS PEMKO S88D X 20' DOOR SWEEP PEMKO PEM-P210AV36 (PAIR) .. CLOSER : 'YALE ' 4400 X 689 ROLL -UP DOOR THRESHOLD PEMKO PEM-P171A72 ' GROUP 3 HINGES STANLEY FBB179 X 4.5•X 4.5 X US26D EXIT DEVICE YALE 2100-36'x LHR x 635F x 630 .DOORSEALS PEMKO S88D. X 17' DOOR SWEEP PEMKO PEM-P210AV36 • CLOSER YALE ' 4400 X 689 ' THRESHOLD •PEMKO PEM-P171A36 GWB WALLS • ' ICI 51009 PALE VISTA • ' SEMI -GLOSS PLYWOOD 'WAINSCOT ICI 11137 FLAGSTONE . . . ' SEMI -GLOSS DOORS/FRAMES , .. BENJAMIN MOORE 11617 CHEATING HEART SEMI -GLOSS STEEL COLUMNS/STEEL 'BEAMS .,SHERWIN WILLIAMS 57059 UNUSUAL GRAY SEMI -GLOSS STAIRS/RAIUNGS R. BASE : • ROPPE 1193 BROWN BLACK . WOOD DECK/PURUNS . WHITE SEMI -GLASS SCALE: 3' = STEEL FRAME PER STRUCTURAL STEEL STUDS PER STRUCTURAL, R-19 BATT INSULATION 5/8' GW8 PRE -FINISHED METAL TRIM NOTE . INSTALL DOOR PER WNUFACIURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS MOUNTING HARDWARE AND ANGLES'.• PER MANUFATURER'S RECOMMENDATION STEEL FRAME PER STRUCTURAL SIL STUDS AT 16' 0.C. PER STRUCTURAL .• R-19 BATT INSULATION ' PRE-F1NISHE'D METAL TRIM NOTE INSTALL DOOR PER MANUFACTURER'S -RECOMMENDATIONS. • MOUNTING HARDWARE AND ANGLES PER MANUFATURER'S RECOMMENDATION 15j BUILDING PAPER 7/8' HAT CHANNEL AT 48' OC.. HORIZONATALLY ROLL -UP DOOR AND TRACK BEYOND PRE -FINISHED METAL SIDING • SIUCONE SEAL .. ' SCALE '3' = 1'-0' • OVERHEAD DOOR JAMB AT EXTERIOR WALL A3511A351 OVERHEAD DOOR JAMB rn AT INTERIOR WALL A3511A351 SALE: 3' = 1,-0' 5151 411 • APWmVEO m ID APPROED DOE .A DENOUSH 2-4X BUILDINGS • 586456-02 :C/ROLLUDP 05.01.09 BOE7IW • DMA SCALE: 3' = 1'-0' 5/8' 0648 R-19 BATT INSULATION 1/2' PLYWOOD SHEATHING STEEL HEADER PER STRUCTURAL PRE -FINISHED METAL TRIM NOTE • INSTALL DOOR PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. MOUNTING HARDWARE AND ANGLES . PER MANUFATURER'S RECOMMENDATION OVERHEAD DOOR HEAD AT INTERIOR WALL A3511A351 SCALE 3' = RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION DOOR SCHEDULES a,RACO REVL960 sn0OI. 586456-02 05.01.09 trecKEEI APPROVED APPROVED TME 'DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS ' BUILDING 2.31 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL X-X/X-X • PLANT 2 9¢Er A351 +oe 00. 586456-02 `- -31-A351 IAO PO. 2-31-A35 WJ RUN NEW ROOFING UP BEHIND . METAL SIDING NEOPRENE CLOSURE AT-• • PANEL •END •; PRE–FINISHED METAL • . DRIP. PLASHING •z BUILT–UP ROOFING NEW 22 GA. PARAPET FLASHING SLOPE PRE–FINISHED METAL DRIP PLASHING RUN ROOFUP. ' FLASHING THROUGH SCUPPER NEOPRENE CLOSURE AT PANEL END PRE–FINISHED METAL • DRIP PLASHING NEW ROOF DRAIN RIGID INSULATION • 20'-0" T.O. DECK (LOW ROOF) PRE–FINISHED METAL DRIP PUSHING EXISTING 2" T k G DECKING EXISTING 6" X 14" PURUN ROOF DRAIN/SCUPPER DETAIL SCALE: 1' = 1'-0` R607- RFA166 RFA167 —I EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE. NOTE: SEE STRUCTURAL FOR STAIR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS_ • SEE A/S535 AND B/S535., • PRE–FAB STEPS W/ EXPANDED MESH TREAD. 1 1/2" 0 PIPE RAIL 5/8°GWB TREATED 2 X•4-SILLPLATE •1/4" X 6" STEEL PLATE WELDED TO UPRIGHTS SEE STRUCTURAL- DETAIL B/5535 FOR SUPPORT TO WALL 26GA PRE–FINISHED • ' METAL . SIDING • 1115 BUILDING PAPER 1/2' PLYWOOD SHEATHING 28'-0" T.O. DECK (CLERESTORY) 7/8" HORIZONTAL HAT CHANNELS AT 48" 0.C. HORIZONTAL 2 X.6 LEDGER ' • ELECT. PENTHOUSE WALL SCALE: 3/4- = 1'-0" D • RFA166 . 07 • RECEIVED APR 092010 9 TREADS AT 11" EA SOUTHL ELEVATION ROOF ACCESS STAIR DETAIL E SCALE: 3/4' = 1'-0" RFA16�07 • 4,-0" FAST FI EVATION SLOPE WJ co SLOPE PARAPET SECTION NEW 22 GA. PARAPET FLASHING RUN NEW ROOFING UP BEHIND METAL SIDING NEOPRENE CLOSURE AT PANEL END ' PRE–FINISHED METAL • DRIP PLASHING NEW .CANT STRIP ••. BUILT–UP ROOFING • EXISTING T&G DECK EXISTING BEAM c SCALE: 1" = 1'-0 PRE–FINISHED METAL CORNER FLASHING SEALANT 26GA PRE–FINISHED METAL SIDING • 26GA PRE–FINISHED - METAL SIDING ALLOW HAT CHANNEL TO ''FLOAT' OVER CONCRETE WALL SEALANT, TYP. • EPDM FLASHING BOOT ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS 05.01.09 RFA16� 07 RFA164 RFA166 RFA167• EXISTING CONCRETE WALL OF 2-25 BLDG. SEALANT PRE FINISHED TRIM FLASHING SEALANT EXISTING CORNER TRIM TERMINATION BAR SEALANT, TYP. ATTACH EPOM BOOT TO FLASHING WITH WATERPROOF MASTIC, CONTINUOUS AT SEAM. PARAPET CAP FLASHING EXPANSION JOINT DETAIL SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS' BOE/A/G® APPROVED DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2.31 ARCHITECTURAL MASTER COL X–X/X–X CURREN( REVISION 586456-02 RFA166A507 05.01.09 PLT 2 JOB NO. DWG NO. 586456-02 2.31–A507 CAMP No. ?? g SEALANT PRE -FINISHED • METAL TRIM SEALANT 26GA PRE -FINISHED METAL • SIDING SEALANT. EQUAL EQUAL EQUAL . 17,-0" RAIL AT TUNNEL ACCESS STAIR A SCALE: 1/2" = 1,-0" 1,-0" 1,-1" • . PRE—FINISHED METAL TRIM SEALANT c G c G II _088888/, R 19 BATT. INSULATION, TYP. SIttL STUDS PER STRUCTURAL EXISTING SIttL LATTICE COLUMN 7/8" HORIZONTAL HAT CHANNELS AT 48" 0.C. HORIZONTAL. ON 115 BUILDING PAPER 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING - 1A14 A508 .26GA PRE—FINISHED METAL SIDING STEEL STUDS PER STRUCTURAL • PRE—F1NISHED EXISTING 0.H. DOOR FRAME METAL TRIM AND SEALANT . 26GA PRE—FINISHED METAL SIDING SEALANT PRE—FINISHED METAL TRIM SEALANT 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING 7/8" HORIZONTAL HAT CHANNELS AT 46° O.C. HORIZONTAL ON 115 BUILDING PAPER EXISTING ROLL—UP DOOR AND FRAME 5/8" GWB . EXISTING STEEL COLUMN R-19 BATT INSULATION STEEL STUDS PER STRUCTURAL PLAN DETAIL AT NW EXT. CORNEA SCALE 3/4" = 1'-0" • PLAN DETAIL AT SW EXT. CORNER( SCALE: 3/4- = 1'-0" 1A1&508 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING 7/8" HORIZONTAL HAT CHANNELS AT 48" 0.C. HORIZONTAL ON 115 BUILDING PAPER TRIM DTL.' AT PARAPET. SEALANT PRE—FINISHED METAL TRIM SEALANT SCALE: 1 1/2" = 1,-0" A62 A508 A63 . 7/8" HORIZONTAL . • HAT CHANNELS AT 48" O.C. HORIZONTAL ON 115 BUILDING PAPER 26GA' PRE—FINISHED . METAL SIDING (TYPE 12) PRE—FINISHED. . METAL TRIM 1A1.3_1908 26GA PRE—FINISHED METAL SIDING (TYPE #1) TRIM BAND DETAIL SCALE 1 1/2" = 1,-0". 5/8" GWB R-19 BATT INSULATION STEEL STUDS PER STRUCTURAL EXISTING STEEL COLUMN DUSTING BRICK COLUMN • SURROUND 5/8" GWB • 5/8" GWB STEEL STUD FRAMING PER STRUCTURAL 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING PLAN DTL. AT SW INT. CORNER re -- SCALE: 3/4" = 1,—O" 1A1...4.1908 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING n A6�A508 A63 RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. SAWCUT CONRETE WALL TO RECIEVE FLASHING. EPDXY FLASHING IN PLACE. • RUN NEW ROOFING UP BEHIND METAL SIDING PRE -FINISHED METAL DRIP PLASHING - BUILT—UP ROOFING EXISTING 2" T & G DECKING • EXISTING 6" X 14" PURIJN LOW ROOF TO 2-25 G SCALE: N.T.S. . RFA16,71908 . RFA166 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISOR err /FARMED EWE IK OEM01131 2-40 BUILDINGS ` 586456-02 :C/ROLLUOA 05.01.09 01_4717EAVAIG ACCEPTABILITY 1110 DESIGN Ar0/08 SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED - APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE :7;M C ROLLUDA 10.24.08 MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS RREM REVISION 586456-02 05.01.09 MPR APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL MASTER DEMOLISH 2-4X BUILDINGS BUILDING 2.31 COL. X—X/X—X PLT 2 A508 JOB N0. 586456-02 77 060 60.•2.31—A508 102- 031.1059 A- APR 0 9. 2010' t I )y II •� r : x'l�Alie.. •ZG GA. GALY. 3TC eL. GV . FLAT .'LA•+u.NG V TN o - ./' . G¢AVeI YjoP c . pc. FZo r YL'INwLjaTwA• Tn r1T 2' T' 4 �' : : d - ••• .. _ - 11 • i� - ., Fan Pb. 0.mr I 1' ,' - • CLI�b�.;fL Ao ITO' DY I.PNI •IM.I�I•AcTut�R -• • 1 '-Yi INAULA2.44 2 T'eG 1 • LC,GA.;GALv. Steel- ! V t tv T.. a )iIG rbCce ID' o -c. - •ttLae LAT N¢.. 5'A Y•4 b.,rj' PL4.14 5 / • '•--: -.-- Z, A4 — -- - ,. FLAT P l]NING VITN sa'r '. .! te. p. Roel Sc•••I n . ..,-cL •0.7•.. t / _ Gtwe- ss Top ft. -4.4 L • •� / 1 . I 'Compo. Qo=r ', ,<„,• 'Ys' IA 0ULA M T" -E.'-�. 4 S.. 4 Yo •� I I I NI IL'[+2.0.7• ,y KP,•t♦. "¢'�.i r--- 'I- 2•vd• a ' IL' I...F Z y I -T. .1 FI . , •- I -' SI rIA'T LA7Nt^lG VITN .. - T . . M ol. ' I d - - . .. •-f•- '• ., - - Z'L6G� -'-(- f ,'{cY L .'... F 9 ' 3x9 /{A1LR0. •I .,tr.! Pun _ TO if al R+%1PN IPQ� - p $. I I r u ` . 2.4r'. LY..• I I (I• �g .to` t6 GA-GwLv. S¢eL, ) _ ._.za ♦ II'zI,: "e/e• •■ Ya } I. . - e_... P`.:.12/ Tli' I C A L WINDOW ;JAMB # 2v f —�i� 01 I DEMO 12 U 111 •IC•t.G GL G.Lv ST. 1 I I , V . 1 •• 3 W/(�: -T' J 1 �) — . e : t SCALE 3•el.-O• . . WINDOW MULLION AT -' 1 . CoLuA•I$ I P / r Z,�r V L 1 ` I ,•= ' 1 r Q 8 W OONC: /2�0�.�7/�. CONE • pp y ,� WALL' 1•., I e. S IO' N tYN WALL OC w4ReNCV oG - OcA<t Y -o - - 'Oil' �o •w V .�. ' Yzi. BRICK EOFLYON SURRD D. j i r - .: - ' i • REM OVAL= NOTES. n.t-1 f•', \�y • ! ;k „ ; q -- , •26 t — .: t A- GALS. S• Det- :� J , '.2Y`'. de. I I I• I I. I '• I _ • .. :. .. tri... t. '4 L , , ' DEMO EXI ING •WALL ON GL WJ INCLUDING'` ALL\ ; ', t V ; r,,.•• MASONRY .I �NI�LI G�' t4 MNS'Tp REMAIN,' T` , t • ' . - . • ' / ! ITu. 1:'.";1''''c- _•I yGon �" L, 1 .:i • `OF ' I \ :> ' Ict eT PO SIOAri loN.: r.r o:c :° Lo AG G C at' - ___:::. ___ . . _ ` RL Gtr -02°. - .— : BRICK- SURROUND AT BASE COL do CONCRETE . :s- ,,•: ...--.. SSoto. �P� • - fLL GAT rLIADNIAb-. .. i t_G.LY.S e! f !-NWG SURROUND AT•'TOP OF COLUMNS /Mk -REMAIN. • +( j 1 1 '1j'� L 2tD 2•T SG/ ' T G • L r•1 Yz trI 41AT•orR - 7 .. - - _ . .. i i t / { _ T, t, G.^ . - __ __ •--_- ._ I ' I. (.. f.XXX Y4 t, { / X __ S6'alq'. -........... PYDLtJ1 . 4'—R10.lYri T. 1 . fig' .is.9' .Jce 1 i I.yr c'T tG.: 46-�144u¢LrN - lel .�: r G. et4' _'. y I , -. - .! ( , I , r --•G'• I t * ' 1 -' � 1' 1 r• i , ' . I/ 1 1'II 1 IIL.11 � _ MyJ - ', Ye: L s - 15=5o so* col To f • ' ' '• I-�.�'_ r , { li - ' Y • 5A• Su rill' VTCO. 1 1, f • . I 1 .. • I 2Yi. •Y�'LY \ , • 1 \ /' I I'y• '. X /: 1 { •s• I I• I 1 '1 (' ••",- • ' = , I' _, .I MASONRY 1 1 , WALL 1 " I . .. �I ul - L Pt'0.bD'[S•o•o.e. ' \\ ` , - DCTAtL5' B° *' A 1. , ,1 • .. 1>, ' DGTW[CA COOP.,PiD 340'4 . A sums 45 PetAttn D ! 4 Cxc.er7 `' `� + AS SNowN ' • ' tl' ' I• •♦ ; br GOLVAA, 'f' - i I_• . 'rp j i G.Lv-Sv �I;As f / t • .L.. t /. l • ' . Rccnn� ve ex15�• VALL.' Dew Yr oojTtD .. - �'6¢aek • - ` - -`' , : - r• t OYxL•. •2t •Y, L - t. :I: - :r•'24 GN. 571•14; • - ... ,.GUTTI¢ •Lo aue. Ra> l! f ayy eRnT RAR. l' IL'.0 -20. T. - • • I t , + _ l . -I'�,.- I. -2f_. .✓Qi , 4• C(Ji $.4a �'�--- {I LYi wLat.j'y!L J / �' IPP1 r II 111‘ � IP P ' 1 ; 1 . pi coltA b u NIA DDDT[TI(N a•1 b1- NG 4 p oN E511 0::,;: 29 - O .. b .. ' " _ ' -Cid• J - .- r - 1 : - IZ' C O LYG • 5 .is RI�L a� iJ 3 L-_ --n-F .. - _ .... _..• .. —,T-11; As -_ -_, _— _— _— t . 4. 1 n. 7.7 t .II•_.t•- . ' . I - • Z • o 1 ifl �. �I) ,'� . ' . ' , � , ' I'/�1�/O ,.�%�% '���� . BRICK SURRO�IND , COL MAY• ZEMAIN' ,i , N - - ` : . . -. ' ' I ,. h _ . — -E• n.s •- TL:. sTEcL. r,,,,:.• - •OF• - - . RE M DUAL i , r .' � . 'i , .. - �. ILI1 t I t , 1I�/ ,� ij' I I 0 DET41t SG4Lt �4 I I 'OR REFERENCE ONLY •• 1 -•- in 'gr II��� � i, I • _ '• - h LIJ I_,, f7 �. - •r 1 l i �c :Lew=D I/ 1 - ''t - I +� � : � ti . ,2.31 ,I - � ,' NIO/4(7AR a WALI SECTIONS. 37E±L:WACLHOU3R ff, i • ; I ,� 1 1 sQQQ�����///� I �� li�� 11 ; _ •'� ` %•1 e-_IGra. - .. - - The Austin Company - ♦•r,`It' `, I I - ' } I / II/��� �I�A,/I/ / 1 I .. - ' - / . J I ENGIN®IS AND ISBtLDERS - etATTLE ) to i'Iant.No 2 ;� -•) I lig '� y �. G -I P wJ•I_L 1'C AO LH Vl A N.Lv. (Idit1c)n$ r v I ' r •I%i� { A. DL` /s;II,L•' lb / T! .,- tea. n•i a ... . •rAN C ,.,,N. 'oreyi(»j� A��i/rcraft' CoinpaI:y r-' �. I p DE1�tL D � r� TA C L ;TAIL` W A .S'eal SCALE ;'4 •1 Ci• f I`• �� - •.y SCALE %.r -e:' ''2,041-L %.` o• tio, ,iTr ashi)gton .,K it ' \ t !' ,Aeirejli , 1 , •:!. DRAWN.: e `1.P..- 1-L. f .• .. '/ -% I�9La neArsollrr • DA NUNern PLCORDA'ru1,.7 r / CO v 44.1._— sneer —'-' i1!// .. I .. .' ' I •'/J'/ n.*Rt Iavl.•w Dr oN••.o • y -r.. • Ra.. 102- 031.1059 A- APR 0 9. 2010' 8 O' BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP PLANT 2 DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDINGS - STORM DRAINAGE 95% DESIGN REVIEW LOCATION IN REGION VICINITY MAP C�* N 0 is 2-41 2-40 3 a z 2-44 2-4 I-271 2-64 — GATE B-18 2-49 0 SITE ACCESS / 2-66 2-65 20 2-63 2-62 2-55 44. 2-61 2-80 2 -fly PROJECT SITE — 2-8 1172-117'i z2-126 SCALE: NONE i 0 4.; • LEGAL DESCRIPTION PLANT 2 CONSOUDATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE FOLLOWING LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS BASED ON TRANSNATION TITLE REPORT ORDER NUMBER 867785, DATED AUGUST 3, 1998. A TRACT OF LAND BETWEEN THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY AS ESTABUSHED BY COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH IN SECTIONS 28, 32 AND 33, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 28, THENCE SOUTH 88'09'49" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 35.92 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE ON THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 16Th AVENUE SOUTH FROM WHENCE THE CENTER BEARS NORTH 81'09'46' WEST 1960.08 FEET, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN AND SAID CURVE 235.12 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN NORTH 01'57'52" EAST 534.65 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN. OF SAID EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BEING 65 FEET DISTANT FROM, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO, THE CENIERUNE OF SAID EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH ON THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 47'52'17" EAST 1189.40 FEET TO THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE SOUTH 88'09'49' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH UNE 23.20 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'52'17' EAST 761.35 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT OF RADIUS 2814.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 1245.10 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 22'32'06' EAST 165.28 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A UNE PARALLEL WITH AND 825 FEET SOUTHERLY OF, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO, THE NORTH UNE OF THE JOHN BUCKLEY DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 42; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN- OF EAST' MARGINAL WAY SOUTH AND PROCEEDING ALONG SAID PARALLEL UNE NORTH 8912'23' WEST 1385.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF SAID DUWAMISH WATERWAY, SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE FROM WHENCE THE CENTER BEARS SOUTH 53'50'05' WEST 1969.12 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE AND SAID CURVE 401.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 4751'36" WEST ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE 1068.05 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY UNE OF THAT 11 FOOT VACATION OF 16TH AVENUE SOUTH AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 38, PAGE 455 OF KING COUNTY COUNCIL RECORDS DATED JUNE 24, 1940; THENCE NORTH 13'00'45' EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY UNE 384.20 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY UNE NORTH 14'06'06" EAST 303.66 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,900,610 SQUARE FEET OR 66.588 ACRES 5114 REVISION RT APPROVED DATE 232)4 BY APPRENED DATE g;LATI7EZAW ACCEPTABILITY 1X23 DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED 92 DEPT. DATE DRAWN SLL AD /ENGINEER DP D 02/16/09 02/16/09 02 16 09 02/16/09 SUBTRLE PROJECT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF WORK: CONTRACTOR: SITE ADDRESS: OWNER: PROJECT 5 TO DEMO THE CENTRAL 2-4X BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED UTILTTITIES; CONSTRUCT A NEW STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WDH WATER QUALITY FEATURES. CONSTRUCT TWO NEW EMPLOYEE PARKING LOTS; AND REPAVE THE FACILITY PROPERTY. CERTAIN UNITIES, INCLUDING FIRE, COLD WATER, SEWER, AND GAS UTILITIES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE. N/A 8123 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP WEST REGION FACILITIES PA. BOX 3707, M/S: 19-35 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-2207 ATTENTION: MIKE PRIME 206.544.0212 RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE COVER SHEET ]PROVED TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET GOA JOB 586456-02 COUP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -GOA •i a INDEX OF DRAWINGS INCLUDEDI INSET SHEET NO. DRAWING TITLE REV DATE DRAWING NO. GENERAL • 2 -YD -GOA GOA COVER SHEET NFC 02.16.09 • 2-YD-G1A G1A INDEX OF DRAWINGS AND KEY MAP NFC 02.16.09 CIVIL • 2-YD-C2B C29 SD ABBREVIATIONS AND LEGEND NFC 02.16.09 • 2-YD-C3B C3B PROJECT CONTROL PLAN NFC 02.16.09 • 2-YD-C4B C4B SD CONSTRUCTION NOTES NFC 02.16.09 • 2-YD-C460R C460R STORM DRAINAGE REMOVAL PLAN NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C460 C4-60 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C461 C461 NW STORM DRAINAGE PLAN NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C462 C462 SW STORM DRAINAGE PLAN NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C463 C463 NE STORM DRAINAGE PLAN NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C464 C464 SE STORM DRAINAGE PLAN NEC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C640 C640 SD PROFILES - SHEET 1 OF 3 NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C641 C641 SD PROFILES - SHEET 2 OF 3 NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C642 C642 SD PROFILES - SHEET 3 OF 3 NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C643 C643 SD PROFILES LATERALS - SHEET 1 OF 2 NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C644 C644 SD PROFILES LATERALS - SHEET 2 OF 2 NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C645 C645 MISC DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C646 C646 SLIDE GATE DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C647 C647 SLIDE GATE DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C648 C648 FLOW SPLITTER DETAILS NEC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C649 C649 MANHOLE DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C650 C650 SW & S PUMP STATION SECTIONS & DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C651 C651 NE & SE PUMP STATIONS SECTIONS & DETAILS NFC 02.16 09 • 2 -YD -C652 C652 BIOSWALE DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C653 C653 BIOSWALE NOTES NFC 02.16 09 • 2 -YD -C654 C654 SOUTH & CENTRAL OUTFALL P&P - PHASE 2 NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C655 C655 NORTH OUTFALL P&P - PHASE 2 NFC 02.16.09 2 -YD -C760 C760 NORTH WQ VAULT NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C761 C761 NORTH WO VAULT SECTIONS & DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C762 C762 CENTRAL WO VAULT NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C763 C763 CENTRAL WO VAULT SECTIONS & DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C764 C764 SOUTH WQ VAULT NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C765 C765 WQ VAULT DETAILS NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C766 C766 WQ VAULT NOTES NEC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -C767 C767 WO VAULT NOTES NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -T1 T1 TESC NOTES NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -T2 T2 CONCEPTUAL TESC PLAN NFC 02.16.09 ELECTRICAL • 2 -YD -E1 E1 SW PUMP STATION ELECTRICAL NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -E2 E2 NE, SE & S PUMP STATIONS ELECTRICAL NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -E3 E3 ACTUATORS & TEMP PUMP STATION ELECTRICAL NFC 02.16.09 • 2 -YD -E4 E4 PUMP STATION CONTROL DIAGRAMS NFC 02.16.09 ISSUE LEGEND NOT YET ISSUED O PREVIOUSLY ISSUED, NOT IN THIS RELEASE IN THIS ISSUE NFC FRO ORIG A PREL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR REFERENCE ONLY ORIGINAL ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION OR FOR PERMIT DRAWING REVISION - SEE SPECIFIC DRAWING FOR NATURE OF REVISION PRELIMINARY KEY MAP SCALE: NTS REWDN SYM gLATZ7E7AVG `Th ACCEPTABILITY DRAWN X02 16 09 suemLE 1196 DESIGN AN0/011 SPECIFlCA710N IS APPROVED RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COIN DEVELOPMENT ll'\fl IE [K CURRENT REMSIO SYMBOL rE CML MASTER INDEX OF DRAWINGS AND KEY MAP DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD S'EET G1A JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. OWG NO. 2-YD-G1A rn wg — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, Inc C 'acanovnky, Donna — 2/18/2009 7:28:54 LEGEND LINETYPES SYMBOL DESCRIPTION p (STING NEW 0 CATCH BASIN 0 MANHOLE FOUND CASED MONUMENT ®• FOUND SURVEY MONUMENT ®®®a. D A PROJECT CONTROL POINT SURVEY CONTROL MONUMENT, STATION SPOT ELEVATION POWER TRANSFORMER POWER VAULT TELEPHONE VAULT ❑ TELEPHONE/IV RISER SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE -0- POWER/UTILITY POLE, DISTRIBUTION POLE UGHT POLE m TEL J -BOX TEL ❑ TEL — j GUY ANCHOR 111 GAS VALVE } FIRE HYDRANT m WATER METER Ft WATER VALVE WATER VAULT BUILDING IPI r) 070 1 L _ 1 1 —0 RIP RAP SLOPE CUT CLEAN OUT MATERIAL SYMBOLS ABBREVIATIONS EDGE OF ASPHALT (EXISTING) —. FENCE (EXISTING) CHAIN UNK FENCE (EXISTING) FLOW UNE (EXISTING) GAS (EXISTING) POWER, UNDERGROUND (EXISTING) POWER, OVERHEAD (EXISTING) ss SANITARY SEWER (EXISTING) UT TELEPHONE (BURIED) (EXISTING) WATER (EXISTING) SO STORM DRAINAGE (PLAN EXISTING) STORM DRAINAGE (PROFILE EXISTING) STORM DRAINAGE (PLAN NEW) STORM DRAINAGE (PROFILE NEW) EXISTING GROUND (PROFILE) PROPOSED GROUND (PROFILE) • — .. — .. EASEMENT (NEW) SF— SF— SF SILT FENCE (NEW) 06-08-08— ORANGE BARRIER FENCE / CONSTRUCTION SAFETY FENCE (NEW) — x— X— x— X— X— TEMPORARY CHAIN UNK CONSTRUCTION FENCE (NEW) F 1 1 1Wirle 1 HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVEMENT CSTC GRAVEL BORROW CONCRETE GRAVEL BACKFILL BACKFILL/NATIVE SOIL ROCK RIP RAP TOPSOIL QUARRY SPALLS DEMOLITION/REMOVAL ARMORFLEX GROUTED AREA TYPICAL SECTION AND DETAIL REFERENCE SYSTEM SECTION CUT ON SHT 4 AND SHOWN ON 5: SECTION LETTER SHT ON WHICH SECTION APPEARS ON SHT 5 THIS DETAIL IS IDENTIFIED AS: DETAIL NUMBER 4YN—SHT ON WHICH DETAIL IS FOUND I SECTION CUT ON SHT 4 AND SHOWN ON 4: 4(1)1‘-- N—SECTION OR DETAIL APPEARS ON SAME SHT AS CUT SECTION LETTER OR DETAIL NUMBER AC ASPHALT CONCRETE ACP ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT APPROX APPROXIMATE ASTM AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS ATB ASPHALT TREATED BASE AVE AVERAGE CE CENTERLINE CB CATCH BASIN CBMH CATCH BASIN MANHOLE CDF CONTROLLED DENSITY FILL CIP CAST -IN-PLACE CMP CORRUGATED METAL PIPE CONC CONCRETE CPEP CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE STORM SEWER PIPE CSBC CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE CSTC CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE CTR CENTER DBD DEFERRED BOLTING DEVICE DET DETAIL DI DUCTILE IRON DIA OR DIAM DIAMETER DWG DRAWING DWL DOWEL E EAST EL, ELEV ELEVATION EOP EDGE OF PAVEMENT ESC EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL EW EACH WAY EXIST, EX EXISTING F FIRE, FAHRENHEIT FM FORCE MAIN FS FLOW SPUTTER FT FOOT OR FEET G GAS GE GRATE ELEVATION HDPE HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE HORIZ HORIZONTAL HMA HOT MIX ASPHALT HWL HIGH WHATER LEVEL HYD HYDRANT IE, INV INVERT ELEVATION IN INCHES KC KING COUNTY L LENGTH LF LINEAR FEET LWL LOW WATER LEVEL MAX MAXIMUM MH MANHOLE MIL 0.001 INCH MIN MINIMUM MISC MISCELLANEOUS MON MONUMENT N NORTH NE NORTHEAST NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NTS NOT TO SCALE NW NORTHWEST 08 ORANGE BARRIER FENCE OC ON CENTER OHW ORDINARY HIGH WATER p POWER P&P PLAN & PROFILE PL PLATE PS PUMP STATION PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PVMT PAVEMENT R RIGHT RL ROOF LEADER RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE REO REQUIRED REV REVISION STU BT APPROVED DATE snA REVISION 61 AMEND prznez.vc. ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED DRAWN SLS AO APPROVED Eft DEPT. DATE 0216/09 WEEN DP 02/16/09 SUBm1E S SOUTH, SLOPE SD STORM DRAIN SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SE SOUTHEAST SF SILT FENCE SHT SHEET SPEC SPECIFICATION SS SANITARY SEWER SSMH SEWER MANHOLE SST STAINLESS STEEL ST STREET STA STATION STD STANDARD SW SOUTHWEST T TANGENT, TOP, TOWNSHIP, TELEPHONE TESC TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL TYP TYPICAL UP UTILITY POLE VERT VERTICAL W WEST, WATER WISHA THE WASHINGTON INDUSTRIAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT WO WATER QUALITY WSDOT WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATOIN RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ll'] IE [K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL cT6 SD ABBREVIATIONS AND LEGEND 02/16/09 CHECKED NC 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C2B JOB No. 586456-02 0396 N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2-YD-C2B DUWAMISH COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DHA -277 LEAD & TACK N: 196406.70 E: 1280467.61 ELEV=36.48' Ii \ /i• 8 CO trl CO J 0 OHA 4 SPIKE & TAG N: 195875.81 E: 1279080.47 ELEV=13.48 arml\L_.I.I.I1.1.1.©.1.1 11 TI k.111 1 I I I 11`1.11 f t I� DHA— LEAD TACK N: 195 73.94 E: 1279701.48 ELEV=13.54' • SCRIBEI • 196 E: 1279 85.49 —LEV-113161 1 � 1 -1 1 zo ,e 1 LEAD & TACK N: 196175.2 E: 1280472 ELEV713.51' -I -1-- 114 I- I -1-- I AI hIll 1 E DI I I I 1 11 1 I- i- I 1 I 11J —r4 - 121 T= -121 N H IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII( �s— LEGEND CONTROL POINT 1 DHA— 1 PK &]WASHEIF N: 19 345.81 E: 1279411.43 ELEVg13.35, TIIIIII I I©II j,.,,.,.,.,.,.'.1. �.. .,.,. .�.1.'., 1111111111111111 - 9- x` fill l l'I'I'fl l u l l 111111 l I I I I I I I I I) I I IT11Tl 1 I IIrI_U I Ft++f 1 l I•__ I'I I I I"I"fl"I"I I fl'I f.\) fl l"III"fl'I I Pf I'I'I 11 1 1 f I I I 111 111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 111-�j1 l I L—LLL—LJ.LLLLL—LLLLLLLLI I. V LLL—i.LL�.LLL�.LLLILL�,I IIIIIIIIIIII�I`1J1111111VIIImIIIIIIPAIIIIIIIIIIIII I I LEAD & TACK N: 195869.80 E: 1280486.36 ELEV=13.24' BHA -7 / SPIKE & TAG N: 195364.47 E: 1280482.87 ELEV=13.59' I 1 1 11111 1 1 11111 11111111tH1 ttttt ttt 11111 11 111 11 11111 11111 11iii 1 4 NNININ-J1112. / DHA—HV-109 PK NAIL N: 195729 69 E: 1280929.46 ELEV=14.63' \`Til nnnn -1-LLyUUU VIIIA -9T ` L PL2-507A i GENERAL NOTES: 1. CONTROL POINTS PROVIDED 11/20/2008 BY DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOC., INC. BASED ON SEPTEMBER 2008 WELL MONITORING SURVEY. 2. HORIZONTAL DATUM: BOEING DATUM CONVERTED FROM WASHINGTON COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH ZONE NAD 83 (91); VERTICAL DATUM: NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM, 1929 (NGVD 29). \ 3. TO CONVERT (APPROXIMATELY) TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM, 1988 (NAVD 88) ADD 3.5 FEET TO NGVD 29 ELEVATION. EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH PROJECT CONTROL PLAN 0 SCALE 1-=80' SOA REVISION REWSON a1E gLAirISEEAVG ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION E APPROVED APPROVED RV DEPT. DATE DRAWN AD TJX AO LNGINELH CP CHECKED uG DP ROMEO APPROVED RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE 80 0 80 Scale Feet 160 iriu �E�h CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE PROJECT CONTROL PLAN 02/16/09 TIRE DEMOLMON OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD C3B JOB 586456-02 CORP NO % SUBMITTAL DWG NO 2—YO—C3B — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck Inc. CITY OF TUKWILA STANDARD CONSTRUCTION NOTES AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION CONTACT ONE -CALL (1-800-424-5555) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS. CONTACTS: PROJECT MANAGER: MIKE PRITTIE, THE BOEING COMPANY DESIGN ENGINEER: DONNA PACANOVSKY, R.W. BECK 206.695.4542 OWNER: THE BOEING COMPANY: 206.544.0212 CITY OF TUKWILA GENERAL NOTES' 1. LOCATIONS SHOWN FOR EXISTING UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE. 2. AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE STARTING PROJECT SITE WORK, NOTIFY THE UTILITIES INSPECTOR AT 206-433-0179. 3. THE CONTRACTOR ASSUMES SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WORKER SAFETY, AND DAMAGE TO STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS RESULTING FROM CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE THE PERMIT(S) AND CONDITIONS, THE APPROVED PLANS, AND A CURRENT COPY OF CITY OF TUKWILA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 5. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THESE APPROVED DRAWINGS. ANY CHANGES FROM THE APPROVED PLANS REQUIRE PRE -APPROVAL FROM THE OWNER, THE ENGINEER, AND THE CITY OF TUKWILA. 6. ALL METHODS AND MATERIALS SHALL MEET CITY OF TUKWILA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE APPROVED DRAWINGS. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A CURRENT SET OF RECORD DRAWINGS ON-SITE. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE RECORD DRAWINGS PRIOR TO PROJECT FINAL APPROVAL 9. PROVIDE TRAFFIC CONTROL AND STREET MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION. 10. ALL SURVEYING FOR PUBLIC FACIUTIES SHALL BE DONE UNDER THE DIRECTION OF A WASHINGTON UCENSED LAND SURVEYOR. CITY OF TUKWILA CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1. ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL BE PER APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ONLY. THE PERMITTEE/CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A SET OF APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ASSOCIATED PERMITS ON THE JOB SITE. WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS. PERMITTEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY FOR A REVISION FOR ANY WORK NOT ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLANS. 2. PERMITTEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE A PRECONTRUCTION CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY'S INSPECTOR(S) PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK. CRY OF TUKWILA UTILITY NOTES: 1. ALL TRENCH EXCAVATION OPERATIONS SHALL MEET OR EXCEED ALL APPLICABLE SHORING LAWS FOR TRENCHES OVER 4 -FEET DEEP. ALL TRENCH SAFETY SYSTEMS SHALL MEET WISHA REQUIREMENTS. 2. POWER, CABLE, FIBER OPTICS, AND TELEPHONE UNES SHALL BE IN A TRENCH WITH A 5' MINIMUM HORIZONTAL SEPARATION FROM UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. 3. ADJUST ALL MANHOLES, CATCH BASINS, AND VALVES IN PUBUC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR EASEMENTS AFTER ASPHALT PAVING. CITY OF TUKWILA STORM DRAINAGE NOTES. 1. ALL METHODS AND MATERIALS SHALL MEET CITY OF TUKWILA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. 2. STENCIL ALL NEW AND EXISTING STORM DRAIN INLETS WITH "NO DUMPING ALLOWED - DRAINS TO RIVER". GENERAL NOTES: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS, WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE 2008 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION (WSDOT SPECS). 2. REFER TO THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS PLANS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION (WSDOT PLANS). 3. CPEP STORM DRAINAGE PIPE SHALL CONFORM TO CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE PIPE PER WSDOT SPEC 7-04 STORM SEWERS. 4. DI STORM DRAINAGE PIPE SHALL CONFORM TO DUCTILE IRON PIPE PER WSDOT SPEC 7-17 SANITARY SEWERS. 5. PERFORATED PVC PIPE SHALL CONFORM TO PERORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE PER WSDOT SPEC 7-01 DRAINS. 6. INITIAL PIPE SEGMENTS CONNECTING TO MH/CB SHALL NOT EXCEED 3' IN LENGTH FOR DUCTILE IRON PIPE AND 1' IN LENGTH FOR PVC PIPE. ITT APPROVED DATE m REV6IDN 61 APPROVED DATE g)LArwAr.c. ACCEPTABILITY 1116 DESIGN MND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BT DEPT. DATE DRAWN SI AO ANFtNEu lNGWELN DP 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SD CONSTRUCTION NOTES Citi �Eth CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE CHECKED 02/16/09 APPROVED D M5PROVED TRU DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C4B 'OB 586456-02 W. COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DAO N0. 2-YD-C4B .01:0193. LEL 9. 6.1610pv. 0.94191 0.4,0/1. WATONX LEGEND TO BE DEMOLISHED BY OTHERS '///////////, TO BE DEMOLISHED v � r 111111111111111111 1111111111111111 1.1. 111111 I1 111I 11 I I 1 11..1.IIII III 11 9 c Fri 11illawl lll�ll�llllHi I IIIIIII` • )4 'I 1111 VII I r .'I I' Trrl_ I Trrrl I rrrrrrr rrl_1Trr1 LI I.I`IJ.LLLLLLI.....l.l.n ..LLI�IJ.L1.1.1..1 Lll.l.l.l •� ` I r1 Iaf1 I I ..1.1.1 ..... REVISION EN APPROVED DATE SYM 11 UA um:am Mn scum REVISION DRAINAGE REMOVAL PLAN N SCALE: 1"=80' BY APPRahD DATE BOE//VIS® ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFTCATN)N IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DER. DATE DRAWN 01 AO TOMER DP 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE NOTES: 1. REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES AND OBSTRUCTIONS PER WSDOT 2-02. 2. CBS AT THE END OF PIPES THAT ARE REMOVED SHALL ALSO BE REMOVED. 80 0 80 160 1 =B0 —0 I Scale Feet STORM DRAINAGE REMOVAL PLAN RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 DCOMMUNITY CURRENT REVTSION SYMBOL MATE 'CHECKED MG APS 02/16/09 PROVED CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C460R .10B 586456-02 COMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. (-2-YD-C460R anode. .111 \• rJJ/7� r•�•�:1°4" S1l''''-(Q/� . I I`� ~. INFMOINNWOMINEMMENNIA •WT!, urgal rfflir i[1 611 II& /<'4,'' : • 1 , moi 11 11Vz,1 3 i ---r EQI Mum. 0. E N = "MOM iWl[.OH .,,E..•, 11 1 No 1 me m CB5 8 0824 I m 1,144:14,111111 gill' 1.11.1. ,.1.11.1.1.LI. N: — �I�ie�ia .... I* • . • 11A11111111in+SSR►`,:, N�ic N 7 1132 oMI NM LEGEND ❑ EXIST CB • NEW CB • NEW MH • REPLACED MH REVISION BY APPROVED DATE REVISION DRAINAGE SITE PLAN® SCALE: 1'=80' Receive ,APRO92411 COMMUNITY BY APPROVED DATE ce;LATL7E7AVG ® ACCEPTABILITY TH5 DESCN ANS/0R SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT DATE 1._80, 0. 80 0 Scale 80 160 Feet DP CHECKED IAD • RDVEI 02/16/09 PROVED CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD ��ti �Ech CURRENT REVISION S/NBDI. C460 DATE JOB NO 586456-02 COMP DWG NO. 2 -YD -C460 rn FFr?k WAIFauI� IVU I E. 1. UNDERDRAIN PIPE SHALL BE PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE, COUPLINGS, AND FITTINGS, 6" DIA, PER WSDOT STD SPEC 7-01. 2. UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPE SHALL BE SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 6" DIA, PER WSDOT STD SPEC 7-04. 3. OTHER EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTIUTIES NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY. REFER TO PROFILE SHEETS C640 -C644 FOR LOCATIONS. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT UTILFTIES TO REMAIN. 4. SEE SHEETS C652 AND C653 FOR BIOSWALE SECTIONS, LENGTHS, ELEVATIONS AND DETAILS. 5. SEE SHEET C653 TABLE 2 FOR WO VAULT COORDINATES. SEE SHELIS C760 -C767 FOR WQ VAULTS. 1 6. SEE SHEETS El TO E4 FOR ELECTRICAL PANELS AND -mI 1�J N + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + N + 4- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4- + + + + + + + UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPE (TYP, SEE NOTE 2) 24 179 LF S=1.6% IE 8.16 IE 5.01 IE 5.02 12" 17 LF 9 LF S=1.7% \ IE 5.02 24° 217 IF S=1.47% RIM 12.0 IE 9.98 1 IE 8.61 12 75 LF S=0.2% 12" 142 LF S=0.9% 2 0.2% CLEANOUT (TYP) C648 IE 8.62 NB BIOSWALE SEE NOTE 4 C RIM i E 67. 8 8 3 i GIs UNDERDRAIN PIPE (TIP, SEE NOTE 1) CA BIOSWALE SEE NOTE 4 CA22 IM 12.9 IE 10.54 CA4 RIM 12.9 IE 8.96 12" 158 LF S=1% CA24 2.9 IE 10.87 12" 158 LF CA5 RIM 12.9 IE 9.29 S= 1% 12" 158 LF S=1% CA26 rIEITT2-79- 10.42 12° 158 IF S=0.5% 12' 158 LF S=1% CA6 RIM 12.9 IE 9.63 12. 158 LF S=0.5% CA21 RIM 12.9 IE 10.54 CAM IM 9 IE 10.87 CA25 RIM 12.9 IE 10.42 LEVEL SPREADER (TYP)� 20 0648 s OO N NB3 RIM 13.0 IE 9.02 N84 RIM 13.0 IE 9.27 NB5 RIM 13.0 IE 9.53 RIM 13.5 NA BIOSWALE SEE NOTE 4 NA4 RIM 12.5 IE 8.96 K Z 12" 120 LF S=1.0% NA5 RIM 12.8 IE 9.21 A RIM 12. ± IE 10.14 RIM 12.5± IE 9 49 NA6 12" 140 LF RIM 12.3 IE 9.46 6" PVC 94 LF 0 0.2%MIN S=0.2% RL 20 RIM 12.5± IE 9.65 12" 39 LF S=0.2% RIM 12.5± IE 9.73 CONDUFFS. 7. PLUGGING OF EXISTING PIPE SHALL BE PER WSDOT 7-08.3(4). RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNiTY CONSTRUCTION NBA°P ABANDON EXIST MH/CB. REMOVE EXIST MH/CB. REPLACE WITH NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG AND ABANDON 8" SD (BOTH SIDES) ® PLUG 12" SD PLUG 24" SD © CONNECT EXIST SD TO NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 15" SD REMOVE EXIST MH/CB REMOVE EXIST PIPE PROTECT EXIST 30' SD PROTECT EXIST 36" SD CONNECT NEW ROOF LEADERS (BY OTHERS) TO NEW SD. CONFIRM LOCATION OF ROOF LEADERS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SLOPE TO DRAIN TO CB AT 0.2% MIN. NW STORM DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: 1"=40' 40 _ 1 =40 -0 1 Scale 0 40 80 C462 C464 C463 ��+liE�ti Feet V/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/00 02/16/09 NW STORM DRAINAGE PLAN TIME DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER DWG NO 586456-02 2 -YD -C461 95% SUBMITTAL PHASE 2 PROJECT AREA - SEE SHEET C654 I NOTES: 1. UNDERDRAIN PIPE SHALL BE PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE, COUPLINGS, AND FITTINGS, 6" DIA. PER WSDOT STD SPEC 7-01. 2. UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPE SHALL BE SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 6" DIA, PER WSDOT STD SPEC 7-04. 3. SEE SHLLIS E1 -E4 FOR ELECTRICAL PANELS/ CONDUITS. 4. SEE SHEETS C652 AND C653 FOR BIOSWALE SECTIONS, LENGTHS, ELEVATIONS, AND DETAILS. 5. FORCE MAIN PIPELINES SHALL SLOPE MINIMUM 0.5% UPWARD TO THE UPSTREAM DISCHARGE MANHOLE. NO INTERMEDIATE HIGH OR LOW POINTS SHALL BE ALLOWED. RAIN .PIPE ^ EE NOTE 1 UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR (TYP, SEE NOTE 2) + SHEET PILE AREA JORGENSEN STEEL i 8 ' RIV.1.3y1 /. . /7714 /�" 89 . "S .u�ios3 ,100 ,•10,I 12" 14 LF 1. IE 8.17 ELEC PANEL /CONDUIT + + + + + + + RI + + C LEVEL SPREADER (TYP) 24" 237 LF S=1.357 S BIOSWALE IE'6761 SEE NOTE 4 CL SE 6", 10.56 -m 12" 99 LF- S=0.2% F S=0.2% CL�4NOUT (TYP) B-BIOSWALE EE NOTE 4 / i JORGENSEN STEEL IE 9.09 RIM 125 IE 9.88 ELEC PANEL/CONDUIT, TYP 2 RIM 12.6 e IE 9.10 12" 158 LF S=0.5% 12" 158 LF e S=0.5% 19 RIM 1 IE 10. 9I7 8 .1341, RIM- 2:6 ± EE NW 6", 10.3 INV SW 24", 2.2 (EXIST)', INV NE 24" 2.20 (EXIST uove S14 11' RIM 12. INV 10. I : si E 64 9.,6 ,.1 -errs vacs hP62 eb lE 1x09.6) RIM 12.1 IE 9.82 6. SEE SHEET C653 TABLE 2 FOR WQ VAULT COORDINATES. SEE SHEETS C760 -C767 FOR WQ VAULTS. 7. PLUGGING OF EXISTING PIPESHALL BE PER WSDOT 7-06.3(4). CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ABANDON EXIST MH/CB. REMOVE EXIST MH/CB. REPLACE WITH NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 8" SD ® PLUG 12" SD PLUG 24" SD CONNECT EXIST SD TO NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 15" SD REMOVE EXIST MH/CB REMOVE EXIST PIPE PROTECT EXIST 30" SD PROTECT EXIST 36" SD 1> CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 12" DI TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 IN COORDINATION WFFH STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK (BY OTHERS). CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WORK IN SHEET PILE AREA WITH BOEINGENGINEER,RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEMDPMENT SW STORM DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: 1"=40' RIM 1 .0 IE 9.42 12" 158 LF S=0.28 RIM 12.9 IE 9.73 40 0 1 =40 -0" RIM 12.1 IE 10.3 RIM 13.0 IE 9.50 2-64 12" 158 LF 5=0.29. 2-48 12" 158 LF S 0.28 IE 10.38 g;LANzEzArga. '6R7,WN S AO 5N081w4 56E88E0 PROW OPPR00t1 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 Scale 40 80 Feet C462 �X), C464 C461 C463 CURRENT RM90 DATE TULE SW STORM DRAINAGE PLAN DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER 586456-02 COMP NO. 2 -YD -C462 RIM 13.0 IE 9.78 IE 9.71 IE 9.96 CA27 IE 10.7 12" 158 LF S=0.5% 12' 158 LF S=0.5% NB7 IM 1 . IE 10.03 NA8 RIM 12 6 IE 9.96 MFA 1. IE 10.29 IE10.1 LAO I 2.9 IE 10.29 IE 10.6 ME 10.22 12" 158 LF 12" 158 LF .111111111o o n RIM 13.2 RIM 13.2 IE 10.49 RIM 13.5 IE 10.8 14+00 12" 150 LF 5=0.2% B9 RIM 13.3 IE 10.60 12" 72 LF S=0.2% 12" 37 LF 5=0.2% 8" 91 15 S=0.2% CA14 RIM 13.4 RIM 1 IE CA17 IM 1 . IE 10.72 CA18 I 1 .2 8. ssiminwmfAmmippo 12 41 15 8 61 IF 0 2% CA33 S=0.2%�; 5= RIM 13.5± m/ g CA19 IE 10.62 - RIM 13.2 CA20 "" ' co IE 10.92 IM 1 .0 IE 10.90 0 12 RIM 12.7 IE 10.83 2" 35 LF ItTIV RIM 12.8 IE 10.96 X116 12" 81 LF St5a-00 S=0.2% (NE PS) RIM 13.2 INV N 9.1 INV W 7.9 �.SL 1:01 PS ELEC PANEL/CONDUIT _COCK Ew Rn, c IE 10.80 RIM 13.0 (Ts, c+ioJsu 170 I RD 91 tds600 3.x.pc3 — \\Se ITH EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH FL EAST MARGINAL WA( SOUTH ACCEPTABILITY SL LHECKLO AO hNOINttN DATE DP CHECKED MG DP ROVED APPROVED '02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 0 NE STORM DRAINAGE PLAN TIRE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1. SEE SHEETS E2 AND E4 FOR PUMP STATION ELECTRICAL PANELS/CONDUITS. 2. PLUGGING OF EXISTING PIPE SHALL BE PER WSDOT 7-08.3(4). CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ABANDON EXIST MH/CB. REMOVE EXIST MH/CB. REPLACE WITH NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 8" SO PLUG 12" SD PLUG 24' SD CONNECT EXIST SD TO NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 15" SD CONNECT ROOF LEADERS (BY OTHERS) TO NEW SD. CONFIRM LOCATION OF ROOF LEADERS FOR CONNECTION. RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NE DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: 1"=40' 40' 20' 0 20' 40' 80' SCALE: 1"=40' C462 C461 C464 C463 (K CURRENT REVISION JOB NO. 586456-02 CIVIL MASTER COMP NO. 2 -YD -C463 SLC 7.52 Ng 636 NOP - 11". 4373 an99x 9., S22 RIM 13. IE 11.3 mr - 0 O T1 -713 - IE 9.91 C650 RIM 12.3 INV 12" INV B" (W CL (NW) 3 (EXIST) 0.94 = 10.46 RIM 12.9 IE 10.40 IE 10.08 0lare StO .0 F SO nN .Nam nm 12" 158 LF CB25 RIM 12. IE 10.9 1 1 N>L-73 5004-9 9t 4 60 6549 1.1 IE 10.25 13 914-727 f.43 Gz`• o 35-rn Awe R ¢.w 3 �P3 WLR 'ss'lu e COOLING TOWERS 1,3542! 69-1 1 •a Ns36-]19 0415- 110 09, CI 1311.4 C827 RIM 1 IE 11 124.110.5M 446 Ems` ei FUFL110 6.30' 640 514160. • Rett • CO.. 1042 A151.12 NM • o nnx¢ 5R� 36-7310 5569 1 Nu 1301 rrr. 509 9 0 12 21 IM 12.2± E 10.5 9V 'E S18 •M IE 10.46 S19 RIM 12.65 o IE 10.58 0414-735 w 9600 J .1..' rD 12" 158 LF N ii N AN 9. m CB7 S=0.2% 1 rye IE 10.41 RIM 1 .5 \ IE 10.58 CB26 IE 10.73 •3100 50166654 6,113 2.7 05 -nu „,,..."-n° N �SNO46a C0-1 CB8 RIM 12.7 IE 10.70 WU s 10� 601 9.5 C6 W C815 RIM 12.8 IE 10.89 5-213 03-1 is501 103 836-213 Nu 139 00, 1 ▪ J5-175 08-1 RN .6 6., CB16 65 °'7 RIM 13.1 IE 11.14"" 1 .0 ► N. 12", 8.95 1 8" 9 , I_ � -I W 4 10.52 m9seA m I I 0 - ELEC PANEL/CONDUIT RIM 14.1 c� EAST AIARGINAL WAY SOUTH 4 13.5 10.981 .. 12" 58 II \0.2' N.'.5 51a2= 813 00 6:13' RIM 1 3.45-159 IE 10 PH w i 3a7 4' 16 (EXIST) 16+84 S 0.2°.6+0 CB17 IM 1 IE 11.26 W 10.4 RIMCA1313.1 IE 11.18 N SWN, F" 0 sumpow.,_._,„ 39,60. mmum �__ W -I W 1x9N�R •58-1 `.„:11,1 9i,n; D %154GD FEIN1,A 19a �o nsc 1414604 q r n�3r�imE3�;� P09.1 5004.1 049 " v N 3.9 4646E 3.1 94904RN 140 5B.g50 N. ].115 na4 511014 PRO 19 YRE19 M19] EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH 93935 49.1 PRD NV1411 93 9Nv 3W gLAminswziv DRAWN ACCEPTABILITY SL Th6 DESIGN MID/OR DREG SPEanDATION 6 APPROVEDAO APPROVED DATE h So 54.316 .11-9 4663 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SE STORM DRAINAGE PLAN 'MU DEMOLITION 00 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD NOTES: 1. SEE SHEETS E2 AND E4 FOR ELECTRICAL PANELS/CONDUITS. 2. PLUGGING OF EXIST PIPE SHALL BE PER WSDOT 7-08.3(4). RECEIVED PAPR 0 9 2010 CONITY DEEVELO MENT CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ABANDON EXIST MH/CB. REMOVE EXIST MH/CB. REPLACE WITH NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 8" SD ® PLUG 12" SD PLUG 24" SD © CONNECT EXIST SD TO NEW STRUCTURE. PLUG 15" SD REMOVE EXIST MH/C8 REMOVE EXIST PIPE PROTECT EXIST 30" SD PROTECT EXIST 36" SD REMOVE EXIST MH/CB PROTECT EXIST 24" SD SE DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: 1"=40' 40 1 =40 -0 0 Scale 40 80 Feet C462 C461 Jb y C 4X64 ,%'r1T C463 IPW CURRENT RENSION CML MASTER 586456-02 2 -YD -C464 it i '2 21,4 ZAci 20 18 16 14 12 10 co m04 °0 C48 Dd Sao _w 3 N0.1 C I- 0 0 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 .6 4 2 0 20 18 16 2+50 cw N V10: W W ?47-cF 5-0 237 2i• nIA r.PFP 2 U 200 LF S-0.2% 24" CIA CPEP 5=0.20% 18 DIA CPEP 0 of W 17' LF =0.27. 18 DIA CP P C 0 CO C 0 -o— 20 CJ C•11, ~ w NCC 153 LH 5=0.2%-12'-131/lc 20 .-12' 01f4 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 PROFILE -S 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 18 16 14 12 10 B "- 01 I wJa ' I .N +Nda O0 0',o F Z 0 , In < o +'?d M-1- rn '±..-- to o—o F-(0 01 CO � ��UQ l�m I__„„i__0124' No +c!O.- Z a0 pERT SCALE. 1 i -J> TE J w U4Nom^ z. WW JQ Ww A Nill NomQ nLc."-'-' UN: WW UNCLW lil ' C6'B C.'6 0 o a 99 rN • �' �" �= •��2 LF 3 LF co (0 ,o 3" t• .I CP P Q,37, 8" DIA C EP i ���3 Wji 150 L 5-020% 2"�DV C PES of err- • " Nr.n N -^OD H -N 00 I n To! tnN�m II mourn +��U II�'III Nmwm T�Qjtil I ^ +Tcp ohl �'IJ _ ■ ■■■T■ ■ V �j NSW ww N U _E-• M - mow, �� ¢Q.�W-;W cl l-ii¢wT U U(/1z VNp=W ■ _ 4-----. I .1._______,, -- � I. -DT -CA ■LF 18" DIA CPEP 166 L S=0 20% 'T. P 18"DIA CEP 16 -0.20% I LF 5=0.2D% 24 DW CPE � 166 LF 0.20% _ =1 4 DIA LF 23% CPEO 13 Lf 5=0.207 24" DIA CPEP 166 - 1 '- C'EP II- 211 DIA lOoll ,. .,.. -1,nn 6400 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 14 0 12 4 10 8 6 4 2 0 2+00 3+00 4+00 PROFILE -CA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4. 13+00 14+00 15+00 PROFILE -CA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 UTILITY NOTES: 111 LOCATION AND DEPTH SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION DEPTH PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF EXISTING UTILITY CONFLICTS W/ IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATOR WITH BOEING IN A TIMELY MANNER. 0 CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS ONE WEEK MINIMUM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE UTIUTY CONFLICT EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH BOEING FOR RELOCATION OF CONFLICTING UT1UTY OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SD PIPEUNE. SYM REVISION 60 APPROVED DAIS SYM REVISION 0Y APPROVED DATE g)LAurs.ff.,Av .r ACCEPTABILITY THS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL AO RNOINEtN OP CHECKED JB CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 20 18 16 412 =10 CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 24" SD (NIC) TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 (STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK BY OTHERS) 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE �8 6 4 2 0 RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IVU 1 L3. 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILITIES. 1"=40'-0" 1 =4 -0 40 0 Scale 4 2 0 Scale 40 80 Feet 4 8 Feet ll'fl1E [K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE SD PROFILES APPROVED JB APPROVED TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C640 'OB 586456-02 0OMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C640 01 I wJa ' I .N +Nda O0 0',o F Z 0 , In < o +'?d M-1- rn '±..-- to o—o F-(0 01 CO � ��UQ l�m I__„„i__0124' No +c!O.- Z a0 i -J> TE J w U4Nom^ z. WW JQ Ww A Nill NomQ nLc."-'-' UN: WW UNCLW lil ' 99 LE • �' �" �= •��2 LF 3 LF 3" t• .I CP P Q,37, 8" DIA C EP i 1 12" rfl.20�- DIA IC'EP 150 L 5-020% 2"�DV C PES II 11- i w 13+00 14+00 15+00 PROFILE -CA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 UTILITY NOTES: 111 LOCATION AND DEPTH SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION DEPTH PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF EXISTING UTILITY CONFLICTS W/ IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATOR WITH BOEING IN A TIMELY MANNER. 0 CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS ONE WEEK MINIMUM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE UTIUTY CONFLICT EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH BOEING FOR RELOCATION OF CONFLICTING UT1UTY OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SD PIPEUNE. SYM REVISION 60 APPROVED DAIS SYM REVISION 0Y APPROVED DATE g)LAurs.ff.,Av .r ACCEPTABILITY THS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL AO RNOINEtN OP CHECKED JB CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 20 18 16 412 =10 CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 24" SD (NIC) TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 (STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK BY OTHERS) 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE �8 6 4 2 0 RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IVU 1 L3. 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILITIES. 1"=40'-0" 1 =4 -0 40 0 Scale 4 2 0 Scale 40 80 Feet 4 8 Feet ll'fl1E [K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE SD PROFILES APPROVED JB APPROVED TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C640 'OB 586456-02 0OMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C640 — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, Inc. 0 3 s A a Paconovsky, Donna — 2/16/2009 7:30:14 PM — oce td3600 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 20 18 16 6 4 2 20 18 16 2+00 3+00 oa N M nn ..^ m Q - 0'- . W 0 O. N0 .-.- In c n-- -- 2 • IiiiCCW C � 14 t7.1III , I '..2- ,.T a 0 _ =W_ __-� 1u��� —. IF S-,0.2% I. ,0j �O _OO1yI� ■ I ��Om N^� Z��C.bW V M•--- Z P IM alimi 10 p, 1 2 0..a% 0 DI S=0 207. 1 12" 2" D CPE1 DIA PEP N NN N 0 • —......1 ZQceTW Oz ' -0 Gcn r - z mar WO — I 7 C6 6 E1 o m� 79 LK Vm0- ...o,),":1-3 t.. DI "L--1 .• I. + �¢��O ..r. m �i CPN - 000 O1 DIA CPEP C 12" m +m NET m ,p[AMd'O. +N cn m • CP S= .2% 1 " D CPEF n�n� N (P 8 LF S=0.2: 12" DW C'EP 10 • z ZZp www; DIA C'EP F 1+6 LIA 5=0.'LUk 1 m n o cn W N�w z zn� E2WpW t(Ip TO QI-.4 ...„_OW tD Z z 'n z ^- •- -� < oa — OmN� N�nu^0O O +L0 —_ R.s ^O —�rn-- +V• NrWo rim; � m o LL' iWW 1 co' U Q - = nWW U CJ N. to WW V W NU � - 8 L S=0 207. ' 8" DIA CPEP 125 LF S=020% 8" D CPE II � CPEF T 12 LF 5=0.20A 24" DIA EP 21 — 1-1 ea I S=0 70% 4" D 5 LF S 1.247. .yv. 24 IjIA CPEP pi H 0% 1 tM CP LP 14 S= LF .2% 66 LP S=O. -i � 1.6 LF {—{ =0.247. 18 DIA I' PEP u IA CTP 0% D CPE' 156 LF S=0.207 24" DIA CPEP 166 IF 5=0.20 18" -�---{ 12" ' IA DI 4i=0 5=1 35% I I 237S S DA DPFP �I-r-�ie rREF 14+ - __ , „ -,inn a+on 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 6 4 2 20 18 16 2+00 3+00 14+00 14 0 m 12 W 10 z U 8 6 4 2 0 10+00 15+00 PROFILE -CB HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 16+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 2 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 PROFILE -CB HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' 22 20 18 16 14 4 2 0 -2 00 oa N M nn ..^ m Q - 0'- . W 0 O. N0 .-.- In c n-- -- 2 • IiiiCCW C � 14 t7.1III , I '..2- ,.T a 0 _ =W_ __-� 1u��� —. IF S-,0.2% I. ,0j �O _OO1yI� ■ I ��Om N^� Z��C.bW V M•--- Z P IM alimi 10 p, 1 2 0..a% 0 DI S=0 207. 1 12" 2" D CPE1 DIA PEP N NN N 0 • —......1 ZQceTW Oz ' -0 Gcn r - z mar WO — I 7 C6 6 14+00 14 0 m 12 W 10 z U 8 6 4 2 0 10+00 15+00 PROFILE -CB HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 16+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 2 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 PROFILE -CB HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' 22 20 18 16 14 4 2 0 -2 00 2+00 3+00 .. , O�^Z z '..2- ,.T a 0 _ =W_ __-� —. Z~WWW. ,0j �O _OO1yI� O "ff'" OO� I ��Om N^� Z��C.bW • mo O Z-jjO M•--- Z .c Orn Q O_ alimi 10 p, N NN N 0 • —......1 ZQceTW Oz -0 Gcn r - z mar WO — 7 C6 6 E1 LF = 5=0.2(,% 79 LK Vm0- ...o,),":1-3 t.. DI .• I. + �¢��O ..r. m �i CPN - 000 O1 DIA CPEP 12" m +m NET m ,p[AMd'O. +N cn m • CP S= .2% 1 " D CPEF n�n� N (P 8 LF S=0.2: 12" DW C'EP 10 • z ZZp www; DIA C'EP F 1+6 LIA 5=0.'LUk 1 ziii� W N�w z zn� E2WpW t(Ip TO QI-.4 ...„_OW tD Z z z ^- -� — --- —_ —�rn-- IME 1 8 L S=0 207. ' 8" DIA CPEP 125 LF S=020% 8" D CPE II CPEF 12 LF 5=0.20A 24" DIA EP 21 1-1 ea I S=0 70% 4" D 5 LF S 1.247. .yv. 24 IjIA CPEP pi H -i � 1 u 2+00 3+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 PROFILE -NA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 PROFILE -NA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' VOA MOON S APPROVED DATE SII REVISION 61 APPROVED BOE/A/G® ACCEPTABILITY AWN TNIS DESIGN AND/OR Eaux SPECRICADON IS APPROVED A0 INtut APPROVE] 9Y DEM.DATE OP NC PROVED DP •m0 NOTES: 22 20 18 16 14 j 12 LI 10 8 'I 6 00 4 2 0 2 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED 114 DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILITIES. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 24" SD (NIC) TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 (STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK BY OTHERS) RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 1 "=ADA -0 eet Scale 0 X 443 80 DAE��(IOUpe 4 2 0 4 8 vrr-v 1 =4 -0 Scale �fFeet 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 suaTmE RUCK CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE SD PROFILES TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C641 .109 NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2 -YD -C641 .. , O�^Z z '..2- ,.T a 0 _ =W_ __-� —. Z~WWW. ,0j �O _OO1yI� O "ff'" OO� I ��Om N^� Z��C.bW • mo O Z-jjO M•--- Z .c Orn Q O_ 10 p, N NN N 0 • —......1 ZQceTW Oz -0 Gcn r - z mar WO — 7 E1 LF = 5=0.2(,% 79 LK S=0 207. 6" DI DIA CPEP 12" DI • 21 6 S= .2% 1 " D CPEF 1 8 LF S=0.2: 12" DW C'EP 10 LF -0.20. 12" DIA C'EP F 1+6 LIA 5=0.'LUk 1 11+00 12+00 13+00 PROFILE -NA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 PROFILE -NA HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' VOA MOON S APPROVED DATE SII REVISION 61 APPROVED BOE/A/G® ACCEPTABILITY AWN TNIS DESIGN AND/OR Eaux SPECRICADON IS APPROVED A0 INtut APPROVE] 9Y DEM.DATE OP NC PROVED DP •m0 NOTES: 22 20 18 16 14 j 12 LI 10 8 'I 6 00 4 2 0 2 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED 114 DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILITIES. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 24" SD (NIC) TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 (STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK BY OTHERS) RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 1 "=ADA -0 eet Scale 0 X 443 80 DAE��(IOUpe 4 2 0 4 8 vrr-v 1 =4 -0 Scale �fFeet 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 suaTmE RUCK CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE SD PROFILES TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C641 .109 NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2 -YD -C641 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 20 18 16 14 12 w w 10 8 6 4 2 2+00 3+00 4+ o c H o, N t, +ad' aV.-l- .3 r _ r `_V...- o"- 0NF- -Fn .4 -"-; �"1 Z N��-w I fn ^'i' W 2 I +�- - - z m +o. a� ;.'_cm '�' of iw 41 LF $=p 8' D DI 5= .2% - 8" [IA DI CO � I [ C1 ' m ,n CO C848N rn I CV .d, 0, mo ,,00" +oo� N o m a n rn� c" 0 nom^\ MDQ rn nom a,.- a��ww a rnr` �i Ili Ew ww Z zm ���ww Na'� ?� �� m NY=-- 2 �mw NY_ ' �W ® • o■ -' -■z 1 ' -- .--_ MIIIII I I _ I P 155 LF 5=0.20% 12 DIA CPcP 12" DIA CP ' 125 LF S=C 20% 8" DIA CPEP 130 LF 5.20% 128 LF 5=0.20% 18" � I DIA CEP 1'5 LF S=0.20% 18" DIA 1A5 LF S=0.i0% 2/' DIA CPEP 201 IF S=C 20% 24" DIA CPE " CPEP 5 LF S41.6% i - ' 17B p 24 IA C I 2 R 0 LTFALTFALL -, A„ n�nn o+n0 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14 12 w w 10 8 6 4 2 2+00 3+00 4+ 14+00 15+00 PROFILE -NB HORIZ SCALE: 1 "=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 16+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 6t00 PROFILE -NB HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' DATE TTY APPROVED DATE gi__Arzs,,vc® ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN IND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. DRAW SLS AO -DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUEOIE RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOTES: 22 20 18 16 4 2 0 2 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTIIJTIES. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 24' SD (NIC) TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 (STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK BY OTHERS) 40 0 40 80 1'=40'-0" Scale Feet 4 2 0 4 8 1 =4 -0 Scale Feet IltfiER CURRENT REV SIGN ssvea DATE SD PROFILES ,INLINWY DATE OP ZMG 02/16/09 02/16/09 APPROVED APPROVED TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SNEET C642 JOB ND. 586456-02 COMP 95% SUBMITTAL 2 -YD -C642 o c H o, N t, +ad' aV.-l- .3 r _ r `_V...- o"- 0NF- -Fn .4 -"-; �"1 Z N��-w I fn ^'i' W Z Ell I 41 LF $=p 8' D DI 5= .2% - 8" [IA DI I [ I 14+00 15+00 PROFILE -NB HORIZ SCALE: 1 "=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 16+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 6t00 PROFILE -NB HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' DATE TTY APPROVED DATE gi__Arzs,,vc® ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN IND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. DRAW SLS AO -DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUEOIE RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOTES: 22 20 18 16 4 2 0 2 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTIIJTIES. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE KNOCKOUT FOR 24' SD (NIC) TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING PHASE 2 (STREAMBANK RESTORATION WORK BY OTHERS) 40 0 40 80 1'=40'-0" Scale Feet 4 2 0 4 8 1 =4 -0 Scale Feet IltfiER CURRENT REV SIGN ssvea DATE SD PROFILES ,INLINWY DATE OP ZMG 02/16/09 02/16/09 APPROVED APPROVED TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SNEET C642 JOB ND. 586456-02 COMP 95% SUBMITTAL 2 -YD -C642 — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck Inc. 20 16 16 14 12 10 8 6 1+00 20 1B 16 14 12 10 8 6 PROFILE-NA10-NA14 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 O O 41. m Wr ray— n in po <0 n w • r- ' +.1 m� iNK +l p W J � Np Q 1nE W lig cE s O oma' % IIP Q� ?O tn».WW� Z -ow W N• Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' Slug U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W ¢�TO a— 35 1 DIA DI - S=1 1% S=0.2% NIA CPFP EAQ O r0 +moo 4 1 r. i CPLD ' IJ __12" 1+00 20 1B 16 14 12 10 8 6 PROFILE-NA10-NA14 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 6 PROFILE-CA18-CA20 1+00 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 O O 41. m Wr ray— n in Et,-, ocsmo w • r- ' rn o m� iNK IN N L. p W J � Np Q 1nE W lig cE s O O % IIP Q� ?O tn».WW� NR' -ow I,=- Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W ¢�TO a— W cU�I S=0.20% 8" DIA DI - = 2F 0 1 S=0.2% NIA CPFP EAQ O r0 +moo 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 6 PROFILE-CA18-CA20 1+00 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-NA10-NA16 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' N O O 41. c0 Wr ray— n in Et,-, N a0 M +d NY)—r R1 6- 1 00 ..Op IN N L. (op 1-517— O lig cE s O O % IIP Q� ?O tn».WW� NR' -ow I,=- Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W ¢�TO a— W cU�I 02 Lf ••�-_ N_ = 2F 0 1 S=0.2% NIA CPFP EAQ O r0 +moo 4 li a N� 0+100 ±v?o- 1- O t N WW IJ __12" , c7 m� U K-. q- O N.'Q7 W — 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-NA10-NA16 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' N O O 41. c0 ¢NKW Et,-, 11 EMI MN= all MIONIMMIIIIIMEMI 1 1 B" DIA 'I1 IN N L. (op 1-517— ^ UNCW lig cE s O 5=0.2 8 DA % IIP - + LNi •1M-�1- ao com 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 2+00 PROFILE-CA33-CA14 HORIZ SCALE 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CB9-CB14 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 6 4 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 o O ( c0 Z . OC - W v: ---b N: • ° : c). - N � UNaC W I.III MIEN A5 IN N L. (op 1-517— ^ UNCW lig cE s O 5=0.2 8 DA % IIP - + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W ¢�TO a— W cU�I W ••�-_ N_ ." 1 AIM EAQ O r0 +moo 4 li a N� 0+100 ±v?o- 1- O t N WW IJ N o0 �o�-��5+y O QQ G:WLA U0~CI , c7 m� U K-. q- O N.'Q7 W — ~WZp WW S4 .20% 12" DIA PEP l 1 0 LF ,, •• li .2% 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CB9-CB14 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 6 4 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 PROFILE-NB9-NB12 HORIZ SCALE:' i"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' o O ( c0 Z . OC - W v: ---b N: • ° : c). - N � UNaC W I.III MIEN A5 IN N L. (op 1-517— ^ UNCW lig cE s O 5=0.2 8 DA % IIP - + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 PROFILE-NB9-NB12 HORIZ SCALE:' i"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CA11-CA16 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' o O ( c0 co 0— ±M�O 1" Nom` 2� W° ao 0 : c). - N � UNaC W w 0-, (op 1-517— ^ UNCW lig cE s O �W Q Z O o + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W Of acv 51 IF 107 5=0.2% 12"DIACPP 8" D.A DI ." 1 EAQ O r0 +moo 4 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CA11-CA16 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CB8-CB28 HORIZ SCALE 1'=40' VERT SCALE: 1".4' 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 o O ( c0 co 0— ±M�O 1" Nom` 2� W° ao 0 : c). - N � UNaC W 'n+ �NW O « ce ? W c.J ^ UNCW N M= ^n 28 cc � o + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn Yf' n ��o 1— v ' +SET) cc) —� N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W Of acv 107 LF S=0.2' 8" D.A DI ." 1 EAQ O r0 +moo 4 a N� 0+100 ±v?o- 1- O t N WW IJ N o0 �o�-��5+y O QQ G:WLA U0~CI , c7 m� U K-. q- O N.'Q7 W — ~WZp WW 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CB8-CB28 HORIZ SCALE 1'=40' VERT SCALE: 1".4' 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2+00 PROFILE-CA12-CA15 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' o O ( c0 co 0— ±M�O 1" Nom` 2� W° .. : cc N � UNaC W 'n+ �NW O « ce ? W c.J ^ UNCW N M= ^n o +,-- +N o + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn — iNa v ' +SET) cc) W N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W Of acv 32 LF _ D 2C% 2 DIA CP EP 'V ." 1 EAQ O r0 +moo 4 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2+00 PROFILE-CA12-CA15 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 1+00 2+00 o O ( G; +000 tn� UND: 1" Nom` 2� W° .. cc �w�� m .4- rr Z ? W c.J ^ UNCW N M= ^n o +,-- +N o + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn — iNa v ' +SET) cc) W N CO Wco m VlK_'—' U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W Of acv I 'V ." Ell. _ M +o • V)0 EAQ O r0 +moo 4 a N� 0+100 ±v?o- 1- O t N WW IJ N o0 �o�-��5+y O QQ G:WLA U0~CI , c7 m� U K-. q- O N.'Q7 W — ~WZp WW (p pm LATA, I$10I1l11, 1 0 LF S=1. li .2% noon 92 LF21 I i• 89 0.8 8"II' DI PIPE LF S=0.21 8" C;IA DI -P ALE 61 LF S= 8" IA .0 CPEP DIAilli ■ S=0.2% 12 DIA S= 20% I 1+00 2+00 1+00 2+00 PROFILE -S2 -S1 1 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 3+00 PROFILE-CB8-CB17 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 ( II .. cc 11,648 L) 6 — � r= m a `+�coMao N MOjW� o + LNi •1M-�1- ao com c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn — v ' +SET) cc) CO Csl coO NCC -w CjAW E— _O W W U M _1 t/1 O Nd' W Of acv I 'V ." Ell. _ M +o • V)0 EAQ O r0 +moo 4 a N� 0+100 ±v?o- 1- O t N WW IJ N o0 �o�-��5+y O QQ G:WLA U0~CI , c7 m� U K-. q- O N.'Q7 W — ~WZp WW (p pm LATA, I$10I1l11, 1 0 LF S=1. li noon DI PI F i• 89 0.8 8"II' DI PIPE 12320E TOS BIOS -P ALE 133 64 F S 12" DIA D.2 =0.2 DIA SPEP 1. DIA CPEP DIAilli ■ S= 20% I 1+00 2+00 PROFILE -S2 -S1 1 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 3+00 PROFILE-CB8-CB17 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CA9-CA32 20 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 4+00 1-- C-1 cp c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn `D a CO _ w + N a0 -00 <5) U Of acv N 'V ." Ell. _ M +o • V)0 EAQ O r0 +moo 4 a N� 0+100 ±v?o- 1- O t N WW IJ N o0 �o�-��5+y O QQ G:WLA U0~CI , c7 m� U K-. q- O N.'Q7 W — ~WZp WW (p pm LATA, I$10I1l11, 1 0 LF S=1. li DIA DI PI 11 IIMBi lIV 64 F S 12" DIA D.2 =0.2 DIA SPEP 8S' 0 0% D DI 8" DIAilli ■ S= 20% I 1+00 2+00 PROFILE-CA9-CA32 20 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 4+00 1+00 REVISION APPROVED DAZE RBRSIDN BE APPROVED DAR: ACCEPTABILITY TH5 DESIGN ANO/OR SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED 2+00 PROFILE -S12 -S3 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=49' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' DRAWN SL tKra E•D AD APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DATE kNGNEER DP 'CHECKED 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBORE 20 18 16 14 12 BO 6 4 2 2 0 3+00 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 4 NOTES: 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILITIES. UTILITY NOTE: n LOCATION AND DEPTH SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION DEPTH PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF EXISTING UTILITY CONFLICTS W/ IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATION WITH BOEING IN A TIMELY MANNER. 2 CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS ONE WEEK MINIMUM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE UTILITY CONFLICT EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH BOEING FOR RELOCATION OF CONFLICTING UTIUTY OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SO PIPELINE. 1 =40 -0 RECEIVE&4D APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT 40 0 40 80 Scale 4 2 Feet 0 4 8 ScaleFeet 1I'\k-1I1E [K CURRENT REVISION SYYBOL SD PROFILES - LATERALS 02/16/09 02/16/09 OPPROVED APPROVED TIME DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD BNEET C643 .TOB N0. 586456-02 DOW N0. 95% SUBMITTAL OWO N0. 2 -YD -C643 1-- C-1 cp c0 , 0 0i- O(JWn `D a CO _ w + N a0 -00 <5) U Z n I (p pm LATA, I$10I1l11, 1 0 LF S=1. li DIA DI PI E 1+00 REVISION APPROVED DAZE RBRSIDN BE APPROVED DAR: ACCEPTABILITY TH5 DESIGN ANO/OR SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED 2+00 PROFILE -S12 -S3 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=49' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' DRAWN SL tKra E•D AD APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DATE kNGNEER DP 'CHECKED 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBORE 20 18 16 14 12 BO 6 4 2 2 0 3+00 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 4 NOTES: 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILITIES. UTILITY NOTE: n LOCATION AND DEPTH SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION DEPTH PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF EXISTING UTILITY CONFLICTS W/ IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATION WITH BOEING IN A TIMELY MANNER. 2 CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS ONE WEEK MINIMUM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE UTILITY CONFLICT EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH BOEING FOR RELOCATION OF CONFLICTING UTIUTY OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SO PIPELINE. 1 =40 -0 RECEIVE&4D APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT 40 0 40 80 Scale 4 2 Feet 0 4 8 ScaleFeet 1I'\k-1I1E [K CURRENT REVISION SYYBOL SD PROFILES - LATERALS 02/16/09 02/16/09 OPPROVED APPROVED TIME DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD BNEET C643 .TOB N0. 586456-02 DOW N0. 95% SUBMITTAL OWO N0. 2 -YD -C643 — Copyright 2008 R. W. Be Pacanoveky, Donna — 2/18/2009 7:30:32 PM — oce 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 2 1 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—S1 4—S4 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' 1 2 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 om1 ^Z -H z O 1- 1 1!!; W 4 N i -I en N) O }�Z00Z ,_ T1 w u7 P- Z rj o Z _ +�.:3z m z o r a a N,p of W�1 <" < FE Wz 0 - WW ' bid..) ..4- in '- 2 <Nb <I� 0 N MI m�em 11 •rs—_ 1 WCC jN H- a s- 0 nem 1 0 LF 115 = •^ 12 If,IONhll m r rt'lirITM D 01 • PE - jNm zo :'' 1 mtzT,.1 `� ��� <a 0 'vce'=' 99 13" I C Fl 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—S1 4—S4 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1 "=4' 1 2 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 PROFILE—NA4—NA1 8 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE. 1"=4' 1 2 om1 tri z 'En0- r`.7? 1- 1 1!!; W 4 N i -I +oo� }�Z00Z ,_ O,n O N6 +QO- '" Z rj o Z _ VI ai x<3 o r !-N O c7 LI, w a X Q W�1 m N� ..4- in zNsT v of o ��S N ,n o6 OC N o v1NELL 1 WCC jN H- a s- 0 45 1 0 LF S=1% 12 SIA CPP V1 ND: o < z jNm zo :'' 1 mtzT,.1 `� ��� <a 0 'vce'=' 99 13" I C Fl 12" — J- zEoE 1 cc, vice Imi 73LFS=O.% 1 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 PROFILE—NA4—NA1 8 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE. 1"=4' 1 2 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—S6—S1 7 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE 1"=4' 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 om1 tri z 'En0- r`.7? 1- 1 1!!; W N• N +oo� }�Z00Z ,_ O,n O N6 +QO- = Z rj o Z _ VI ai x<3 o r ZNCZZc1 a X w W�1 �1+'? V^WNLn.- Qs 4'Nr'WW& ..4- in O v of o ��S N ,n o6 OC N o v1NELL 1 WCC jN H- a s- 0 45 / 1 N M.- .. i zE V1 ND: o < z jNm zo :'' 1 mtzT,.1 `� ��� <a 0 'vce'=' 99 13" I C Fl 12" — J- zEoE 1 cc, vice Imi 73LFS=O.% 1 ■■ - 111. 104 S=O. F % 58 LF L f ti 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—S6—S1 7 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE 1"=4' 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 2+00 3+00 PROFILE—S1 6—S5 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 2 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 o I +I e>� 'En0- r`.7? 1- 1 1!!; W N• N +oo� NaN O,n O N6 +QO- o'w^� I-'> Z rj o Z _ Q Z f0 v C7 d'CD� n0 Y ZNCZZc1 <�?O N w W�1 -H CO in ..4- in O v of o ��S N ,n o6 OC N o ' 1 4 jN H- a s- 0 45 G 1 N M.- .. i zE V1 ND: o < z jNm zo :'' 1 mtzT,.1 `� ��� <a 0 'vce'=' -- ZI EaTw 12" — J- zEoE ■ cc, vice Imi 73LFS=O.% 1 ■■ - 111. 104 S=O. F % 58 LF Q PtP� II �� f ti =0.2% 8" IA 1-11 PIPF 78 LF 5=0.2% 12" . DIA ■ 18 DIA IPP • b=Irr• I D CPE 11 Il yams 8 L 0.3 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 2+00 3+00 PROFILE—S1 6—S5 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 2 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 1+00 o I +I e>� 'En0- r`.7? 1- 1 1!!; W N• N +oo� NaN O,n O N6 +QO- o'w^� I-'> Z rj o Z _ Q Z f0 v C7 d'CD� n0 Y ZNCZZc1 <�?O N w W�1 N CO in ..4- in O ioP n v' �;� NC=T N =• n 'fco ? T4 1 4 jN H- a s- 0 45 G 1 N M.- .. i zE V1 ND: o < z jNm zo :'' 1 mtzT,.1 `� ��� <a 0 'vce'=' -- ZI EaTw 12" Lt _. J- zEoE ■ r ■ 73LFS=O.% 1 ■■ - II DI►''�i4�langilallil II 104 S=O. F % 58 LF Q PtP� II �� f ti =0.2% 8" IA 1-11 PIPF 78 LF 5=0.2% 12" 8 ' DIA ■ ` DIA CSEP 1 b=Irr• I D CPE 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1+00 2+00 3+ PROFILE—NA5—NA21 HORIZ SCALE: r=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 o I m 'En0- r`.7? + 'n t. -..,5V1 1 1!!; �3-Z�a +oo� NaN z3ri V` yrsz o'w^� I-'> Z rj o Q Z Ir�O(41 n' ZNCZZc1 „. W�1 N 4. ..4- in s Vm N =• n 'fco ? T4 1 4 jN H- a s- 0 45 G 1 N M.- .. i zE V1 ND: o < z jNm zo :'' 1 mtzT,.1 `� ��� <a 0 'vce'=' -- ZI EaTw 12" Lt _. J- zEoE ■ r ■ 73LFS=O.% 1 ■■ 31 ODIXPOE II DI►''�i4�langilallil II -- 8" DI 78 LF 5=0.2% 12" 39 LF 14F LF •=0.2. i ,•P ■ ` DIA CSEP 1 b=Irr• I D CPE 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1+00 2+00 3+ PROFILE—NA5—NA21 HORIZ SCALE: r=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—S2—S1 3 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 2+00 PROFILE—S7—S1 9 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 20 20 18 16 14 12 18 16 14 12 10 • 10 8 6 4 2 o I m 'En0- r`.7? + 'n t. -..,5V1 1 1!!; �3-Z�a +oo� NaN z3ri V` yrsz o'w^� I-'> Z rj o Q Z Ir�O(41 ZNCZZc1 „. W�1 N /�� r s MI =• WTo w 1 45 I 1 N 4 PVC FTII V1 ND: c8 L� \, lik '7111 FM 12" Lt _. II ■ r 73LFS=O.% 1 ■■ 31 ODIXPOE II DI►''�i4�langilallil II 8" DI Iii ■ ■ 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—S2—S1 3 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 2+00 PROFILE—S7—S1 9 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 20 20 18 16 14 12 18 16 14 12 10 • 10 8 6 4 2 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—NA1 1 —NA1 7 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' APPROVED DAM SYM REVISION 06 APPROVED DQE g)LISFASIEZAW* ACCEPTABILIT' 1E5 DESIGN AN0/0R SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED DRAWN SL AD APPROVED 9Y DEFT. DATE ENGINEER DP CHECKED J8 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 022/16/09 02/16/09 n o I m 'En0- r`.7? + 'n t. -..,5V1 1 1!!; �3-Z�a +oo� NaN z3ri V` yrsz o'w^� I-'> Z rj o Q Z Ir�O(41 ZNCZZc1 „. W�1 N /�� r s MI WTo w 1 45 I 4 PVC FTII I c8 L� " PVC FM 12" Lt _. II 1+00 2+00 PROFILE—NA1 1 —NA1 7 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' APPROVED DAM SYM REVISION 06 APPROVED DQE g)LISFASIEZAW* ACCEPTABILIT' 1E5 DESIGN AN0/0R SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED DRAWN SL AD APPROVED 9Y DEFT. DATE ENGINEER DP CHECKED J8 8 6 4 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 022/16/09 02/16/09 n 1 =4 -0" SUe1DEE 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 40 2+00 PROFILE—S21 —S1 0 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 3 D- W + 'n t. -..,5V1 1 1!!; NaN X56 X.- Z rj o 'x <CmZp Z „. W�1 N /�� r s MI WTo w 1 I■ I c8 L� " PVC FM 12" Lt _. II 73LFS=O.% 1 31 ODIXPOE 1 LF 8" DI 1 =4 -0" SUe1DEE 1+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 40 2+00 PROFILE—S21 —S1 0 HORIZ SCALE: 1"=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' 1+00 PROFILE—S9—S8 HORIZ SCALE: 1 "=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' RECEIVED )APR 0 9 20101 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 40 80 Scale 4 2 0 4 Feet 8 Scale Feet 2+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 3+00 0 8 6 4 2 0 8 6 4 NOTES: 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILDIES. UTILITY NOTE: LOCATION AND DEPTH SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION DEPTH PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF EXISTING UTILITY CONFLICTS W/ IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATION WITH BOEING IN A TIMELY MANNER. X21 CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS ONE WEEK MINIMUM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE UTILITY CONFLICT EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH BOEING FOR RELOCATION OF CONFLICTING UTILITY OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SD PIPELINE. 1I'\1)E [K CURRENT REVL4ON SYMBOL DATE SD PROFILES - LATERALS 02/16/09 02/16/09 APPROVED JB APPROVED VOX CIVIL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C644 Joe NO. 586456=02 COMP N0. 95% SUB 1TTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C644 _ W + 'n t. -..,5V1 co o D_ X.- Z rj o 'x <CmZp Z „. W�1 N CC -1_ (om. il MI 1 I■ c8 L� " PVC FM II 1+00 PROFILE—S9—S8 HORIZ SCALE: 1 "=40' VERT SCALE: 1"=4' RECEIVED )APR 0 9 20101 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 40 80 Scale 4 2 0 4 Feet 8 Scale Feet 2+00 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 3+00 0 8 6 4 2 0 8 6 4 NOTES: 1. SEE SHEET C645 FOR TRENCH DETAILS. 2. PROFILES OF ALL LATERAL SD NOT PROVIDED IN DEMO AREA DUE TO ABANDONMENT/REMOVAL OF ALL UTILDIES. UTILITY NOTE: LOCATION AND DEPTH SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION DEPTH PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF EXISTING UTILITY CONFLICTS W/ IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATION WITH BOEING IN A TIMELY MANNER. X21 CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE POTENTIAL UTILITY CONFLICTS ONE WEEK MINIMUM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE UTILITY CONFLICT EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH BOEING FOR RELOCATION OF CONFLICTING UTILITY OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SD PIPELINE. 1I'\1)E [K CURRENT REVL4ON SYMBOL DATE SD PROFILES - LATERALS 02/16/09 02/16/09 APPROVED JB APPROVED VOX CIVIL MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C644 Joe NO. 586456=02 COMP N0. 95% SUB 1TTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C644 0 0 8 E 9 0 8 8"0 ID CAST IRON RING & COVER LANDSCAPING PAVEMENT 3000 PSI CONCRETE COLLAR THREADED PLUG 2'-0" •QUARE ASPHALT PAVEMENT FIBER JOINT PACKING 3000 PSI CONCRETE ENCASEMENT MIN 4" THICKNESS 6" PIPE 6" 45 BEND TIP OF 2 6" PVC PIPE SECTION SEWER PIPE TYPICAL CLEANOUT SCALE NTS C652 ASPHALT PAVEMENT w DETECTOR TAPE GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR PIPE ZONE BEDDING —\/,\\ � SUBGRADE TRENCH WIDE PER WSDOT SPEC 2-09.4 0 0 z w 0_ GRAVEL BORROW TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION FOR FLEXIBLE PIPE OR SHALLOW PIPE SCALE: NTS -2" OF 5/8" MINUS TOP COURSE PER WSDOT STD 9-03.9(3) COMPACTED TO 95% OF ITS MAX DRY UNIT WT AS DETERMINED BY ASTM D1557. .-4" HMA PLACED IN TWO LIFTS 6" AGGREGATE BASE COMPACTED TO 95% OF ITS MAX DRY UNIT WT \ AS DETERMINED BY ASTM D1557 COMPACT SUBBASE TO DENSE AND YIELDING CONDITION TYPICAL 4" ASPHALT PAVEMENT SCALE: NTS NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE SURFACE TO EXIST CONDIDON OR BETTER OUTSIDE OF DEMOLITION AREA. WITHIN DEMOLITION AREA, SURFACE RESTORATION BY OTHERS (NIC). CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE TO SUBGRADE ELEVATION. DETECTOR TAPE 15% PIPE 0.D. 1/4 PIPE 0.D. (6" MIN.) 504 REMSION BY APPROVED DATE 5074 APPROVED DATE BOE/A/G® ACCEPTABILITY 095 DESIGN AND/OR SPECO1CA710N 5 APPROVED APPROVED 9Y 00.T. DATE PER WSDOT SPEC 2-09.4 ASPHALT PAVEMENT SUBGRADE GRAVEL BORROW GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR PIPE ZONE BEDDING TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION FOR RIGID PIPE SCALE: NTS 'DRAWN SCLC AO h-I.INLtHI DP 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTT11.0 NOTES: 1. BACKFILL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN 8 -TO 12 -INCH LIFTS. 2. GRAVEL BORROW SHALL BE PER WSDOT 9-03.14(1). COMPACTOR SHALL BE 95% USING THE MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST (ASTM 01557). 3. GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR PIPE ZONE BEDDING PER WSDOT 9-03.12(A). COMPACTOR SHALL BE 95% USING THE MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST (ASTM 01557). 4. FOR DEEP EXCAVATIONS, > 6', CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE W/ BOEING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TO CONFIRM THAT SUBGRADE IS SUITABLE FOR PIPE AND STRUCTURES. TO DETERMINE IF OVER EXCAVATION IS REQUIRED. PAYMENT FOR OVER EXCAVATION AND ADDI11ONAL BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL BE PER FORCE ACCOUNT. 5. CDR ENCASEMENT SHALL BE USED FOR ALL FLEXIBLE PIPE WHERE FINAL COVER IS LESS THAN 1 FOOT. CDF ENCASEMENT SHALL SURROUND OUTSIDE OF PIPE 6 -INCH MIN. CDF PER WSDOT 9-09.3(1)D. RECEIVED IPPR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOP AENT CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE MISC DETAILS M'GHP�Etno 02/16/09 APPROVED DP 7vt�tavE TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD sNEEY C645 J08 NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2 -YD -C645 ELECTRIC GATE OPERATOR 60" DIA MH 24" SOUD COVER \- LADDER PLAN CA1 SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" STEM COVER OPERATOR PEDESTAL 1 C462 JL. 24" IE 1.00 MH BOT -0.53 1_ L TOP OF CIP WALL EL 6.25 24° DIA. SD FLOW IE 4.97 SUDE IN FULLY OPEN POSITION EDGE OF CIP WALL 24" SLIDE GATE SECTION CA1, 60" DIA n SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A )111 intlen= Mk MINIIIIMB 24" SOLID COVER • 60" DIA MH LADDER PLAN NA1 SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" COVER FINAL GRADE EL 13.8 3" DIA CORED HOLE IN COVER STEM GUIDES, TYP CIP WALL STEM 24" IE 4.97 24" SUDE GATE -d 24" DA. SD FLOW IE 1.00 114 G LADDER 60" DIA MANHOLE 12" DIA SD FLOW IE 4.93 SECTION CA1, 60" DIA SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" ELECTRIC GATE OPERATOR 'J #5 X12 32" HORIZ ® $5 VERT AS SHOWN #5 DWL Q 12 Mer CIP WALL #5 EPDXY DWL 3 1/2" MIN EMBEDMENT, TYP 2'-0" ± DWL CONSTRUCTION NOTES: EXTEND 24" SD TO FACE OF CIP WALL AND CAST IN WALL GENERAL NOTES: 1. SEE SHT C647 FOR SLIDE GATE NOTES. 2. CIP CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 4000. SECTION SECTION SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" SCALE: 1"=1'-0" STEM COVER OPERATOR PEDESTAL 24" DIA. SD FLOW -a- IE 4.93 /- 12° IE 4.84 24" IE 0.92' MH IE -0.78 TOP OF CIP WALL EL 321.80 24" DLA. SD t FLOW r 1 IE 4.93 SLIDE IN FULLY OPEN POSITION EDGE OF CIP WALL SLIDE GATE SECTION NA1, 60" DIA SCALE: 1/2"= -0" SYM REVISION APPROVED DATE REVIST05 APPROVED DAD: g)LAsum-,Avc. ACCEPTABILITY 1NO DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFTGTATN IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL AD ENGINEER OP CHECKED 1G DKED APPROVED OP APPROVED 02%16/09 02/16/09 SUBDNE I�I 1/2"=1'-O" 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Scale 1 0 1 =1 -0 I - � Feet 1 Feet 2 COVER Scale RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 DEVELOPNMCOMMUEWT FINAL GRADE /EL 13.8 PAVEMENT ;ac iii,. mss. ✓ra -- '%v: 3" DIA CORED HOLE IN COVER STEM GUIDES. TYP STEM CIP WALL 24" IE 4.93 SLIDE GATE 24" DIA. SD FLOW 0.92 PRECAST BASE LADDER FLOW 12" DIA. SD IE 4.84 SECTION NA1, 60" DIA 12" SCALE: 1/2"=1-0" FOOTING, TYP 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DA SLIDE GATE DETAILS 02/16/09 02/16/09 TITLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C646 JOB 586456-02 COMP NO 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C646 U E x E 8 E e Donna — 2/16/2009 7:30:57 PM — SLIDE GATE 24" SOLID COVER (II 54" MH — \lid 17 3" DIA CORED HOLE IN COVER STEM GUIDES, TYP PLAN MANHOLE S1 SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" O STEM IT CIP WALL 12" SUDE GATE 12" DIA. SD t1 l FLOW IE 097 PRECAST BASE n NOTES: 1. S1 SUDE GATE DETAILS SIMILAR TO SECTIONS E AND F ON SHEET C646 ADAPTED FOR 12" GATE. ELECTRIC GATE OPERATOR L LADDER 12" DIA. SD 6" DIA. SD FLOW IE IE 4.90 •.4944"0:074.1,401 11 '•1 ; 1 13 - 5i•ru;��r r•�: To 1. �:� SECTION SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" STEM COVER 1p..---- OPERATOR PEDESTAL P r FLOW —► EDGE OF CIP WALL 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A i MH IE 0.00 TOP OF CIP WALL EL 4.70 • SUDE IN FULLY • OPEN POSITION • 12" SUDE GATE FOOTING (TYP) ---12' SECTION SCALE: 1/2"=1'-D" RET/6109 er APPROVED DATE sM el APPROVED DATE ce;LinsrLL-,Aw® ACCEPTABILITY 105 DESIGN ANO/OR SPECDICAT1ON 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL AO CK.CKED rELNOINEEN NG 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBDRE SLIDE GATE AND ACTUATOR NOTES 1. SLIDE GATES SHALL BE FABRICATED ALUMINUM, WATERMAN MODEL AC -31F, NON -SELF-CONTAINED WITH SEPARATE STEM GUIDES AND OPERATORS. 2. GATES SHALL BE FLUSH MOUNTED TO CONCRETE WITH STAINLESS STEEL ANCHOR BOLTS WITH SIZE AND SPACING AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GATE MANUFACTURER. FRAME SHALL BE GROUTED WITH APPROXIMATE 1" GROUT DEPTH. 3. FRAMES AND GUIDES: THE GATE FRAME SHALL BE A RIGID UNIT COMPOSED OF EXTRUDED ALUMINUM GUIDE RAILS WITH UHMW SEATS UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM. THESE SHALL FORM A TIGHT SEAL BETWEEN THE FRAME AND THE SLIDE (DISC). THIS TIGHT SEAL SHALL PROVIDE AN ALLOWABLE LEAKAGE RATE OF NO MORE THAN 0.1 GALLONS PER MINUTE (GPM) PER PERIPHERAL FOOT OF PERIMETER OPENING FOR SEATING HEADS AND .2 GPM PER PERIPHERAL FOOT FOR UNSEATING HEADS. ALUMINUM RETAINER BARS, CROSS BARS AND HEAD RAILS (FOR SELF-CONTAINED GATE ONLY) SHALL BE PROVIDED. THE GUIDES SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT LENGTH TO SUPPORT TWO-THIRDS OF THE HEIGHT OF THE SUDE WHEN IN THE FULL OPEN POSITION. 4. SLIDE COVER (DISC): THE SUDE COVER (DISC) SHALL BE ALUMINUM PLATE REINFORCED WITH STRUCTURAL SHAPES WELDED TO THE PLATE. THE SLIDE COVER SHALL NOT DEFLECT MORE THAN 1/720TH OF THE SPAN' OF THE GATE UNDER THE MAXIMUM HEAD. THE STEM CONNECTION SHALL BE EITHER THE CLEVIS TYPE, WITH STRUCTURAL MEMBERS WELDED TO THE SLIDE AND A BOLT TO ACT AS A PIVOT PIN, OR A THREADED AND BOLTED (OR KEYED) THRUST NUT SUPPORTED IN A WELDED NUT POCKET. THE CLEVIS OR POCKET AND YOKE OF THE GATE SHALL BE CAPABLE OF TAXING, WITHOUT DAMAGE, AT LEAST TWICE THE RATED THRUST OUTPUT OF THE OPERATOR AT 40 POUNDS PULL 5. FLUSH BOTTOM CLOSURE: GATES SHALL BE FURNISHED WITH A FLUSH SEAL ARRANGEMENT. A RESILIENT SEAL WITH A MINIMUM WIDTH OF EXPOSED FACE OF 3/4" SHALL BE SECURELY ATTACHED TO THE FRAME ALONG THE INVERT, AND SHALL EXTEND TO THE DEPTH OF THE GUIDE GROOVE. 6. MATERIALS: • FRAMES, RAILS, COVER SLIDES, YOKES: ALUMINUM - ASTM B-209 AND B-211 ALLOY 6061 T-6 • FASTENERS AND ANCHOR BOLTS: STAINLESS STEEL - ASTM A-593 AND 594, TYPE 304CW • STEMS: STAINLESS STEEL - ASTM A-276, TYPE 304. • FLUSHBOTTOM SEALS: RUBBER - ASTM D-2000 BC 615/625 GRADE BE 625 • SEATS: ULTRA HIGH MOLECULAR WEIGHT POLYETHYLENE (UHMW) • FINISH: MILL FINISH ON ALL ALUMINUM AND STAINLESS STEEL SURFACES 7. ACTUATORS SHALL BE AUMA SA 10.1-54A • 13.57 MINUTE, 220 VAC/3 PHASE, 60 HZ, 2 -GEAR TRAIN LIMIT SWITCHES, OPEN AND CLOSE TORQUE SWITCHES, SIDE MOUNTED HAND WHEEL • ENCLOSURE: NEMA 4, KN COATING. • ELECTRIC CONTROLS: AUMA MATIC, ELECTRO -MECHANICAL STARTERS, 3 PUSH BUTTON, 3 LIGHTS, SELECTOR SWITCH RECEIVED gAPR 0 9 2010 COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT 1/2=1-0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Scale 'MIER CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE Feet SLIDE GATE DETAILS PECKED 02/16/09 APPROVED APPROVED ^'.E DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD sNEEr C647 Boa NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C647 wg — Copyright 2008 R. W. E i E 0 S 111 Low% TOOBIOSWAN lE • �• J •Aktia 6 ORIFACE PLATE �) NA3 DETAIL SCALE: 1"=2' —0" CREST EL SEE TABLE C461 6" THICK WW1( 1111", 111011.11g1 TYPICAL SECTION A A SCALE: NTS C650 0s, AI* _TO BIOSWALE f 1 ORIFACE PLATE ' A 1711# 1 `A• #5012" EW 0 CTR #5 EPDXY DWLS X2'-6" W/4" EMBEDMENT, TYP FLW S3 DETAIL SCALE: 1".2' —0" LOW SPLITTER ORIFACE TABLE STRUCTURE ID WALL CREST ELEVATION ORIFACE DIAMETER (INCHES) ORIFACE INVERT (FT) RADIUS INCHES NA3 11.11 8 8.61 30" NB2 11.12 6 8.62 36" CA3 11.20 7 8.70 36" CB2 11.25 7 8.75 42" S3 11.18 8 8.68 48" C 62 STM BY APPROVED DATE STM NEVLSION 6T APPROVED gi__Are;wz.v- ACCEPTABILITY TH6 DESIGN AND/OR SPECO1CATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 3 C641 DRAWN SL tREERM AO 8"0 SST EXPANSION ANCHOR 1 BOLTS AT 2-2" MIN. EMBEDMENT -DATE r 1-2" X 1" THICK DUROMETER 20 NEOPRENE STRIP CONTINUOUS 0 PERIMETER OF PLATE 02/16/09 ,LNOMEEH DP 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBDRE CB2 DETAIL SCALE: 1"=-2'-0" ORIFACE PLATE SCALE: 1 "=1'-0" C640 4 C642 DISCHARGE PIPE TO BIOSWALE ORIFACE INVERT TO MATCH DISCHARGE PIPE INVERT ELEV. SECTION SCALE: 1"-1' —0" 1.-1' 0" 0 Scale 2 1 0 Scale NEOPRENE STRIP 1 2 1—� Feet 2 4 Feet RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ll'ff[ [K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE FLOW SPLITTER DETAILS CHECKED MG 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TITLE CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C648 Doe NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. • 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2—YD—C648 TRUNK NA ID TYPE DETAIL REFERENCE COVER DETAIL NO. N E NA1 60" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196307.79 1280232.40 NA2 54" MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196307.01 1280411.61 NA3 60" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 196255.74 1280411.55 NA4 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196087.08 1280411.94 NA5 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195963.39 1280411.89 NA6 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195835.56 1280411.61 NA7 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195710.52 1280411.61 NA8 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195584.83 1280411.61 NA9 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195456.57 1280411.61 NA10 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NA11 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING NA12 CB TYPE 1 • TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NA13 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NA14 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING NA15 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NA16 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NA17 54" MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.80-00 EXISTING NA18 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING NA19 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING NA20 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING NA21 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING TRUNK CA ID TYPE DETAIL REFERENCE DETAIL NO. N E CA1 60" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196292.01 1279540.00 CA2 54" MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196286.57 1279757.00 CA3 72" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196245.10 1279767.27 CA4 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196117.08 1279802.51 CA5 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195950.74 1279802.59 CA6 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195784.86 1279802.59 CA7 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195618.92 1279802.59 CA8 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195452.87 1279802.59 CA9 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA10 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA11 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA12 C8 TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA13 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA14 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING CA15 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA16 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA17 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING CA18 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING CA19 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING CA20 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING CA21 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196117.24 1279960.88 CA22 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196117.07 1279644.34 CA23 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195950.90 1279960.97 CA24 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195950.73 1279644.43 CA25 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195785.02 1279960.97 CA26 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195784.85 1279644.43 CA27 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195619.07 '1279960.97 CA28 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195618.91 1279644.43 CA29 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195453.03 1279960.97 CA30 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195452.86 1279644.43 CA31 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196247.53 1279902.35 CA32 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CA33 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195288.86 1279802.59 TRUNK NB ID TYPE DETAIL REFERENCE DETAIL NO. N E NB1 54" MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196307.79 1280053.65 NB2 72" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196255.83 1280053.65 NB3 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196087.68 1280163.37 NB4 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 19596287 1280163.37 NB5 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195835.34 1280163.37 NB6 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195710.43 1280163.37 NB7 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195585.38 1280163.37 NB8 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195455.31 1280163.37 NB9 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING NB10 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NB11 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING NB12 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS TUKWILA DS -06 EXISTING TRUNK CB ID TYPE DETAIL REFERENCE DETAIL NO. N E CB1 54" MK TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196284.99 1279302.93 CB2 84" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196250.73 1279277.81 CB3 60" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196117.10 1279174.29 CB4 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195950.91 1279174.24 CB5 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195784.97 1279174.18 CB6 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195619.10 1279174.13 CB7 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195453.03 1279174.13 CB8 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CB9 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195279.82 1279230.91 CBI CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING CB11 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CB12 S12 NOT USED CB13 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING C814 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CB15 C8 TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING C816 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING CB17 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING C818 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195472.13 1278947.84 CB19 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195300.91 1279954.54 C820 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 19524297 1279886.61 CB21 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195950.87 1279489.06 C822 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195784.99 1279331.63 CB23 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195784.93 1279489.00 CB24 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195619.12 1279331.57 CB25 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 195619.07 1279488.95 CB26 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195619.10 1279174.13 CB27 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195453.00 1279488.95 CB28 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING REASON En APPROVED DATE m REVISION By APPROVED DATE BROE/A/G® ACCEPTABILITY NIS DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED WN SI TRUNK S ID TYPE DETAIL REFERENCE DETAIL NO. N E S1 54" MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 196351.45 1279273.77 S2 54° MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 196332.51 1279066.71 S3 96" CB TYPE 2 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 196318.73 1279037.44 S4 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 196100.34 1279037.86 S5 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195900.23 1279037.44 S6 48" CB TYPE 2 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195697.51 1279037.47 S7 CB TYPE 1L TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 195525.10 1279037.24 S8 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 195362.32 1279037.07 S9 72" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.80-00 EXISTING S10 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S11 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING S12 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S13 84" MH TYPE 3 WSDOT STD PLANS 36" DIA OPEN GRATE 195310.35 1279010.66 S14 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S15 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S16 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S17 54" MH TYPE 1 WSDOT STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.80-00 EXISTING S18 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S19 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S20 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT 8-30.50-00 EXISTING S21 CB TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING S22 C8 TYPE 1 TUKWILA STD PLANS WSDOT B-30.50-00 EXISTING AD D P.NW JBECNED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010' COMNFTY DEVELOPMENT NN �E[K CURRENT BENSON SYMBOL DATE MANHOLE DETAILS APPROVED APPROVED JB 11TLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD sNEEr C649 AM No. 586456-02 CUP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2 -YD -C649 — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, Inc. cal\CADD\955 Submittal\2—YD—C650 SW & S Pump E TITE 8 84' MANHOLE WIER WALL C-) C648 36' DIA OPEN GRATE (HS20) PLAN S13 (SW) PUMP STATION MANHOLE SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0" RIM EL 12.6 MATCH EXIST GRADE/SURFACE IN KIND 6" PVC SECTION CHAIN T1E GUIDE RAIL 6" TRANSTNON COUPLING 6" EL 10.30 PIPE SUPPORT TYP OF 3 M C651 HWL 5.70 TOP OF WIER WALL a 5.50 \PUMP ON EL 5.20 PUMP OFF & LOWEST IE 2.20 S6L-870 RPM AS MANUFACTURED BY PUMP TECH, INC. 1'-0" 1'-0" TYP F— — 84" MH S13 (SW) PUMP STATION MANHOLE n SCALE: 3/4'=1'-0" LWL & BOTTOM EL -0.30 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A. 54' MANHOLE 30" DIA OPEN GRATE (HS20) PLAN S17 (S) PUMP STATION MANHOLE SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0' 2 C464 MATCH EXIST GRADE/SURFACE IN KIND RIM EL 12.3 CHAIN TIE GUIDE RAIL FLOW S3SD-1150 RPM AS MANUFACTURE BY PUMP TECH INC. 14'MIN, 24 -MAX 3' PVC FM PUMP ON EL 7.75 3' 10.46 3' COUPLING PUMP OFF ELEV. & LOWEST IE 6.45 4/ ease*v.,o,',•�'.. 0 �o e1 •)1io •• V n'9>a, 4)CIA. n'" Win• ��n, PIPE SUPPORT TYP OF 3 J Cv51 BOTTOM 3.83 54" MH SECTION S17 (S) PUMP STATION MANHOLE( SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0' SEM APPROVED SEM REVDATN APPROVED DATE gi___ArzrEzivG® ACCEPTABILfTY THB DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE RAWN SL AO tCKEU ,ENGINEWN DP 02%16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 3' ELBOW 12' MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A. SUEMTLE SW & S PUMP STATION SECTIONS & DETAILS NOTES: 1. DUCTILE IRON PIPE: CLASS 53, FLANGED, MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT 9-30.1(1), AND FITTINGS MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT 9-30.2(1). 2. PVC FORCE MAIN: AWWA C900, WITH OUTSIDE DIAMETER MATCHING DUCTILE IRON PIPE, MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT 9-30.1(5) WITH RESTRAINED RUBBER GASKET JOINTS. ALL FITTINGS 4' AND GREATER TO BE DUCTILE IRON. 3. CHECK VALVES (4' AND GREATER): FLANGED, OUTSIDE LEVER AND SPRING AS MANUFACTURED BY M&H, AWWA C508 STANDARD FLANGE CHECK VALVE OR APPROVED EQUAL 4. PIPE COUPUNG: DUCTILE. IRON. 5. GUIDE RAJL, MTM, AS MANUFACTURED BY HYDROMATIC, TO BE ATTACHED WITH SST DBD'S PREFERRED BOLTING DEVICES BY HILTI OR RED HEAD, OR APPROVED EQUAL. 6. CHAIN TIE TO BE SST 090. RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3/4"=1'-0' 1 0 1 2 3 Scale CURRENT REN90N MINOS Feet CH 02/16/09 PPROVED APPROVED TRU DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SNE,T C650 J0O No. 586456-02 OOMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C650 PLAN NA17 (NE) PUMP STATION MANHOLE SCALE: 3/4"=1'-O" 4" FM 4" PVC 4" D.I. 4" TRANSITION COUPUNG MATCH EXIST GRADE/SURFACE IN KIND 54" MANHOLE 30" DIA OPEN GRATE (HS20) GUIDE RAIL rCHAIN 11E RIM EL 13.2 c_ 72' MANHOLE 4" PVC 4" TRANSITION COUPLING 4" PVC FM 4" D.I. 4" 11.02 4" 90' DI ELBOW FLxFL (Thi i PIPE SUPPORT TYP OF 2 HWL ELEV 11.34 PUMP ON ELEV 10.84 IE 8.20 12" /LOWEST IE 7.9 & PUMP OFF \LWL ELEV 7.7 S4N-1150 RPM AS MANUFACTURED BY PUMP TECH, INC. BOTTOM EL 5.4 •IJ•.1.• 1• .• ��1�•i. I.i 1�' 1.• � 54" MH \ 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKF1LL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)4. SECTION A NA17 (NE) PUMP STATION MANHOLE SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0 Sp d a 30" DIA OPEN GRATE (HS20) PLAN S9 (SE) PUMP STATION MANHOLE SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0" MATCH EXIST GRADE/SURFACE IN KIND GUIDE RAIL C464 CHAIN TIE RIM EL 13.0 4" PVC 4" TRANSITION COUPUNG 4" D I 4%1 4" 11.02 I J \ PIPE SUPPORT TYP OF 2 JJ IE 9.93 HWL 12.00 PUMP ON ELEV. 11.57 EXIST 12" SD FLOW LOWEST IE 8.95 & JJJ PUMP OFF ELEV. 1U' da S4M-1150 RPM AS MANUFACTURED BY PUMP TECH, INC. BOTTOM EL 6.45 & LWL V,o X0 1 ••.�� ■•�• �� rIo•■1t 1'-0" TYP 72" MH SECTION B S9 (SE) PUMP STATION MANHOLE SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0" ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT DTE DRAWN SLS AO MaNtrN DP 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKF1LL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A. 0216/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 60 DPPRO S 02/16/09 APPROVED 3/4 =1 -0" IVU 1 tJ: 1. DUCTILE IRON PIPE: CLASS 53, FLANGED, MEEI1NG REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT 9-30.1(1), AND FITTINGS MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT 9-30.2(1). 2. PVC FORCE MAIN: AWWA C900, WITH OUTSIDE DIAMETER MATCHING DUCTILE IRON PIPE, MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT 9-30.1(5) WITH RESTRAINED RUBBER GASKET JOINTS. ALL FITTINGS 4" AND GREATER TO BE DUCTILE IRON. 3. CHECK VALVES (4' AND GREATER): FLANGED, OUTSIDE LEVER AND SPRING AS MANUFACTURED BY M&H, AWWA C508 STANDARD FLANGE CHECK VALVE OR APPROVED EQUAL. 4. PIPE COUPUNG: DUCTILE IRON. 5. GUIDE RAIL, MTM, AS MANUFACTURED BY HYDROMA11C, TO BE ATTACHED WITH SST DBD'S PREFERRED BOLTING DEVICES BY HILTI OR RED HEAD. OR APPROVED EQUAL. 6. CHAIN TIE TO BE SST DBD. IPE SIZE PER PLAN 3/16 b 1/4" S.S. U -BOLT 1 1/2" MIN L 3 1/2" X 3 1/2" X 3/8" DETAIL PIPE SUPPORT (ThrS SCALE 1"=4'-0" - Cv50 RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SECTION SCALE: 1"=4'-0" 1 0 1 2 3 Scale Feet SUBITRE NE & SE PUMP STATION SECTIONS & DETAILS UTLE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER ll'W'l]IE[K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DTE C651 JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C651 tog — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, Inc. E i E S 8 3 0 i 0 8 CLEANOUT W/CAP 41-1 C645 3 SOD FOR BIOSWALE SIDES Q ./ 4-* 3 12" DIA INLET PIPE 1 12" THICK TOPSOIL LEVEL SPREADER 1% FOR DIMENSIONS AND INVERTS, SEE TABLE 1, SHEET C653 SWALE DMDER Q® SOD FOR BIOSWALE SIDES 12" DIA OUTLET PIPE UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPE — (SOLID WALL) UNDERDRAIN PIPE (PERFORATED) Q1 6" PERFORATED UNDERDRAIN PIPE(S) PER 7-01 SEEC461C462 SHEETS & 0462 100' BOTTOM LENGTH GEOTEX1LE " Arjar-04116 .41g; 3' MIN LEVEL SPREADER (2' x 10' UNTREATED CEDAR PLANKS) Q - /SWALE DMDER HDPE UNER``•`% (SEE NOTE 2) GEOTEXTILE<al QUARRY SPALLS APRON, TYP., PER WSDOT STD. SPEC. 9-13.6 Q REBAR ANCHOR POST DETAIL LEVEL SPREADER HDPE LINER SCALE NTS 1' MIN KEYED INTO GROUND BOTH SIDES SECTION LEVEL SPREADER REBAR ANCHOR POST, TYP Q SCALE. NTS GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR DRAINS NATIVE SOIL PROFILE TYPICAL BIOSWALE A A SCALE: 1"=4' C461 C462 3 1 SOD FOR BIOSWALE SIDES Q SWALE DMDER ?-0 r`�o (1=) HDPE UNER ANCHOR 18" THICK GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR DRAINS, PER WSDOT STD. SPEC.9-03.12(4) 1 "=5'-0" 1.=4'-0" 5 SOD FOR BIOSWALE BOTTOM <::::2] Q 6" UNDERDRAIN (TYP) J3 Tl O 3r— HDPE LINER REBAR QANCHOR POSTS (SEE NOTE 2) BOTTOM WIDTH FROM TABLE SECTION TYPICAL BIOSWALE SCALE: 1"= 4' J1 3 12" THICK TOPSOIL Q7 GEOTEXTILE 2.5 0 5 Scale 4 2 0 4 10 Feet 8 Scale Feet DETAIL HDPE LINER ANCHOR SCALE NTS HDPE LINER (SEE NOTE 2) UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPE MANIFOLD (SOLID WALL) ' GEOTEXTILE FOR UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE UNDERDRAIN PIPE SHALL BE PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE, COUPLINGS, AND FITTINGS, 6" DIA, PER WSDOT STD SPEC 7-01. UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPE SHALL BE SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 6" DIA, PER WSDOT STD SPEC 7-04. SYM REVISOR 01 APPROhD DATE SYN REIN 01 APPROVED DATE ejl____ATISIEFAVG® ACCEPTABILITY TFIIS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT DATE DRAWN SL MZEIZE0 AO 022/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 &NowNG EER 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED suaTTDE NOTES: 2. LLENGTH VARIES SEE HDPE UNER NOTES, DWG C653. UNDERDRAIN CONNECTOR PIPES SHALL BE 6" SOLID WALL PVC PIPE PER WSDOT 7.01 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: TOPSOIL SHALL CONSIST OF 60-90% SANDY LOAM, 10-30% COMPOST, AND 0-10% CLAY. TOPSOIL SHALL BE FREE OF SUBSOIL AD -MIXTURES OR SOIL AMENDMENTS, CLAY LUMPS OR CLODS OF HARD EARTH, BRUSH, WEEDS, STUMPS, ROOTS, OTHER LIIILH, STICKS, STONES LARGER THAN 1-1/2 INCHES IN ANY DIMENSION OR OTHER EXTRANEOUS MATERIAL OR TOXIC MATTER HARMFUL TO PLANT GROWTH. SOIL SHALL NOT BE USED IN A MUDDY CONDITION. COMPOST SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 9-14.4(8) FOR COMPOST. SOD SHALL BE STRONGLY ROOTED, NOT LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD, FREE OF WEEDS AND UNDESIRABLE NATIVE GRASSES AND MACHINE CUT TO PAD THICKNESS OF 3/4 -INCH (+/- 1/4 -INCH), EXCLUDING TOP GROWTH AND THATCH, 18 -INCH MAXIMUM PAD WIDTH, 48 -INCH MINIMUM PAD LENGTH. PROVIDE ONLY SOD CAPABLE OF VIGOROUS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT WHEN PLANTED (VIABLE, NOT DORMANT). PROVIDE SOD OF UNIFORM PAD SIZES WITH MAXIMUM 5% DEVIATION IN EITHER LENGTH OR WIDTH. BROKEN PADS OR PADS WITH UNEVEN ENDS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE. SOD PADS INCAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THEIR OWN WEIGHT WHEN SUSPENDED VERTICALLY WITH A FIRM GRASP ON UPPER 10% OF PAD WILL BE REJECTED. PROVIDE SOD FROM ACCEPTABLE LOCAL SOURCE. SOD SHALL NOT CONTAIN CLAY CONTENT GREATER THAN 10%. SUBMIT UST OF PLANT VARIETIES AND PERCENTAGES IN SOD MIX FOR APPROVAL PLACE SOD WITH LENGTH PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW UNE OF SWALE. SOD FOR BIOSWALE BOTTOM SHALL HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED FROM SEED MIX SUITABLE FOR WET SOIL CONDITIONS, EQUIVALENT TO SEED MIX 1 OR SEED MIX 2 SPECIFIED IN TABLE 6.3.1.0 OF 2005 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL. SOD FOR BIOSWALE SIDES SHALL HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED FROM THE FOLLOWING SEED MIX OR SIMILAR: 40 PERCENT DWARF TALL FESCUE (FESTUCA SPP., E.G., MANY MUSTANG, SILVERADO), 30 PERCENT DWARF PERENNIAL RYE 'BARCLAY' (LOUUM PERRENNE VAR. BARCLAY), 25 PERCENT RED RESCUE (FESTUCA RUBRA), AND 5 PERCENT COLONIAL BENTGRASS (AGROSITS TENUIS OR CAPILLARIES). LEVEL SPREADER MUST BE LEVEL LEVEL SPREADER SHALL BE UNTREATED CEDAR PLANKS, MINIMUM PLANK LENGTH 10'. PLANKS SHALL BE ABUTTED END-TO-END FOR BIOSWALE WIDTH. SWALE DIVIDER SHALL BE 2"X10" UNTREATED CEDAR PLANKS, MINIMUM PLANK LENGTH 10'. DIVIDER PLANKS SHALL BE ABUTTED END-TO-END FOR BIOSWALE LENGTH. EMBED 6" SWALE DMDER BELOW FINISHED GRADE. REBAR ANCHOR POSTS SHALL BE #4 REBAR, 36' LONG. PLACE ANCHOR POSTS 4 PER PLANK. 1' FROM EACH END AND ON BOTH SIDES. TWO MAN ROCK PER WSDOT 9-13.7. END SWALE DMDER 2 FEET UPSTREAM FROM OUTLET PIPE. ® PLACE GEOTEXTILE ON TOP OF GRAVEL BACKFILL GEOTEXTILE SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE FOR UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE, MODERATE SURVIVABILITY, CLASS A PER WSDOT STD SPEC 9-33.2, TABLES 1 RECEIVED DAPR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY BIOSWALE DETFEfO atiENT TIRE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD CURRENT REVISION MOO/ DATE SHEET C652 JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2 -YD -C652 HDPE LINER NOTES HDPE LINER SHALL BE 60 MIL TEXTURED HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE MEMBRANE. SUBMIT HDPE LINER INSTALLER AND MATERIAL QUALIFICATIONS, INCLUDING CERTIFICATION STATING THAT THE RESIN MEETS THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND SUPPLIER'S QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL CERTIFICATES. SUBMIT DRAWINGS SHOWING PROPOSED PANEL LAYOUT INCLUDING FIELD SEAMS AND DETAILS. NO RECLAIMED POLYMER SHALL BE ADDED TO RESIN. EXTRUDATE RESINS AND/OR ROD SHALL BE CERTIFIED THAT ALL EXTRUDATE IS FROM ONE MANUFACTURER, IS THE SAME RESIN TYPE, AND WAS OBTAINED FROM THE SAME RESIN SUPPUR AS THE RESIN USED TO MANUFACTURE THE HDPE UNER ROLLS. THE MATERIAL SHALL BE WARRANTED, ON A PRO -RATA BASIS AGAINST MANUFACTURER'S DEFECTS FOR A PERIOD OF 5 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF HDPE LINER INSTALLATION. THE INSTALLATION SHALL BE WARRANTED AGAINST DEFECTS IN WORKMANSHIP FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR FROM THE DATE OF HDPE UNER COMPLETION. TEXTURED HDPE MEMBRANE SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING PROPERTIES: Property NORTH WO VAULT Frequency(' Test Method DIAMETER HIM Thickness (nominal) (mils) NORTHING EASTING NORTHING EASTING INVERT "B COORDINATES 60 Thickness (rnin average) (mils): NORTHING Per roll D1593 SW CORNER OF FOUNDATION 196291.54 57 • Lowest Individual 1279525.77 196338.91 1279230.39 NE CORNER OF FOUNDATION 196249.37 54 Tensile Properties (min average): 1279554.24 50,000 SF D638 Type N Specimen 0 2 in/min 1280377.22 • Yield Strength (Ib/In) 37 7.97 196252.97 1280279.52 NB 125 • Break Strength (Ib/in) 32 8.55 196263.22 1280084.81 12 90 • Break Elongation (X) 196262.52 1280182.05 CA 33 12 12 • Veld Elongation (X) 196244.14 1279693.88 12 43 7.97 100 Test Resistance (min average) (Ib) CB 50,000 SF 01004 99 8.56 42 Puncture Resistance (min average) (Ib) 50,000 SF D4833 FTHS 101/Hethod 2065E�1 90 Carbon Block Content (range) (X) 12 50,000 SF 01503/D4218 196332.45 1279099.46 2.0-3.0 Carbon Black Dispersion 7.97 50,000 SF D5596 Note Density (min average) (g/cc) Resin Batch 01505/D792 0.94 Stress C rock Resistance (hr) Resin Botch D5397 (app.) . 200 Dimensional Stability (max overage) (X) Resin Batch D1204 4 Seam Properties: D4437 • Shear Strength, Ib/in 120 • Peel Strength. Ib/in 88 & FTB (1) ILSIING FREQUENCIES ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST FULL ROLL. (2) FTMS HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH 4833. VALUES ARE SHOWN FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES ONLY. CARBON BLACK DISPERSION FOR 10 DIFFERENT VIEWS: ALL 10 IN CATEGORIES 1 OR 2. EXTRUDATE ROD OR BEAD MATERIAL SHALL BE MADE FROM SAME TYPE RESIN AS THE MEMBRANE. ADDFTIVES SHALL BE THOROUGHLY DISPERSED. MATERIAL SHALL BE FREE OF CONTAMINATION BY MOISTURE OR FOREIGN MATTER. HDPE LINER INSTALLATION SHALL NOT BE DONE DURING ANY PRECIPITATION, IN THE PRESENCE OF EXCESSIVE MOISTURE (I.E. FOG, DEW), IN AN AREA OF STANDING OR PONDED WATER, OR DURING HIGH WINDS. PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF THE HDPE UNER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT THE SURFACES TO BE LINED ARE SMOOTH AND FREE OF DEBRIS, ROOTS, AND ANGULAR OR SHARP ROCKS TO A DEPTH OF FOUR SHALL(4) DIAMETER OR HARD OBJECTS S. NO SHARP BEALLOWED WTTHIINNTHE GED STOP EFOUR (4) INCHES OS, STONES LARGER F INCH THE SUBGRADE.WH RE UNSUITABLE MATERIALS MUST BE REMOVED FROM SUBGRADE, BACKFILL WITH GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR DRAINS. THE ENGINEER SHALL CONDUCT A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE SUBGRADE PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE UNER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT THE SUBGRADE FROM BECOMING T00 DRY, FLOODING AND FREEZING. SUBGRADE FOUND TO HAVE CRACKS GREATER THAN 1/2 INCH IN WIDTH OR DEPTH OR WHICH EXHIBIT SWEWNG, HEAVING OR OTHER SIMILAR CONDIDONS SHALL BE REWORKED TO REMOVE THESE DEFECTS. IN GENERAL, SEAMS SHALL BE ORIENTED PARALLEL TO THE SLOPE, (DOWN HILL) NOT ACROSS THE SLOPE. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, HORIZONTAL SEAMS SHOULD BE LOCATED NOT LESS THAN FIVE (5) FEET FROM THE TOE OF THE SLOPE. UNER SHALL BE WELDED USING FUSION WELDING OR EXTRUSION FILET WELDING. IF FUSION WELDING IS USED, A HEATED WEDGE, MOUNTED ON A SELF PROPELLED VEHICULAR UNIT, SHALL PASS BETWEEN TWO (2) OVERLAPPED SHEETS SUCH THAT BOTH SHEETS ARE HEATED TO TEMPERATURES RANGING FROM 600 DEGREES F. TO 950 DEGREES F. AFTER BEING HEATED BY THE WEDGE, THE OVERLAPPED EDGES SHALL PASS THROUGH A SET OF PRESET PRESSURE ROLLERS WHICH COMPRESS THE PANELS TOGETHER FORMING A CONTINUOUS HOMOGENOUS FUSION WELD. THE FUSION WELDER SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A TEMPERATURE READOUT DEVICE WHICH CONTINUOUSLY MONITORS THE TEMPERATURE OF THE WEDGE. THE PANELS SHALL OVERLAP APPROXIMATELY FOUR (4) INCHES. PRIOR TO WELDING, THE SEAM AREA SHALL BE CLEAN AND FREE OF MOISTURE, DUST. DIRT AND DEBRIS. IF EXTRUSION FILLET WELDING IS USED, A RIBBON OF MOLTEN RESIN SHALL BE INTRODUCED ALONG THE EDGE OF THE SEAM OVERLAP TO THE TWO SHEETS TO BE WELDED. THE MOLTEN POLYMER SHALL BE PLACED AT A TEMPERATURE TO CAUSE SOME OF THE MATERIAL OF EACH SHEET TO BE UQUEFIED RESULTING IN A HOMOGENEOUS BOND BETWEEN THE MOLTEN WELD BEAD AND THE SURFACES OF THE SHEETS. THE EXTRUSION WELDER SHALL BE EQUIPPED WTFH GAUGES GIVING THE TEMPERATURE IN THE APPARATUS AND THE PREHEAT TEMPERATURE AT THE NOZZLE. THE PANELS SHALL OVERLAP A MINIMUM OF THREE (3) INCHES. THE SEAM OVERLAP SHALL BE GRINDED PRIOR TO WELDING WITHIN 15 MINUTES OF WELDING OPERATION IN MANNER THAT DOES NOT DAMAGE THE POND LINER. THE SEAM AREA SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO WELDING TO ASSURE THE AREA IS CLEAN AND FREE OF MOISTURE, DUST, DIRT AND DEBRIS. THE EXTRUDER SHALL BE PURGED PRIOR TO BEGINNING THE SEAM TO REMOVE ALL HEAT -DEGRADED EXTRUDATE FROM THE BARREL THE WELDING ROD SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AND OFF THE GROUND. WHILE WELDING A SEAM, MONITOR TEMPERATURE GAUGES TO ASSURE PROPER SETTINGS ARE MAINTAINED AND THAT THE MACHINE IS OPERATING PROPERLY. FISHMOUTHS OR WRINKLES AT SEAM OVERLAPS THAT CANNOT BE WELDED THROUGH SHALL BE CUT ALONG THE RIDGE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A FLAT OVERLAP. THE CUT AREA SHALL BE SEAMED AND WELDED. ANY PORTION WHERE THE OVERLAP IS INADEQUATE SHALL BE PATCHED WITH AN OVAL OR ROUND PATCH EXTENDING SIX INCHES BEYOND THE CUT IN ALL DIRECTIONS. ALL CROSS/BUTT SEAMS BETWEEN TWO ROWS OF SEAMED PANELS SHALL BE WELDED DURING THE COOLEST TIME OF THE DAY TO ALLOW FOR CONTRACTION OF THE UNER. ALL T JOINTS SHALL HAVE THE OVERLAP FROM THE WEDGE WELDER SEAM TRIMMED BACK TO ALLOW AN EXTRUSION FILET WELD. THEN GRIND TNO INCHES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SEAM AND EXTRUSION WELD ALL OF THE AREA PREPARED BY GRINDING. WHERE PIPE PENETRATES UNER, CUT AND TRIM UNER SO THAT OPENING DIAMETER IS NO GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES LARGER THAN THE PIPE DIAMETER. A DEMONSTRATION TEST SEAM SHALL BE PERFORMED AT EACH LINER LOCATION FOR EACH SEAMING APPARATUS USED. TEST SEAMS SHALL BE MADE ON FRAGMENT PIECES OF THE UNER AND UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS ACTUAL SEAMS. THE TEST SEAM SHALL BE AT LEAST THREE (3) FEET LONG, MADE BY JOINING 2 PIECES AT LEAST 9" IN WIDTH. VISUALLY INSPECT THE SEAM FOR SQUEEZE OUT, FOOTPRINT, PRESSURE AND GENERAL APPEARANCE. TWO SAMPLES ONE INCH WIDE SHALL BE CUT FROM THE TEST SEAM. THE SAMPLES SHALL THEN BE TESTED IN PEEL AND SHALL NOT FAIL IN THE SEAM. FAILURE SHALL BE A FILM TEAR BOND (FTB). IF A SAMPLE FAILS, THE ENTIRE PROCEDURE SHALL BE REPEATED. IF ANY OF THE SECOND SET OF SAMPLES FAIL, THE MACHINE SHALL NOT BE ACCEPTED AND USED FOR SEAMING UNTIL THE PROBLEM IS CORRECTED AND 2 PASSING TESTS ARE ACHIEVED. AIIER COMPLETION OF THE TEST THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE TEST SEAM SHALL BE DISCARDED. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF THE TEST RESULTS. DOCUMENTATION OF THE TEST SEAMS WILL BE MAINTAINED BY LISTING MACHINE I.D. NUMBER, OPERATORS NAME, TEMPERATURE CONTROL SETING AND TEST RESULTS. LINER MANUFACTURER SHALL PROVIDE INSPECTION SERVICE DURING THE INITIAL LINER INSTALLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONDUCT A DETAILED WALK THROUGH AND VISUALLY CHECK ALL SEAMS AND NON -SEAM AREAS OF THE HDPE UNER FOR DEFECTS, HOLES, BUSTERS AND SIGNS OF DAMAGE DURING INSTALLATION. ANY PORTION OF THE HDPE LINER SHOWING A FLAW SHALL BE REPAIRED. PATCHING SHALL BE USED TO REPAIR LARGE HOLES, TEARS AND DESTRUCTIVE SAMPLE LOCATIONS. ALL PATCHES SHALL EXTEND AT LEAST SIX INCHES BEYOND THE DEFECT AND ALL CORNERS OF PATCHES SHALL BE ROUNDED. GRINDING AND WELDING SHALL BE USED TO REPAIR SECTIONS OF EXTRUDED SEAMS. SPOT WELDING OR SEAMING SHALL BE USED TO REPAIR SMALL TEARS, PINHOLES OR OTHER MINOR LOCAUZED FLAWS. CAPPING SHALL BE USED TO REPAIR LENGTHS OF FAILED EXTRUDED AREAS. BAD SEAMS SHALL BE REPLACED WITH A STRIP OF NEW MATERIAL SEAMED INTO PLACE. THE ENGINEER SHALL CONDUCT A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE UNER PRIOR TO FlWNG OVER THE UNER. WALE DIMENSIONS TABLE 2. WQ VAULT COORDINATES BIOSWALE NORTH WO VAULT CENTRAL WO VAULT SOUTH WQ VAULT DIAMETER NORTHING EASTING NORTHING EASTING NORTHING EASTING INVERT "B COORDINATES NORTHING EASTING NORTHING EASTING FT SW CORNER OF FOUNDATION 196291.54 1280219.85 196280.08 1279525.77 196338.91 1279230.39 NE CORNER OF FOUNDATION 196249.37 1280244.59 196238.45 1279554.24 196326.08 1279268.22 BIOSWALE BOTTOM WIDTH INLET PIPE OUTLET PIPE DIAMETER LENGTH INVERT AT "A" SEE SHEET C652 INVERT "A" COORDINATES DIAMETER LENGTH INVERT AT 'B° SEE SHEET C652 INVERT "B COORDINATES NORTHING EASTING NORTHING EASTING FT IN FT FT IN FT FT NA 40 12 32 8.55 196252.44 1280377.22 12 37 7.97 196252.97 1280279.52 NB 17 12 32 8.55 196263.22 1280084.81 12 40 7.97 196262.52 1280182.05 CA 33 12 75 8.55 196244.14 1279693.88 12 43 7.97 196242.82 1279595.19 CB 30 12 99 8.56 196243.47 1279375.63 12 54 7.98 196243.33 1279473.04 S 40 12 32 8.55 196332.45 1279099.46 12 33 7.97 196332.50 1279197.60 REV610N 6Y REVISION 6Y 0,1E eLAIL7EFAW ACCEPTABILITY 195 DESIGN MND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN sE 40 AO hNGWEEN NG08 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SU608.E RECEIVED APR 0920101 DCOMMOUNDY EVELPMENT 1I'\v'11E [K CURRENT REVISION BIOSWALE NOTES 02/16/09 DP APPROVED TRE DEMOLITION OF. 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD C653 m co co JOB 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG 2 -YD -C653 CO wg — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, Inc. 0+ I 4 PROJECT EAP 2 iii + I -}- I 20' WIDE— — II 1 u GROUTED -ill / ISEE 1 S 0+50 1 400 MLLW-5.8 I COz� o< cam— O 1+ E +I I + -1 - SOUTH OUTFALL SCALE: 1'=10' I I I AREA 3'W .X 51.• I I I ORFLEX BLOCK SOUTH OUTFALL NOTES FINISH GRADE (SURFAC 100 LF S=1% 2 C IE 0 UTFAL C655 0+00 0+50 1+00 SOUTH OUTFALL NOTES: 1. ARMORFLEX BLOCK 401- ARMORTEC EROSION CONTROL SOLUTIONS. GROUT 3'W X 5L PAD BELOW OUTFALL TO FILL VOID SPACE. PROFILE S1 - SOUTH OUTFALL SCALE: 1"=10' PIPE FLANGE INSULATING NOTES (REFERENCE SHEET C655 FOR LOCATION): 1. ALL PIPE FLANGE -INSULATING MATERIALS SHALL BE OF THE TYPE DESIGNATED BY THE MANUFACTURER AS SUITABLE FOR APPROPRIATE SERVICE AT THE OPERATING TEMPERATURES AND PRESSURES OF THE APPROPRIATE WATER PIPELINE PIPE FIANCE INSULATING KITS SHALL CONTAIN A FULL -FACE INSULATING GASKET, DOUBLE INSULATING WASHERS, FULL LENGTH INSULATING BOLT SLEEVES, AND STEEL WASHERS. a. INSULATING GASKET: INSULATING GASKET RETAINERS SHALL BE SELF CENTERING TYPE F, NEMA G-10 WITH A NITRILE RECTANGULAR CROSS SECTION 0 -RING SEALING ELEMENT. b. INSULATING WASHERS AND SLEEVES: INSULATING SLEEVES SHALL BE FULL LENGTH. INSULATING SLEEVES AND WASHERS SHALL BE NEMA G-10. c. STEEL WASHERS: STEEL WASHERS SHALL BE STAINLESS STEEL. 2. INSULATING FLANGE KIT INSTALLATION: THE INSULATED PIPE FLANGE KITS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE REFERENCED DRAWINGS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THE INSULATED PIPE FLANGE KITS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NACE INTERNATIONAL RP0286-97. PARTICULAR ATTENTION SHALL BE PAID TO PROPERLY ALIGNING THE PIPE FLANGES PRIOR TO INSERTING THE INSULATING SLEEVES AROUND THE FLANGE BOLTS. FLANGE MISALIGNMENTS WILL CAUSE FLANGE BOLTS TO CUT THROUGH THE INSULATING SLEEVES AND CREATE AN ELECTRICAL SHORT THROUGH THE INSULATED PIPE FLANGE. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN TO PREVENT ANY MOISTURE. SOIL OR OTHER FOREIGN MATTER FROM CONTACTING ANY PORTION OF THE TWO MA11NG PIPE FLANGES OR GASKETS PRIOR TO OR DURING INSTALLATION. IF MOISTURE, SOIL OR OTHER FOREIGN MATTER CONTACTS ANY PORTION OF THE INSULATED PIPE FLANGE, THE ENTIRE PIPE JOINT SHALL BE DISASSEMBLED, CLEANED WITH A SUITABLE SOLVENT AND DRIED PRIOR TO REASSEMBLY. STRICTLY FOLLOW THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE TORQUING PATTERN OF THE BOLTS AND THE AMOUNT OF TORQUE TO BE USED WHEN INSTALLING' THE PIPE FLANGE INSULATING KIT. CONDUCTIVE GREASE SHALL NOT BE USED ON THE FLANGE BOLTS OR ANY OTHER FLANGE COMPONENTS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. 3. EXTERIOR COATING FOR INSULATING PIPE FLANGES: BURIED INSULATING FLANGES SHALL BE COATED WITH A PETROLEUM WAX TAPE COATING SYSTEM AS SHOWN IN THE DRAWINGS. THE SURFACE SHALL FIRST BE PREPARED AS SPECIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER. THE WAX TAPE COATING SYSTEM SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL FLANGES, COUPLINGS, VALVES AND OTHER FITTINGS IN DIRECT CONNECTION TO THE PIPING THAT DO NOT HAVE A CEMENT MORTAR COATING. 4. INSULATED PIPE FLANGE TESTS: EACH INSULATED PIPE FLANGE SHALL BE TESTED FOR EFFECTIVE ELECTRICAL ISOLATION OF THE TWO MATING PIPE FLANGES. THE INSULATED PIPE FLANGE SHALL BE JUDGED FOR EFFECTIVENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH NACE INTERNATIONAL RP0286, SECTION 8, "FIELD TESTING AND MAINTENANCE" THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE OR REPAIR ANY INSULATED PIPE FLANGE THAT IS NOT ELECTRICALLY EFFECTIVE. 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 25 20 15 10 5 10 -15 + PROJECT AREA r GROUT AREA 4'W X: 51. CA1 a�l 1101 0 50 1 00 I ARMORFLEX BLOCK SEE CENTRAL OUTFAIILINOTES + CENTRAL OUTFALL SCALE: 1"=10' ^ I+ N a 01 i.:1,•-= �wz� n NISHI GRAD (SURFACE EST01.ATION BY OTHERS 90 LF S=1P 24" CPEP 0+00 REVISION 65 APPROVED SYN REVISION APPROVED DATE BOE/Aw® ACCEPTABILITY 1115 OEM AND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE 'DRAWN SLS AO 2N4INEIN DP 0+50 PROFILE CA1 - CENTRAL OUTFALL SCALE 1"=10' DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUOTTTLE RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1+00 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 CENTRAL OUTFALL NOTES: 1. ARMORFLEX BLOCK 70T, ARMORTEC EROSION CONTROL SOLUTIONS. GROUT 4'W X 5L PAD BELOW OUTFALL TO FILL VOID SPACE. 1"=10'-0 10 5 0 Scale 10 20 Feet ll'fl1E [K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL art 02/16/09 LACKED 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED 1,15E SOUTH & CENTRAL OUTFALL PLAN & PROFILE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD CML MASTER SHEEP C654 JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2 -YD -C654 - Copyright 2009 R. to1V-YD-C655 North Outtoll P&P.d K i 1 8 8 8 E ti 8 e 8 NA1 I .1 PROJECT AREA PHASE GROUTED AREA 4'WX5' ARMORFLEX BLOCK • SEE NORTH' OUTFALL NOTES KEY IN ED E (THREE '161........titoteeflaiet 1 "I 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0+50 (EY IN OP NORTH OUTFALL SCALE: 1'=10' 1+00 10 R +n 0- c -, e0 o, COO w RFAC RES RAT N BY OTH OU 0+00 0+50 PROFILE NA1 - NORTH OUTFALL SCALE: 1'=10' 1+00 NORTH OUTFALL NOTES: 1. ARMORFLEX BLOCK 40L, ARMORTEC EROSION CONTROL SOLUTIONS. GROUT 4'W X 5'L PAD BELOW OUTFALL TO FILL VOID SPACES. FLAP GATE NOTES I I ► PROJECT AREA PHASE 2 GROUTED AREA 4' W X 5' L K IN TOP /FINISH GRADE (SURFACE RESTORATION BY OTHERS) DI FLANGED END MIN PIPE LENGTH 19' AT OUTFALL �2 � I I „ III/��_Ai l /VeVatWeli //O///t KEY IN EDGES (THREE SIDES) ARNORF.LEX BLOCK SEE NORTH; OUTFALL NOTES OUTFALL DETAILt t SCALE: NTS C656 PIPE FLANGE INSULATING, SEE NOTES SHEET C656 FLAP GATE (SEE NOTES) //%'/////Y.//////V, IE 0.0' 3 1. SUBMIT PRODUCT LITERATURE THAT INCLUDES INFORMATION ON THE PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE FLAP GATE, MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION, DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHTS, FLOW DATA HEADLOSS DATA, AND PRESSURE RATINGS. 2. FLAP GATES ARE TO MATCH THE DIAMETER OF THE OUTFALL PIPE. 3. COMPANY NAME, PLANT LOCATION, VALVE SIZE AND SERIAL NUMBER SHALL BE BONDED TO THE FLAP GATE. A SINGLE MANUFACTURER SHALL PROVIDE ALL FLAP GATES. 4. ALL GATES SHALL BE AF-41ff (FOR FLANGE MOUNTING) AS MANUFACTURED BY WATERMAN INDUSTRIES OR APPROVED EQUAL 5. FLAP GATES SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL AND APPROVED SUBMITTALS. PROVIDE 6' CLEARANCE ABOVE FINISHED GRADE GRpurfD .5. 1 ARMORFLEX (SEE NOTES) 6" THICK, GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR DRAINS PER WSDOT 9-03.12(4) SEPARATION GEOTEXTILE PER WSDOT 9-33.2(1) SECTION SCALE: NTS ARMORFLEX NOTES: 1. GROUT ARMORFLEX BLOCKS TO FILL VOID SPACE BELOW OUTFALL PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. NON—SHRINK GROUT, NS GROUT PER EUCUD CHEMICAL COMPANY OR APPROVED EQUAL 2. KEY IN OUTSIDE EDGES OF BLOCK PAD PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. SYM REVS N BY APPROVED DATE SYM REVISION BY APPROVED DATE ?LAW:RE/NG® ACCEPTABILITY THS DESIGN MND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL CHECKED A0 4EFA.INLLN DP 0216/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUENITI.E RECEIVED `APR 0 9 2010' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT w MLLW-5.8' 1 =10 —0 10 5 0 10 20 Scale ll''1IE [K CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE Feet GECCKED 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED VILE CML MASTER NORTH OUTFALL PLAN AND PROFILE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD sAEET C655 JOS ND. 586456-02 COMP NO. 95% SUBMITTAL OVIG NO. 2—YD—C655 Detail 1210 Influent Pipe Inv Elev 7.47 (See Note A) 5 - 20'-0" Span x 7'-0' Rise x 8'-0" Long Precast Concrete Vault Units 4 - Attached Precast Concrete Endwalls 4-0" Plus 4 Joints @ 1/2't per Joint 4'-0" 10" Precast 6' Underdrain connectorplpe Inv Elev 5.10 (See Note A) 8" Precast Attached Endwall - SE comer location point - See Table 2 Sheet 0653 36"0 Access opening w/ precast grade rings and cast iron frame 8 cover (typ) Ladder Flow Spreader (tyP) NE comer J location point - See Table 2, Sheet C653 36'0 Access opening w/ precast grade rings and cast iron frame 8 cover OVA) Detail Energy Dissipator (typ ) 12"0 Influent Pipe Inv Elev 7.47 (See Note A on CIS1) VAULT PLAN SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 40 -2. 12'4" 16'-1" 12'4" 8" Precast T/Riser Vanes Max. Elev. 13.75 (See Note B) 1 C 765, Joint Seal, Tyn Ladder (Typ) € Structure 6" Underdrain connector pipe Inv Elev 5.10 (See Note A) Attached Endwall Floor Elev 5.02 Detail IE 7.86 Flow Spreader D Ladder, OSHA -approved 10" Precast Storm Filter Attached E all Cartridge 8" Precast Attached Endwall 'I 'III wit III lid 8" Precast 12"0 PE Effluent Pipe Inv Elev 5.02 (See Note A) Attached Endwall Ladder, OSHA -Approved (Typ) Detail Energy Dissipator IE 6.52 r CIP slab for Flowldt 8 C765 SECTION VAULT SCALE 1/4"=1'-0" f0 t 12"0 PE Effluent Pipe Inv Elev 5.02 (See Note A) RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DESIGN DATA Design Loading: Vault Units: HS2044 Hatches, Frames, and Covers: HS -20 Design Method: Load factor per AASHTO Specification Assumed Allowable Soil Bearing: 2,000 PSF. Stormftlter Cartridge Number. 138 (181 MATERIALS Precast units shall be constructed and Installed In accordance with CON/SPAN Specifications. Concrete for Footings shall have a minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi Reintbming steel for footings shall conform to ASTM 815, A616 or A817 -Grade 60. Concrete for r CIP slab shall be class 3000. GENERAL NOTES A. All pipe/structure connections to be fit with grout. B. Access cover elevations to be field adjusted to match finished grade, using grade rings. 1/4"=1'-0" 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 Scale Feet �1M1 �E[K APPROVED DATE SYM REVISION ITh APPROVED BOE/AIG® ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE "DRAWN SL LHLLNLU AO 2NCN&Lx 10 CHECKED 00 APPROVED DP 0 /16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE NORTH TREATMENT SYSTEM CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 APPROVED DRE CML MASTER DEMOLETION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C760 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG No. 2 -YD -C760 95% SUBMITT� — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, C760 60 9" 42'-Y 1'-0" CO 1-Y Keyway 6-10Z" Structure Limits 9" Structure T/ Footing Elev. 5.02 Grade Rings (By C PLAN FOUNDATION SCALE 1/4"=1'-0" 1_IIIII iI,IIIIII1A +000+000+0000000+000.000+ EMI 20'-0" Span SECTION FOUNDATION SCALE: 1/4"=V-0" C`60 r CIP slab for Flowkit Reinforcing not shown for clarity Detail© m T7 12"0 PE Influent Pipe (See Note A on Sheet C760) 10" r CIP slab for Flowkit 7/Finished Grade Vanes 20'-0" Span SECTION FOUNDATION (-b7 SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" — T/ Arch Elev. 12.68 T/Inside Arch Elev. 11.85 MIMED Min Fc 12"0 PE Influent Pipe (See Note A on Sheet C760) Flow Spreader (Typ) 20'-0" Span 2" Inside Face of Inside Face of Precast Vault Unit Precast Vault Unit — 2" CIr. • #6 bars Q 1'-0" o.c. CV o. •#7bars x23 -r © 11111111111,11 � ?i7%r7��4500AIME ISEAAS016016q RYA) Tend all bars to miss keyways 86 bars 3.-0" Q 1'-0"o.c. 23'-8" 0) DETAIL FOUNDATION (Th SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" — SYM REVISION at APPROVED DATE RENSmN 9T APPROVED DATE gLAIPZIEFIVG ® ACCEPTABIUTY MIS DESIGN ANO/OR SPECIATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. BATE DRAWN SL 022/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 LHECKED AD &91.INUJI SECTION FOUNDATION - SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 17 MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A SUBTITLE T/ Footing Elev. 502 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 1/4 =1 —0 Scale Feet RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CURRENT REVISION mem BATE NORTH WQ VAULT SECTIONS & DETAILS CHECKED 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TUID DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C761 JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. DWO NO. 2—YD—C761 s. .7 4....., co StructureLimits 44 1-6" 1.-Y Keyway Keyway 0 1 `7 t 9" Structure T/ Footing Elev. 5.02 Grade Rings (By C PLAN FOUNDATION SCALE 1/4"=1'-0" 1_IIIII iI,IIIIII1A +000+000+0000000+000.000+ EMI 20'-0" Span SECTION FOUNDATION SCALE: 1/4"=V-0" C`60 r CIP slab for Flowkit Reinforcing not shown for clarity Detail© m T7 12"0 PE Influent Pipe (See Note A on Sheet C760) 10" r CIP slab for Flowkit 7/Finished Grade Vanes 20'-0" Span SECTION FOUNDATION (-b7 SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" — T/ Arch Elev. 12.68 T/Inside Arch Elev. 11.85 MIMED Min Fc 12"0 PE Influent Pipe (See Note A on Sheet C760) Flow Spreader (Typ) 20'-0" Span 2" Inside Face of Inside Face of Precast Vault Unit Precast Vault Unit — 2" CIr. • #6 bars Q 1'-0" o.c. CV o. •#7bars x23 -r © 11111111111,11 � ?i7%r7��4500AIME ISEAAS016016q RYA) Tend all bars to miss keyways 86 bars 3.-0" Q 1'-0"o.c. 23'-8" 0) DETAIL FOUNDATION (Th SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" — SYM REVISION at APPROVED DATE RENSmN 9T APPROVED DATE gLAIPZIEFIVG ® ACCEPTABIUTY MIS DESIGN ANO/OR SPECIATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED 9Y DEPT. BATE DRAWN SL 022/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 LHECKED AD &91.INUJI SECTION FOUNDATION - SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 17 MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A SUBTITLE T/ Footing Elev. 502 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 1/4 =1 —0 Scale Feet RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CURRENT REVISION mem BATE NORTH WQ VAULT SECTIONS & DETAILS CHECKED 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TUID DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C761 JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. DWO NO. 2—YD—C761 1210 PE Influent Pipe Inv Elev 7.47 (See Note A on C'S1) Detail 40'-2" 5 - 24'-0" Span x 7'-0" Rise x 8'-0" Long Precast Concrete Vault Units 4 - Attached Precast Concrete Endwalls 4 Joints @ 1/2"3 per Joint 4'-0" 1'-0" Precast 6" Underdraln connector pipe Inv Elev 5.10 (See Note A) 8" Precast Attached Endwall 36"0 Access opening w/ precast grade rings and cast Iron frame & cover (typ.) BENSON Ladder Flow Spreader (tYP) NE Comer Location Point See Table 2, Sheet C653 36"0 Access opening w/ precast grade rings and cast iron frame & cover (ITP) Detail irk :21 TROPP I MTORVI MOIL IWWO,* II O.K I: MO* 1R.Ol I PROaIPMEM *W. 'VMI. *or vor Cwpf Igwr Energy Dissipator (tYR) 12"0 PE Influent Plpe Inv Elev 7.47 (See Note A) PLAN VAULT SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 40'-2' 4'-0" 8' Precast Attached Endwall 8' Precast Attached Endwall 12'4' 16'-1' 12'4' T/Riser Varies Max. Elev. 13.50 (See Note B) C765 Joint Seal, Typ SW Comer Location Point See Table 2, Sheet C653 (TTP) CE Structure 1210 PE Effluent Pipe Inv Elev 5.02 (See Note A) 6' Underdrain connector pipe Inv Elev 5.10 (See Note A) ai Oi 'Tani Floor Elev 5.02 lEk Detail 0! r-- Ladder, OSHA -Approved Storm Fitter Cartndge 1'-0" P Attached End 11 n 8' Precast Attached Endwall 1 1 II i!11!1 1!111 i !j! 1L 8' Precast Attached Endwall Ladder, OSHA -Approved (Typ) IE 7.86 Flow Spreader Detail APPROVED DATE Sm Energy Dissipator r CIP slab for Flowlet 1E 6.52 REVISION SECTION VAULT SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0' BY AEI ARPROVED DATE ¢ 1210 PE Effluent Pipe Inv Elev 5.02 (See Note A ) ce:Ltemezdv. ACCEPTABILITY THS DESIGN M'0/0R SPEC61GTION 6 APPROVED MmHg SI. SLTILOSTO3 AO KL /PPROVED BY DEP!. DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUDTITEE DESIGN DATA Design Loading: Vault Units:11520-44 Hatches, Frames, and Covers: HS -20 Design Method: Load factor per AASHTO Specification Assumed Allowable Soll Bearing: To Be Provided' Stormfilter Cartridge Number: 150 (18') MATERIALS Precast units shall be constructed and Installed In accordance with CON/SPAN Specifications. Concrete for Footings shall have a minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi. Reinforcing steel for footings shall conform to ASTM 615, A616 orA617-Grade 60. Concrete for r CIP slab shall be class 3000. GENERAL NOTES A. All pipe/structure connections to be fit with grout. 8. Access cover elevations to be field adjusted to match finished grade, using grade rings. RECEIVED/4-1 ° APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY CENTRAL WO VAULT 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 Scale Feet CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE 02 16 09 CM Clan 02/16/09 PROVED DP APPROVED T".E DEMOL81ON OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD 5lIEEf C762 eoa NO. 586456-02 COMP NO. DWG NO. 2 -YD -C762 2008 R. W. Beck Inc. 2 e U a E pe 8 C 1210 PE Influent Pipe lee Note A on Sheet C762 2. 8 E ci 2 i 418 5" 8 VOA 42'-r V-0" r-0" C760 Keyway Structure Limits 1-6" a Structure Limits 1=r Keyway 29 Keyway N N CG .. 9" Structure T/ Footing Elev. 5.02 T/Overflow Weir T/Finished Grade Vanes — PLAN FOUNDATION SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 000001110111 j I Oil 7/ Arch Elev. 12.68 T/Inside Arch Elev. 11.85 :. rD:GP./1717'iLS!il ::.1...•:t -1T_. �^!irs!i1 �!:tip:; .r .r. 24'-0" Span SECTION FOUNDATION SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" g 12"0 PE Influent Pipe (See Note A on Sheet C762) Flow Spreader(Typ) T/ Footing Elev. 5.02 10" r CIP slab for Flowldt 24'-0' Span Inside Face of Inside Face of Precast Vault Unit Precast Vault Unit 2" • #6 bars @ •#8bars x27-8" @ 5" o.c. 11111111111111 RrTYI qi��i.'! -"�y7 i` •r:i��. 1F:I��.ri�~F_i�,al �`�r?%: (tyP) 'Bend all bars to miss keyways #6 bars x3'-0" @ 1'-0"o.c. 27-8" DETAIL FOUNDATION rTh SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" - Detail _.............,Th ®+T i+ ... + 000+ 0000000+ ... 1 000+ G "..lil ...•iL..!iT.:,.�'...•T ..!Ll n!14�..l��n"11'1.^. �5-'i !L}�..!�'S!i'S-�4:Sil-`^n!i1�n SECTION FOUNDATION SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" C762 12" MIN GRAVEL BACKFILL PER WSDOT 9-03.12(1)A 24'-0" Span FOUNDATION SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 60 APPROVED DATE STN RLV6ION BY APPROVED DATE g)L.AOE/AG ACCEPTABILITY TH5 DESIGN AND/0R SPEC61CA159 5 APPROVED HAWN SL APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE AD 1NGINWEH KL CHECKED NC 021,6/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SOEORLE r CIP slab forFlowkit C765 Reinforcing not shown for clarity RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 20101 2 0 2 4 6 B 10 1/4 =1 -0 Scale Feet COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTRAL WQ VAULT SECTIONS & DETAILS RIMIER CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE APPROVED DP APPROVED CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C763 JOB 140. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -C763 8 3 E 9i i I 9 i E 8 8 E '5 2 n 8 2 a 21 Ta d a J W 0 SW CORNER LOCATION POINT - SEE TABLE 2, SHEET C653 .D 0 6' 37'-6' OVERALL - TOP 6 BASE OVERHANG 9' WALLS 36'-6' OVERALL - WALLS 35'-0' INSIDE CLEAR 1'-5' TYP J 1 W J 0 6 N 0! D i .. t7 0 24'0 FRAME & COVER CAST -IN, BY CSS SIDE WALL (2) PLACES 'S1' _IYL \52. IDE WALL END WALL 'El' N -LI- 111=11111 1'-8' 0' 6' OVERHANG 9' WALLS 16'0 HOLE FOR 12'0 OUTLET PIPE I.E. = 5.02 I 1I 11 I 14 I 16'0 HOLE FOR SIDE VALICOVER SLAB 12'0 INLET PIPE 'S2' w/ 3-332P DOOR I.E. = 7.47 PLAN VIEW TOP 'T1' RIM = 13.15 SCALE: 3/16"=1'-0" 5106 -AT -3-332P COVER SLAB SIDE WALL 'SI' TOP 'T2' LADDER END WALL 'E2' RIM = 13.15 RIM 13.1 NE CORNER LOCATION POINT - SEE TABLE 2, SHEET C653 2x) 2504-4' RISER TOP OF VAULT = 12.44 CEILING = 11.60 INLET I.E. cm =7.47 IE 6.52 BASE IE 6.52 SECTION SCALE: 3/16"=1'-0" 1'0 COIL THREAD INSERT GALVANIZED CONNECTION BOX 1'0 PLATED COIL -THREAD ROD GALVANIZED PLATE WASHER w/ OFFSET HOLE 1'0 PLATED HEX NUT D ETAI L WALL CONNECTION SCALE: NTS BOLT CONNECTIONS ARE USED TO COMPRESS CONSEAL GASKET AND HOLD WALLS DURING ASSEMBLY) BOLT CONNECTIONS ARE NOT STRUCTURAL x 10'-6' x 7' DEEP SUMP GASKET (2 ROWS) (TOP OF WALLS) II 111 6' BAFFLE _C' BAFFLE NL BAY BAFFLEB1' SIDE VALSIDE VALL 'Sl' 'S2' BAFFLE 'B2' DESCRIPTION OEM R 18 eo Col Thread Nut 1' - Plated 3'-3' OUTLET BAY 2'-9' x 10'-6' x 7' DEEP SUMP END WALL 'El' 96) ZPG FILTER CARTRIDGES 2 95 lbs EA. FLOOR = 5.44 OUTLET I.E. = 5.02 BOTTOM OF VAULT = 4.60 GASKET SHOULD BE CONTINUOUS AROUND CORNERS 4BUTT JOINT AT 4.BUTT NOT OVERLAP) SPLICE GASKET (2 ROWS) (BETWEEN ALL WALLS> WRAP GASKET ONTO BASE 6' GASKET (2 ROWS) (IN BASE KEYWAY) • ICM, SEE 10' KEYWAY DETAIL BILL OF MATERIAL PART CITY UIM DESCRIPTION OEM R 18 eo Col Thread Nut 1' - Plated 010-5100720-000 18 eo Col Rod -1' X ID -I/4' Plated 010-5100730-000 18 eo Plate Vasher Gab". Panel Vault 010-5100710-000 580 ft Consent 1' CS -101 010-5130010-000 DETAIL GASKET INSTALLATION SCALE: NTS • SEE 10' DETAIL KEYWAY, SIDE WALL 'S2' 9'-0' POLY BOLT -ON LADDER INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR ND WALL 'E2' SIDE VALL 'S1' PLAN VIEW (WITHOUT TOP AND COVER) SCALE: 3/16"=1'-0" DETAIL SEAM GROUT SCALE: NTS SYM REVISION 81 APPROVED DATE S18 REVISION ED APPROVED DATE g)L_Answ,Aw® ACCEPTABILITY 1145 DESIGN AND/OR SPECIFICATION LS APPROVED -DRAWN SLQ AO LNGINEtn KL APPROVED 8Y DER. DATE FILL RECESS WITH GROUT DETAIL TOP SEAM n SCALE: NTS _ SCALE NTS CONSEAL GASKET LOCATIONS VAULT VALL 10 ATICN STRUCTURAL NOTES 1. CONCRETE, 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH f'c = 7000 psi 2. REBAR, ASTM A-615 GRADE 60 3. MESH' ASTM A-185 GRADE 65 4. DESIGN' ACI -31B-05 BUILDING CODE 5. LOADS, AASHTO HS -20 TRUCK WHEEL, P=16.0 kip ASTM C-890 'MINIMUM STRUCTURAL DESIGN LOADING FOR MONOLITHIC OR SECTIONAL PRECAST CONCRETE WATER AND VASTEVATER STRUCTURES' 305 IMPACT FOR LESS THAN 2 FT. SOIL COVER SOIL DENSITY 120 pcf 40 pcf E.F.P. LATERAL SOIL PRESSURE ABOVE VATERTABLE 80 pcf E.F.P. LATERAL SOIL PRESSURE BELOW VATERTABLE 80 psf LIVE LOAD SURCHARGE NO LIVE LOAD SURCHARGE FOR SOIL COVER > 8'-0' TOP OF VAULT 5'-0' BELOW FINISHED GRADE (MAXIMUM) VATERTABLE 5'-0' BELOW FINISHED GRADE (ASSUMED) GENERAL NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR TO, VERIFY ALL VAULT FEATURES SUPPLY CRANE TO OFT -LOAD AND SET PANELS SUPPLY PERSONNEL AND TOOLS NEEDED FOR INSTALLATION INSTALL GASKET AT TOP, BOTTOM AND BETWEEN ALL WALLS (PER DETAIL2) GROUT ALL SEAMS (PER DETAIL 3> 6 BOLT POCKETS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING (GROUT TO BE NON -SHRINK, 3000PSI MINIMUM BEFORE BACKFILLING) SUPPLY, INSTALL 6 GROUT -IN ALL PIPING & SAMPLING TEES GROUT IN ALL PIPES. FIELD ADJUST ACCESS COVER AND DOOR ELEVATIONS TO MATCH FINISH GRADE, USING GRADE RINGS AND GROUT. 2. CONTECH STORMVATER SOLUTIONS T0, SUPPLY STORM FILTER CARTRIDGES & ENERGY DISSIPATOR AT STARTUP. SUPPLY LIFTING CLUTCHES 3. VAULT VENDOR T0' PROVIDE PRECAST PANELS, CONSEAL GASKET, WALL CONNECTION HARDWARE 4. TOP SECTION NOT REMOVABLE AFTER VAULT IS BACKFILLED PIECE DETAILS (2) 24' x 4' F&C, (2) 300 lbs (2) 2504-4' RISER, (2> 120 lbs (1) 5106 -AT -3-332P,(1) 3,950 lbs .-(2) TOP, (1) 'Tl' 31,350 lbs (1) 'T2' 28,350 lbs lbs (2) END WALLS, (1) 'El' 8,600 lbs (1) 'E2' 8,600 lbs (4> SIDE WALLS, (2) 'SI' 15,350 lbs (2) 'S2' 11,000 lbs (2> BAFFLES, (1) '131' 1,850 lbs (1) 'B2' 4,150 lbs (1) BASE, (1) 56,475 lbs (16) PIECES TOTAL CONSEAL GASKET 2 ROWS PLACE IN 3' xT1( RECESSES 9' VAULT VALL 1 -PLACE VALL IN CENTER OF KEYVAY 3' x ' RECESSES VAULT BASE DETAIL 10" WIDE KEYWAY RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE 3/16'=1'-0" 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Scale Feet lii1 fiEch DURRE112 REVISION SO/B01 DATE CmcoaD MG 02/16/09 APPROVF-D DP APPROVED TITLE CIVIL MASTER SOUTH WQ VAULT DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C764 JOB NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG NO. 2 -YD -C764 R. W. Beck Inc. Primer Compaiibl with Joint Wrap Top of Precast Vault Unit 7B' x 13B" Butyl Rope " Wide SealWrap or EZ -Wrap Rubber 1"0 Backer Rod Detail recast Vault Unit (typ.) Slkaflex-2c NS Sealant 12' Minimum Thickness Applied per Manufacturer Specifications DETAIL JOINT SEAL SCALE: NTS C760.762 Note: Vertical and horizontal Slkaflex must bond In order to ensure continuous joint. Vertical Slkaflex-2c along Endwall g and Unit per manufacturer specifications K Horizontal Sikaflex-2c Applied in i Keyway or Along Bottom of Wall per Attached Details 0 E xg 7 n 5 2 '33 Precast Attached Endwall recast Vault Unit Leg 3" DETAIL Inside Face of Precast Vault Unit Leg Foundation Inside Face of Precast Endwall 4 SCALE: 1"=1'-0" C760, C762 1"0 Backer i" Joint (typ.) 3/4"x 3/4" Chamfer In Precast Unit DETAIL SCALE: NTS Slkaflex-2c NS Sealant 12' Minimum Thickness Applied per Manufacturer Specifications Inside Face of Precast Endwall Grout to be held 12" below Top of Base Slab 10' 1'0 Backer Rod Inside Face of Precast Vault Unit Leg Slkaflex-2c NS Sealant 1/2" Minimum Thickness Applied per Manufacturer Specifications Structural Base Slab (reinforcement not shown for clarity) Sikaflex-2c NS Sealant 12' Minimum Thickness Applied per Manufacturer Specifications Backer Rod or Backer Tape Grout to be held 12" below Top of Base Slab DETAIL SCALE NTS C760, C762 tructural Base Slab (reinforcing not shown for clarity) 0 U m a 'c a U D ETAI L Rectangular Backer Rod or Backer Tape 3 SCALE 1"=1'-0° to U Ci U 0 C761 C 63 Primer Compatible with Joint Wrap 1'0 Backer Rod 7B" x 13/6' Butyl Rope 36"0 Cast Iron Frame and Cover DETAIL SCALE: NTS 36"0 Access Opening Stormfilter Cartridge (typ.) C760, C762 9' Wide SealWrap or EZ -Wrap Rubber tructural Base Slab Inside Face of Precast Vault Unit Slkaflex-2c NS Sealant 1/2° Minimum Thickness Applied per Manufacturer Specifications Precast Vault Unit (typ) SECTION SCALE NTS 3" 10" Endwall-North Vault (Sheet C760) Endwall-Central Vault (Sheet C762) Inside Face of Precast Endwall Sikaflex-2c NS Sealant 12" Minimum Thickness Applied per Manufacturer Specifications Backer Rod or Backer Tape Grout to be held 12° to 1 12" below Top of Base Slab r Finish Floor Cartridge Bay Poured in Place by Contractor DETAIL SCALE 1"=2'-0" C760, C762 Underdrain Manifold SYN REVISION BY APPROVED DATE SYN REVISION By WARMED 561E g)LAraweifew ® ACCEPTABILITY THE DESIGN 900/OR SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL AO b 4NLINLEN KL 0//16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 DETAIL tructural Base Slab (reinforcing not shown for clarity) SCALE: NTS RECEIVED 'APR 0 9 2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 1/4°=1'-0 Scale Feet CURRENT REVISION SMBOL DATE WQ VAULT DETAILS CHECKED 02/16/09 APS D APPROVED TITLE CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C765 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2—YD—C765 SUBMITTALS SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION: PRECAST VAULT: A. DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND DRAWINGS STAMPED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UCENSED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE AN OVERALL PLAN AND SECTIONS, AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS AND REINFORCEMENT FOR EACH NON-DUPUCATE MEMBER. DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE DETAILS OF ALL OPENINGS, JOINT DETAILS AND UFTING DEVICES. B. REVISED CALCULATIONS AND DRAWINGS, IF NECESSARY, AS A RESULT OF PERMITTING AGENCY REVIEW COMMENTS. C. CONCRETE MIX DESIGN. D. CONCRETE TESTING REPORTS. E. METHOD OF CURING. F. COMPLETED QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION FOR EACH PIECE INCLUDING SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE OF RESOLUTION OF ALL NON -CONFORMITIES DETECIU) THROUGH THE QUALITY CONTROL PROCESS. G. JOINT DETAILS FOR PROVIDING WATER TIGHT SEALED JOINTS. H. INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS, INCLUDING LIFTING REQUIREMENTS, CONNECTION AND SEALING DETAILS. I. PROCEDURE FOR CONNECTING ALL PRECAST ELEMENTS TOGETHER SHALL BE INCLUDED WITH INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. INSTALLATION SHALL INCLUDE REQUIRED BRACING FOR STRUCTURAL STABIUTY AND BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS. J. MATERIAL CERTIFICATIONS, INCLUDING CEMENT, AGGREGATE, AND REINFORCEMENT. K. PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF QUAUFICATION FOR THE PRECAST MANUFACTURER AND ITS PROPOSED FIELD ERECTION SUPERVISOR. L. VAULT APPURTENANCES. SHOP DRAWINGS: A PROVIDE COMPLETE INSTALLATION DRAWINGS INDICATING EVERY ELEMENT OF THE SYSTEM. B. INDICATE DIMENSIONS INSIDE THE VAULT. C. INDICATE DIMENSIONS RELATIVE TO FIXED PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROJECT SITE FOR ACCURATE PLACEMENT OF THE VAULT. D. DEMONSTRATE GRAPHICALLY THAT EACH REMOVABLE COMPONENT CAN BE EASILY ACCESSED FOR SERVICE, AND THAT FILTERS, COMPONENTS AND OTHER ITEMS CAN BE REMOVED WITHOUT REQUIRING DISASSEMBLY OF OTHER PARTS, AND WITHOUT MODIFICATIONS TO THE PERMANENT ELEMENTS. E. INDICATE LOCATION, SIZE, MATERIAL, AND INVERT ELEVATION OF ALL INLET AND OUTLET PIPES. F. PROVIDE THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES. PRODUCT DATA SHEETS: A. PROVIDE FOR EACH MANUFACTURED PRODUCT INSTALLED UNDER WORK COVERED BY THIS SECTION. B. PROVIDE FOR EACH FILTER UNIT AND COMPONENT TYPE, AND EACH TYPE OF FILTER MEDIA. C. INCLUDE FITTINGS, COUPUNGS, AND JOINTS. DIAGRAMS: A. PROVIDE SCALE DIAGRAMS OF ASSEMBLIES, STRUCTURES, OR OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE MATERIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CONDDIONS INDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. B. INCLUDE SPECIAL FITTINGS, INCLUDING CONNECTIONS MANUFACTURED SPECIALLY FOR THE PROJECT. PRECAST VAULT CONSIDERATIONS PRECAST MANUFACTURER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETE DESIGN OF THE VAULT TO THE CRITERIA GIVEN ON THE DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRECAST VAULT TO ACCEPT PERMANENT STORMWATER FILTRATION SYSTEM. THIS MAY INCLUDE INSTALLATION OF THE PRECAST VAULT WITH A SLOPED FLOOR. PERMITS CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING A VAULT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND PERMIT(S) FOR TRANSPORTING THE VAULT. SUBMIT PRECAST MANUFACTURER'S DESIGN CALCULATIONS, DRAWINGS AND OTHER DATA REGARDING THE VAULTS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL WARRANTY PROVIDE MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN WARRANTY AGAINST DEFECTS IN MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP, AND AGREEING TO REPAIR OR REPLACE COMPONENTS THAT ARE DEFECTIVE OR FAIL DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. WARRANTY PERIOD FOR THE STORM FILTRATION SYSTEM FOR DEFECTS OR FAILURE IN MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP, PERFORMANCE, AND GENERAL SYSTEM' INTEGRITY IS FIVE (5) YEARS COMMENCING ON THE DATE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. GENERAL SYSTEM INTEGRITY CONSISTS OF THE SYSTEM BEING CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THE WATER QUALITY FILTRATION FUNCTIONS WHEN USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND FOR THE PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION AND WHEN FITTED WITH THE PROPER FILTERS AND OTHER REPLACEABLE ELEMENTS. PRODUCTS STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM SHALL BE STORMFILTER BY CONTECH STORMWATER SOLUTIONS, INC. DRAIN MANIFOLD SHALL FABRICATED UTILIZING A TEMPLATE TO FIT WITHIN THE PRECAST FILTER VAULT THAT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE FILTER CONFIGURATION. LADDERS SHALL BE VAULT LADDER WITH PULL-UP HANDRAIL BY LANE INTERNATIONAL OR APPROVED EQUAL, FABRICATED FROM ASTM A 36 STEEL AND ENCASED IN POLYPROPYLENE. LADDERS SHALL CONFORM TO APPUCABLE REGULATIONS. ANCHOR LADDER SECURELY TO STRUCTURE, WITH ANCHORS SPACED NOT MORE THAN SIX (6) FEET ON CENTER. PROVIDE TELESCOPING SAFETY POSTS. INSTALLATION COMPLY WITH MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS, INCLUDING TECHNICAL BULLETINS AND PRODUCT CATALOG DATA. CONTACT THE PRODUCT REPRESENTATIVE TO CONFIRM APPROPRIATE PROCEDURES PRIOR TO BEGINNING INSTALLATION. RETAIN MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS AT THE PROJECT SITE. CARTRIDGE PIPING SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH TEMPORARY WATERTIGHT CAPS. FILTER CARTRIDGES SHALL BE DELWERED SEPARATELY, BUT NOT INSTALLED, IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST FOR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. CLEANING THOROUGHLY PRESSURE WASH ALL INTERIOR PRECAST VAULT SURFACES USING A MINIMUM TWO THOUSAND (2000) PSI WATER BLAST PRIOR TO TRANSPORTING TO THE PROJECT SITE. PRESSURE WASHING SHALL REMOVE ALL SURFACE LATENCY, FORM RELEASE COATING, AND LOOSE CEMENT PASTE. FLUSH VAULT AND ALL RELATED PIPING TO REMOVE COLLECTED DEBRIS IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FILTERS. PROTECTION UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY THE PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE, SURFACE WATER RUNOFF SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO ENTER THE FILTER SYSTEM THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE WORK. REVSION Err APPROVED DAIS s1J REVISION APPROVED WE gLISPARE,Alfig ® ACCEPTABILITY SL TNS DESIGN AND/OR 5FIECRCO 02/16/09 SPECIFICATION 5 APPROVED AO hfA.iNEEN WN 02/16/09 SBBIIRE APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DP ' JB RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 COMMUNITY' DEVELOPMENT ��ti pE�K CMRREATT REVISION mea BATE WQ VAULT NOTES 02/16/09 02/16/09 JB ROVED APPROVED JB TnE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C766 JOB ND. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBM1TTAL 060 NO. 2 -YD -C766 wg — Copyright 2008 R. W. Beck, SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANUFAU I UHL ANU I ALLA l I UIV Vr I.0/V/Jrr%/vv onto/ v can 1. DESCRIPTION This Rork shad consist dconstricting a CON/SPAWN vault In aocndancs with mese specifications and in masonablydose mnMmlyw'ith the fines, grades, desgn end dimensions shown on Vs Censoras established by the Engineer. In s(walis s where two amore 6pedAtationsapply to me Rods the most stringent requfrenrents shall gmnm. 2. TYPES Precast reinforced concrete CO94SPANO vault units menufadurad In accordance with the specification shall be designated by span and rise. Precast reinforced concrete CON/SPAN®erdeaits manufactured in a:cadence with this specification she be designated by Carat); and heght. 3. MATERIALS - CONCRETE Theo:mete for the structures shall be air-entrairred waren Metalled in areas subject to f 56re-Oeve conditions, composed of portland comm g, fine and mase aggregatee admbbnes and water. Air -entrained concrete shall contain 632 percent ad. The all entraining admixture shad ccnforn to AASHTO M154. 3.1 Portland Cement - ShaIconform to Oro requirements of ASTM Specifications C150 -Type l Type ll, or Type lIIcemem. 32 Coarse Aggtegate- Shall consist °sine having a madmum stn of 1 tens Aggregate shad meet requirements far ASTM C33. 3.3 Weer Reducing Admixture- The manuacarrermay submit tor approval bYSe Engineer, a water -reducing adm/dure for the purpose of browsing workability and reducing the waerrequhement dor the concrete. 3.4 Calcium Chloride- Theaddldon to theta' ofcalcium chloride aadmixtures containeg rakcum chloride wadTrot be permitted. 4. MATERIALS - STEEL REINFORCEMENT AND HARDWARE All reinforcing steel fix destructures shad be fabricated and placed In accordance wdh the detadsdshop drawings submitted by the manufacturer. 4.1 Steel Reinforcement - Rebbnementshad consist ofwelded wire tbrb conforming oASTM Specification A i65 orA 497, ordn77edbilletsteel bars conforming to AST I SpadfI8800nA 615, Grade 60. Longitudinal dethbuton reinfomemed maycoasists ofweded wire fabricordeformed billalsed bas. 4.2 Hareem: Inserts heandol connections shall beAJS7 Type 304 sta/nlees seal, F-58 Expanded Cod insert as manafachred byDaybnRichmond Concrete Accessories, Mamebug, Ohio, (800)7453700. Ca7rods and nuts used 5 enthrall mrtnec5ons shall beAISI Type 304 stainless sed. Washers used In endive connections she IbeANSl Type 304 stainless steel plate washers. Reinforcing bar splices shag be made using the Doeel Bar Splicer System as manufactured by Dayton/Richmond Concrete Accessories, Miamisburg, tyke, (800)745-3700, and shall consist ads Dowel Bar Splicer(DB-SAE)and Dowel -In (0I). Fame Loop Inserts shad be FS1 Faroe Loop Inserts as manuadured by Dsyert lihchmand Concrete Accessories, Miamisburg, Ohio, (800)74a-3700. Hoak Sole used 5 endwdd connections shad beASTM A 307. 5. MANUFACTURE 5.1 Mixture - The aggregates, omeMand water shall be proportioned and mixed in a batch mixer to produce a homogeneous comets meeting the strength requirements tithe specification. The proportion ofpmtland cement in the mixture shall not be las than 564 pounds (8 sacks) per cubic yard of concrete. 5.2 Gong - The precast concrete vault units shad be mored for a sufficient length arena so that the concrete w05eve/op Me specified compressive strength 528 days orless. Any one tithe Wowing methods arousing or combinations haredshag be used 521 Seam Curing - The units may be tow pressure, steam cured by a system that will maintain a moist atmosphere. 522 Water Curing- The units may be water cured byany method that wWkeep Me sectors moist 523 Membrane Curing -A seabg membrane conform0g to he requirements °ASTM Specification C 309 maybe applied and shad be /ended unts7 the required comate compressive strength is attained. The concrete temperature et the lime ofappletion shad be Mtn t 10 degrees F°da atosphenc tmhp9,abra All surfaces shed be kept moist pure bre application of the compounds and shaft be damp when Se compound is applied. 5.3 Forms - the forms used In manufacture shallba sufficiently rigid and accurate to maintain he structure dimension within 59 permissible legations Oen kr Section 70757088 specifications. All casting surfaces shad be ofasmooth material. 5.4 Handling - Handling devices wholes shad be peantlted 5 each vault unit or lye purpose dhandling and seting. 5.5 Storage - The precast almonds shad be sexed In such a manrerbpevent cracking ordamage. The units shall not be mowed until the concrete compressive seerglh has reached a minimum of 2500 psi, and they shall of be sited 5 an upright position until the concrete compressive sm9,yth e a minimum °4,000 psi. 6. DESIGN 6.1 The precast element dimension and reinforcement details shag be as prescribed 5 the pan and 5e shop drawings pmNdedbythe manufacturer, abject 10 the provisions of Section 7, below. The minimum concrete compressive strength daft be as shown on to shop drawings The minimum steelyield sbengh shad be 60,000 psi unless otherwise cad on he shop drawings. 6.2 The precast element are designed In accordance with the 'Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges' 17th Edition, adopted by the Amedean Association of WASHINGTONH ighwdy and Transpaelbn 2002 A minimum ofone foot of cover above Se crown tide vault units i required 55e Installed condition. (Unless noted omenwav ore on to shop drawings and designed accordingly) Officials, 6.3 Placement of Reinforcement In Precast Vault Units - The cover of concrete over the outside circumferential reblacament shad be 2 inches mbimum. The mlerdmmaet over Os bade circumferential rsisIlb snrent shad be 1 12 ethos minimum, mess otherwise noted on the dap drawings The deardistance of the end circumferential wee shad not be less than an0Inch nor more Meir two Inches from 00 ends of each seehbn. Reinforcement shall beassembled utilizing single dmuldpleIayers of welded Me 5bd0 (Trot to exceed 3 Layers,1 supplemented with a single layer ofdefamed adet-sleet bee when necessary. Welded Me fabric shall bo composed of deumrerenSal and longitudinal woes meeting the spacing requirement 0768 bebw, and shall contain sufficient longlbd/naf wires extending through the vault unk o maintain The shape and position wedLontheinal Vi may welded ora and shall meet Me sparing requirements °88 belbe: The erne tide iongtebal andinches >�ends onot orelunit Men3In hes 8.4 Placement dReinforcement fYPrecast Enthralls - Thecover ofconcrete over the longitudinal andoaraverse reinforcementaha1 bet inches minimum. The dear distance from the end leach precast element b the and transverse reinforcing steel shell not be less than one inch nor more than two Inches. Relat ememshall be assembled utlll:irlg a single /8)70r874487585 was atria ora single layer of defamedbWetsteel baa. Welded who /abrb shad be composed of transverse and !digitate! when meeting the spacing requirement 0767, below, end shad contain sufficient lortgdInd wires extending through the demon o maintain The shape andposttbn time reinforcement Longitudinal reinforcement may be wadded wire ebb ordeformed Met -steel bars and shall mettle stedng requirements 016.7, below. The ends of me longitudinal etnbrcement sha1be not more than 3 incite and not las Men 1 12 inches tom the ends cede was 6.5 Bending of Reinforcement for Precast Vault Units -The outside and lnsldeWwmbaenfd reinforcing sed for the cornered the vaunt shall be bent a such an angle Mata approximately equal to the configuration tithe vault. outside comer. 66 Laps, Welds, and Spacing for Precast Vault Units - Torsion splices in Oe drwmferen7d reinforcement shad be made bylapping. Laps maybelsdr welded together for assembly purpases. For smooth welded wire ebb, fie overlap shall sheet be requirements of AASHTO8.302and 8.326. For debr ed welded wire 56177 the overlap shad meet the requirements of AASHTO 8.30.1 are 8.32.5 The overlap ofwe5ed wire ebdoshed be measured between the outrmost bngdudbal wires °each Mob sheet For deformed billet -steel bars Me ovedap shad meet The fequ/raments ofAASHTO 8.25. For splices other Man tension splices, the overlap shall bea minimum of 12' for welded Me fabric or deformed billet -steel bars. The spadrg center to center ofthe circumferential wires Ina wire abiesheet shall be not less Mang hoses nor more than 4 inches. The spacing center to center ofthe longitudinal wires shad not be more than inches. The sparing center to arta, ofthe longitudinal debrbution steel for either line ofreinfordng in the by slab shad be not more Mania Inches. 6.7 Laps, Weds, and Spading IorPrecast Edwafs - Spl/ces in the reinforcement shall be rade by lapping. Laps maybe tech welded Meer for assembly purposes. Forsmooth welded wire 5brf6 5e overlap shall meet the requirements ofAASH708.302 and 8.326 For deemed welded wire ebdF the overlap shed meet he requirements ofAASHTOS30.1 and8.32.5 Fordeformed CM -steel bars, he ovadap shad meet the requirements ofAASHTO 825. The spedngcenter-totanerdthe wits In a wirefillet shed shall be notless Man 2 Inches nor more nen 8 inches 7. PERMISSIBLE VARIAT/ONS 7.1 Vault Units 7.1.1 Interne Dimensions - The Internal dimension dell vary not mot than 1% from The design dimensions nor more man 1-12 inches whichever is less. The haunch dimmable shad very not more than 3/4 Inch from the desgn dimension. 7.1.2 Slab and Wall Thickness - The slab and wall Bidets shall not be less than that sheen In to design by [nom than 1/4 Inch. A thickness more San gat required in to design shall not because for rejection. 7.13 Lags ofOpposite surfaces-Varla7acs In eying 'anginal bo opposite surfaces dye vauo unit shall not be more than 12 me h 5 any section, exceptwhere bevelled ends for eying of curves are specified by me purchaser. 7.1.4 Length of Section - The undemm in length of a section shad let be more Than 125th 5 any veldt unit. 7.1.5 Position of Reinforcement- The=Mem variation inposition tithe reinforcement shall be x 02 inch In no cele shed the cover over the reinforcement be less than 1 12 inches fame outside cbwnserentalsael tube less than 1Inch lathe Inside circumferential sad as measured to tae external or Internal surfaced the cult. These tolerances orcover requirements do not appy to meting surfaces of the joints. 7.1.8 Area ofRebforrement- The areas of steel ainfonanremsha/l be the design steel areas as sham 5 the manufacoreri shop drawings. Sleet areas greater than those required shall not be cause for rejection. The permissible variation in diameter of any reinforcement shall conform to the tolerances preso7ed the AST MSpedl®dor tartlet type ofrelnfo camenL 72 Endwalls 72.1 Wad Thickness . The wad Sidoess shall not vary tom that shown In the deegn by more Man 12Inch. 722 Lergt/VHeight of Wad sections- The length and height of the wall shad not vary from that show n in the design by mom than 1/2 Inch. 7.2.3 Position of Reinforcement -The maximum legation in the pasition of the m/nlorcementdalIbei 125th Inno rase shall the cover over the re5orrame ntbe less man 1 12 Oche& 724 She ofRe67ortement - The permissible ',Madan In d/amoterat any reinforcing shat conform to the tolerances proscribed in the ASTM Specification to that type dmintreg. Steel area greater than that required shall not be cause for rejection. 8. TESTING AND INSPECTION 61 Typed Test specimen - Concrete compressive 06erg5 ahna be detenn5edfrom Compvessionests made on cylinders or coma For cylinder testi g, a minimum 074 cylinders Mel be taken during each produdal run. Fbl axe haling, one cxe shad be wt horn each of 3 precast elements selected atrandom Som each production group. A productiongroupshad be defined as 15orfewer vault units (da padoderMe; or enthralls in a continuous poduxton nm. For each continuous pmdurton run, Me produ iGngroup orb9am thereof shall be considered sepwateryfor the purpose oftesting end acceptance. A production run shaebe cxrsldanedcontinuous Ifnot Interrupted fix mono than 3 consecutive days. 8.2 Commission Testing • Cyfrders sheik be madame bated as presaibed by the ASTM C39 Specification. Coes shall be obbtned and tested brconpesive strength in accordance wlS flee provisions tithe AST MC497 Sped9xation. 83 AaapSt4iyofCylinder Tele - When to average compressive strength tial eyfirdealasted is equal to or greater Menthe design 45,0901700/8779/18750010918 than 10% ems minders tested llama mmpreneve 509,19111059 than the design concrete strength and no cylinder tested has a mmpressiVe strength less Oen 80% of the design compressive s1S ngm, men to tet shall be accepted. When the compressNe sbangm time cylinders tested does not conform to M/s acceptance criteria, the acceptability time tet maybe detenniedas described 5 sector 8.4, below 84 Acceptability ofCom Tests - The mm71005 a s5ergth°the concrete beach production group as defined in 81 is acceptable when Me average core est strength Is equal toagreater than to deo/gn =crate strength When the compess/09 shangm alto core tested is less San he design concrete strength the precast element from which that core was taken maybe re -cored When the compessh9soength time scare IS equal b orgreaart an the dasgn concrete sb9,gth, Ma compressive streng5 of he comet in that po dc'cnn group is areepebe. 84.1 When 58 compressive strength of any ecore is less than 5e design concrete atrergth, the precast element from which that taxa was taken shall be rejected. Two precast element from the remabdero(the group shaft be selected et random and one core shad be taken from each Ode =recessive strength of both saes is equal to orgreaert an 5e design concrete strength, the compressive strength time remainder dthat group is acceptathe two odes sttested 5 compressive the design concrete optionstrength the remainder of all be al the of be ranufamrmr, � precastor, precast of die remainder 0! Ihogro'jp shad be coed and accepted Indivfduaiy, and any of Mese elements that have cores with less than to deep concrete strength shad be rejected. 8.42 Plugging Core Hales - The care holes shall be plugged and sealed by the manufacturer in a manner such tree to elements will meet id of the test requ5aments tithe specification. Precast elements so sealed shad be considered satisfactory kr use 8.4.3 Test Equipment. Every manufacturer lean shi g vault endures under fills specification shad Amish all diad and personnel necessaryto carryout the test required. 9. JO/NTS The vault units shad be produced with flat butt ends. The ends ohne vault units shag be such that when the sections are laid togethertey will make a continuous line of with a smooth interior free of appreciable 5aguan/es, all compatible with the permisible variations 5 Sector 7, above. The jollity/eh shall not exceed 314 inches. 10. WORKMANSHIP AND FINISH The precast vault unit and eokads strati be subsentalty free Linactures. The ends ° Me vault units shad be tonal to the walls and centdrme time vault motion, w1m5 the Emits ata variations given In section 7, above, except where beveled ends are speddsd. The faces Lida analyst and vaut cods shad be petaled to each oma, weer to limits of lettere glean m sexton 7, atom. The surface of the precast eiements shall be a smooth steel form or toweled surface. Trapped alrpodrets causing surface defects shaft be considered as part 07a smooth, steel form finish. 11. REPAIRS Precast elements maybe repaired'(necessary, because of imperfections in manufacture or handling damage and will be aaapable if, In he opinion ofthe purchaser, the repairs are sound, property finished and cured and the repaired sedan conforms to the requirements ants specification. 12. INSPECTION The quaffyofmated* the process of manufacture, and the 6nehed structures shall be abject to inspection by The purchaser 13. REJECTION The precast elements shall be subject lo rejection on account°any of the specification requirements. Individual precast elements maybe rejected because e any ofthe blowing: 13.1 Fractures or creaks passing through to wall, except for a tingle end beck that does not exceed m81)000 thickness erne wag. 13.2 Defects that indicate proportioning, mixing, and mating not 5 compdence with Section 5Lithese specifications. 13.3 Honeycombed of open 5xbre. 13.4 Damaged ends, where such damage weuSprevent making a 6abaadayjoint 14. MARK/NG Each vault unit shad be dearly marled by waterproof paint The folbwing shad be sham on the inside elle vertical fog of the vert se05056 Vault Span X VaultRise Date of Manufacture Name or trademark of the manuacbrer 15. CONSTRUCT/ON REQUIREMENTS 15.1 Footings- The vsultunits and exhale sha0be insts0edon ether protestor cast -in-place concrete *mange. The design atm and etevaten of the footings shad be as determ/ned byte Egineer. A dose Inde deep keyway shad be brined In the top surface of the vault footing three kc'hes dear °the kslde and outside faces tithe Mage units, unless specified Otherwise on the plans. A keyway is also required in the bat/rigs for Oa enoMils, unless otherwise specified. The boSrgs she be given a smooth floe1 finish and shat reach a compressive strength of bridge and endive elements. The completed toting surface shell placemenbefore t dkr =ardente oath grades shown on Ore plans. When tested with a 10 bot straght edge, the surface shall not nary move San 1/4 kat in 10 feet Oa precast concrete footing a used, the c n achxshallprepare a 4 kith thick base layerdcompacted granular material ha ted width tithe toting prior to placing the pass/ footing. 152 Placement of the Vault (Arid and EndWafts - The vault units and endows/Is shall be Moe dasshown on the Engineers plan drawlrga. Specht rare shall betaken In setting the elements b the due fire and grade. The vault units and enthralls shall be eat on 6'x6' amanita ordeal shims. A mknknumgap of 12ineh shad be provided between the footing and the bottom Lithe mils vertical fogs or the erdaa8 The gap shall be Med with cement gnat (Portland cement and water orcement mortar Composed dPortland tamer/ sand and water) with a minimum 213daycompressive strength 073000 psi Ounds have been set with temporary ties (cables, bars, eb)graul must attain a minimum compressive strength of 1507 psi before foes maybe removed 15.9 Edema( Protection ofJoints -The talent made by Iwo adjoining vault units shad be covered wits 7B'x 1 3r8'prelamed bituminous IMO sealant and a minimum de 9 itch vedejolts wrap. The surface shad be free of dirt belles applying the joint material. A primer compadide wise the joint wrap to be used shad be applied foramblmum with h of nine larches on each Me of the lent The extra/ wrap shad be either EZ -WRAP RUBBER by PRESS -SEAL GASKET CORPORA770N, SEAL WRAP by MAR MAC MANUFACTURING CO. INC. or approved equal Thep/nlsAaflbe covered dednwusly horn to both= done vault section leg, across the top time arch and to the oppos1e vauksecton leg. Any laps That result l the joint wrap shef/be a minimum da/xhxles king with the overlap running downhfi/ In addition to diejints between vault units, Motel behmen the end vault unit and the ended shadalso be sealed asdescribedabove. Also, On holes are formed In the arch units, they shall be primed and covered with a 9'x 8' squaredpint wrap. During to Iedd4Tvg operation, care shall betaken 10 keep to pint wrap 5 its properbratbn over this laird Internal Protection of Joints -Certain vaults may require addionalpint protection 10 ensure that the structure is water -tight Various joint sealing details Including elastomaric urethane, or liquid sealing maybe show)an he plans, Any internal joist sealing shell be pedonmed as Indicated on the construction plans. 15.4 Backfill - 8ackdd shad be considered mall replaced excavation and new embankment adjacent to the CON/SPANt9 vault umlts and enO15Oa//s. The project construction and material specifications which Include the specifications for excavation for structures and roadway excavation and embankment c asbuc'5o, shall apply except as modified h the section. N0 bec*il shd/be placed against anysbucbral elements unithey have been approved by the Engineer. Baakh/lagainst a waterproofed surface shad be placed carebdytoavoid damage 105e waterproofing martial. Mechanical tampers orappraved bang equipment shall be used to compact all backhd and embankment immedetelyadjacent to each side and averse top dead+ vault unit unb7it is covered to a minimum depth done foot unless She design fill height Is less than 1-0' 77m baddill within Me Critical B9dkfiZona (shown bye diagramsbelow)shad be placed In les ofeightInches or less (loose depth). Heavy compaction equipment shall not be opel8 d 5 this area or over the bridge until it covered toa depth of one foot unless the design 507 heght Is fess San 110' fighlweghl dozers and graders maybe operated over mu/1 unit having one daotof compacted cover, but heavy each moving equipment (larger than a 04 Dozer weighing in excess of 12 tons and having Made pressures of eight psi or greater)shad require two fed of cover unless the design covers less than two eel Ino rase shad equipment operating 5 exoes tame design load (HS20 orH525) be permitted over the vault units unless approved by CON/SPAh05 Anyaddlioral fi I and subsequent excavation required to provide the minimum cover shall be made atno addltonal cath the project As a precaution against introducing unbalanced messes 5 5e vein( when placing bacidllll at no time shad the difference between Me height of fill on opposite sides of the vault exceed 24' 16. QUALITY ASSURANCE TIM Precast, shall demonstrate adherence o 5e standards set forth In the NPC4 Quality Control ManuaL The Powder shall meet eOherSection 16.1 or 162. 16.1 Certification: The Perasarshall be celled by the PrecastPrestessed Concrete Institute Pant Certification Pegram or the National Precast Concrete Assn ateni Plant Certification Programptsra and during production of the products covered by this specification. 162 Qualice5ans Testing and Inspection 1621 The Precasershal have been 5 to business of producing precast concrete products ender to Grose specified bra minimum of three years. He shed malne5 a pennanan quality control department or retain an independent testing agency on a continuing basis. The agency shall Issue a report certifier/ bya licensed engineer, detailing the ability of the Precasts( to produce quality products consistent with edusdysondant 1622 The Precesf rshaSshow that be following tests am performed in acoodaoe w1117 he ASTM standards indicated. Tests shall be performed for each 150 are byards at concrete placed, but not kiss trequen*then once perpodudbn run, redefined 5 §8 of these specifications. 1622.1 Air Conant C231 orC173 76222 Compressive Strength: 039, 0497 182.3 The Precastershal provide dawmen55on dem onstaeg compliance with this seam 10 CON/SPAMat regularkarvals orupon request. 1824 The Owner an Inspector In Medal when the products covered by this smelted= are being manufactured. 0 1A REVISION 77 APPROVED 047E REVISION BY APPROVED 040E gLATOEFAW* ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED ROVED BY OET+7. MATE APP DRAWN SL /LII V/vi`1viv BACKFILL DESCRIPTION (AASHTO M 14591) Group Clasicadon A-1 A -1-a A-1-0 A.2-4 A-25 A-2.6 A-2-7 A-3 A-2 Sieve Analysts, Percent Passing (100% Passing 3'S/eve) No. 10 50 max. Ab. 40 30 max. No. 200 15 max. Gsracegsfis of Fred/on Passing Ab. 40 Liquid Limit P'aslSEATTLE Index Usual Types dSignicant Constituent Materials General Rene as Subgrade 50 max.. 51 min 25 max. 10 mar. 35 max 35 max. 35 mar. 35 max. 6max. Stone Fragments, Gravels Sand 40 max. 41 min. 40 max. 41 min. N.P. 10 max 10 max. 11 m5. 11 min. Fine Silty orClayey Gravel and Sand Sand Excellente Good A-4 36 min. 40 max 10 max. Say Sat Feeto Pao Finished Grade Compacted Material (see chart below) CHECKGD AO KL ERC REER CHECKED MG DATE 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 :'em Limits of Critical Backfill Zone (C.B.Z.) ELEVATION :v`'7 NOTES 1. SEE CON/SPMW SPECIFICATIONSSECTION 15.4 FOR BACKFILL SPECIFICATIONS. 2 FOR FILL HEIGHTS GREATER THAN 7-0. GBL LIMIT -SHALL 8ETOABOVE ARCH GROWN, FORF/LL HEIGHTS LESS THAN ZAP, THE FINISHED GRADE SHALL BE THE BOUNDARY LINE FOR THEG.82 3 BACKFILLING OPERATIONS WITHIN THEGBZ SHALL BE PERFORMED PIUFISOF9' OR LESS (LOOSE DEPTH) A MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY SHALL BE DETERMINED BYMSHTO T-09 OR OTHER APPROVED METHODS 6 R4C/CFILL SWILL BE COMPACTED INLAYERS UNTIL THE DENSITY IS NOT LESS THAN 95% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY. SUBTILE -EMBANIAENTWITERML PER PROJECT SPE BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS lnsitu Soil? NATIVE BACKFILL, 95% COMPACTION USING MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST (ASTM D1557) RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 QQMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT tV fit [K CURRENT 80151074 5155011 DATE WQ VAULT NOTES 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TITLE CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C767 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG N0. 2 -YD -C767 ACCEPTABISMATERIAL ACCEPTABLEMATERLM. SPAN FAL HEIGHT 575/DEC92 07/15bEG82 ..280 > 720 A1,A3 ^ /528-0' x176' 8I,A; AAA4 a• >240 ALL At A3 ' -EMBANIAENTWITERML PER PROJECT SPE BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS lnsitu Soil? NATIVE BACKFILL, 95% COMPACTION USING MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST (ASTM D1557) RECEIVED APR 0 9 20101 QQMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT tV fit [K CURRENT 80151074 5155011 DATE WQ VAULT NOTES 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TITLE CML MASTER DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD SHEET C767 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG N0. 2 -YD -C767 wg — Copyright 2088 R. W. Bec GENERAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES: 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TESC PLAN AND POLLUTION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL FOLLOW APPROPRIATE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) IN ACCORDANCE WITH: a. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY (ECOLOGY) CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT UNDER NPDES. b. CITY OF TUKWILA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (SECOND EDITION REVISION 1 2005) c. KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL d. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON (DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, 2005) e. DIVISION 8 (AS AMENDED) OF THE WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS f. WASHINGTON ADMINSTRATNE CODE (WAC): WAC -173A -201A, WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SURFACE WATERS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON g. ALL APPUCABLE PROJECT PERMITS AND APPROVALS 2. THE TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL FACILITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SELECTING AND IMPLEMENTING ALL NECESSARY BMPS TO MEET ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE TESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE. REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE FACILITIES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AND APPROVED. ADDITIONAL FACILITIES SHALL BE INSTALLED ,AND/OR UPGRADED AS NECESSARY AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR TO PREVENT SEDIMENTATION OUTSIDE THE OMITS OF CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLTITON OR AS REQUESTED BY THE ENGINEER AT NO ADDMONAL COST TO THE OWNER. ANY SCHEDULE DELAYS CAUSED BY CHANGES OR UPGRADES REQUIRED TO THE TESC FACILITIES ARE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S RISK. 3. THE TESC PLAN DRAWING AND THESE NOTES ARE CONCEPTUAL AND ARE PROVIDED AS GUIDEUNES FOR THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS REOUIRED TO SUBMIT A DETAILED CONTRACTOR'S EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN (CESCP) (ALSO CALLED CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (CSWPPP)). THE CESCP SHALL DOCUMENT ALL TESC MEASURES USED ON-SITE AND SHALL BE UPDATED DURING CONSTRUCTION AS CONDITIONS CHANGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPUCABLE PERMITS AND REGULATIONS. THE CESCP SHALL INCLUDE A PROJECT -SPECIFIC STORMWATER CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLAN (SCTP) (IF THE CONTRACTOR USES CHITOSAN-ENHANCED SAND FILTRATION) AND A PH REMEDIATION SYSTEM OPERATION PLAN. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURES (SPCC) PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. 5. EMPLOY A LOCAL. CERTIFIED PROFESSIONAL TESC CONTRACTOR WHO HAS DOCUMENTED PRIOR EXPERIENCE IN THE LATEST MECHANICAL AND CHEMICAL TESC METHODS. A CERTIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (CESCL) SHALL BE ON-SITE OR ON-CALL 24 -HOURS -PER -DAY, 7 -DAYS -PER -WEEK. NE CESCL MUST BE A CERTIFIED PROFESSIONAL IN EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (CPESC) OR A CERTIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (ESC) LEAD WHOSE CERTIFICATION IS RECOGNIZED BY KING COUNTY AND ECOLOGY. THE ESC LEAD (AND/OR ALTERNATE) SHALL BE AVAILABLE AND IDENTIFIED AT THE PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE. NE ESC LEAD (AND/OR ALTERNATE) SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE AND DIRECT TESC WORK AND TESC EXPENDITURES ON SITE. 6. THE TESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO ANY DEMOLITION, GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR NE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. THE TESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSTALLED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT -LADEN WATER DOES NOT ENTER THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM OR RECEIVING WATER BODY OR VIOLATE APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. 7. THE CONSTRUCTION/DEMOUTION OMITS SHOWN ON THE PLANS SHALL BE CLEARLY FENCED BY CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, NO DISTURBANCE BEYOND THESE OMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE FENCING SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. 8. THE TESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY OR AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER TO ENSURE THEIR CONTINUED FUNCTION AND OPERATION. DAMAGED OR IMPROPERLY FUNCTIONING BMPS SHALL BE REPLACED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. AT A MINIMUM, TESC FACILIITES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING A MEASURABLE RAIN EVENT (0.5 INCHES OR GREATER) FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30, AND WEEKLY AND AFTER ANY MEASURABLE RAIN EVENT FROM MAY 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN LOGS OF TESC INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES, AND KEEP THE LOGS ON SITE, AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION BY THE ENGINEER. 10. TESC FEATURES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING WSDOT STANDARD PLANS (OR EQUIVALENT): HIGH VISIBILITY FENCE: SILT FENCE: EROSION CONTROL AT CULVERT ENDS: COMPOST SOCK: STRAW BALE BARRIER' TEMP SILT FENCE FOR INLET PROTECTION IN UNPAVED AREAS: STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION: GEOTEXTILE ENCASED CHECK DAM INSTALLATION: MISCELLANEOUS EROSION CONTROL DETAILS: 1-10.10-00 1-30.10-00 1-30.20-00 1-30.40-00 1-30.50-00 1-40.10-00 1-40.20-00 1-50.10-00 1-80.10-00 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY BMPS TO PREVENT OR MINIMIZE THE TRANSPORT OF SEDIMENT ONTO OFF-SITE PAVED SURFACES. IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO AN OFF-SITE PAVED SURFACE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN THE SURFACE AT THE END OF EACH DAY USING A VACUUM -TYPE STREET SWEEPER AS NEEDED. 12. TEMPORARY SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED TO FOLLOW CONTOURS. THE FENCE POSTS SHALL BE SPACED AT A MAXIMUM OF 8 FEET APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES). 13. COVER ALL DISTURBED AREAS (INCLUDING EXPOSED SOILS, PILES OF DEMOLISHED CONCRETE, AND OTHER STOCKPILES) THAT WILL NOT BE WORKED FOR MORE THAN SEVEN DAYS DURING THE DRY SEASON (MAY 1 TO SEPTEMBER 30) OR TWO DAYS DURING THE WET SEASON (OCTOBER 1 TO APRIL 30). DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE COVERED BY PLASTIC OR OTHER BMPS AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER. DURING THE WET SEASON, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO: a. PROTECT STOCKPILES AND EXPOSED SLOPES IF UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 12 HOURS. b. EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABIUZED AT THE END OF THE WORKDAY PRIOR TO A WEEKEND, HOUDAY, OR PREDICTED RAIN EVENT. c. STOCKPILE ON-SITE ENOUGH COVER MATERIALS TO COVER ALL DISTURBED AREAS. 15. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY STORMWATER BYPASS SYSTEMS USING PUMPS, TEMPORARY DITCHES, TEMPORARY SURFACE CHANNELS, AND TEMPORARY PIPING TO PREVENT ROOF RUNOFF AND ANY CLEAN PIPE FLOWS FROM COMING INTO CONTACT WITH EXPOSED EARN. RELOCATE AND MODIFY TEMPORARY BYPASS SYSTEMS TO FACILITATE PROGRESSION OF WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A STORMWATER COLLECTION AND PHASING PLAN FOR APPROVAL BY ENGINEER. 16. UPON FINDING A RISK OF EROSION OR AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY APPLY SOIL STABIUZATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER RESOURCES ON SITE AT ALL TIMES, IN ADEQUATE QUANTITIES TO IMMEDIATELY STABIUZE SOIL 17. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT DUST CONTROL MEASURES TO MINIMIZE RAISING DUST FROM THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND PREVENT AIR -BORNE DUST BOTH ON AND OFF THE SITE. IN ADDITION TO OTHER MEASURES DESCRIBED HEREIN: D. UTILIZE WATERING TRUCKS TO DAMPEN DRY SOIL OR CONCRETE MATERIALS. b. USE VACUUM STREET SWEEPERS WITH DUST SUPPRESSANTS AS NECESSARY TO REMOVE DIRT AND DEBRIS FROM OFF-SITE AND ON-SITE PAVEMENT. VtNtKHL tKUJIVIN HINU JLUIIVILIN I IAJIN I RUL !NU 1 L3 1`l_Av1y I v/. 18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD LOCATE AND PROVIDE STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION IN ALL CATCH BASINS, INLETS OR OTHER DRAINAGE STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION LIMITS, OFF-SITE STAGING AREAS, OR AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. SEDIMENT SHALL -BE REMOVED FROM CATCH BASINS WHEN IT EXCEEDS 60 PERCENT OF THE SUMP DEPTH AS MEASURED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE CATCH BASIN TO THE INVERT OF THE LOWEST PIPE INTO OR OUT OF THE BASIN. AT LEAST 6 INCHES OF CLEARANCE FROM THE SEDIMENT SURFACE TO THE INVERT OF THE LOWEST PIPE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES. ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE ONES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATIONS SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT -LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 19. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO ENSURE THAT ALL RUNOFF WFFHIN CONSTRUCTION AREAS MEETS ALL LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER QUALITY PRIOR TO DISCHARGE INTO RECEMNG WATER BODIES. WATER DISCHARGED FROM THE SITE SHALL BE MONITORED BY CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NPDES PERMIT. AT A MINIMUM, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FEATURES SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED TO COMPLY WITH THE ECOLOGY MANUAL: a. THE TURBIDITY OF THE SURFACE WATER LEAVING THE SITE (AS MEASURED UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM OF THE WORK AREA) SHALL NOT EXCEED 5 NTU OVER BACKGROUND TURBIDITY WHERE THE BACKGROUND TURBIDITY IS 50 NTLI OR LESS, OR SHALL NOT EXCEED A 10 PERCENT INCREASE IN THE TURBIDITY WHERE THE BACKGROUND TURBIDITY IS MORE THAN 50 NTU. b. PH SHALL BE WITHIN THE RANGE OF 6.5 TO 8.5 (FRESHWATER) OR 7.0 TO 8.5 (MARINE WATER) WITH A HUMAN -CAUSED VARIATION WITHIN A RANGE OF LESS THAN 0.2 UNITS. c. THERE SHALL BE NO VISIBLE SHEEN OF PETROLEUM PRODUCT ON THE RECEIVING WATERS AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT. 20. ALL RUNOFF WATER FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AREA SHALL BE COLLECTED VIA SLOPES, SWALES, SUMPS OR OTHER METHODS, AND ROUTED OR PUMPED TO A TEMPORARY STORAGE POND OR TANK PRIOR TO DISCHARGE FROM THE SITE IN ORDER TO DETERMINE IF TREATMENT IS REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL REGULARLY INSPECT PONDS, TANKS AND SUMPS AND REMOVE SEDIMENT TO ENSURE THAT POND VOLUME IS NOT REDUCED DUE TO SEDIMENT DEPOSITION. STORMWATER MEETING THE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS SHALL BE DISCHARGED TO THE DUWAMISH RIVER VIA THE EXISTING OUTFALL SHOWN ON SHEET T2. 21. CONSTRUCTION RUNOFF TREATMENT/DISPOSAL OPTIONS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO MEET ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED AND DESIGNED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAY INCLUDE: a. SETTLING IN A TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND OR PORTABLE TREATMENT TANK. b. TRANSPORT OFF SITE IN VEHICLE, SUCH AS A VACUUM FLUSH TRUCK, FOR LEGAL DISPOSAL IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT POLLUTE STATE WATERS. c. ONSITE TREATMENT USING CHEMICALLY ENHANCED SAND FILTERS OR OTHER SUITABLE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (TACKIFIERS SHALL NOT BE USED ON AREAS WHERE RUNOFF WILL BE COLLECTED FOR CHEMICAL TREATMENT). 22. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ANY ADDITIONAL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE SELECTED TREATMENT/ DISPOSAL OPT1ON(S). 23. CLEAN, NON -TURBID STORMWATER RUNOFF SHALL BE CONVEYED AND DISCHARGED TO NE DUWAMISH RIVER PROVIDED THE FLOW DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION OR FLOODING OF RECEIVING WATERS. THESE CLEAN WATERS SHOULD NOT BE ROUTED THROUGH STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS. 24. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REQUIREMENTS, WASTE WATER FROM CEMENT CONCRETE, MASONRY, OR ASPHALT CONCRETE CUTTING OR POURING OPERATIONS SHALL NOT BE DISCHARGED INTO STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS OR SURFACE WATERS. CUTTING AND POURING OPERATIONS, IN ADDITION TO STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM FRESHLY POURED CONCRETE, INCREASE THE PH OF WASTE WATER. THEREFORE FILTERING PRIOR TO DISCHARGE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. WASTE WATER OR STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM FRESHLY POURED CONCRETE THAT DOES NOT MEET THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY'S REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE EITHER CHEMICALLY TREATED FOR PH OR COLLECTED USING A VACUUM OR PUMP AND PROPERLY DISPOSED. IF THE CONTRACTOR CHOOSES TO DISPOSE OF THE WATER, THE WATER SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN A MANNER THAT MEETS ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS. IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CONTAMINATED WITH SEDIMENT AND GRIT FROM CUTTING, PLANING OR PULVERIZING OPERATIONS SHALL BE CLEANED TO PREVENT CONTAMINANTS FROM ENTERING THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS OR SURFACE WATERS DURING RAIN. 25. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES ON SITE SHALL ONLY OCCUR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PREVENTIVE MEASURES IN THE SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURES PLAN (SPCCP) AND THE SPECIFICATIONS. 26. CONCRETE TRUCK CHUTES, PUMPS AND INTERNALS, HAND TOOLS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SCREEDS, SHOVELS, RAKES, FLOATS AND TROWELS SHALL BE WASHED OUT ONLY INTO FORMED AREA AWAKING INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE OR ASPHALT. 27. UNUSED CONCRETE REMAINING IN THE TRUCK AND PUMP SHALL BE RETURNED TO THE ORIGINATING BATCH PLANT FOR RECYCLING. 28. EQUIPMENT NAT CANNOT BE EASILY MOVED, SUCH AS CONCRETE PAVERS, SHALL ONLY BE WASHED IN AREAS THAT DO NOT DIRECTLY DRAIN TO NATURAL OR CONSTRUCTED STORMWATER CONVEYANCES. 29. UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, STABIUZE ALL DISTURBED AREAS, REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL SEDIMENT ACCUMULATED BEHIND OR WITHIN BMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS. 30. WHEN A TEMPORARY EROSION OR SEDIMENT CONTROL FEATURE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE THE MEASURE OR MEASURES. 31. REUSE OF A CONTROL MEASURE MAY BE ACCEPTABLE IF: a. THE MEASURE OR DEVICE HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY CLEANED OF ALL DEBRIS; b. THE MEASURE OR DEVICE IS FREE OF TEARS, HOLES, OR OTHER DAMAGE, AND c. THE MEASURE IS VERIFIED IT CAN PERFORM AS INTENDED. 33. WITHIN 30 DAYS FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF WORK, REMOVE TEMPORARY BMPS AND RESTORE SITE AS INDICATED ON NE DRAWINGS. 34. FAILURE TO MAINTAIN TESC MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE MAY RESULT IN THE WORK BEING PERFORMED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE DIRECTOR (CM( OF TUKWILA) AND ASSESSED AS A LIEN AGAINST THE PROPERTY WHERE SUCH FACILITIES ARE LOCATED. ANY SUCH UENS WILL BE PASSED ON TO HE CONTRACTOR. 35. SUBSTANTIAL PENALTIES ALSO EXIST FOR FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF THE NPDES PERMIT. ANY SUCH FINES OR PENALTIES INCURRED BY THE OWNER AS PERMITTEE WHICH ARE DUE TO THE ACTIONS OR LACK THEREOF BY THE CONTRACTOR, SHALL BE DEDUCTED FROM THE CONTRACT PAYMENTS OR RECOVERED IN THE FORM OF UEN AGAINST NE CONTRACTOR. ANY DEDUCTIONS FROM THE CONTRACT PAYMENTS WILL BE MADE AT THE TIME OF THE NEXT PROGRESS PAYMENT AND MAY BE DEDUCTED FROM ANY CONTRACT ITEM. 36. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR THE DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE FEATURES, AND SHALL WITH THE DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL, REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT DEPOSITION RESULTING FROM PROJECT -RELATED WORK. 37. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE FOR AND COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING: a. NOTIFY THE TUKWILA PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING INSTALLATION OF TESC MEASURES. b. OBTAIN PERMISSION IN WRITING FROM THE TUKWILA PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO MODIFYING THE TESC PLAN. c. MAINTAIN ALL ROAD DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, STORM WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, CONTROL MEASURES AND OTHER FACILITIES AS IDENTIFIED IN THE TESC PLAN. d. REPAIR ANY SILTATION OR EROSION DAMAGES TO ADJOINING PROPERTIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES. e. INSPECT ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED TESC INSPECTION SCHEDULE AND MAKE NEEDED REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY. REASON BY APPROVE) DATE REASON 61 APPROVED DATE BOE//VG ACCEPTABILITY THIS DEEM AND/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVE) APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SLS AO LNCINLLN JG 022/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBRRE RECEIVED 'APR 0920101 TY DEVELOPNMCOMMUENT 111 fit, CK CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE TESC NOTES CHECKED 60 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED TM.E DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CML MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET T1 JOS NO. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG N0. 2 -YD -T1 1 3 0 E E 8 8 8 E B ns Pacanovsky, Donna — 2/1B/2009 11:40 TEMPORARY STORAGE TANKS AND TREATMENT FACILITIES AREA NOTES 3, 4 AND 5) • DISCHARGE TREATED WATER , TO EXISTING OUTFALL TO DUWAMISH 01.111.511M.1141. nromT 01.1.n611 mnwu unreal TEMPORARY STORAGE POND • (LINED). TYP (SEE NOTES 3, 5 AND 6) PUMP TO TEMPORARY TREATMENT FACILITIES, TYP (SEE NOTE 8) CONTRACTOR STAGING AREA (SEE NOTE 4) LLbCIN LJ DEMO LINE TEMPORARY CURB TEMPORARY PUMP 0 1..S 1.SEE SHEET T1 FOR ADDI11ONAL TESC NOTES. 2. DEMOLRION OF EXISTING CONCRETE OR ASPHALT PAVING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE TIMED AND CONDUCTED IN STAGES TO MINIMIZE SOIL EXPOSURE. NO MORE THAN 5 ACRES OF THE SITE MAY BE EXPOSED/DISTURBED AT ANY GNEN TIME. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT AVAILABLE STORAGE VOLUMES IN THE TEMPORARY PONDS AND ANY TEMPORARY STORAGE TANKS SHALL BE ADEQUATE TO STORE THE 10 -YEAR STORM VOLUME (WITH A 2:1 SAFETY FACTOR) GENERATED FROM THE EXPOSED ON-SITE AREA AT ANY GIVEN TIME (E.G., MINIMUM 0.48 ACRE-FEET OF STORAGE PER ACRE EXPOSED). TEMPORARY STORAGE PONDS SHOWN WILL PROVIDE APPROXIMATELY 2.44 ACRE-FEET OF STORAGE. SEE SHEET C654 FOR POND DIMENSIONS (SAME AS BIOSWALE DIMENSIONS). SEE TIR FOR BASIS FOR CALCULATION. j 4. CONTRACTOR STAGING AREA AND TEMPORARY STORAGE TANKS AND TREATMENT FACILITIES • AREA LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE ���`R ��` $ % APPROXIMATE. F��r��u R45. CONTRACTOR SHALL SIZE AND DESIGN ANY SETTLING OR TREATMENT SYSTEMS NEEDED IN ORDER TO MEET DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS AND STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. fT 6. TEMPORARY STORAGE PONDS SHALL BE LINED PRIOR TO USE FOR COLLECTION OF CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF. SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. STORAGE POND LININGS SHALL BE CLEANED FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION AND PRIOR TO USE AS PERMANENT BIOSWALES. SEE SHEET C654 FOR HDPE LINER NOTES. ANY DAMAGE TO THE LINER SHALL BE REPAIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. 117. DEWATERING WATER SHALL BE DISCHARGED TO THE SANITARY SEWER IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRIOR APPROVAL FROM BCA EHS AND KCDNR. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND APPROVALS. • CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE DISCHARGE W" LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH PERMITS AND WITH APPROVAL BY THE OWNER. EXISTING SEWER IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH AND EAST • SIDES OF THE PROJECT SITE. 8.• 'TEMPORARY PUMP SIZES ARE AS FOLLOWS (SEE TIR FOR DETAILED CALCULATIONS BASED ON THE 10 -YEAR EVENT): CENTRAL 52 HP (3430 GPM) NORTH: 21 HP (900 GPM) SOUTH: 1 HP (135 GPM) 9. INSTALL TEMPORARY CURB ALONG WEST SIDE OF PROJECT AREA AS SHOWN TO PREVENT UNTREATED CONSTRUCTION RUNOFF FROM LEAVING THE SITE. 111F -1111▪ 11111171111111111110 a111111__ 1 M1, iu uuui•a�uiUliI�iIIUI11 I r.1'1 1 III l IfI'1'I'F I'I'IJ I'I I'I 1 1 1 1 1.1 1. l. U .1.1.1.1. 1.1.1.. 11.1.1.1 °I . 1.1.11 11.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1.1.11.11.1 r_rzErio,„ '10r pm • 1=1.114'mml / Ln . Sii■n SW VINCI DISCHARGE DEWATERING WATER TO EXISTING SEWER (SEE NOTE 7) SEM EAST 11410.4 ar Tam CAST .wmui ... Sam REVISION APPROVED 001E SO/ REVISION Err APPROVED CONCEPTUAL TESC PLAN SCALE: 1'=B0' N DUE ce;Litinsw,Aw ACCEPTABILITY 1146 DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY OEM. DATE DRAWN SL ... AO JG .02 16 09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTITLE CONCEPTUAL TESC PLAN RECEIVED tAPR 092010' COMMUNITY 80 DEVELOP[NT 160 1 =80 -0 I — — — n1 Scale Feet CURRENT REVISION MEIN - DATE NG 02/16/09 APPROVED DP APPROVED EMS DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING CIVIL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD SHEET T2 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG NO. 2 -YD -T2 g — Copyright 2009 R. W. Beck A E • - x i 6 6ns 0 i 8 2/1B/2009 11:10:50 AM — 2/18/2009 11:10 CO N • C-1 (BY OTHERS) GROUND NEUTRAL AT THIS POINT —3 6 MP STATION TRICAL PAP ELS SITE PLAN NE PUMP STATION NONE NOTE 3 "-- FEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY CI -2"C PVC (BY OTHERS) / 30A 30A BUS MIN T T l CBI B2 20A / 20 5A 2P C2 -3/4"C RGS-31112, 11120 C3 -2"C PVC (CABLE BY MANUF.) C6 -1"C PVC -9#14 1.9A I PANELBOARD H2 600V RATED 277/480V, 30, 4W SERVICE ENTRANCE RATED w�C4-3/4"C RGS-2#12, 1#120 3kVA 480-120, 10, 2W C-3, C-6 PJMP STATIOV E.ECTRICAL FANELS C-1 (BY OTHERS) COVERED WAII.K,IAY GROUND NEUTRAL AT THIS POINT 1 SITE PLAN SE PUMP STATION NONE 30A BUS MIN CB1 20A NOTE 3 j— FEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY C1 -2"C PVC (BY OTHERS) ) 30A C2 -3/4"C RGS-3#12, 1#12G PANELBOARD H3 600V RATED 277/480V. 30, 4W SERVICE ENTRANCE RATED —3/4°C RGS-2#12, 1fl12G 3kVA 480-120, 10, 2W C5 -3/4"C RGS-2#10, 1#12G OL C5 -3/4"C RGS-21110, 1#12G C3 -2"C. PVC (CABLE BY MANUF.) C3 -2"C PVC (CABLE BY MANUF.) C6 -1"C PVC -9#14 C6 -1"C PVC -91114 PANEL L1 CIRCUITS 1-15A CONVENIENCE OUTLET 2—PUMP CONTROL PANEL PANEL L1 CIRCUITS 1-15A CONVENIENCE OUTLET 2—PUMP CONTROL PANEL SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM NE PUMP STATION SCALD NONE GROUND NEUTRAL AT THIS POINT 1 C,1 (BY OTHERS) D W Q 0 C-3, C-6 nnnnnnn SITE PLAN S PUMP STATION NONE PUMP STATION ELECTRICAL PANELS NOTE 3 j— FEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY C1 -2"C PVC (BY OTHERS) C2 -3/4"C RGS-3#12, 1#12G PANELBOARD H4 600V RATED 277/480V. 30. 4W SERVICE ENTRANCE RATED C4 -3/4"C RGS-2#12, 1#12G 3kVA 480-120, 10, 2W 7.2A SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM SE PUMP STATION SCALE! NONE C5 -3/4"C RGS-2#10, 1j120 PANEL L1 CIRCUITS 1-15A CONVENIENCE OUTLET 2—PUMP CONTROL PANEL SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM S PUMP STATION SCALE, NONE sYM REVISION er APPROVED DATE SYu REVISION 86 APPROVED DATE g)LArAtezAw ACCEPTABILITY THIS DESIGN MED/OR SPECIFICATION 6 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE -DRAWN- SL 16111MRD RAWWSLS RNLINLLN DP 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUERERE GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL ELECTRICAL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, THE LOCAL CODE JURISDICTION AND STANDARD DOCUMENT D38201 AND ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS. D38202. 2. SEE DRAWING E-1 FOR ELECTRICAL PANEL ELEVATIONS, CONDUIT SCHEDULE AND INSTALLATION DETAILS. 3. POWER -TO PUMP STATION FROM EXISTING POWER SOURCE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. COORDINATE WITH OWNER FOR ACCESS AND SCHEDULE SERVICE INTERRUPTION. 3/4°=1'-0" RECEIVED 'APR 092010 ITY DEVELOPMENT 0 1 2 3 Scale Feet (I( CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL DATE CCHECKED 02/16/09 APPROVED J8 APPR0VE0 J NE, SE & S PUMP STATION ELECTRICAL DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING PLANT 2 YARD ELECTRICAL MASTER sNEar E2 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBMITTAL DWG NO. 2—YD—E2 Copyright 2089 R. W. BeckInc. E Jtl e 0 E st gi A 8 8 cs E 0 0 Q TEMP FEEDER (BY OTHERS) TEMP PUMP PANELBOARD CABLES BY MANUF. HYDROMATIC CONTROL PANEL C1 (BY OTHERS) • SITE PLAN SOUTH TEMP PUMP & 12" GATE ACTUATOR SCALD NONE NOTE 3 FEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY TEMP FEEDER CABLE PROVIDED BY OTHERS TEMP 277/480V I \ 20A I —PUMP PANELBOARD TEMP CABLES PROVIDED BY MANUF. 1.8A SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM FOR SOUTH TEMP PUMP STATION SCALD NONE NOTE 3 FEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY r.,C1-2'C PVC (BY OTHERS) 277/480V o/ 20A I HYDROMATIC CONTROL PANEL SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM FOR 12" GATE ACTUATOR SCALE: NONE HYDROMATIC CONTROL PANEL Cl (BY OTHERS) TEMP FEEDER (BY OTHERS) TEMP PUMP PANELBOARD • O SITE PLAN CENTRAL TEMP PUMP & 24" GATE ACTUATOR SCALD NONE NOTE 3 IrFEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY TEMP FEEDER CABLE PROVIDED BY OTHERS TEMP 277/480V `125A PUMP PANELBOARD 1 TEMP CABLES PROVIDED BY MANUF. 77A . SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM FOR CENTRAL TEMP PUMP STATION SCALD NONE NOTE 3 flllli WER SUP FEEDER FROM YEXISTING POPL C1-2'C PVC (BY OTHERS) 277/480V HYDROMATIC 1 0/ 20A I CONTROL PANEL SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM FOR 24" GATE ACTUATOR SCALD NONE NEMA 3R ACTUATOR & TEMP PUMP ENCLOSURE NOTE 2 DETAIL ENCLOSURE rTh .SCALE: NONE GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL ELECTRICAL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, THE LOCAL CODE JURISDICTION AND STANDARD DOCUMENT D38201 AND ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS, D38202. 2. SEE DRAWING E—I FOR INSTALLATION DETAILS. 3. POWER TO GATE ACTUATORS AND TEMP PUMP STATION FROM EXISTING POWER SOURCE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. COORDINATE WITH OWNER FOR ACCESS AND SCHEDULE SERVICE INTERRUPTION. TEMP FEEDER (BY OTHERS) TEMP PUMP PANELBOARD ci (BY OTHERS) HYDROMATIC CONTROL PANEL CABLES BY MANUF. SITE PLAN NORTH TEMP PUMP & 24" GATE ACTUATOR SCALD NONE NOTE 3 FEEDER FROM EXISTING POWER SUPPLY TEMP FEEDER CABLE PROVIDED BY OTHERS TEMP 277/480V r � 30A PUMP PANELBOARD TEMP CABLES PROVIDED BY MANUF. 34A SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM FOR NORTH TEMP PUMP STATION SCALD NONE NOTE 3 FEEDER =EXISTING POWER SUPPLY Cl—2-CPVC (BY OTHERS) 277/480V HYDROMATIC I o) 20A I CONTROL PANEL SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM FOR 24" GATE ACTUATOR SCALD NONE REYIDON er APPROVED DATE REVISION e APPROVED ce;LArAsr,isw ACCEPTABILITY T116 DESIGN AND/0R SPECIFICATION I5 APPROVED APPROVED BY DEPT. DATE DRAWN SL AOE� 02/16/09 TWCNiEEH DP 02/16/09 JBCKED 02/16/09 02/16/09 APPROVED APPROVED SWOREACTUATORS & TEMP PUMP STATION ELECTRICAL T DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING ELECTRICAL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD CURRENT REVISION DATE SHEET E3 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. DWG NO. 2—YD—E3 — Copyright 2009 R W BeckInc 480V-30-60 HERTZ POWER SUPPLY ,B 1 480V, 3 PHASE Lz POWER SUPPLY M1 OL. 1 _ 3 oJx,,o T1 ✓ -oma _ - T2 .4 PUMP � A MTR. of po--- T3 (1-1/2 A) Y FUSE (3A) ISR.1 c 1°.0. ,1 TRANSFORMER 150VA 115V ISR.2 01 Io c n.o. FUSE 161 (3A) LR 1i 9 ISR.3 Fo c n.o. OFF o HAND 0 AUTO MTR.1 13W14 PUMP 1 RUN •0. HEAT SENSOR OL.1 ■ 9 10 • CI) ■ •• • • ©• LOWLEVEL 'c'>>1' 13 W14 HIGH LEVEL LR 12 4 HR 12 8 0 no nc o 0 120VAC SEAL FAILURE INPUT 09 010 SEAL FAIL 1 i:<4" PUMP 1 SEAL PROBE FLSR. 0• mmm®mta =Eamon G1 AC AC NCNOC ISR.1 ISR.2 ISR.3 [GI IHILI 101 IGI IHILI 101 101 IHILI 101 CI17-11-CIl.I/ vL1�''I I-LIl� L1� v 1 2 5ki 3�4 7�8 NON -HAZARDOUS AREA HAZARDOUS AREA LS 1 (LOW LEVEL) L LS 3 LS 2 (ON) (OFF) LS - 4 (HIGH LEVEL) FLOAT SWITCHES (TYP.) CUSTOMER SUPPLIED SEAL -OFFS (TYP.) INSTALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 504 OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE TYPICAL PUMP CONTROL DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE L3• — - - CUSTOMER CONNECTION 17 18 11 24VAC/30mA MAX U1 V1 W1 F2 2-Y4 D -F4 VAC - 24VDC o -o rvn F3 BRD. PWR. E1 COMMAND SIGNAL A7 I-1 POT-1 1E2t E2 T ^ T (V +) (V +) (V -) (V -) 1 CT 8--� 1 R2 R3 • it I, L 11111 I I A22 I 1,1 10 9 LOCIAL OFF REMOTE o TI X 0To I 1 1 10 01 0 1 o Sok REMOTE SEAL IN C REMOTE SEAL IN 0 LOCAL SEAL IN C LOCAL SEAL IN 0 BLINK R OFF W S2 (V +) ISS1 OPEN .--0 0 STOP �a_Lo CLOSE —0 0 (V +)s-, NOTE 5 LSO 7 ® LSC 6 •` CLOSE LSC 5 LSO TORQUE OPEN —0 L4 LSO 7 T50 3 TOROUS CLOSE E LSO 8 LSC 5 TSC 1 C (MID TRAVEL) T�0' TSC TH PC • 8 OPEN FAULT STATUS 1 • 11 K1 K2 FAULT CUSTOMER CONNECTION CUSTOMER CONNECTIONS XK El INPUT COMMAND SIGNAL CUSTOMER FAULT USE STATUS 24VAC "I I U 11 V 11 W 11U21 V21W2I 1 1 2 1314 1 5 16 17 18 19 1101111121131141 611 1 1191 III II �� I 11111 1 1 1 1 1 1 zI I I I I 1 1 I 0 1 1 1 �I 1111 III I oIrII 1 1- 3 PHASE SUPPLY PWR. OPTINAL CONTROLS 4-20mA MAIN (AUTO 0 o CL°SE a 00 OPEN REMOTE LOCAL COMMON SELECTOR SWITCH CUSTOMER LSC LSO WIRING 9 10 11 12 Amo©mmommmr TYPICAL ACTUATOR CONTROL DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE 60 APPROVED GYM RE -VISION B APPROVED D11E g;LA WArA g ACCEPTABILI1Y THIS DESIGN MND/OR SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED DRAWN JRR DRECEO:D AO LNGINktN DP JBE APPROVED BY DEPT. OATS 14 15 16 LEGEND A2 LOGIC BOARD A7 POSRIONER BOARD A8 POWER SUPPLY A20 SIGNAL AND CONTROL BOARD A22 REMOTE COMMAND BOARD F1 -F2 PRIMARY FUSES H HEATER K1 -K2 REVERSING CONTACTOR K9 FAULT STATUS RELAY LSC (WSR) LIMIT SWITCH CLOSE LSO (WOL) UNIT SWITCH OPEN M MOTOR PC PHASE CORRECTION POT POTENTIOMETER S1 SW. -TORQUE SEATING, CLOSE S2 SW. -SEAL -IN, BLINKER, TORQUE FAULT S3 SW. -TORQUE SEATING, OPEN SS SELECTOR SWITCH TH MOTOR THERMAL SW. (AUTO -RESET) TSC (DSR) TORQUE SWITCH CLOSE TS0 (DOL) TORQUE SWITCH OPEN (I•) CLOSE CONTACTS (--) OPEN CONTACTS VALVEPOSITION OPEN INTERMEDIATE CLOSE TSC 1 2 TSO 3 4 LSC 5 6 LSO 7 8 LSC 9 10 LSO 11 12 E SYM. DESCRIPTION SYM. DESCRIPTION UGHTS INVERTER El CUSTOMER TERMINATION AND GATE CONTROL RELAY SOLDER LINKS NOTES: 1. — - - — FIELD WIRING BY OTHERS. 2. PAIRED SWITCHES WITHIN BRACKETS MUST HAVE SAME VOLTAGE. 3. ACTUATOR DRAWING SHOWS THE UNIT IN THE MID-POSITION. 4. FAULT STATUS K9 SHOWN IN FAULT CONDITION. • FAULT STATUS INCLUDES: (COLLECTIVE) - THERMAL OVERLOAD - LOSS OF PHASE - LOSS OF POWER - TORQUE SW. TRIP (MID -TRAVEL) 5. J1 -J3 SOLDER LINKS FOR LIGHTS ON IN MIO TRAVEL OR J2 -J4 SOLDER UNKS FOR LIGHTS ON AT END OF TRAVEL. 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 02/16/09 SUBTOIE PUMP STATION CONTROL DIAGRAMS RECEIVED APR 0 9 2010 G u' 1TY CURRENT REVISION SYMBOL APPROVED JB TILE DEMOLITION OF 2-4X BUILDING ELECTRICAL MASTER PLANT 2 YARD E4 JOB N0. 586456-02 COMP N0. 95% SUBTMITTAL OWC N0. 2 -YD -E4 C Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director • City of Tukwila • Jim Haggerton, Mayor Sent via email to mark.d.clement@boeing.com (no hard copy to follow) NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION April 20, 2010 Mr. Mark Clement PO Box 3707 MC 1W-09 Seattle, WA 98104 RE: Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Project E10-010 Dear Mr. Clement, Your application for SEPA Environmental Review is considered complete on April 20, 2010 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. As the next step, the City will coordinate the required public notice for your project. Please contact Julie at FastSigns (206-757-2110) to prepare your sign. The City will provide FastSigns with the necessary posting information. The posting and notice of land use application will occur by May 4, 2010 and continue until the date of all decisions are final and appeal periods have been exhausted. Upon posting, the public comment period will start and will continue for fourteen days. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. Your project is now under review with various City departments. Feel free to call me at 206.433.7162 or via email at lmiranda@ci.tukwila.wa.us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lynn Miranda Senior Planner LM Page 1 of 1 04/20/2010 W.:I UsersILYNNMISEPA 20101BoeingIPlant 2 SEPT NOC.DOC 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Lynn Miranda - Land Use Sign From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Lynn Miranda Fast Signs -- Attn: Julie Signs 04/20/2010 9:12 AM Land Use Sign • Hi Julie, Page 1 of 1 Mark Clement of the Boeing Company requires a standard public notice sign. Please inform me when the sign is installed. SITE ADDRESS: 7755 E. Marginal Way S., Tukwila, WA 98188 Here's the sign info: PROJECT NAME: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition & Site Development Improvements FILE NUMBERS: E10-010 PERMIT ACTION: SEPA Environmental Review Determination Please post before Monday May 3, 2010. A map is attached. Thank you, Lynn Lynn Miranda, AICP, Senior Planner 206.433.7162 - City of Tukwila, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday -Wednesday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm APlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail file://C:\temp\XPGrpWise\4BCD6FFCtuk-mail6300-po 100172667711 A74C 1\GW }0000... 04/20/2010 Locate sign here immiimmin 417 ft CityGIS N Copyright O 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digdal Map Products. • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development RECEIVED Alm "0 Lu10 TUKWILA PUBLIC WOAKS File Number t.i O f 0 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: Building Planning Public Work Fire Dept. Police Dept. 1►;q Parks/Rec Project: Improvements Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Address: 7755 E. Marginal Way S, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date transmitted: 20 April 2010 Response requested by: 4 May 2010 Staff coordinator: Lynn Miranda Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) na -F0 deo sLutx, %Lci Souv►-d r ow 20( bg9 -4oS8 - ma/ 0 ; Coto .° ;ASCI O rp N 0 W j -v 1 ) (, 0 kv ei 9 i Q, t SQA/t.ccuAA.76?-e-.A L c,6N t. c' I 15 re,491A;626,4 )19y- ,44W, o r i te, (, ,,, 04s rl o o -da reS No tvl,.. ' i✓1Q ` b at,Lc.e, 6vS ti P 1 fi' /4120, Plan` beck date: i 2 'p Comments prepared by: Uc.)`% Update date: " ° _Sed • • CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION CENTER 1270 Sixth Avenue South, MS/QS, Seattle, WA 98134 Phone: (206) 684-2732 Fax: (206) 684-2686 Email: construction.coord@metrokc.gov The Construction Information Center (CIC) receives construction information from state, county and dty jurisdictions, developers, contractors and utility companies and then notifies various sections throughout King County Metro Transit. The CIC works with city engineers and project managers, including foremen and crew chiefs, to plan for and mitigate the impacts to transit service operations caused by on-site construction scheduling and work issues. Throughout King County construction projects often impact bus service operations and bus zone facilities. The CIC provides timely construction information to the various transit departments within Metro to lessen the impact on scheduled bus service, to keep customers informed and to maintain operations continuity. Construction impact information is crucial to transit operations. The following notifications are required for all sidewalk or street construction work -taking place in any public transit right-of-way. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULING • Pre -construction Phase: Provide at least two weeks advance notice of scoping/pre- construction meetings, phase changes and re -starts of maturing projects. CIC involvement does not supersede or substitute for the necessity of Transit Planning decisions in these meetings. • During Construction: The CIC is most active in assessment and mitigation of the impacts of construction on transit services and the riding public. As long-term projects mature, re- start, or during shorter term construction, Metro requests a two week notice on large projects and a five day notice on other work that may impact usage of bus zones, bus • shelters, bus signs & posts, electrical trolley overhead wires and any other transit facilities or equipment. • Immediate Impacts: Unforeseen problems may occur during construction work, which will have an immediate impact to transit buses or facilities. In this case, immediately call the CIC for a rapid, coordinated response to an urgent situation. STREET USE CONSIDERATIONS • Buses: Transit buses have a larger turning radius and are wider than most vehicles, including freight trucks. Clearance width is approximately 11 feet. Turning radius requirements will vary and must be evaluated on-site with a Metro service supervisor and a project foreman. • HOV lanes: (High Occupancy Vehicle) restricted lanes may not be used during peak traffic hours, usually 6 to 9 AM and 3 to 6 PM. HOV lane hours restrictions include downtown streets where city sidewalk signage reads "METRO ONLY" --- even when parking meters have been covered with yellow or red hoods. Read sidewalk signage for METRO ONLY HOURS as City Truck Enforcement Officers enforce HOV lane violations. Tickets cost $500.00. • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number Ei0-oro LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM 1%'Planning TO: (I i :uilding Public Works Fire Dept. Police Dept. 1►-�1 Parks/Rec Project: `--- ' Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Improvements Address: 7755 E. Marginal Way S, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date transmitted: 20 April 2010 Response requested by: 4 May 2010 Staff coordinator: Lynn Miranda Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) Plan check date Q Comments Update date: G �_�O prepared by: TO: Lei • • City of Tukwila , Department of Community Development File Number EIO-oro LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM Building Planning XPublic Works rJ Police Dept. 1► -Q Parks/Rec Project: Boeing Plant 2 Demolition and Site Development Improvements Address: 7755 E. Marginal Way S, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date transmitted: 20 April 2010 Response requested by: 4 May 2010 Staff coordinator: Lynn Miranda Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) NO `ACW-C ryv; O� lS A-\ �`/v�1N....�S \.s\\\*1� Yea a \4„ J,)c7�► ask Cir --40 TvRw\q �� �.r Cw•A , a vc7^ovv. A bo Lob- 515 - 4e{ a� Plan check date: k\gyp CommentsUpdate prepared by �(1.\c5 k date: