HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit D06-223 - City View Estates - Lot 10CITY VIEW ESTATES
13040 34 LN S
EXPIRED 06 -03 -08
D06 -223
Parcel No.: 7359600654
Address: 13040 34 LN S TUKW
Suite No:
City Tukwila
Tenant:
Name: CITY VIEW ESTATES, LOT 10
Address: 13040 34 LN S, TUKWILA WA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206 -431 -3670
Fax: 206 -431 -3665
Web site: ci.tukwila.wa.us
Owner:
Name: TOSHIKAWA TERRANCE
Address' 2416 32 AV W, SEATTLE WA, 98199
Phone:
Contact Person:
Name: GEORGE K. HIRAI
Address 15615 NE 62 CT, REDMOND WA, 98052
Phone: 206 786 -2981
Contractor:
Name: BAZALA INC
Address: 2416 32ND AVE W, SEATTLE, WA 98199 -1031
Phone: 206 286 -3574
Contractor License No: BAZALI *163PR
doe: IBC - PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
**continued on next page**
Permit Number: D06 -223
Issue Date: 10/04/2006
Permit Expires On: 04/02/2007
Expiration Date: 01/11/2008
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
CONSTRUCTION OF 2018 SF SFR WITH 392 SF ATTACHED GARAGE.
PUBLIC WORKS ACTIVIES INCLUDE: TESC, LAND ALTERING, STORM DRAINAGE, DRIVEWAY ACCESS, AND
UNDERGROUNDING OF POWER.
WATER DIST. 125 & VAL -VUE SEWER DIST.
Value of Construction: $191,043.10 Fees Collected: $4,588.20
Type of Fire Protection: SPRINKLERS International Building Code Edition: 2003
Type of Construction: VB Occupancy per IBC: 22
D06 -223 Printed: 10-04 -2006
Public Works Activities:
Channelization / Striping: N
Curb Cut / Access / Sidewalk / CSS: Y
doc: IBC - PERMIT
City orgTukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206 - 431 - 3670
Fax: 206 - 431 - 3665
Web site: c /.tukwila.wa.us
Fire Loop Hydrant: N Number: 0 Size (Inches): 0
Flood Control Zone: N
Hauling: N Start Time: End Time:
Land Altering: Y Volumes: Cut 20 c.y. Fill 20 c.y.
Landscape Irrigation: N
Moving Oversize Load: N Start Time: End Time:
Sanitary Side Sewer: N
Sewer Main Extension: N Private: Public:
Storm Drainage: Y
Street Use: N Profit: N Non - Profit: N
Water Main Extension: N Private: Public:
Water Meter: N
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
Permit Number: 006 -223
Issue Date: 10/0412006
Permit Expires On: 04/02/2007
Permit Center Authorized Signature: /12— J14U$_fr\ t J Date: [DIM lilt
I hereby certify that I have read and a i d is permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of law and
ordinances governing this work will b mp with, whether specified herein or not.
The granting of this . ermit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local laws
regulating constr - ion or the performance of work. I am authorized to sign and obtain this development permit.
Sign -ea - I i,. DateOet DL
Print Name: . ,rye r_ 1H I ab-I
This permit shall become null and void if the work is not commenced within 180 days from the date of issuance, or if the work is
suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days from the last inspection.
D06 -223 Printed: 10-04-2006
rt7YOF 1U
• "`IIU 4ITY L -
-_
*.ENTL.
1 981b
1: ***BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS***
PERMIT CONDITIONS
PERMIT CENTER
Parcel No.: 7359600654 Permit Number: D06 -223
Address: 13040 34 LN S TUKW Status: ISSUED
Suite No: Applied Date: 06/1212006
Tenant: CITY VIEW ESTATES, LOT 10 Issue Date: 10/04/2006
2: No changes shall be made to the approved plans unless approved by the design professional in responsible charge and the
Building Official.
3: All mechanical work shall be inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the City of Tukwila Permit Center
(206/431- 3670).
4: All permits, inspection records, and approved plans shall be at the job site and available to the inspectors prior to
start of any construction. These documents shall be maintained and made available until final inspection approval is
granted.
5: Truss shop drawings shall be provided with the shipment of trusses delivered to the job site. Truss shop drawings shall
bear the seal and signature of a Washington State Professional Engineer. Shop drawings shall be maintained on the site
and available to the building inspector for inspection purposes.
6: All construction shall be done in conformance with the approved plans and the requirements of the International
Building Code or International Residential Code, International Mechanical Code, Washington State Energy Code,
7: Notify the City of Tukwila Building Division prior to placing any concrete. This procedure is in addition to any
requirements for special inspection.
8: All wood to remain in placed concrete shall be treated wood.
9: There shall be no occupancy of a building until final inspection has been completed and approved by Tukwila building
inspector. No exception.
10: Manufacturers installation instructions shall be available on the job site at the time of inspection.
11: All construction noise to be in compliance with Chapter 8.22 of the City of Tukwila Municipal Code. A copy can be
obtained at City Hall in the office of the City Clerk.
12: Ventilation is required for all new rooms and spaces of new or existing buildings and shall be in conformance with the
International Building Code and the Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code.
13: Except for direct -vent appliances that obtain all combustion air directly from the outdoors; fuel -fired appliances
shall not be located in, or obtain combustion air from, any of the following rooms or spaces: Sleeping rooms,
bathrooms, toilet rooms, storage closets, surgical rooms.
14: Equipment and appliances having an ignition source and located in hazardous locations and public garages, PRIVATE
GARAGES, repair garages, automotive motor -fuel dispensing facilities and parking garages shall be elevated such that
the source of ignition is not less than 18 inches above the floor surface on which the equipment or appliance rests.
15: Water heaters shall be anchored or strapped to resist horizontal displacement due to earthquake motion. Strapping shall
be at points within the upper one -third and lower one -third of the water heater's vertical dimension. A minimum
doc: Conditions
006 -223 Printed: 10-04 -2006
CITY OFTUKV;IiA
DEPT. OF CO'. "'Ui:TY G; '.'"1 n,^P' -NT
6300 G..U'Ii,`...1! L.: C ,,
Tu ' A, Y;.i ti .�'.:
19: ***FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS * **
` PERMIT CENTER
distance of 4- inches shall be maintained above the controls with the strapping.
16: All plumbing and gas piping work shall be Inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the Cityof Tukwila
Permit Center.
17: All electrical work shall be inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the Washington State Department
of Labor and Industries (206/248- 6630).
18: VALIDITY OF PERMIT: The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of,
any violation of any of the provisions of the building code or of any other ordinances of the City of Tukwila. Permits
presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the code or other ordinances of the City of Tukwila
shall not be valid. The issuance of a permit based on construction documents and other data shall not prevent the
Building Official from requiring the correction of errors in the construction documents and other data.
20: The attached set of building plans have been reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau and are acceptable with the
following concerns:
21: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification
placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers
shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabet letters. Numbers shall be a
minimum of 4 Inches (102mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7mm). (IFC 505.1)
22: Every building shall be accessible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access roadways with all- weather driving
surface of not less than 20' wide and 13'6" vertical clearance. Access roads in excess of 150' shall be provided width
an approved turn - around area. Access shall be within 150' of all portions of the buildings. (City Ordinance #2047)(As
modified in letter dated 12/08/2004)
23: FIRE LANE - NO PARKING areas were declared at your complex because of less than minimum clearances for fire department
vehicle access. Fire apparatus access roads "Fire Lanes" shall be identified by painting the curb yellow and a four
inch wide line and block letters 18 inches high, painted in the lane, at fifty foot intervals, stating, "FIRE LANE NO
PARKING ", color to be bright yellow, or by the posting of signs stating, "FIRE LANE NO PARKING ", and painting the curb.
Signs shall be posted on or immediately next to the curb line or on the building. Signs shall be twelve inches by
eighteen inches and shall have letters and background of contrasting color, readily readable from at least a fifty foot
distance. Signs shall be spaced not further than fifty feet apart nor shall they be more than four feet from the
ground. (City Ordinance #2047) (Install signs and 4" yellow strip on access drive.)
24: All required hydrants and surface access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction. (IFC 503.1, 508.1)
25: Fire hydrants shall conform to American Water Works Association specifications C- 502 -54; it shall be compression type,
equipped with two 2 -1/2" N.S.T. hose ports and one 5" Storz pumper discharge port, and shall have a 1 -1/4" Pentagon
open -lift operating nut. (City Ordinance #2052)
26: Fire hydrant installation requires a Public Works permit.
27: The minimum fire flow and flow duration requirements for one- and two- family dwellings having a fire area which does
not exceed 3,600 square feet (344.5 m2) shall be 1,000 gallons per minute (3785.4 Lfmin.). Fire flow and flow duration
for dwellings having a fire area in excess of 3,600 square feet (344.5 m2) shall not be less than that specified in
Table A- III -A -1. Exception: A reduction in required fire flow of 50 percent, as approved by the chief, is allowed when
the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (IFC Appendix B105.1)
28: In lieu of a fire hydrant, an approved residential fire sprinkler system may be installed when vehicular travel
doc: Conditions
006 -223 Printed: 10 -04 -2006
CITY OF TUK:V /II A
DEPT OF CG'. ": "i "'fi Y C: \'-!.nnMENT
6303 C _ U 1 :, - 3 . "& n r YD.
TUK'.idA, V': 9 I .3
PERMIT CENTE9
distance from the nearest hydrant exceeds 150 feet.
29: Adequate ground ladder access to rescue windows shall be provided.
30: ***ELECTRICAL*** - IFC - NFPA 70 - NEC
31: Each circuit breaker shall be legibly marked to indicate it's purpose. (NEC 110 -22)
32: Any overlooked hazardous condition and /or violation of the adopted Fire or Building Codes does not imply approval of
such condition or violation.
33: These plans were reviewed by Marshal 51. If you have any questions, please call Tukwila Fire Prevention Bureau at
(206)575 -4407.
34: ***PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS***
35: Contractor shall notify Public Works Project Inspector Mr. Greg Villanueva at (206)433 -0179 of commencement and
completion of work at least 24 hours in advance.
36: Downspouts and driveway shall be connected to the proposed storm drainage system within 34th LN South. Provide catch
basins at connection points. Coordinate with Public Works Inspector in the field.
37: Work affecting traffic flows shall be closely coordinated with the City Utilities Inspector. Traffic Control Plans
shall be submitted to the Inspector for prior approval.
38: The City of Tukwila has an undergrounding ordinance requiring the power, telecommunications, and cable service lines be
underground from the point of connection on the pole to the house.
39: My material spilled onto any street shall be cleaned up immediately.
40: The site shall have permanent erosion control measures in place as soon as possible after final grading has been
completed and prior to the Final Inspection.
41: The Land Altering Permit Fee is based upon an estimated 20 cubic yards of cut and 20 cubic yards of fill. If the final
quantity exceeds this amount, the developer shall be required to recalculate the final quantity and pay the difference
in permit fee prior to the Final Inspection.
42: From October 1 through April 30, cover any slopes and stockpiles that are 3H:1 V or steeper and have a vertical rise of
10 feet or more and will be unworked for greater than 12 hours. During this time period, cover or mulch other disturbed
areas, if they will be unworked more than 2 days. Covered material must be stockpiled on site at the beginning of this
period. Inspect and maintain this stabilization weekly and immediately before, during and following storms.
43: From May 1 through September 30, inspect and maintain temporary erosion prevention and sediment at least monthly. All
disturbed areas of the site shall be permanently stabilized prior to final construction approval.
44: Downspouts, driveway, patio and drainage from other impervious areas shall be collected in an on -site storm drain
system. Drains shall be 4" minimum diameter, PVC schedule 40 or corrugated poly ethylene pipe with a minimum 1% slope
for gravity discharge to location approved by the Public Works Department. Downspouts shall not connect to footing
drains. Footing drain and downspouts may share a single discharge pipe downstream of the lowest footing drain.
45: Driveways shall comply with City residential standards. Driveway width shall be a 10' minimum and 20' maximum. Slope
shall be a maximum of 15%. Turning radii shall be a minimum of 5'.
doc: Conditions
D06 -223 Printed: 10 -04 -2006
CITY CF TIJYV!!I A
DEPT. CF CC'. '::U. :: TY D_ `.'-1! -rANT
63GJ r'
ILA, WA 91U3
I hereby certify that I have read these conditions and will comply with them as outlined. All provisions of law and ordinances
governing this work will be complied with, whether specified herein or not.
The granting of this permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provision of any other work or local laws
regulating construction or the performance of work.
Si Date:
Print Name: denc c,P
doc: Conditions
PERMIT CENTER
D06 -223 Printed: 10-04 -2006
CITY OF TUKWILA
Community Developmenapartment
Public Works Deparlmer/ ' '`k✓
Permit Center
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100
Tukwila, WA 98188
http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.115
J)
Applications and plans must be complete in order to be accepted for plan review.
Applications will not be accepted through the mail or by fax.
"Please Print"
1301-to t a( h
Tenant Name:
Property Owners Name: a VC j4- (2e 1 14r.
Mailing Address: E f fp f ce N r (0 4 e4- R. QAn runt
Site Address:
Company Name: 6 a A Lk ii-f 0
Mailing Address: / (0 3244 ri A-w W
Contact Person: (7r.61:2-&-r f" l /P -A I
E-Mail Address: 6CM A-E. 4 -/ /R.4 i e Contc4ST . Aim
Contractor Registration Number: #- 1 At A-1- I `:,3 PR
E -Mail Address:
i
Q: Uppliatiau\PoawApplicatimu On LineU-2006 - Permit Application doe
Revised: 42006
bit
King Co Assessor's Tax No.: 175 1 Cob 03 cci
b .C44 SO) Suite Number: Floor:
City
CON- q)( _9/
Name: 1r6 R.& IR -II- 1 Day Telephone: .2 7R6
Mailing Address: )51, LC NC a/ /7+t/a C P tkth 1A A- -- Is 0��
City State Zip
E -Mail Address: E /QJ�/ p�d4C11 sc7. Fax Number:
GENERAL✓ CONTRACTOR I FORMATION
,,(pin tractor Information for Mechanical Mg 4) for Plumbing and Gas Piping (pg S)y -
SEA -774 -c
City
Day Telephone:
Fax Number:
Expiration Date: /- //— U O
Company Name: hie15 /k/A- ( s,n1C14 L— r $-f(T &(( +4 ee Z)f p
City
New Tenant: ❑ .... Yes ❑ ..No
State
1.94-
state
Zip
gf
Zip
dot - 7111 -
TECT OF RECORD .‘- All plans musf be tvet stamped by Arcblteet of Preto
Company Name: be Si ErN II Al LI In I - ref')
Mailing Address: l /L / 3 VS T NC .St./,TE F City KENT (t) 4- 18 °3z
S tate Zi
Contact Person: �2/- -1 Rect —tJ 6 LC_ Day Telephone: 2c3 - �f7 �, .2. S 5 -
E -Mail Address: Fax Number: ,Z,. - $ - ',Co 2.e / p
INEEROFRE ORD - All 'plans must bet iaiampedby"Englneerofieeord'
Mailing Address: P. n .9 tt 55 9-/ 1 / ! t UC WA- i6 o IS
state zip
Contact Person: hi A-W- / NA- / bA-P--. Day Telephone: 1 -1 4 2.0 ` & I/ /- 41533 r
12 S. tSs, Fax Number: %l23 (j Lit
Page I of 6
Valuation of Project (contractor's bid price): $ coo
Scope of Work (please provide detailed information): i v
Lae
hAt erYt 1 f 'Y 1 , :
Existing Building Valuation: $
t (1 u t Aqo e/+
/-
kr dCO
Will there be new rack storage? ❑ .. Yes t] .. No (If yes, a separate permit and plan submittal will be required)
Provide All Baildiiig Areas in.Square Footage Below,
t!Fl
2Q Floor
3r" Floor
Floors .
cees ./
Attached Garage,
Detached Garage
Attached Carport ..
Detached Carport
Covered Deck
Uncovered Deck
In terior
Remodel
Addition tp ; �.:
Existing
'Structure
ai
PLANNING DIVISION:
Single - family building footprint (area of the foundation of all structures, plus any decks over 18 inches and overhangs greater than 18 inches) 1 I y
2c -i-
*For an Accessory dwelling, provide the following:
Lot Area (sq ft): Floor area of principal dwelling: Floor area for accessory dwelling:
*Provide documentation that shows that the principal owner lives in one of the dwellings as his or her primary residence.
Number of Parking Stalls Provided: Standard:
Will there be a change in use? ❑ ....Yes ❑ ..No If "yes", explain:
Compact: Handicap:
FIRE PROTECTION/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
.Sprinklers ..Automatic Fire Alarm ❑ ..None ❑. Other (specify)
Will there be storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials in the building? ❑ .. Yes No
If "yes", attach list of materials and storage locations on a separate 8 -1/2 x 11 paper indicating quantities and Material Sa ety Data Sheets.
SEPTIC SYSTEM:
❑ On -site Septic System — For on -site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health
Department.
Q:Uppliatimuwotm.- Application. On LineV -2006 - Permit Appliation.doc
Revised: 4 -2006
hi,
Page 2 of 6
MAC WORKS PERMIT INFORMATION -:206- 433 -0179
Scope of Work (please provide detailed thFi3?mation):
Please refer to Public Works Bulletin #1 for fees and estimate skeet.
Water District
❑... ukwila Water District 4125
Water Availability Provided
Sewer District
❑...Tukwila ValVue
❑ ...Sewer Use Certificate Sewer Availability Provided
, S � . u , y'°fitted with Application (mark boxes which apply):
�. ivil Plans (Maximum Paper Size -22" x 34 ")
T echnical Information Report (Storm Drainage)
❑ ...Bond ❑ .. Insurance ❑ .. Easement(s)
Proposed Activities (mark boxes that apply):
❑ _Right-of-way Use -Nonprofit for less than 72 hours
❑ ..Rightof- -way Use - No Disturbance
`�.Construction/Excavation/Fill - Right-of-way /
Non Right-of-way ✓
V...Total Cut 2 t) cubic yards
Total Fill t o cubic yards
❑ ...s(nY Yr eSew
❑...Cap or Remove Utilities
❑...Frontage Improvements
❑ ...Traffic Control
❑ ...Backflow Prevention - Fire Protection
Irrigation "
Domestic Water
� (tmf�, water t sr. ft( ) •
❑ ... ermanent Meter Size...
❑ ...Temporary Water Meter Size.. "
❑...Water Only Meter Size _
❑...Sewer Main Extension Public
❑...Water Main Extension Public
0
Q:AppliuliomV'omu•Appliaiimu On Line U @006 - Permit Appliwbn.doc
Revised 4-2006
sa
Call before you Dig: 1 800424 - 5555
.. Abandon Septic Tank
.. Curb Cut
.. Pavement Cut
.. Looped Fire Line
Private
Private
❑ .. Highline
❑ ...Renton
❑..Renton ❑...Seattle
❑ .. Approved Septic Plans Provided
O Geotechnical Report ❑...Traffic Impact Analysis
❑ .. Maintenance Agreement(s) ,� 0... Hold Harmless — (SAO)
0... Hold Harmless — (ROW)
❑ .. Right-of-way Use - Profit for less than 72 hours
❑ .. Right-of-way Use — Potential Disturbance
❑ .Work in Flood Zone
Storm Drainage
❑ .. Grease Interceptor
❑ .. Chamelvation
reach Excavation
.. Utility Undergrounding
❑...Deduct Water Meter Size
Page 3 of 6
FINANCE INFORMATION
Fire Line Size at Property Line Number of Public Fire Hydrant(s)
❑...Sewage Treatment
❑...Water ❑...Sewer
Monthly Service Billing to:
Name: it .1-- 1 /A.l4 -I MC
Mailing Address: f T(e / r N r 6 C-7
Water Meter Refund/Billing:
Name: 6—.JL. 4-/ A l YMC
Mailing Address: S ki r Kr hat-n CT
Day Telephone: ?' -O 6 - 78 O - a2 / a /
b ►,r Al— 9 gar)._
City State Zip
Day Telephone:
/ + V
City State
Zip
Unit Type:
Qty
„Unit Type;',
Qty :Unit
Ty pe:
Qty
". Boner /Compress
Qty
Fumace<100K BTU
r
Air Handling Unit >10,000
CFM
Fire D amper
.:
0-3 HP /100,000 RttP
o S
Fumace>100K BTU
Evaporator Cooler
Diffuser
3 -I5 HP/500,
\
Floor Furnace
/
Ventilation Fan Connected
to Single Duct
Thermostat
15 -30 HP /1,000 ,0 Y U
4 -"1
v
Suspended/Wall/Floor
Mounted Heater
Ventilation Syst9m
Wood/Gas Stove
30 -50 HP /1,750,000 BTU
Appliance Vent
Hood and Duct
Water Heater
1
50+ HP /1,750,000 BTU
Repair or Addition to
Heat/Refrig/Cooling
Y stem
Incinerator - Domestic
Emergency
Generator
I.
�
Air Handling Unit
<10,000 CFM
Incinerator — Comm/Ind
Other Mechanical
Equipment
. Z.)' • 1 t i tt
3 17
MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City State Zip
Day Telephone:
Fax Number:
Expiration Date:
Contact Person:
E -Mail Address:
Contractor Registration Number:
Valuation of Project (contractor's bid price): $ Cg OCP) ,vt
Scope of Work (please provide detailed infonnation): Ana. cAnsv ,-r c J4fte '4c ..Y 7 4- t Yk
R2iry iktil CO — r /
Use: Residential: New ....p Replacement ....0
Commercial: New ....El
Replacement ....
v
•J
Fuel Type: Electric 0 Gas ....0 Other:
Indicate type of mechanical work being installed and the quantity below:
Q ?Applicatione\Fmme- Applications On Line \3 -2106 - Permit Application.doc
Revised: 4-2006
bb
Page 4 of 6
Fixture Type:
Qty
Fixture Type:
Qty
Fixture Type:
Qty
Fixture Type:
Qty
Bathtub or combination
bath/shower
'
V /
Drinking fountain or water
cooler (per head)
Wash fountain
Gas piping outlets
Bidet
Food -waste grinder,
commercial
Receptor, indirect
waste
Clothes washer, domestic
/
Floor drain
Sinks
Dental unit, cuspidor
Shower, single head trap
Urinals
Dishwasher, domestic,
with independent drain
Lavatory
Water Closet
Building sewer or trailer
park sewer
Rain water system — per
drain (inside building)
Water heater and/or
vent
Industrial waste
pretreatment interceptor,
including its trap and vent,
except for kitchen type
grease interceptors
Repair or alteration of water
piping and/or water treating
equipment
Repair or alteration
of drainage or vent
piping
Medical gas piping system
serving one to five
inlets/outlets for specific
gas
Additional medical gas
inlets/outlets — six or more
LEMBING AND GAS PIPING PERMIT INFORMATION - 206-431= 670
PIsAJIVIBU G AND GAS PIPING CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City State Zip
Day Telephone:
Fax Number:
Expiration Date:
Contact Person:
E -Mail Address:
Contractor Registration Number:
Valuation of Project (contractor's bid price): S
Scope o� Work (please provide detailed information):
Indicate type of plumbing fixtures and/or gas piping outlets being installed and the quantity below:
Q:Upplic.d sWonns- Appliraimu On Line. -2006 - Pmmil Applieetion.doe
Revised: 42006
ba
Page 5 of 6
Value of Construction - In all cases, a value of construction amount should be entered by the applicant. This figure will be reviewed and is subject
to possible revision by the Permit Center to comply with current fee schedules.
Expiration of Plan Review - Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation.
Building and Mechanical Permit
The Building Official may grant one or more extensions of time for additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. The extension shall be
requested in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated. Section 105.3.2 International Building Code (current edition).
Plumbing Permit
The Building Official may grant one extension of time for an additional period not exceeding ISO days. The extension shall be requested
in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated. Section 103.4.3 Uniform Plumbing code (current edition).
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED /PHIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE UNDER
PENALTY OF PERJURY BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND I AM AUTHORIZED TO APPLY FOR THIS PERMIT.
BUILDING OW OR AUTHO • t AGENT:
sy Date-
.
Signa
Print N
Mailing Address:
•R&E 1L. )-( /1
■_„911 -0 r
Q: ApplicetionsWonm- Applications On Line\ -2106- Pamit Application.doc
Revised: 4-2006
bh
p-/
Day Telephone' x.06 - $ 6 1 72/
City
tate
Zip
I Date Application Accepted: c u I z `r
Date Application Expires:
12117 -1u
Staff Initials:
i
Page 6 of 6
QUANTITY IN CUBIC
YARDS
RATE
Up to 50 CY
Free
51
—100
$23.50
101
-1,000
$37.00
1,001
- 10,000
$49.25
10,001
— 100,000
$49.25 for 1 10,000,
PLUS $24.50 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof.
100,001- 200,000
$269.75 for 1 100,000,
PLUS $13.25 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof.
200,001 or more
$402.25 for 1sT 200,000,
PLUS $7.25 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof.
BULLETIN A2
TYPE C PERMIT FEE ESTIMATE
PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FEES DUE WITH APPLICATION
PW may adjust estimated fees
PROJECT NAME C /TY VI E lY £ STMLS PERMIT #
If you do not provide contractor bids or an engineer's estimate with your permit
application, Public Works will review the cost estimates for reasonableness and may adjust
estimates.
1. APPLICATION BASE FEE $250 (1)
2. Enter total construction cost for each improvement category:
Mobilization
Erosion prevention
Water /Sewer /Surface Water loon / /000 / / o00
Road/Parking/Access ' jOoo
e
A. Total Improvements 4Oo o °..—
3. Calculate improvement -based fees:
B. 2.5% of first $100,000 of A. /O0 ° ---
C. 2.0% of amount over $100,000, but less than $200,000 of A. —
D. 1.5% of amount over $200,000 of A.
4. TOTAL PLAN REVIEW FEE (B +C +D) $ /00 (4)
5. Enter total excavation volume to cubic yards
20 cubic yards
Enter total fill volume
Use the greater of the excavation and fill volumes.
GRADING Plan Review and Permit Fees
Approved 09.25.02
Last Revised Jan. 2006
1
Use the following table to estimate the grading plan review and permit fee.
$
TOTAL PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FEE DUE WITH PERMIT APPLICATION
(1 +4 +5) $ 350
The Plan Review and Approval fees cover TWO reviews: 1) the first review associated with the submission of the
application/plan and 2) a follow -up review associated with a correction letter. Each additional review, which is
attributable to the Applicant's action or inaction shall be charged 25% of the Total Plan Review Fee.
(5)
RECEIPT NO: R06 -01567
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206 -431 -3670
Fax: 206-431 -3665
SET RECEIPT
Payment Date: 10/04/2006
User ID: 1165 Total Payment: 9,287.94
Initials: JEM
Payee: G K HIRAI, LLC
SET ID: 1004 SET NAME: CITY VIEW ESTATES
SET TRANSACTIONS:
Set Member Amount
D06 -223
D06 -224
D06 -226
TOTAL:
3,047.40
3,047.40
3,193.14
9,287.94
TRANSACTION LIST:
Type Method Description
Amount
Payment Check 1054 9,287.94
TOTAL: 9,287.94
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Description
BUILDING - RES
PW LAND ALT PERMIT FEE
PW PERMIT /INSPECTION FEE
PW PLAN REVIEW
STATE BUILDING SURCHARGE
TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEES
Account Code Current Pmts
000/322.100 5,757.12
000/342.400 70.50
000/342.400 300.00
000/345.830 75.00
000/386.904 13.50
104.367.120 3,071.82
TOTAL: 9,287.94
0400 10/05 9710 TOTAL 9287.94
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
RECEIPT NO: R06 -00851
Initials: JEM
User ID: 1165
Payee: G K HIRAI, LLC
SET ID: 0612
SET TRANSACTIONS:
Set Member Amount
D06 -222
D06 -223
D06 -224
D06 -225
D06 -226
M06 -117
M06 -118
M06 - 119
M06 -120
M06 -121
PG06 -055
PG06 -056
PG06 -057
PG06 -058
PG06 -059
TOTAL:
1,455.09
1,540.80
1,540.80
3,989.30
1,635.53
38.70
38.70
38.70
38.70
38.70
32.00
32.00
32.00
32.00
27.00
10,510.02
TRANSACTION LIST:
Type Method Description
Payment Check
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Description
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206 - 431 -3670
Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
1033
PLAN CHECK - RES
PW BASE APPLICATION FEE
PW LAND ALT PLAN REVIEW
PW PLAN REVIEW
SET RECEIPT
SET NAME: CITY VIEW ESTATES
TOTAL:
000/345.830 6
000/322.100 1
000/345.830
000/345.830 2
TOTAL:
6380 0013 9716
Payment Date: 06/12/2006
Total Payment: 10,510.02
Amount
10,510.02
10,510.02
Account Code Current Pmts
,436.52
,250.00
23.50
,800.00
1 ibt 0.0 1%510.02
Steven M. Mullet. Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
DESIGNS UNLIMITED
STOCK PLANS • CUSTOM DESIGN
end � c - -.:, t •►YYy'
.. c atta
Gravity Load Analysis `-
L
ICON
Permit No.
PLAN 1294R/A/DB /2
Beam Calculations using
Beam Chek 2.4 Software and/or
TJBeam 6.16 Software
NDS 97
5/23/2005
REVIEWED FOR
CODE COMPLIANCE
/
nnt fvcn
SEP 2 9 2006
Ci OfTwkwila
IMMTVISTON
CITYOF
JUN 12 nos
PERMIT CENTER
•
1701e-
19613.81 st Ave S • Suite F MeiStinTiqt -2580 • Fax: (253) 872 -3649
■ Email: designstudio @designsunlimited.com ■
/2 9, ze /.1
DINING/KIT
Selection
Conditions
Data
Attributes
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Adiustments
Loads
R1=1091
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to: Designs Unlimited Reg # 6101 -1456
4x6 HF
NDS '91
Min Bearing Area
R1= 2.7in' R2= 2.7in'
BM (1)
Prepared by: IA. Date: 4/29/05
Lu = 0.0 Ft
Beam Span
Beam Wt per ft
Bm Wt Included
Max Moment
TL Max Defl
4.5 ft
4.68 #
21 #
1227'#
L / 240
Reaction 1 TL
Maximum V
Max V (Reduced)
TL Actual Defl
1091 # Reaction 2 TL 1091 #
1091 #
868 #
L / 763
Section (in') Shear (in') TL Defl (in)
17.65
13.32
OK
76%
19.25
17.37
OK
90%
0.07
0.23
OK
31%
Fb (psi)
Fv (psi)
E (psi x mil)
Base Values
850
Base Adjusted 1105
75
75
1.3
1.3
405
405
CF Size Factor
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1 300
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le = 0.00 Ft Kbe = 0.0
Uniform TL: 480 = A
Uniform Load A
SPAN = 4.5 FT
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
R2 = 1091
Fc l (psi)
/2 4 91IltAig /L
BED 2
Selection 14x 8 HF #2
Conditions NDS'91
Min Bearing Area
Attributes
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Adjustments
Loads
R1 = 1337
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to: Designs Unlimited Reg # 8101 -1456
R1= 3.3 in=
BM (2)
Prepared by: LA. Date: 4/29/05
R2= 3.3 in'
Beam Span
Beam Wt peril
Bm Wt Included
Max Moment
TL Max Defl
5.5 ft
6.17 #
34#
18381
L / 240
Reaction 1 TL
Maximum V
Max V (Reduced)
TL Actual Defl
1337 # Reaction 2 TL 1337 #
1337 #
1043 #
L / 954
Section (in Shear (in') TL Defl (in)
30.66
19.96
OK
65%
25.38
20.86
OK
82%
0.07
0.28
OK
25%
Fb (psi)
Fv (psi)
Lu = 0.0 Ft
E (psi x mil)
Uniform TL 480 =
Uniform Load A
SPAN = 5.5 FT
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
R2=1337
Fc (psi)
Base Values
850
Base Adjusted 1105
75
75
1.3
1.3
405
405
CF Size Factor
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1 300
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le = 0.00 Ft Kbe = 0.0
r _
S. 1 . V
t` f �. / \cns/
35473
ract
I924R/A/DB /2 BM
GARAGE Prep by: LA. Date: 5/17/05
Selection 3-1/13x 10-1/2 GLB 24F -V4 DF /D
Conditions
Data
Attributes
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Adjustments
RI = 891
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to: Designs Unlimited Reg # 8101 - 1456
Min Bearing Area RI = 1.4 in 1.4 in
Beam Span
Beam Wt per ft
Bm Wt Included
Max Moment
TL Max Defl
16.5 ft
7.97 # Reaction I TL
132 # Maximum V
3674'0 Max V (Reduced)
L / 240 TI Actual Defl
891 # Reaction 2 TL 891 #
891 #
796 0
L/ 598
Section (ins)
Shear (in TL Defl (in)
57.42
18.37
OK
32%
32.81
6.29
OK
19%
0.33
0.83
OK
40%
Fb
Fit
E (psi x mil)
Dull
( psi)
Base Values
Base Adjusted
2400
2400
190
190
1.8
1.8
650
650
Cv Volume
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1.000
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le = 0.00 Ft Kbe = 0.0
Loads Uniform TI: 100 = A
Uniform Load A
SPAN = 16.5 FT
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
Lu = 0.0 Ft
Fc I (psi)
I)
L
/2 qg-. 4 /zma /2
BSMT
Selection
Conditions
Data
Attributes
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Adjustments
Loads
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to: Designs Unlimited Reg # 8101 -1456
NDS'91
Min Bearing Area
R1= 4.7 in R2= 4.7 in
Section (in) Shear (in') TL Defl (in)
BM (5)
Prepared by: IA.
Date: 4/29/05
4x10 HF#2
Lu = 0.0 Ft
Beam Span
Beam Wt per ft
Bm Wt Included
Max Moment
TL Max Defl
6.5 ft
7.87 #
51 #
3105
L / 240
Reaction 1 TL
Maximum V
Max V (Reduced)
TL Actual Defl
1911 #
1911 #
1457 #
L / 993
Reaction 2 TL
1911 #
49.91
36.53
OK
73%
32.38
29.15
OK
90%
0.08
0.33
OK
24%
Fb (psi)
Base Values
850
Base Adjusted 1020
75
75
1.3
1.3
405
405
CF Size Factor
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1.200
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le = 0.00 Ft Kbe = 0.0
Uniform Load A
SPAN = 6.5 FT
Fv (psi)
E (psi x mil)
Uniform TL: 580 = A
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
Fe l, (psi)
IRES 03 -16 -0
Iz9¢R /os /z
BSMT
Selection
Conditions
Data
Attributes
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Adjustments
Loads
R1=1586
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to: Designs Unlimited Reg # 8101 -1456
4x10 HF#2
Lu = 0.0 Ft
NDS'91
Min Bearing Area
R1= 3.9 in R2= 3.9 in
Beam Span
Beam Wt peril
Bm Wt Included
Max Moment
TL Max Dell
6.5 ft
7.87 # Reaction 1 TL 1586 # Reaction 2 TL
51 # Maximum V 1586 #
2577 W Max V (Reduced) 1210 #
L / 240 TL Actual Defl L / >1000
1586 #
Section (ins) Shear (n TL Defl (in)
Fb (psi)
BM (4)
Prepared by: IA.
49.91
30.31
OK
61%
32.38
24.19
OK
75%
0.07
0.33
OK
20%
Fv (psi)
E (psi x mil)
Base Values
850
Base Adjusted 1020
75
75
1.3
1.3
405
405
CF Size Factor
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1.200
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le = 0.00 Ft Kbe = 0.0
Uniform TL: 480 = A
Uniform Load A
SPAN = 6.5 FT
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
Date: 4/29/05
R2 = 1586
Fol. (psi)
Li fQNA%..' ,
X± "3 L3 -16
1294R /A /DB /2
PORCH
Selection
Conditions
Data
Attributes
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Ad ustments
oats
RI = 393
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to Designs Unlimited Reg # 8101 -1456
4x 4 HF #2
Lu = 0.0 Ft
NDS '97
Min Bearing Area
Section fln
R1= 1.0 inzR2= 1.0 in
Beam Span
Beam Wt per ft
Bm Wt Included
Max Moment
TL Max Defi
5.5 ft
2.98 #
16 #
541 '#
L / 240
Reaction 1 TL
Maximum V
Max V (Reduced)
TL Actual Deft
393 #
393 #
351 #
L/365
Reaction 2 TL
393 #
Shear (101 Ti. Den (inl
7.15
5.09
OK
71%
12.25
7.03
OK
57%
0.18
0.28
OK
66%
Fb (Psi) W
BM
Prepared by: I.A.
E (psi x mil)
(Psi)
Base Values
Base Adjusted
850
1275
75
75
I.3
1.3
405
405
CF Size Factor
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1.500
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le = 0.00 Ft Kbe = 0.0
Uniform TL: 140 = A
Uniform Load A
SPAN = 5.5 FT
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
Date: 5/19/05
R2 = 393
Fc I (psi)
1
a
I294R/A /DB /2
BACEMENT
Selection
Conditions
Data
Attributes Section (in
Actual
Critical
Status
Ratio
Values
Adlustments
Loads
/\
RI = 1669
BeamChek v2.4 licensed to: Designs Unlimited Reg # 8101 -1456
BM
Prepared by: I.A.
3 -1/8x 9 GLB 16F-V3 DF /DF
Lu = 0.0 Ft
Min Bearing Area
RI = 3.0 in = 3.0 in
Beam Span 5.5 ft
Beam Wt per ft 6.83 # Reaction I TL 1669 # Reaction 2 TL 1669 #
Bm Wt Included 38 # Maximum V 1669 #
Max Moment 2295 '# Max V (Reduced) 1214 #
TL Max Dell L / 240 TL Actual Defl L / >1000
Shear (1n TL Defl (in)
42.19
17.21
OK
41%
28.13
9.58
OK
34%
0.04
0.28
OK
16%
Fb (psi)
Fv
E (psi x mU)
(psi)
Base Values
Base Adjusted
1600
1600
190
190
1.5
1.5
560
560
Cv Volume
Cd Duration
Cr Repetitive
Ch Shear Stress
Cm Wet Use
1.000
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
CI Stability 1.0000 Rb = 0.00 Le a 0.00 Ft Kbe a 0.0
Uniform it 600 = A
Uniform Load A
SPAN a 5.5 FT
Uniform and partial uniform loads are lbs per lineal ft.
Date: 5/19/05
R2 = 1669
-IRES ( - 13 -0
INTRODUCTION
This report presents1 he results of our geotechnical engineering investigation and evaluation of the Hirai
Short Plat project in Tukwila, Washington. The site is located at the northwest comer of the intersection
of South 132 Street and Pacific Hwy South, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of
. r
this study is to explore and characterize the site's surface and subsurface conditions, and to provide
geotechnical recommendations for site development. For our use in preparing this report, we were
provided with an undated site plan titled "Hirai Site Plan," prepared by Medina Consulting Engineers,
Inc., showing the existing site topography and the planned lot layout.
Project plans include developing this 0.58 -acre site into five single - family residential lots with associated
pavement and utilities. Daylight basement retaining walls may be incorporated into some of the
structures constructed on mildly sloping ground. Stormwater management plans will likely consist of on-
site detention, via either a vault or pipes. The proposed lot alignments and existing topography are shown
on the Site Plan in Figure 2.
SCOPE
Plcn
1
t
c .
FILE Coat
Permit No.
Geotcchriicai EngineesinxEShigtion
Hirai Short Plat -torim
Tukwila, Washington'
The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site subsurface conditions, and provide
general recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services includes the
following:
1. Review available soils and geologic maps of the area.
2. Explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions within the site witpi
excavated test pits. Trackhoe was subcontracted by NGA. CITY Q Talmu d;
3. Map the surficial slope conditions and produce cross - sections. JUN 12 ?vns
4. Perform grain -size sieve analysis on soil samples. PERMITCENIE
5. Provide our opinion regarding slope stability.
6. Provide recommendations for earthwork, foundation support, and slabs -on- grade.
7. Provide recommendations for subgrade preparation and pavements.
8. Provide recommendations for site drainage and erosion control.
9. Document the results of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a written
geotechnical report.
17C(0 _ 22.5
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 2
SITE CONDITIONS
= Surface Conditions
The property is an irregularly shaped parcel covering approximately 0.58 acres. The property is bordered
to the north and west by developed residential property, to the east by Pacific Hwy South, and to the south
by South 132 Street. The site slopes gently down toward the eastern property line, where the slope then
becomes moderate to steep over a vertical relief of less than 10 feet, buttressed by a 3.5 -to 8.0 -foot high
rockery retaining wall. Profiles of the existing ground surface and the interpretive subsurface conditions
are shown on Cross Sections A -A', B -B', and C -C', in Figures 3 through 5, respectively. Access to the
property is currently from a gravel driveway off South 132 Street along the southwest corner of the site.
The site is currently undeveloped, covered with grass, blackberries, and a few conifer and fruit trees. The
northeast corner of the site in particular is heavily vegetated. We observed ponding water within the site
during our site visit on March 15, 2006. This water appeared to be collecting on the surface of a
previously graded building pad, where a structure was likely Located in the past. The approximate
location of the ponding water is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.
Subsurface Conditions
Geology: The geologic units for this area are shown on the Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and
Vicinity, Washington, by Howard H. Waldron, Bruce A. Liesch, Donald R. Mullineaux, and Dwight R.
Crandell (U.S.G.S., 1962). The site is mapped as Vashon till (Qt), and the area just east of the site is
mapped as undifferentiated deposits of the Pleistocene age (Qu). The till is described as a nonsorted
mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders. Our explorations generally encountered
glacially consolidated silt with trace fine sand. We interpreted this material to be an interglacial deposit,
likely consolidated during the Vashon age glaciation.
Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on March 15, 2006 by excavating
eight test pits to depths ranging from 2.0 to 11.0 feet below the existing ground surface using a trackhoe.
The approximate locations of our explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. An engineer from
NGA was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered,
obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained logs of the test pits.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 3
The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
presented in Figure 6. The logs of our test pits are attached to this report and are presented as Figures 7
and 8. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraph. For a
detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs of the test pits should be reviewed.
Test Pits 2, 4, and 8 exposed a 1.3 -to 2.0 -foot thick layer of dark brown to black silt with trace fine sand
and roots, which was interpreted as topsoil/modified ground. Test pits 1, 3, and 5 through 7 exposed a
1.0 -to 2.8 -foot thick surficial layer of dark brown silt with trace fine sand, roots, bricks, and other
miscellaneous rubble. We interpreted this material to be undocumented fill. Underlying the topsoil and
fill, our explorations exposed stiff to very stiff, brown -gray to blue -gray silt with trace fine sand extending
to the bottom of the explorations. We interpreted this material to be native glacially consolidated
material.
Hydrologic Conditions
Groundwater seepage was not encountered in any of our explorations, however, we would expect that a
perched groundwater condition may develop on this site during the wet season. Perched water occurs
when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils, such as topsoil and fill, and
accumulates on top of a relatively impermeable material, such as the very stiff to stiff native silt soils.
Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched
water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount
of groundwater to decrease during drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods.
LABORATORY ANALYSIS
We performed two grain -size analyses on selected soil samples obtained from the explorations, located in
the central section of the development area, as shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The results of the
sieve analyses are presented as Figures 9 and 10. The analyses indicated that the soils underlying the site
are predominately composed of silt.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 4
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION
Seismic Hazard
We reviewed the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) for seismic site classification for this project.
Since very stiff to stiff silt was encountered underlying the site at depth, the site conditions best fit the
IBC description for Site Class D.
Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground
motion. Liquefaction is caused by a rise in pore pressures in a loose, fine sand deposit beneath the
groundwater table. It is our opinion that the competent glacially consolidated deposits interpreted to
underlie the site have a low potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion.
Erosion Hazard
The criteria used for determination of the erosion hazard for affected areas include soil type, slope
gradient, vegetation cover, and groundwater conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative
cover and the specific surface soil types, which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil
Survey of King County Area, Washington, by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was reviewed to
determine the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The site was mapped just beyond the boundaries of the
Soil Survey; however, the surface soils are closely associated with the mapping unit of Kitsap Silt loam, 8
to 15 percent slopes. The erosion hazard for this material is listed as moderate to severe. It is our opinion
that the erosion hazard for site soils should be low in areas where vegetation is maintained, and severe in
areas of exposed silt.
Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability
The criteria used for evaluation of landslide hazards include soil type, slope gradient, and groundwater
conditions. The overall site inclinations are gentle to moderate, however, a slope below the five
residential lots has inclinations of up to 30 degrees, with a vertical relief of less than 10 feet. This slope is
buttressed by a 3.5 -to 8.0 -foot high rockery retaining wall.
The core of the site slope is inferred to consist of stiff to very stiff glacially consolidated silt. Relatively
shallow failures as well as surficial erosion are natural processes and could be expected on the slope
below the site during severe rainstorms. However, these processes would be limited through the
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 5
maintenance of a vegetative cover and proper stormwater management. It is our opinion that there is not
a significant potential for deep- seated slope failure under current site conditions. Proper site grading and
drainage as well as vegetation management as recommended in this report should help maintain current
_ stability conditions. Also, the recommended effective structure setback should reduce the potential
adverse impacts of site development on the slope and vice versa.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
It is our opinion from a geotechnical standpoint that the site is compatible with the planned development.
Our explorations indicated that the planned development area is generally underlain by a one -to three -foot
thick surficial layer of very soft topsoil and fill, underlain by competent silt deposits. The medium stiff or
better native soils should provide adequate support for the planned structures and roadways. We
recommend that the structures be designed utilizing shallow foundations. Footings should extend through
any undocumented fill, or loose materials, and be founded on the underlying medium stiff or better native
soils or structural fill extending to these soils. Our explorations generally encountered medium stiff or
better native soils at depths of two feet below the existing ground surface.
Adequate structure setbacks should be maintained in relationship to the locally steep sloping ground and
rockery retaining wall. To protect the existing slope and rockery from development, we recommend that
the downhill structure footing lines be set back at least 10 feet from a line drawn at 27 degrees from the
horizontal, starting at the base of the rockery and extending upwards into the slope, intersecting the site
ground surface above. NGA should be retained to evaluate final structure placement on each lot.
Under no circumstances should water be allowed to flow over or concentrate on the steep slope, both
during construction and after construction has been completed. The yard areas should be graded to direct
runoff away from the top of steep slope, if possible. We recommend that stormwater runoff from the
roofs, driveway, footing drains, and yard drains be collected in catch basins and tightlined into an
approved stormwater management system.
We understand that an underground detention vault or pipe will likely be considered for stormwater
management on this project. If the vault will be located in an unexplored area of the site, or will extend to
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 6
a depth below the depths explored, we should observe additional explorations in the area of the planned
vault to confirm that the subsurface conditions are consistent with our design recommendations. Grading
for the vault should be in accordance with the recommendations found in the Site Preparation and
Grading and Temporary and Permanent Slopes subsections of this report.
We would expect wet surficial soil conditions during the wetter times of the year We recommend the use
of footing drains around structures, and wall drains behind stein/retaining walls. Specific drainage
recommendations are given in the Site Drainage subsection of this report.
The site soils are considered extremely moisture - sensitive and will disturb easily even in moderately wet
conditions. We strongly recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months and
suspended during wet periods. If construction is to be attempted in wet conditions, major additional
expenses and delays should be expected due to the wet conditions. Additional expenses could include the
need for placing a blanket of rock spalls and/or geo -fabric on exposed subgrades, construction traffic
areas, and paved areas prior to placing structural fill, and the need for using all - weather material for
structural fill. The use of the native on -site soils as structural fill will likely be unfeasible, but will depend
on the moisture content of the soil at the time of construction. NGA should be retained to determine if the
on -site soils could be used as structural fill material prior to construction. We should also note that major
erosion control expenses and delays may be incurred if the site is to be developed in wet weather.
Erosion Control
The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is considered severe for exposed soils but actual erosion potential
will be dependent on how the site is graded and how water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management
Practices (BMPs) should be used to control erosion. Areas disturbed during construction should be
protected from erosion. Erosion control measures may include covering exposed soils with a layer of
crushed rock, diverting surface water away from the stripped or disturbed areas, and limiting construction
traffic on prepared subgrades. Silt fences or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from
leaving the site. Disturbed areas should be planted as soon as practical and the vegetation should be
maintained until it is established. Other erosion control measures may include the use of a temporary
sediment control pond or Baker's tanks to store muddy water prior to leaving the site. This can be
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 7
evaluated at the time of construction based on the actual site conditions. The erosion potential of areas
not stripped of vegetation should be low.
_ Temporary and Permanent Slopes
Temporary cut slope stability is a function of many factors, including the type and consistency of soils,
depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open and the
presence of surface or groundwater. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate
a stable, temporary, cut slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to
maintain safe slope configurations since he is continuously at the job site, able to observe the nature and
condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the subsurface materials and groundwater conditions
encountered.
The following information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants and
should not be construed to imply that Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job
site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor.
For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in any undocumented fill and loose soils be no
steeper than 2.0 Horizontal to 1.0 Vertical (211:1V). Cuts in the native silt could stand at inclinations as
steep as 11-1: 1V. If significant groundwater seepage is encountered, we would expect that flatter
inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut slopes be protected from erosion. These
erosion protection measures may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface
runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than four
feet, if worker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope heights and inclinations conform to
appropriate OSHA/WISHA regulations.
We recommend that permanent cuts in the native silt, as well as any permanent fill slopes to be
constructed on site be no steeper than 2.0 unit Horizontal to 1.0 unit Vertical (2.OH:1V). We recommend
that permanent cut and fill slopes be protected from erosion. Vegetation should be planted on permanent
slopes and maintained until established. To reduce the potential for erosion, surface water runoff should
not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the permanent slopes.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 8
After erosion control measures are implemented,
development areas of organics, any fill, and loose soils to expose medium stiff or better native soils for
the structural fill subgrade, and in foundation, slab, and pavement areas. Our explorations generally
encountered medium stiff or better native soils at depths of two feet below the existing ground surface.
However, additional stripping may be required in unexplored areas of the site or if the exposed subgrade
becomes disturbed due to wet weather. The stripped materials should be removed from the site or
stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. If the stripped material is to be stockpiled on site, the
stockpiles should be kept away from the steeper portions of the slope and covered with plastic at all times.
We recommend that any undocumented fill encountered in the structure and pavement areas be removed
and replaced with structural fill or rock spalls extending to competent native material.
Site Preparation and Grading
site preparation should consist of stripping the
Depending on subgrade and weather conditions, pavement and slab subgrade should be compacted to a
non - yielding condition using static rollers then proof- rolled with a heavy rubber -tired piece of equipment.
Areas observed to pump or weave during the proof -roll test should be reworked to structural fill
specifications or over - excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural fill or rock spalls. For
better pavement and slab -on -grade performance, especially in wet conditions, a. one -foot thick layer of
crushed rock may be placed over the prepared subgrade prior to placing asphalt or concrete. Final
subgrade preparation recommendations can be provided at the time of construction.
If significant surface water flow is encountered during construction, this flow should be diverted around
areas to be developed and the exposed subgrade maintained in a semi -dry condition. If wet conditions are
encountered, alternative site stripping and grading techniques will be necessary due to the highly sensitive
nature of the site soils. These methods could include using large excavators equipped with wide tracks
and a smooth bucket to complete site grading and covering exposed subgrade with a layer of crushed rock
for protection. If wet conditions are encountered or construction is attempted in wet weather, the
subgrade should not be compacted as this could cause further subgrade disturbance. In wet conditions it
may be necessary to cover the exposed subgrade with a layer of crushed rock as soon as it is exposed to
protect the moisture sensitive soils from disturbance by machine or foot traffic during construction. The
prepared subgrade should be protected from construction traffic and surface water should be diverted
around prepared subgrade.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 9
The site soils are considered extremely moisture- sensitive and will disturb easily even in moderately wet
conditions. We strongly recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. If
construction takes place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays should be expected due to
the wet conditions. This may include the need for installing an interceptor drain along the uphill side of
the site. Additional expenses could also include the need for placing a blanket of rock spalls and/or geo-
fabric on exposed subgrades, construction traffic areas, and paved areas prior to placing structural fill.
The use of on -site soils as structural fill will likely be unfeasible, but will be highly dependent on the
moisture content of the soil at the time of construction. NGA should be retained to determine if the on-
_
site soils could be used as structural fill material at the time of construction. For planning purposes, the
use of the on -site material as structural fill should be considered unfeasible.
Foundations
Conventional shallow spread foundations should be placed on undisturbed medium stiff or better native
soils or be supported on structural fill extending to those soils. Where undocumented fill or less dense
soils are encountered at the planned footing elevation, the subgrade should be over - excavated to expose
suitable bearing soil. The over - excavation may be filled with structural fill, or the footing may be
extended down to the native bearing soils. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill zone should
extend outside the edges of the footing a distance equal to one -half of the depth of the over - excavation
below the bottom of the footing.
Footings, including interior footings, should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished
ground surface for frost protection and bearing capacity considerations. Foundations should be designed
in accordance with the 2003 IBC. Footing widths should be based on the anticipated loads and allowable
soil bearing pressure. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose
or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing concrete. It might be
prudent to place a layer of crushed rock on prepared foundation subgrade to limit subgrade disturbance by
foot traffic.
For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of
not more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the design of foundations supported on the
medium stiff or better native soils or structural fill extending to the competent native soils. A
representative of NGA should evaluate the foundation bearing soil. We should be consulted if higher
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 10
bearing pressures are needed. Current IBC guidelines should be used when considering increased
allowable bearing pressure for short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation
settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than one -inch total
and 1/2-inch differential between adjacent footings or across a distance of about 20 feet based on our
experience with similar projects.
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of the footing and passive resistance against the
subsurface portions of the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be used to calculate the base
friction and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. Passive resistance may be calculated as a
triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf) should be used for passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This
level surface should extend a distance equal to at least three times the footing depth. These recommended
values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate values for frictional and
passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the foundations should be
poured "neat" against the native medium dense/stiff soils or compacted fill should be used as backfill
against the front of the footing. We recommend that the upper one -foot of soil be neglected when
calculating the passive resistance.
Structural Fill
General: Fill placed beneath foundations, pavement, or other settlement- sensitive structures should be
placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and
standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field
monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests
to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. The area to receive the fill
should be suitably prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection prior to
beginning fill placement.
Materials: Structural fill should consist of a good quality, granular soil, free of organics and other
deleterious material and be well graded to a maximum size of about three inches. All- weather fill should
contain no'more than five - percent fines (soil finer than U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on that fraction passing
the U.S. 3 /4-inch sieve). The use of on -site soils as structural fill will likely be unfeasible, but will be
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 11
highly dependent on the moisture content of the material at the time of construction. Most of the on -site
soils will be virtually impossible to compact to structural fill specifications in wet conditions. We should
be retained to evaluate proposed structural fill materials prior to construction.
Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All filling
should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to eight inches thick. Each lift should be spread evenly and be
thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas
and pavement subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density.
Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D -1557
Compaction Test procedure. The moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about
two percent of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to over -
excavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All
compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree
of compaction.
Slab -on -Grade
Slabs -on -grade, if used, should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site
Preparation and Grading subsection of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by
at least six inches of free - draining sand or gravel for use as a capillary break. We recommend that the
capillary break be hydraulically connected to the footing drain system to allow free drainage from under
the slab. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting (6-mil minimum), should be placed over
the capillary break material.
Pavements
Pavement subgrade preparation, and structural filling where required, should be completed as
recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading and Structural Fill subsections of this report. Any
undocumented fill should be removed and replaced with structural fill or thoroughly compacted prior to
placing the pavement section. The pavement subgrade should be proof -rolled with a heavy, rubber -tired
piece of equipment, to identify soft or yielding areas that require repair. The ability to leave some of the
undocumented fill in the payment subgrade will be dependent on the nature of the fill and expected
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 12
pavement performance. We should be retained to evaluate any fill to be left in pavement areas, observe
the proof - rolling, and recommend repairs prior to placement . of the asphalt or hard surfaces.
— Stormwater Management
The soils exposed in our explorations on this site consisted of silt with trace fine sand. These soils have
extremely low permeability and are not considered suitable for stormwater infiltration. A detention vault
or pipe may provide a more practical alternative for stormwater management on this site. The possible
location of a detention vault for this project had not been established at the time that this report was
prepared. Preliminary recommendations for excavation and retaining walls of an underground vault are
included in the following subsections of this report. However, if the vault will be located in an
unexplored area of the site, or will extend to a depth below the depths explored, we should observe
additional explorations in the area of the planned vault to confirm that the subsurface conditions are
consistent with our design recommendations.
We understand that stormwater may also be handled using a detention pipe, rather than a detention vault.
If a detention pipe is used, the bottom of the trench should be cleared of any loose or sloughing material
prior to placing the pipe. The pipe should be underlain by one to two feet of washed rock and surrounded
with washed rock at least halfway up the pipe, placed evenly in small lifts on both sides of the pipe. The
top of the washed rock fill should be covered with filter fabric (Mirafi 140 N or equivalent) prior to
placing native material. We recommend that construction equipment not be operated over the pipe until
at least three feet of fill is placed over the pipe, or as recommended by the manufacturer. If native
material is used over the washed rock, it should be clear of particles over 3 inches in diameter and be
placed in thin lifts (no more than 6 inches in thickness). The fill should be compacted using walk behind
vibratory plate compactors. We should be retained to review the layout and design of any detention pipe
systems.
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls may be incorporated into project plans in the form of daylight basement stem -walls for
the new structures and for any detention vault. The lateral pressure acting on subsurface retaining walls is
dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement
which can occur as backfill is placed, wall drainage conditions, the inclination of the backfill, and other
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 13
possible surcharge loads. For walls that are free to yield at the top at least one thousandth of the height of
the wall (active condition), soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as wall
stiffness or bracing (at -rest condition). We recommend that walls supporting horizontal backfill and not
subjected to hydrostatic forces be designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to that
exerted by a fluid with a density of 45 pcf for yielding (active condition) walls, and 65 pcf for non-
yielding (at -rest condition) walls.
_ These recommended lateral earth pressures are for a drained granular backfill and are based on the
assumption of a horizontal ground surface behind the wall for a distance of at least the subsurface height
of the wall, and do not account for surcharge loads. Additional lateral earth pressures should be
considered for surcharge loads acting adjacent to subsurface walls and within a distance equal to the
subsurface height of the wall. This would include the effects of surcharges such as traffic loads, floor slab
and foundation loads, slopes, or other surface loads. Also, hydrostatic and buoyant forces should be
included if the walls could not be drained. We could consult with you and your structural engineer
regarding additional loads on retaining walls during final design, if needed.
The lateral pressures on walls may be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and
by passive resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. Recommendations for
frictional and passive resistance to lateral loads are presented in the Foundations subsection of this
report.
All wall backfill should be well compacted as outlined in the Structural Fill subsection of this report.
Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures, due to over - compaction of the
wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in thin loose lifts and compacting it with
small, hand - operated compactors within a distance behind the wall equal to at least one -half the height of
the wall. The thickness of the loose lifts should be reduced to accommodate the lower compactive energy
of the hand - operated equipment. The recommended level of compaction should still be maintained.
Permanent drainage systems should be installed for retaining walls. Recommendations for these systems
are found in the Subsurface Drainage subsection of this report. We recommend that we be retained to
evaluate the proposed wall drain backfill material and drainage systems.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 14
Site Drainage
Surface Drainage: Final site grades should allow for drainage away from the planned structures. We
suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a minimum gradient of three percent for a distance of at least
10 feet away from the buildings. Surface water should be collected by permanent catch basins and drain
lines, and be discharged into an appropriate discharge system. Water should not be allowed to collect in
any area where footings, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Surface water generated from paved
areas and roof drains should be routed into permanent catch basins and then tightlined into appropriate
stormwater facilities. Water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes or adjacent rockery.
Subsurface Drainage: If groundwater is encountered during construction, we recommend that the
contractor slope the bottom of the excavations and collect the water into ditches and small sump pits
where the water can be pumped out and routed to a suitable discharge point.
We recommend the use of footing drains around the planned structures and wall drains behind retaining
walls. Footing drains should be installed at least one foot below planned finished floor elevation. The
drains should consist of a minimum four - inch - diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded
by free - draining material, such as washed rock, wrapped in a filter fabric. We recommend that an 18-
inch -wide zone of clean (less than three - percent fines), granular material be placed along the back of the
walls above the drain. Pea gravel is an acceptable drain material or a drainage composite may be used
instead. The free- draining material should extend up the wall to one foot below the finished surface. The
top foot of backfrll should consist of impermeable soil placed over plastic sheeting or building paper to
minimize surface water or fines migration into the footing drain. Footing drains should discharge into
tightlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point with convenient cleanouts to prolong
the useful life of the drains. Roof drains should not be connected to footing drains. If a detention vault or
pipe is used and these elements can not be effectively drained, they should be designed to withstand
hydrostatic forces.
USE OF THIS REPORT
NGA has prepared this report for Mr. George Hirai, and his agents, for use in the planning and design of
the development planned on this site only. The scope of our work does not include services related to
construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors'
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 15
methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for
consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations
and also with time. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of
subsurface conditions. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and
schedule.
We recommend that NGA be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services 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 and foundation installation
activities comply with contract plans and specifications. We should be contacted a minimum of one week
prior to construction activities and could attend pre - construction meetings if requested.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was
prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, fmdings, and opinions are
a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
o-O -o
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Hirai Short Plat
Tukwila, Washington
March 30, 2006
NGA File No. 733906
Page 16
It has been a pleasure to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require
further information, please call.
Sincerely,
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
in A. McCaughan, EIT
Senior Staff Engineer
Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Principal
CAM: KMS:lam
Ten Figures Attached
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale
Tukwila, WA
oaoaeM
en�uest, Inc. '(� �•v , - S w .arc
62A66-N74V7 "E4
N
Project Number
733906
Figure 1
Hirai Short Plat
Vicinity Map
N GA NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
1 ASSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTCCHNICAL ENGINtCRS 81 GtOLOGISTS
4n4 rw...1*.—
018141 4a 11%0401M
w.,.ww. ei�w°f'°att
No.
Gate
3/20/08
Revision
Original
By
ACO
CK
CAM
-.
LEGEND
Property Line
TP - 1
Number and Approximate
Location of Test Pit
Concrete Walkway
A A' • t Approximate Location
I of Cross- Section
Reference: Site Plan is based on a topographic site plan dated June 1, 2005, titled 'Hirai Site Plan,"
prepared by Medina Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Existing Rockery
Scale: 1 inch = 40 feet
A
N
Catch basin
Ditch
0 40 80
Project Number
733906
Figure 2
Hirai Short Plat
Site Plan
N GA NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
ASSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTtCNNICAL ENGINEtRS Sc GEOLOGISTS
No.
Date
3/20/06
Revision
o,giw
By
ACO
CK
CAM
1
T
a
Co
C)
a x
N _a
d! u)
0
o a
D • m
o
;i1 " 2
it zD
1 q r
z • • W
M o Z
• ▪ n0
• s ar
i o
PI -I
w A
✓ Z I
g o z
II e r
I
-0
a
wa
m z
8C
Z
0
s
I
g
to
0
Southwest
230—
l Fill Tp_7 (Projected 15-ft. Southeast)
210—
190—
170—
A
Gravel Alleyway
0
Exploration
Test Pit Designation -9 TP -1
During
Geologic Contact --9 ?
(a -Pete)
Stiff to very stiff sift
with trace sand
TP -1
A'
Northeast
— 230
Concrete Walkway —
Existing Rockery
Fill up to 30° locally
R
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance (feet)
Reference: Cross Section Is based on a topographic site plan dated June 1, 2005, titled 'Hirai Site Plan, prepared by Medina Consulting Engineers, Inc.
NOTES:
1) Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between
the explorations. Actual conditions may vary.
2) Elevations are approximate.
210
190
170
NGA Drafting 200617339O0 H4avCadttg
- n
to
c
r
A
v
a
CO 0
03
CD c
3
t o
n tv
2 la
0
z o
to 9A
PI -I
w • Q
✓ Z
y 5 $ 3
a a
i • r
z
a
x
2006173390e
Southwest
220
200
180
160
B
Exploration
Test Piit Designation —4 TP -1
Groundwater Level —3
During Exploration
Geologic contact -* ?
(approximate)
Gravel Alleyway
R
TP-5
Topsoil & Fill
— Stiff to very stiff silt TP-4 Concrete
with trace sand r 20° Walkway
20 40 60 80
Distance (feet)
100
B'
E fisting Rockery
120 140
Northeast
—220
200
— 180
160
NOTES:
1) Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between
the explorations. Actual conditions may vary.
2) Elevations are approximate.
Reference: Cross Section Is based on a topographic site plan dated June 1, 2005, titled 'Hirai Site Plan,' prepared by Medina Consulting Engineers, Inc.
1
NGeaman
Aransas"
Drafting 2006O33806 rre eaclag
T
cc
C
0,
n
8x
N
en a ,
o
O
O �
9 m
n
2
3c
O
x
Southwest
220
200
180
160
Gravel Alleyway
C
Exploration
Test Mt Designation _...j TP -1
DDuring Exploration
Level 1
Geologic Contact --) ?
(aPPte)
Fill
TP -3
Stiff to very stiff sift
with trace sand
R
Existing
Rockery
Concrete
Walkway
0 20 40 60 .80 100 120
Distance (feet)
Northeast
220
200
180
160
NOTES:
1) Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between
the explorations. Actual conditions may vary.
2) Elevations are approximate.
Reference: Cross Section is based on a topographic site plan dated June 1, 2005, tided "Hirai Site Plan," prepared by Medina Consulting Engineers, Inc.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
,
GROUP
SYMBOL
GROUP NAME
'
COARSE -
GRAINED
SOILS
- MORE THAN 50 %
RETAINED ON
NO. 200 SIEVE
GRAVEL
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE FRACTION
RETAINED ON
NO. 4SIEVE
CLEAN
GRAVEL
GW
WELL - GRADED FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAVEL
WITH FINES
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
MORE THAN 50 %
OF COARSE FRACTION
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
CLEAN
SAND
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SP
POORLY GRADED SAND
SAND
WITH FINES
SM
SILTY SAND
SC
CLAYEY SAND
FINE -
GRAINED
SOILS
MORE THAN 50 %
PASSES
NO. 200 SIEVE
SILT AND CLAY
LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50 %
INORGANIC
ML
SILT
CL
CLAY
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
SILT AND CLAY
LIQUID LIMIT
50% OR MORE
INORGANIC
MH
SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
CH
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FLAT CLAY
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT
NOTES:
1) Field classification Is based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:
examination of soil in general
accordance with ASTM D 2488-93. Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to
the touch
2) Soll classification using laboratory tests
Is based on ASTM D 2488-93. Moist - Damp, but no visible water.
3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated,
consistency are based on usually soil Is obtained from
Interpretation of blowcount data, below water table
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data.
Project Number
733906
Hirai Short Plat
Soil Classification Chart
_�\ NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
lye Gq \. ASSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
{,mlxs,w,11/4.w,.aw
ate
Revision
K
I
orio
Figure 6
DEPTH (FEET)
TEST PIT ONE
0.0 - 2.0
2.0 -8.0
8.0 -10.0
TEST PIT THREE
TEST PIT FOUR
0.0 - 13
1.3 - 2.0
TEST PIT FIVE
ACO:CAM
LOG OF EXPLORATION
USC SOIL DESCRIPTION
ML DARK BROWN SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND, DARK ORGANICS, BRICK, AND TIMBER
(VERY SOFT, MOIST) cow
ML BROWN -GRAY, IRON -OXIDE STAINED, SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
ML BLUE -GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.8, 3.0, AND 9.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 2.0 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 10.0 FEET ON 3/15/06
TEST NT TWO
0.0 -1.3 DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND AND ROOTS (TOPSOIL)
1.3 -7.0 ML BROWN -GRAY, IRON-OXIDE STAINED, SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
7.0 -8.5 ML BLUE -GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 0.8, 2.5, AND 8.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 1.3 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 8.5 FEET ON 3/15/06
0.0 -3.2 ML DARK BROWN SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND, ROOTS, BRICK, AND CONCRETE
(VERY SOFT, MOIST TO WET) (FILL)
3.2 -10.5 ML BROWN -GRAY, IRON -OXIDE STAINED, SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
10.5 -11.0 ML BLUE -GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0, 4.0, AND 10.8 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 3.2 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 11.0 FEET ON 3/15/08
DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND AND ROOTS (TOPSOIL)
ML BROWN -GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 2.0 FEET ON 3/15/06
0.0 -1.0 ML DARK BROWN SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND, TOPSOIL AND GARBAGE
(VERY SOFT, MOIST TO WET) (FILL)
1.0 -5.5 ML BROWN -GRAY, IRON -OXIDE STAINED, SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 5.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 1.0 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.5 FEET ON 3/15/06
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 733906
FIGURE 7
TEST PIT SIX
- 0.0 -1.5 ML DARK BROWN SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND, BRICKS, AND GARBAGE (VERY SOFT, MOIST) (FILL)
1.5 -4.5 ML BROWN-GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
- TEST PIT SEVEN
DEPTH (FEET)
LOG OF EXPLORATION
USC SOIL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
HEAVY TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 1.5 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.5 FEET ON 3/15/08
0.0 -2.8 ML BROWN -GRAY, IRON -OXIDE STAINED, SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND AND ROOTS
(VERY SOFT, MOIST) (FILL)
2.8 - 5.2 ML BROWN -GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE TO MEDIUM SAND AND FINE GRAVEL (STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.5 AND 4.5 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 2.8 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 6.2 FEET ON 3/15/06
TEST PIT EIGHT
0.0 -2.0 DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND AND ROOTS (TOPSOIL)
2.0 -2.4 ML BROWN -GRAY SILT WITH TRACE FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 2.4 FEET ON 3/15/06
ACO:CAM
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 733906
FIGURE 8
I I 1 I I I I 1 I I
- 1 a
0
mx
ez Le
n
-n
0
c
(D
.I0)
w a
8 Z
c
m •
Q
� w
I: w
t. "G1
i%
p.
o • to O
w O Z
r y A
3 n a A
w O
r Z=
z
P
A
0
s.
a
S
a
100
90
80
I-
p 70
m60
re
z 50
LL
F
w 40
UI
0
a
20
10
0
1000
100
U.S.
# i
�� • • a0 b s o i4 # e re
+a. + +o' i' 4)'
I I I I V II II I I I�IIY
II �
1111111.111111111
II =M11 11111111111111111111111
II 1_IM111INIIIIIIIr11MIIIIIIIIM
II 1 3E11 11111•111111111
a ___ ai 111111111111‘111 II I1•11111u u11111M1LU11M
I _ _____ 11�1■11siruii1
II aim �
II IIIIIVSII 1•11111111iI11111M
a I 11 .111 11•11s1111•1111
II MINIM NIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIM
II I 11N11 111111111111■1•1111
II I_N1111111 NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
uri—h all 11•11111111111an11
ii _ — ai NIII1•11nI111IIN.11111111•1•1
II 1E111E11 11w11w1■Iau11
10 1.0
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
0.1
0.01
0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
ARS� MEDIUM
COARSE I FINE
FINE
SILT OR CLAY
U.S.C.
SYMBOL
•ML
EXPLORATION
NUMBER
TP -1
SAMPLE
DEPTH
9.0 feet
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Gray silt with trace fine sand
SOIL
DISTRIBUTION
Gravel = 0%
Sand = 3%
Sift/Clay = 97%
NGADcaihp 2006V3390E HhASInuOyp
11
c
o '
a
Wa
0)
3
CD
en
m
s
m A. 2.
0
Z
.
0
Z
F 1
a • aq O
• • a Z
PI n
•
• ' s n
0
w n
8 n 2
i
A
3
a
I
4
100
90
80
I-
0 70
a:
z50
U.
F
w 40
w
W30
a
20
10
0
1000
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
II I 1 I III
1111111111111111111111
IIMIIMI�IMIII
NMIMI11IMIN
UMIIMI�IMIl
1111111111111111111
11S11S1IS1u
11111111111111111111
11MIMIIIMIU
111111111•1111111111
1111111111111111111
11w11•1111111n1
111111111111111411111
111111111111111111111
NMIMI�IMIN
IIMIIMIuIMIII
NMlIMI111I•11
111111111111111111111 1
•
100
ha s?
ibi 2 +
10 1.0
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
is IP # s it
20 . 20. 2p• + 0* 4.5'
0.1
0.01
0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
COARSE I FINE COARSE! MEDIUM I FINE
SILT OR CLAY
U.S.C.
SYMBOL
•ML
EXPLORATION
NUMBER
TP -2
SAMPLE
DEPTH
2.5 feet
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Gray sift
SOIL
DISTRIBUTION
Gravel = 0%
Sand = 0%
Silt/Clay = 100%
Section 7
OTHER PERMITS
• Technlwllnformaton Report (711i)05-251-2006
mtomed Consulting Engineers. Inc.
1MEDINA Projegs1Hiiei SPIErpiiaenng
Other Permits:
The project owners will obtain for a Right -Of -Way Use permit from the City of Tukwila to
install drainage improvements in Pacific Highway (99), and will obtain the proper
permits from King County Water District No. 49 and Valvue Sewer District for the
installation of the proposed water and sanitary systems. The owners will also obtain a
Clearing Grading Permit from the City of Tukwila to dear and grade the sites, and for an
individual Building Permits to construct proposed homes.
o0o
Technical Inlormalion Report (T1R) 05.251.2006 %MEDINA ProjectsWirai SPlEnyineenng
11110074 C onwkk CngWie s. Yc.
FILE COPY
Permit No.
F!an r
I _...
is
Lateral Load Analysis f
Design Unlimited
Plan 1294R/A/DE3/2
Western Washington Default
C:
Per 2003 IBC usingQlat v 4.0
Seismic Design Category
Site Class
SDs
R
Exposure
Wind Speed
Snow Load
D
D
0.865
6.5 (OSB)
'B'
85 mph (3 sec)
25 psf
May 9, 2005
r-. emissions,
_iorize
:-cot
REVIEW ' FOR
CODE COMPLIANCE
nnlfvsf
SEP 2 fi 7006
Ci f Tukwila
RUTWING OTWSIOru
EXPIRES 03 -16 -0
This lateral has been personally reviewed by me and it is in full
compliance with the 2003 International Building Code.
RECEIVED
CITY OFTUKWILA
JUN 12 ?OM
PERMIT CENTER
"PW-22.;
Y
4
A
1 4
Walls
Holddowns
Struts
Story : 2
20.0
•
•
•
•
•
•
El
3
40.0
05 -09 -2005 1294RDB2
1 I 1 I
[ 7/16" Wood Structural Panel w/ 1Od Box [Cr III S ecies 1=
C Simpson Strong -Tie Holdown] [ Cr III ecies
[ Simpson Cnnctr I 14-Exceeds maximum table value
V
4
A
1 4 Story
Walls
Holddowns
Struts
2
20.0
3
40.0
05 -09 -2005 1294RDB2
C 7/16" Wood Structural Panel w/ 1Od Box [Cr III S ecies ]_
C Simpson Strong - Tie Holdown] I Cr III Species
C Simpson Cnnctr 3 *-Exceeds maximum table value
lit
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:05
Date : 05 -10 -2005
- - =s =__===-= ======== ======= __l_______ = = == =sae= =
SUMMARY OF SHEAR WALL AND HOLDDOWN SELECTIONS
-Walls Parallel to X axis
Story Line Wall SW LtHD RtHD
2 A 1 1
2 A 2 1
2 A 3 1
2 A 4 1
2 B 1 1
2 C 1 1 1 1
2 C 2 1 1 1
* Exceeds table capacity
- None required
1 A 1 1 1 1
1 A 2 1 - -
1 A 3 1 - 1
3. B 1 2
1 C 2 1
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 1
SW selection based on file: W7HF10BW.TBL
HD selection based on file: HCWA.TBL
OCWA.TBL
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:05
Date : 05-10 -2005
===== =================== === =aaa SS
SUMMARY OF SHEAR WALL AND HOLDDOWN SELECTIONS
Walls Parallel to Y axis
Story Line Wall SW LtHD RtHD
2 1 1 1
2 2 2 1
2 3 1 1
2 3 2 1
1 1 1 1
1 2 1 3
1 3 1 1
* Exceeds table capacity
- None required
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 1
= = aaaaaa a==
SW selection based on file: W7HF1OBW.TBL
HD selection based on file: HCWA.TBL
OCWA.TBL
- L
O llc0.1 ndll D1:11Gt1LL10
[ 7/16" Wood Structural
1 LV1 111 OhJCl.1cA
Panel w/ 10d Box]
J
Shear Wall
Edge
Anchor
Bottom
Rim /Blk to
Allow
SW
Sheathing
Nailing
Bolts
Plate
Top plate
Shear
Notes
#
[Thick (side)]
(in oc)
(in oc)
(in oc)
(in oc)
(Ri
7/16" OSB(1)
10d @ 6
5/8" @ 48
16d @ 5
A35 @24 w /12 -8d
0..
� tfl
MM to U) to
rl rl I t
i1-4 rlr,r,
7/16" OSB(1)
10d @ 4
5/8" @ 32
16d @ 3
A35@16 w /12 -8d
0.
7/16" OSB(1)
l0d @ 3
5/8" @ 12
16d @ 2
A35 @12 w /12 -8d
0.
7/16" OSB(1)
10d @ 2
5/8" @ 8
16d @ 2
A35@ 9 w /12 -8d
0.
7/16" OSB(2)
10d @ 4
5/8" @ 24
2 -16d @ 3
2-A35 @15 w12 -8d
0.70
7/16" OSB(2)
l0d @ 3
5/8" @ 18
2 -16d @ 2
2- A35 @12 w12 -8d
0.90
7/16" OSB(2)
l0d @ 2
5/8" @ 12
2 -16d @ 2
2 -A35@ 9 w12 -8d
1.20
[ Shear Wall Notes ]
GENERAL NOTES (apply to all shear walls)
a) For Rated Sheathing panels, space nails @ 12 in (305 mm) oc along
intermediate framing members.
b) Block all panel edges with minimum 2x (51mm) blocking.
c) Apply nailing to all studs, top and bottom plates and blocking.
d) Framing to be a maximum of 24 in (610mm) oc.
e) Fasteners shall be driven flush with surface of sheathing.
f) Provide solid blocking under the shear walls at the diaphragms to
accommodate the bottom plate attachment.
g) Offset panel joints on each side of wall minimum one stud bay.
SPECIAL NOTES FOR SHEAR WALLS (apply to walls specifically noted)
1) APA Rated Sheathing EXP1 /EXP2 /EXT or C -C /C -D /Struct II Plywood.
2) Provide 3x's (76mm) at adjoining panel edges w /nails staggered.
3) Provide minimum 3x (76mm) blocking or joists beneath bottom plate
with bottom plate nails staggered.
4) Walls >0.35 klf use a minimum of a 3x sill. For walls between 0.35
and 0.60 anchor bolt spacing has been decreased by 1/2 (use 2x).
5) Framing to be a maximum of 16 in (610 mm) o.c. for shear walls
1 and 2.
6) Provide nailing at intermediate supports the same as edge nailing
in shear walls that use GWB (shear walls 1 and 2).
7) For shear walls 2, 7, 8, and 9, panel joints shall be offset to
fall on different framing members or framing shall be 3" nominal
or thicker, and nails on each side shall be staggered.
—
L nusuww 1 J L
[ Simpson Strong
[ Simpson 2004
J I. VL
-Tie Holdown]
Catalog ]
111 Jk)CC.C5
J
Foundation Level
HD
Type
Stud
Fastner
Anchor
Cap
Detail
#
.
Type
to Stud
Bolt
Kips
Number
rl N rq d Ul to l� CO DI 11
STHD8
N N N N N W dM <V ID
N N N N N
(24) 16d
- --
2.37
(2)CS20(36 ")
STHD11
(28) 16d
- --
2.99
(2)CS18(36 ")
STHD14
(38) 16d
- --
4.43
(2)CS16(48 ")
PHD6
(18)SDS3
7/8 "0
5.86
to
PHD8
(24)SDS3
7/8 "0
6.73
2)MST48
HDQ8
(20)SDS3
7/8 "0
8.33
2)MST60
HD10A
(4)7/8 "0
7/8 "0
9.54
2)MST72
HD14A
(4) 1" 0
1" 0
11.08
HD15
HD15
(5) 1" 0
1 -1/4 "0
15.30
—
L nosuowa oLneuuse J
[ Simpson Strong -Tie
[ Simpson 2003 Catalog
I vi.
Holdown ]
]
111 JkJCl;1CJ
J -
Other Levels
HD
Type
Stud
Fastener
Tie
Cap
Detail
#
Type
to Stud
Rod
Kips
Number
rl N rq d Ul to l� CO DI 11
CS18(36 ")
2x
(18)lOd
- --
1.27
(2)CS20(36 ")
(2)2x
(18) 8d ea
- --
2.01
(2)CS18(36 ")
(2)2x
(18)10d ea
- --
2.54
(2)CS16(48 ")
(2)2x
(28) 8d ea
- --
3.30
MST72
3x
(56)16d ea
- --
5.80
2)MST48
(2)3x
(42)16d ea
- --
7.63
2)MST60
(2)3x
(46)16d ea
- --
8.92
2)MST72
(2)3x
(56)16d ea
- --
11.60
HD15
6x
(5) 1 "i
5/4 "0
15.30
[ Holddown Notes ]
GENERAL NOTES
a) Minimum concrete compresive strength to be 2.5 ksi (17.2 MPa).
b) Refer to manufacturers' catalogs for minimum distance to foundation
corner.
c) Refer to manufacturers' catalogs for minimum backing member size.
d) Refer to manufacturers' catalogs for anchor bolt embedment depth.
e) Posts at holddcwn: 2x & 4x (38mm x and 89mm x) - -- #2 or better
6x ( 140mm :c ) - -- #1 or better
f) The anchor type holddowns at other levels shall have a pair, one
above and one below, tied by a threaded rod.
g) Use STHD8RJ for STHD8, STHD1ORJ for STHD1O, and STHD14RJ for STHD14
where rim joists are installed.
he stud tner for . STHD i be
, T s .aso
,. - .._ _ ., _ s shay .. 6d sinkers.
Minimum stem wall to be 6" wide for _- storybu_= dings, 3" wide for
buildings =zaving - or more stories
[ Drag Strut Notes . ]
GENERAL NOTES (apply to all drag struts)
a) Each listed drag strut is the minimum size for the design drag
force and may be replaced by members with larger cross sections.
b) Double top plates to be graded Standard or better (Ft critical).
c) 4x and 6x members to be graded No.2 or better (Ft critical).
SPECIAL NOTES FOR DRAG STRUTS (where specifically noted)
1) The length of the metal strap is the total nailing length, one half
applies within shear wall, the other half beyond shear wall on the
drag strut.
The number of nails to metal strap connector is the total number
of nails required, one half applies within shear wall, the other
half beyond shear wall on the drag strut.
2) The anchor tie shall have a pair, one applies within shear wall,
the other beyond shear wall on the drag strut.
L uLay LUL.
[ Simpson Cnnctr
[ Simpson 1996
ocneause f tur.
]
Catalog
s /11 bfJel.lebJ
DS
Conn
Drag
Fastner
Thru
Cap
Note
#
Type
Strut
to Cnnctr
Rod
Kips
>.
- 24 " -CS16
DEL TOP PL
(22) -l0d
--
1.
H rl rl H rl NNNN
(2)24 " -CS16
DEL TOP PL
(22) -l0d ea
--
3.:
(3)24 " -CS16
4x 6
(22) -10d ea
--
4.
155 "- CMST14
4x 6
(88) -l0d
--
6.'
202 "- CMST12
4x 6
(118) -l0d
--
9.6
(2) -HD14A
4x 6
ea (4)- 1" 0
1" 0'
11.08
(2) -HD15
6x10
ea (5)- 1" 0
1 -1/4 "0
15.30
(4) -HD10A
6x10
ea (4) -7/8 "0
7/8 "0
19.80
(4) -HD15
6x10
ea (5)- 1" 0
1 -1/4 "0
30.61
[ Drag Strut Notes . ]
GENERAL NOTES (apply to all drag struts)
a) Each listed drag strut is the minimum size for the design drag
force and may be replaced by members with larger cross sections.
b) Double top plates to be graded Standard or better (Ft critical).
c) 4x and 6x members to be graded No.2 or better (Ft critical).
SPECIAL NOTES FOR DRAG STRUTS (where specifically noted)
1) The length of the metal strap is the total nailing length, one half
applies within shear wall, the other half beyond shear wall on the
drag strut.
The number of nails to metal strap connector is the total number
of nails required, one half applies within shear wall, the other
half beyond shear wall on the drag strut.
2) The anchor tie shall have a pair, one applies within shear wall,
the other beyond shear wall on the drag strut.
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:06
Date : 05 -10 -2005
Ht (ft)
8.0 -
9.0 -
SUMMARY SHEET
SEISMIC DATA: Manual
R Y -Axis = 4.5 BSF Y -Axis = 0.095
R X -Axis = 4.5 BSF X -Axis = 0.095
__
EPVRA = 0.33
EPA = 0.33
SHEG = I
Seis Perf Cat =
Soil Profile = S4
Period = 0.17
Snow Factor = 0.25
WIND DATA: Manual
Wind Exposure
Wind Speed
Structure
Imp Factor
Story 2
Story 1
= B
= 85
= Encl /Unencl
= 1.0.0
Load Summary II to Y
Level (K) DL Seis
2 - 31.5 3.7
1 - 20.4
1.3 3.2
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 1 of 5
__
II to X
Wind DL Seis Wind
3.6 33.1 4.1 6.4
30.1 2.0 3.7
Base Total 4.9 6.8 6.0 10.1
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:06
Date : 05 -10 -2005
C
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 2 of 5
a Zxxxxxxaa x xaaxxxa= aaasaaaaaxaxxxaaxxzsxaaaxaxxxaa a aax
INPUT DATA - Walls
Calc Plot Wall Length Wall Lt Trib Rt
Dis Dis Dis Ht Shear Holddown DL Span Width Span
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (Ksf) (ft) (ft) (ft)
WALLS Parallel to Y -Axis
X X Y
Story 2
Line 1
Wall 1 0.0 0.0 20.0 8.0 23.0 23.0 0.015 0.0 20.0 0.0
Line 2
Wall 2 20.0 20.0 26.5 8.0 16.5 16.5 0.015 0.0 1.0 0.0
Line 3
Wall 1 40.0 40.0 0.0 8.0 27.5 27.5 0.015 0.0 20.0 5.0
Wall 2 40.0 40.0 32.5 8.0 13.5 13.5 0.015 5.0 20.0 0.0
Story 1
Line 1
Wall 1 0.0 0.0 3.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 0.015 0.0 1.0 0.0
Line 2
Wall 1 20.0 25.0 38.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 0.150 0.0 1.0 0.0
Line 3
Wall 1 40.0 40.0 3.0 8.0 43.0 43.0 0.015 0.0 1.0 0.0
WALLS Parallel to X -Axis
Y Y X
Story 2
Line A
Wall 1 0.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 4.5 4.5 0.015 0.0 1.0 8.0
Wall 2 0.0 3.0 20.5 8.0 4.5 4.5 0.015 8.0 1.0 0.0
Wall 3 0.0 0.0 25.0 8.0 4.5 4.5 0.015 0.0 1.0 6.0
Wall 4 0.0 0.0 35.5 8.0 4.5 4.5 0.015 6.0 1.0 0.0
Line B
Wall 1 23.0 23.0 0.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 0.015 0.0 1.0 0.0
Line C
Wall 1 46.0 46.0 25.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 0.015 0.0 1.0 5.0
Wall 2 46.0 46.0 35.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 0.015 5.0 1.0 0.0
Story 1
Line A
Wall 1 0.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 4.5 4.5 0.015 0.0 8.0 6.0
Wall 2 0.0 3.0 18.5 8.0 11.0 11.0 0.015 6.0 8.0 6.0
Wall 3 0.0 3.0 35.5 8.0 4.5 4.5 0.015 6.0 8.0 0.0
Line B
Wall 1 23.0 23.0 0.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 0.150 0.0 1.0 0.0
Line C
Wall 2 46.0 46.0 25.0 8.0 15.0 15.0 0.150 0.0 3.0 0.0
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:06
Date : 05 -10 -2005
=_ = === === -_= === ==== === = ==
========”=== ======
LINES Parallel.
Roof Level
Lines 1 2
Lines 2 3
Level 1
Lines 1 2
Lines 2 3
INPUT DATA
Build
Dimen
(ft)
to Y -Axis
==C === == =____ _= ====_= == =_= = = == ==s ====
- Diaphragms
Dead Part Live
Load Load Load
(Ksf) (Ksf) (Ksf)
_ = ===C= = =_=_== C====
LINES Parallel to X -Axis
Roof Level
Lines A B 40.0 0.015 0.000 0.000
Lines B C 40.0 0.015 0.000 0.000
Level 1
Lines A B 40.0 0.010 0.000 0.000
Lines 8 C 40.0 0.010 0.000 0.000
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 3 of 5
Start Cant Ext Roof Slope
Dia Dia Wall Front Back
(ft) (Ksf)
43.0 0.015 0.000 0.000 3.0 0.015
46.0 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.0 0.015
20.0 0.010 0.000 0.000 3.0 N 0.015
43.0 0.010 0.000 0.000 3.0 N 0.015
0.0 0.015
3.2 3.2
4 4
3.5 3.5
0 0
0.0 0.015 4 4
0.0 0.015 3.54 3.5
0.0 0.015 0 0
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:06
Date : 05 -10 -2005
∎_=======-== = -= _ = = = = =es = ■ = =S== = _ = === ==
OUTPUT DATA - Shear walls and Holddown Forces
Line Shear Wall Shear H Drag Force Holddowns
Seis Wind Seis Wind Lt Rt Left Rght
(K) (K) (kif) (kif) w (K) (K) (K) (K)
WALLS Parallel to Y -Axis
Story 2
Ln 1 0.9
Wall 1
Ln 2 1.8
Wall 2
Ln 3 0.9
Wall 1
Wall 2
Story 1
Ln 1 1.1
Wall 1
Ln 2 2.5
Wall 1
Ln 3 1.4
Wall 1
0.9
1.8
0.9
1.7
3.4
1.7
WALLS Parallel to X -Axis
Story 2
Ln A 1.0 1.6
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 4 of 5
___ ___ = == _= __ = = = = ==
0.039 0.039 0.3 0.4 0.0
0.111 0.109 0.5 1.0 0.0
0.023 0.022 0.3 0.0 0.0
0.023 0.022 0.6 0.0 0.0
0.055 0.085 0.4 0.0 0.0
0.308 0.425 1.0 1.5 0.0
0.032 0.040 0.2 0.0 0.0
Wall 1 0.056 0.089 1.8 0.3 0.0
Wall 2 0.056 0.089 1.8 0.4 0.2
Wall 3 0.056 0.089 1.8 0.2 0.0
Wall 4 0.056 0.089 1.8 0.2 0.0
Ln B 2.0 3.2
Wall 1 0.101 0.161 0.4 0.0 1.6 --
Ln C 1.0 1.6
Wall 1 0.101 0.161 1.6 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0
Wall 2 0.101 0.161 1.6 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0
Story 1
Ln A 1.5 2.5
Wall 1 0.075 0.126 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.0
Wall 2 0.075 0.126 0.7 0.2 0.0 --
Wall 3 0.075 0.126 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.7
Ln B 3.0 5.1
Wall 1 0.150 0.253 0.4 0.0 0.9
Ln C 1.5 2.5
Wall 2 0.100 0.169 0.5 0.6 0.0
S- Support required beneath holddown M -Manaul input of holddown
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:06
Date : 05 -10 -2005
==== a = = = = = = = =a
= ===a= == =ea == =seas= =a= == = === a = = = = =a
LINES Parallel to Y -Axis
Roof Level
Lines 1 2 0.5
Lines 2 3 0.4
Level 1
Lines 1 2 1.0
Lines 2 3 0.5
OUTPUT DATA - Diaphragms and Chord Forces
LINES Parallel to X -Axis
Roof Level
Lines A B 0.6 2.03
Lines B C 0.6 2.03
Level 1
Lines A B 0.6 0.98
Lines B C 0.6 0.98
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 5 of 5
_ =a== = = =s==
H Dia Load Seismic Shear Wind Shear Chord Force
- -- Seismic Wind Left Right Left Right Max at
W (Kips) (Kips) (Klf) (Klf) (Klf) (Kif) (Kip).xxL
a = =a e= = = = == a = =a ==a a =a == = == = =a== = ==
1.78 1.80 0.02 -0.02 0.02 -0.02 0.1 .50
1.89 1.80 0.02 -0.02 0.02 -0.02 0.1 .50
0.41 1.60 0.01 -0.01 0.04 -0.04 0.2 .50
0.85 1.60 0.01 -0.01 0.02 -0.02 0.1 .50
3.22 0.03 -0.03 0.04 -0.04 0.2 .50
3.22 0.03 -0.03 0.04 -0.04 0.2 .50
1.84 0.01 -0.01 0.02 -0.02 0.1 .50
1.84 0.01 -0.01 0.02 -0.02 0.1 .50
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:07
Date : 05 -10 -2005
=rat=r2= 3=== = === =3= S
* * * * * * * * ** Detailed Calculations * * * * * * * * **
WALLS Parallel to Y -Axis
Story 2 Line i Wall 1 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 0.892
OTM 8.182
Uniform DL: 0.300
Header DL : LT 0.000 RT 0.000
Max Down LT -0.356 RT -0.356
Res Moment: LT 94.426 RT 94.426
Holddown LT -3.750 RT -3.750
Story 2 Line 2 Wall 2 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 1.836
OTM 15.439
Uniform DL: 0.015
Header DL : LT 0.000 RT 0.000
Max Down LT -0.936 RT -0.936
Res Moment: LT 15.620 RT 15.620
Holddown LT -0.011 RT -0.011
Story 2 Line 3 Wall 1 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 0.633
OTM 6.320
Uniform DL: 0.300
Header DL : LT 0.000 RT 0.750
Max Down LT -0.230 RT -0.980
Res Moment: LT 134.991 RT 152.522
Holddown LT - 4.'679 RT -5.316
Story 2 Line 3 Wall 2 Height 8.0 SW Len 13.5
Seismic
Wall Force: 0.311
OTM 3.103
Uniform DL: 0.300
Header DL : LT 0.750 RT 0.000
Max Down LT -0.980 RT -0.230
Res Moment: LT 41.138 RT 32.532
Holddown LT -2.817 RT -2.180
Story 1 Line 1 Wall 1 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 1.098
OTM 9.699
Uniform DL: 0.010
Header DL : LT 0.000 RT 0.000
Max Down LT -0.485 RT -0.485
Res Moment: LT 22.100 RT 22.100
Holddown . LT -0.620 RT -0.620
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 1
23.0 HD Len 23.0 Wt 0.015
Wind
0.900
7.200
0.140
LT 0.000 RT 0.000
LT -0.313 RT -0.313
LT 46.076 RT 46.076
LT -1.690 RT -1.690
16.5 HD Len 16.5 Wt 0.015
Wind
1.800
14.400
0.007
LT 0.000 RT 0.000
LT -0.873 RT -0.873
LT 11.583 RT 11.583
LT 0.171 RT 0.171
27.5 HD Len 27.5 Wt 0.015
Wind
0.604
4.829
0.140
LT 0.000 RT 0.350
LT -0.176 RT -0.526
LT 65.869 RT 72.318
LT -2.220 RT -2.454
HD Len 13.5 Wt 0.015
Wind
0.296
2.371
0.140
LT 0.350 RT 0.000
LT -0.526 RT -0.176
LT 19.040 RT 15.874
LT -1.235 RT -1.000
20.0 HD Len 20.0 Wt 0.015
Wind
1.700
13.600
0.010
LT 0.000 RT 0.000
LT -0.680 RT -0.680
LT 17.420 RT 17.420
LT -0.191 RT -0.191
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:07
Date : 05 -10 -2005
==========
WALLS Parallel to Y -Axis
Story 1 Line 2 Wall 1
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
Story 1 Line 3
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
LT
LT
LT
LT
Height
Seismic
2.465
23.370
0.010
0.000
- 2.921
32.912
- 1.193
RT
RT
RT
RT
Wall 1 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
1.367
12.895
0.010
LT 0.000 RT 0.000
LT -0.300 RT -0.300
LT 102.157 RT 102.157
LT -2.076 RT -2.076
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 2
8.0 SW Len 8.0 HD Len 8.0 Wt 0.150
Wind
3.400
27.200
0.010
0.000 LT 0.000 RT 0.000
-2.921 LT -3.400 RT -3.400
32.912 LT 25.942 RT 25.942
-1.193 LT 0.157 RT 0.157
43.0 HD Len 43.0 Wt 0.015
Wind
1.700
13.600
0.010
LT 0.000 RT 0.000
LT -0.316 RT -0.316
LT 80.524 RT 80.524
LT -1.556 RT -1.556
rns Unlimited
: 03:06:07
: 05 -10 -2005
.== =======e===== = ==== _= ===== == = = == _= _== _ = =_ = == = Mme.
> Parallel to X -Axis
2 Line A
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
y 2 Line A
.
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
2 Line A
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
cy 2 Line A
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
ry 2 Line B
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down :
Res Moment:
Holddown .
Wall 1 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
0.253
2.233
0.015
LT 0.000 RT 0.060
LT -0.496 RT -0.556
LT 1.162 RT 1.391
LT 0.238 RT 0.187
Wall 2 Height
Seismic
0.253
2.233
0.015
LT 0.060 RT
LT -0.556 RT
LT 1.391 RT
LT 0.187 RT
Wall 3 Height
Seismic
0.253
2.233
0.015
LT 0.000 RT
LT -0.496 RT
LT 1.162 RT
LT 0:238 RT
Wall 4 Height
Seismic
0.253
2.233
0.015
'0.045 RT
- 0.541 RT
1.334 RT
0.200 RT
LT
LT
LT
LT
Wall 1 Height
Seismic
2.028
17.134
0.015
0.000 RT
-0.857 RT
22.950 RT
- 0.291 RT
LT
LT
LT
LT
WOODZWOMIMMO
File: SINS
Page: 1
4.5 HD Its WIt
a
LT tat
LT itSMIAIR
LT 19SZ fl
LT lOBIL1MIE
8.0 SW Len 4.5 HDJBWIIIIIIE
a
a
a
0.000 LT flt fl
- 0.496 LT 4MKII -62a
1.162 LT !a
0.238 LT sum
8.0 SW Len 4.5 HDfl f MZE
a
a
EMI
IMF
0.045 LT MGM
- 0.541 LT flan
1.334 LT az.OM
0.200 LT St W
8.0 SW Len 4.5 morrimmem .
for
1�6
0.000 LT IIILSICIS
- 0.496 LT 4nrir -1ar
1.162 LT 1M M
0.238 LT at a
8.0 SW Len 20.0 Hit 11tC
a
a
a
a
0.000 LT ME M
- 0.857 LT a1t ^a ..
22.950 LT Mr= .
-0.291 LT =MOW
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:07
Date : 05 -10 -2005
WALLS Parallel to X -Axis
Story 2 Line C Wall 1 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 0.507
OTM 4.283
Uniform DL: 0.015
Header DL : LT 0.000 RT 0.038
Max Down LT -0.857 RT -0.894
Res Moment: LT 1.434 RT 1.594
Holddown LT 0.570 RT 0.538
Story 2 Line C Wall 2 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 0.507
OTM 4.283
Uniform DL: 0.015
Header DL : LT 0.038 RT 0.000
Max Down LT -0.894 RT -0.857
Res Moment: LT 1.594 RT 1.434
Holddown LT 0.538 RT 0.570
Story 1 Line A Wall i Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 0:338
OTM 2.909
Uniform DL: 0.080
Header DL : LT 0.000 RT 0.240
Max Down LT -0.646 RT -0.886
Res Moment: LT 1.721 RT 2.639
Holddown LT 0.164 RT 0.060
Story 1 Line A Wall 2 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force: 0.826
OTM 7.111
Uniform DL: 0.080
Header DL : LT 0.240 RT 0.240
Max Down LT -0.886 RT -0.886
Res Moment: LT 12.529 RT 12.529
Holddown LT -0.493 RT -0.493
Story 1 Line A Wall 3 Height 8.0 SW Len
Seismic
Wall Force:
0.338
OTM 2.909
Uniform DL: 0.080
Header DL : LT 0.240 RT 0.000
Max Down LT -0.886 RT -0.646
Res Moment: LT 2.639 RT 1.721
Holddown LT 0.060 RT 0.264
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 4
5.0 HD Len 5.0 Wt 0.015
Wind
0.805
6.440
0.007
LT 0.000 RT 0.018
LT -1.288 RT -1.305
LT 1.064 RT 1.122
LT 1.075 RT 1.064
5.0 HD Len 5.0 Wt 0.015
wind
0.805
6.440.
0.007
LT .0.018 RT 0.000
LT -1.305 RT -1.288
LT 1.122 RT 1.064
LT 1.064 RT 1.075
4.5 HD Len 4.5 Wt 0.015
Wind
0.569
4.554
0.080
LT 0.000 RT 0.240
LT -1.012 RT -1.252
LT 1.357 RT 2.080
LT 0.710 RT 0.550
11.0 HD Len 11.0 Wt 0.015
Wind
1.391
11.132
0.080
LT 0.240 RT 0.240
LT -1.252 RT -1.252
LT 9.876 RT 9.876
LT 0.114 RT 0.114
4.5 HD Len 4.5 Wt 0.015
Wind
0.569
4.554
0.080
LT 0.240 RT 0.000
LT -1.252 RT -1.012
LT 2.080 RT 1.357
LT 0.550 RT 0.710
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:07
Date : 05 -10 -2005
==R ======x s=== =flan
WALLS Parallel to X -Axis
Story 1 Line B
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
Story 1 Line C
Wall Force:
OTM
Uniform DL:
Header DL :
Max Down .
Res Moment:
Holddown .
Wall 1 Height
Seismic
3.004
33.155
0.010
LT 0.000 RT
LT -1.658 RT
LT 205.700 RT
LT -8.627 RT
Wall 2 Height
Seismic
1.502
18.857
0.030
LT 0.000 RT
LT -1.257 RT
LT 117.619 RT
LT -6.584 RT
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 5
S
=== = = S
8.0 SW Len 20.0 HD Len 20.0 Wt 0.150
Wind
5.060
40.480
0.010
0.000 LT 0.000 RT 0.000
-1.658 LT -2.024 RT -2.024
205.700 LT 162.140 RT 162.140
-8.627 LT -6.083 RT -6.083
8.0 SW Len 15.0 HD Len 15.0 Wt 0.150
Wind
2.530
20.240
0.030
0.000 LT 0.000 RT 0.000
-1.257 LT -1.349 RT -1.349
117.619 LT 92.711 RT 92.711
-6.584 LT -4.831 RT -4.831
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:08
Date : 05 -10 -2005
___ = = = = === ====== ====
SUMMARY OF ACCUMULATED HOLDDOWN FORCES @ LEFT END OF SHEAR WALL
Wal Parallel to Y axis
LEFT END SEIS WIND
X Y Lt Lt
Dis Dis HD HD
Story Line Wall ft ft K K
2
2
2 20.00 26.50 0.00 0.50
1 20.00 20.00 0.07 1.71
2 3 3 25.00 39.00 0.07 0.47
1 3 1 25.00 39.00 1.79 4.86
2 4 2 40.00 32.50 0.00 0.14
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 1
= _____
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:08
Date : 05 -10 -2005
== === a======= a= = == = == as = a= a=a==== =as= =aa = - - = -=
SUMMARY OF ACCUMULATED HOLDDOWN FORCES @ RIGHT END OF SHEAR WALL
Walls Parallel to Y axis
Story Line Wall
RIGHT END SEIS WIND
X Y Rt Rt
Dis Dis HD HD
ft ft K K
2 3 3 25.00 46.00 0.07 0.47
1 3 1 25.00 46.00 1.79 4.86
2 4 2 40.00 46.00 0.00 0.04
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RD82
Page: 2
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:08
Date : 05 -10 -2005
vam =aes a = exvsv =aflax as svt
SUMMARY OF ACCUMULATED HOLDDOWN FORCES @ LEFT END OF SHEAR WALL
Walls Parallel to X axis
LEFT END SEIS WIND
X Y Lt Lt
Dis Dis HD HD
Story Line Wall ft ft K K
2 A 1 8.00 3.00 0.50 0.92
1 A 1 8.00 3.00 1.09 2.52
2 A 2 20.50 3.00 0.45 0.92
1 A 2 18.50 3.00 0.16 1.75
2 B 1 0.00 23.00 0.00 0.38
1 B 1 0.00 23.00 0.00 1.53
2 C 1 25.00 46.00 1.01 1.65
1 C 2 25.00 46.00 0.94 2.49
2 C 2 35.00 46.00 0.98 1.65
1 C 2 25.00 46.00 0.94 2.49
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 3
Designs Unlimited
Time : 03:06:08
Date : 05 -10 -2005
__________________ _____________________ == == = = = = =_
SUMMARY OF ACCUMULATED HOLDDOWN FORCES @ RIGHT END OF SHEAR WALL
Walls Parallel to X axis
Story Line Wall
RIGHT END SETS WIND
X Y Rt Rt
Dis Dis HD HD
ft ft K K
2 A 1 12.50 3.00 0.45 0.92
1 A 1 12.50 3.00 0.82 2.35
2 A 2 25.00 3.00 0.50 0.92
1 A 2 29.50 3.00 0.09 1.55
2 B 1 20.00 23.00 0.00 0.38
1 B 1 20.00 23.00 0.00 1.53
2 C 1 30.00 46.00 0.98 1.65
1 C 2 40.00 46.00 0.94 2.49
2 C 2 40.00 46.00 1.01 1.65
1 C 2 40.00 46.00 0.94 2.49
WOODCAD QLAT (Pro V4.0)
File: 1294RDB2
Page: 4
_ _
I
J
�C7
Oy
O
L \
0
— t0.9L-
741W
ayy,,
D ti
Q.
C)
k
J
�C7
Oy
O
L \
0
— t0.9L-
741W
ayy,,
�l�iIIII. IIIi�I� ,i1lIIJIIIIIIiII:IilIII!� iI}II,LIr Ii31IiII�I-I 4' ��ii�I '�I�I����i�5��lia��i_I_�i_i�h
Inch 1/18
♦1 ++v +vVl l � 44r• i { f Y�� r4. `�yet.�a mt.«�" , X ` �
�.�s +� � xo.••� ;rr e r
.• t t r tw �4, t U: 1 S t+.
Since 1872.
u�. niliiii�niiliiu�iuiliiu�IUililii�Iililiin�liiliu: i. ��iil` i�ililiillui�iii�llili�lii' lli�il�ililliiii�i�i�l�iii�iliilfi�i�iii�liiii�iii�l ►►i.i�
,OrY_ 1�.�•.i1_ .,
RECEIVED
JUN 2 7 2006
TUKWILA
PUBLIC WORKS
ffeceven
cn,yoF'rUKWU INCOMPLETE
J U N 2 2 2x06 L T R#
F 'fT CENTrzR
PO4
L
0
S�
V
V
V
Y
a
=
• ea
G ^ Gf
o °
dq `
e
LL
.-
,
IL
U-7f1
•
• • ,�
F
4
<O
I
W
U
�l�iIIII. IIIi�I� ,i1lIIJIIIIIIiII:IilIII!� iI}II,LIr Ii31IiII�I-I 4' ��ii�I '�I�I����i�5��lia��i_I_�i_i�h
Inch 1/18
♦1 ++v +vVl l � 44r• i { f Y�� r4. `�yet.�a mt.«�" , X ` �
�.�s +� � xo.••� ;rr e r
.• t t r tw �4, t U: 1 S t+.
Since 1872.
u�. niliiii�niiliiu�iuiliiu�IUililii�Iililiin�liiliu: i. ��iil` i�ililiillui�iii�llili�lii' lli�il�ililliiii�i�i�l�iii�iliilfi�i�iii�liiii�iii�l ►►i.i�
,OrY_ 1�.�•.i1_ .,
RECEIVED
JUN 2 7 2006
TUKWILA
PUBLIC WORKS
ffeceven
cn,yoF'rUKWU INCOMPLETE
J U N 2 2 2x06 L T R#
F 'fT CENTrzR
PO4
L
0
S�
V
V
V
Y
King County
Deportment of Development
anti Environmental Services
900 Oukesdalc Avenue Southwest
iLnlou, WA 96055 -1219
frin 2
LATERAL DESIGN COMPLiAtt•.: r f ECKLIST
For Use with the 2003 IBC METI IC ; : , SIMPLIFIED
291
Re - -
I
C
Simplified Seismic Load Design Method: Performance Criteria
FILE' COpl
Permit No.
.,j
omisSfOnt
. tfrop
REVIEWED FOR - Jed:
CODE COMPLIANCE
SEP 2 A 2006
Burl
ibLik
Of Tukwila
•
Mr; tltvfSION
Alternative use of AS':E 7-02 For Wind and Seismic Load Design:
Introduction
The lateral design provisions of the 2003 edition of the international Bi, . :n ig Code (IBC) differ si'g'nificantly from previous
editions of the Uniform Building Code. Generally, the lack of a prescril a submittal format for required engineering
analysis results in varying submittal formats often difficult to Interpret. 11 purpose of this checklist Is to provide a tool to
review staff to assist in the plan review process to assess compliance. Is . IBC Section 1609 and Section 1615. If the
lateral design is based on the simplified method In part or whole, pie. .e t , anplete the front and backside of the attached
second page and submit it along with the lateral calculations. The . h _ mils both analytical and simplified approaches
for both wind and seismic I4teral design. This checklist pertains only ti ' simplified methods of IBC Section 1609.6 and
Section 1617.5. Both are,atidressed separately.
Simplified Wind Load Design Method: Performance Crii, It is
IBC Section 1609.6 establishes building and site criteria necessary in ordi r'to use the simplified method. These criteria
are as follows:
CITY OFTU RECEIVED
JUN 12 2006
PERMffCENTER
1. The structure is an enclosed building.
2. The building must not have a mean roof height in excess of 80 feet.
3. The roof height cannot exceed the least horizontal dimension of the building.
4. The building cannot be situated, on top of a hill or escarpment over 60 feet in height for Exposure B, and 30
feet for exposure C. The maximum average slope does not exceed 10 percent. In addition the hill or
escarpment is unobstructed by other topographic features for a distance from the high point of 50 times the
height of the hill or 1 mile, whichever is less. •
5. The building is a simplified diaphragm building per IBC Section 1609.2
6. The building is not a flexible structure with afundamental period greater than 1 second.
7. The building has no 'pedal joints Cr separatiorls.
a. The building has regular shape and Is approximately symmetrical In cross section and in each direction.
9. Roof slopes do not exceed 45 degrees.for gable roofs or 27 degrees for hip roofs.
IBC Section 1617.5 allows for the simplified seismic design based on the following formula:
V= i.2Sos W
R •
IBC Section 1616.6.1 outlines the criteria limiting the use of the simplified method according to the following criteria:
1. Structure Is Seismic Use Group I:
2. Building is of light frame construction and does not exceed three stories in height, excluding
basements.
3. Buildiflgs any construction other than light- framed construction, not exceeding two stories in height,
exciuding'basements, with flexible diaphragms at every level as defined In IBC Section 1602.
This worksheet addresses the requirements of the Simplified Method specific to IBC Section 1609:6 and Section 1617.5.
Alternatives to the simplified method are contained in ASCE 7-02.
Ground
snow
load
Wind
Speed
(mph)
Seismic
design
category
Subject to damage from
Winter
design
temp.
Ice-
shield
required
Flood
hazards
Air
freezing
Index
Mean
annual
temp.
.
Weathering
Frost
line
depth
Termite
Decay
Varies
85
D1 or
D2
Moderate
•
12" <
1,000ft
elev.,,
Slight
to Mod,
Slight
to
Mod.
25
No
Varies.,
100 to
250
50
IRC Design criteria.
�.
1. Bpildings and strucf parts thereof, shall be constructed to safely support all loads, Including dead loads,
live loads, roof loads, flood loads, snow loads; wind loads and seismic loads as prescribed by this code. The
*t constnicti9,p.gf buildings and structures shah result In a system that provides a complete load path capable of
transfeFf np all loads from their point of origin through the load- resisting elements to the foundation. R301.1 As an
astern Foe t5 the requirements In Section R301.1 the following standards are permitted subject to the limitations of
this cosh and the limitations therein. Where engineered design Is used In conjunction with these standards the design
shall criktply with the. International Building Code.
1. American Forest and Paper Association (AF &PA) Wood Frame Construction Manual (WFCM).
2. American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), Standard for Cold- Formed Steel Framing — Prescriptive Method rot
One- and Two - family Dwellings (COFS /PM). R301.1.1
2. Table R301.2(1) as Adopted for Unincorporated King County, King County Code Title 16.05.040.
1. The "Snow Load Analysis for Washington "Second Edition (1995), published by the Structural Engineers
Association of Washington, shall be used In determining snow load except where the department determines by public
rule that a different standard is necessary to protect the public health and safety. The minitnum roof snow load shall be
25 pounds per square feet.
2. Seismic design category shall be D1 for areas of unlbgorporated King County to the east of the Snoquahnle
River as It traverses from the King County — Snohomish County link to the city limits of Snoqualmie, east of the town of
Snoqualmle, east of the Snoqualmie Parkway and the Echo Lake-Snoqualmie Cut -off SE as they run from the city limits of
the town of Snoqualmie to State Highway 18 and to the south or east of state Highway 18. All other portions of
unincorporated King County shall be selsmto design category 02.
3. The frost line depth shall be considered to be 12 Inches for sites up to an elevation 000'1000 feet above sea
level. For sites over 1,000 feet above sea level a specific site analysis may be required.
4. Flood hazard within King County varies. See the flood hazard code provisions of KCC 21A.24.
r
CLIMATIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA FOR KING COUNTY
Step ": Step Procedure Checklist for Wind Load Design by Mot Jd I: Simplified
Step Question
ff
Have you used the 3- second gust
wind speed of 85 MPH In your
1 design?
2 What is the importance factor, 1w,
used in your design?
3
4
5
6
7
What is the Exposure category
used?
What is the mean building height
of the building?
What is the Exposure Adjustment
Coefficient used?
Has the building been segmented
into the specific zones pursuant •
to the guidelines of IBC Figure
1609.6.2.1?
From IBC Table 1609.6.2.1 (1),
What are the wind design wind
pressures used for the following
zones:
Horizontal Pressures
Zone A
Zone B
Zone C
Zone D
Vertical Pressures
Zona E
Zone F
Zone G
Zone H
Overhang Zone EoH
Overhang Zone GoH
Has the design wind pressures
been modified due to building
height exceeding 30 Met or
subject to Exposure C conditions?
Background Information '
Basic wind speed for most of King
County is 85 mph. per Table
R301.2 (1) and IBC Figure 1809.
Importance factor, 1w, pursuant to
IBC Section 1609.5 and Table
1604.5, •
Exposure category per IBC Section
1609.4 for all building exposure
quadrants. Most of King County
utilizes Exposure B with the
exception of commercial
applications where Exposure C Is
assumed unless Justifying
documentation Is provided
by the en;i: . r to use a different
exposure at tog.
.
Building heignt.
Exposure Adjustment Coefficient
(EAC), from IBC Table 1609.8.2.1
14) based on mean roof height.
Based on the main wind force
resisting system ( MWFRS) and
illustrated In IBC I figure 1809.6.2.1,
sections of the building are now
zoned to receive different wind
loading conditions. The MWFRS
of the structural
elements that are necessary for the
overall stability of the building to
resist lateral forces. IBC Section
1609.2 an)1 ASCE 7, Section 6.2
provides foritial definitions of what
constitutes the MWFRS.
IBC Table 1609.8,2.1 (1) specifies
the design wind pressures, ps30,
for both the transverse and
longitudinal directions of the main
Wind force resisting system for
buildings less than 30 feet In height
and subject to Exposure B. For
buildings over 30 feet In height or In
Exposure C , the values from Table
1609.6.2.1.(1) will need to be
adjusted based on the formula:
Ps= AIwPs30
Have the wind pressures for the Application of modified design wind
Answer
es El No
o the wing
peed used
e sOre
a c t
❑ Rher (State
Feet
_= E.A.C.
/15tY No
LIAO
Co 1 % Lae
❑ Yes ❑No
Comment
• WIND AND SEISMIC LATERAL DESIGN CHECKLIST 200 IBC
King County Application No. Engineer /Architect
Seismic Design Performance Criteria Used: •
Simplified analysisprocedure pursuant to IBC Section 1616.6.1.
Alternate design procedure frrm ASCE 7 -02.
Wind Design Performance Criteria Used:
X i Building and site meet criterin and simplified method used pursuant to IBC 1609.6.
Alternate design procedure fmm ASCE 7 -02.
Step by Step Procedures C hecklist for Seismic Load Design by Method I: Simplified
Step
1
2
3
4.
5
Question
Are you using the fommi
specified in IBC Section
1617.5?
What is the design ele r
response acceleration
used?
Has the seismic force
been determined for etch
level of the building?
Are you dividing the
ultimate base shear by
1.4 to get the allowat le
working stress base
shear?
Have you calculated .
redundanc factor .'
Design Loads
Please specify the design r!*ad
loads used for the buildinn•
• „ -
Background
Information
Based on the ultimate
base shear formula
outlined above In the
scoping language,
reference IBC Section
1617.5 for details
pertaining to the formula
values.
The design elastic •
response acceleration,
SIDS„ for short period as
modified with Section
1615.1.3:Sos =% Sins
where: Sms =Fa Ss per
IBC Section 1615.1.2 .
Vertical distribution of
seismic forces at each
level is calculated .
pursuant to IBC Section
1617,5.2 using the
following formula:
FX = 1 2SDS Wx
R
Ultimate base shear may
be adjusted per IBC
Section 1605.3
Check for redundancy p,
per IBC Section 1617.2.2.
.Answer
Yes ❑ No
,2G5
S os ,
ytes CI No
Yes
a
No
Roof = J� psf
. Walls!Pa ions = � psi
Floor = psi`
Flat roofs 5 5% slope with Z 30 lbs snow load,
• 20% snow load = ncf
Comment
05-08 -2008
GEORGE K. HIRAI
15615 NE 62 CT
REDMOND WA 98052
RE: Permit No. D06 -223
13040 34 LN S TUKW
Dear Permit Holder:
In reviewing our current records the above noted permit has not received a final inspection by the City of Tukwila Building Division.
Per the International Building Code and/or the International Mechanical Code, every permit issued by the Building Division under the
provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not
commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or
abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days.
Based on the above, you are hereby advised to:
Call the City of Tukwila Inspection Request Line at 206 - 431 -2451 to schedule for the next or final inspection.
This inspection is intended to determine if substantial work has been accomplished since issuance of the permit or last inspection; or if
the project should be considered abandoned.
If such determination is made, the Building Code does allow the Building Official to approve one or more extensions of time for
additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. Extension requests must be In writing and provide satisfactory reasons why
circumstances beyond the applicants control have prevented action from being taken.
In the event you do not call for the above inspection and receive an extension prior to 06/03/2008 , your permit will become null and
void and any further work on the project will require a new permit and associated fees.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Je mi't r Marshall,
Permit Technician
xc: Permit File No. D06 -223
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director
6300 South center Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665
January 29, 2008
George Hirai
15615 NE 62 Ct
Redmond WA 98052
Dear Mr. Hirai,
Sincerely,
Ter Marshall
Permit Technician
Ian
Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director
RE: Request for Extension
Development Permit No. D06 -223
Mechanical Permit Nos. M06 -118
Plumbing /Gas Piping Permit Nos. PG06 -056
City View Estates, Lot 10 —13040 34 Ln S
This letter is in response to your written request for an extension Permit Nos. D06 -223, M06-
118, and PG06 -056. The Building Official has reviewed your letter and considered your request
to extend the above referenced permit. The City of Tukwila Building Division will be extending
the expiration date of your permit an additional 180 days, through June 3, 2008.
If you should have any questions, please contact our office at (206) 431 -3670.
File: Permit No. D06 -223, M06 -118, PG06 -056
P;\Petn,it CenteiExtension Letten\Pcnnits \2006\D06- 223 +Permit Extension #3.doc
Page I of I
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665
Memo
To: Jennifer Marshall & Bill
Fro= Bob Benedicto
CO Brenda Holt , Brandon Miles
Date: January 8, 2008
Re: George Hirai request for extension for permits applicable to City View Estates.
Mr. Hirai applied for all of his permits in June of 2006, consequently he is entitled to be vested in the
code requirements (including the administrative sections) of the 2003 IRC, IMC, IFGC & UPC. The
administrative provisions allowed one or more extensions of 90 days each for applications, and one or
more extensions for the time period in which to commence work. Each request for extension had to be
in writing and justifiable cause cited. Mr. Hirai has complied with this requirement.
Attached is a list of his permits. Please extend as indicated.
• Page 1
City Of Tukwila
Ilpuuiuivuf Ca,mnu,av IXRicpnxn1
BUILDING DIVISION
GEORGE HIRAI PERMITS -
Building Request for
LOT # Permit # Applied Approved Issue Expiration Extension Extend
k 9 D06- 222+/ 06/12/2006
•p 10 D06 -223 06/12/2006
lc 11 006 -224' 06/12/2006
12 006 -225✓/ 06/12/2006
' 13. D06 -226V 06/12/2006
12/05/2006 NO
09/29/2006 YES
08/16/2006 YES
04/11/2007 NO
08/16/2006 YES
MECH f�
Il I�h ✓'__
f MO6 -1 8 06/12/2006
Iy M06 -120J 06/12/2006
t3 M06- 12106/12/2006
PLUMBING & GAS PIPING
PG06- 055/p6/12/2006 12/05/2006 NO
}V PGO6- 056'96/12/2006 09/29/2006 YES
/ ( PG06-057 106/12/2006 08/16/2008 YES
( y PG06-058/06/12/2006 04/11/2006 NO
PGO6- 059/06/12/2006 08/16/2006 YES
PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
09/29/2006 YES
04/11/2007 NO
08/16/2006 YES
PW07 -063 Pending NO N/A
12/04/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/04/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/04/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/04/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/04/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/04/2007 12/06/2007 YES
12/28/2007 12/06/2007 YES
? Period
90 DAYS sir
180 DAYS
180 DAYS
90 DAYS 6K(
180 DAYS
180 DAYS
90 DAYS
180 DAYS
90 DAYS
180 DAYS
180 DAYS
90 DAYS
180 DAYS
N/A
11 -06 -2007
GEORGE K. HIRAI
15615 NE 62 CT
REDMOND WA 98052
RE: Permit No. D06 -223
13040 34 LN S TUKW
Dear Permit Holder;
In reviewing our current records the above noted permit has not received a final inspection by the City of Tukwila Building Division.
Per the International Building Code and/or the International Mechanical Code, every permit issued by the Building Division under the
provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not
commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or
abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days.
Based on the above, you are hereby advised to:
Call the City of Tukwila Inspection Request Line at 206 - 431 -2451 to schedule for the next or final inspection.
This inspection is intended to determine if substantial work has been accomplished since issuance of the permit or last inspection; or if
the project should be considered abandoned.
If such determination is made, the Building Code does allow the Building Official to approve one or more extensions of time for
additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. Extension requests must be in writing and provide satisfactory reasons why
circumstances beyond the applicants control have prevented action from being taken.
In the event you do not call for the above inspection and receive an extension prior to 12/28/2007 , your permit will become null and
void and any further work on the project will require a new permit and associated fees.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
1 6
XC:
er Marshall,
t Technician
Permit File No. D06 -223
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665
August 17, 2007
George Hirai
15615 NE 62 Ct
Redmond WA 98052
RE: Request for Extension
Development Permit No. D06 -223 and 224
Mechanical Permit Nos. M06 -118 and 119
Plumbing/Gas Piping Permit Nos. PG06 -056 and 057
City View Estates
Dear Mr. Hirai,
This letter is in response to your written request for an extension to the above permits. The
Building Official has reviewed your letter and considered your request to extend the above
referenced permit. The City of Tukwila Building Division will be extending the expiration date
of your permit an additional 90 days, through December 28, 2007.
If you should have any questions, please contact our office at (206) 431 -3670.
jem
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
File: Permit No. D06 -223 & 4, M06 -118 & 119, PG06 -056 & 057
P:Wemut Cente?Extension Letten\Penmb\2006 \D06-223 & 224+ Permit Extensioadoc
Page I of I
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila,. Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665
To: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development
RE: Permit Numbers: D06 -2 _, t6 -118, PG06 -056, D06 -224, M06 -119, PG06 -057,
M06 -121, PG06 -226
Dear Permit Center
Due the delay in obtaining approval from the City of Tukwila Public Works Department
affecting the above building permits for the subject lots and the pending permit approval
for the drainage vault that handles the drainage for the subject lots, I am requesting an
extension on the subject permits. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
ots10, 11, and 13.
C34.1eveG TO dc9J
S
o8 4 7 / o7 *11
5A- n
RECE NED
'AUG 161007,
cOMM
07 -31 -2007
GEORGE K. HIRAI
15615 NE 62 CT
REDMOND WA 98052
RE: Permit No. D06 -223
13040 34 LN S TUKW
Dear Permit Holder:
In reviewing our current records the above noted permit has not received a final inspection by the City of Tukwila Building Division.
Per the International Building Code and/or the International Mechanical Code, every permit issued by the Building Division under the
provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not
commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or
abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days.
Based on the above, you are hereby advised to:
Call the City of Tukwila Inspection Request Line at 206-431 -2451 to schedule for the next or final inspection.
This inspection is intended to determine if substantial work has been accomplished since issuance of the permit or last inspection; or if
the project should be considered abandoned.
If such determination is made, the Building Code does allow the Building Official to approve one or more extensions of time for
additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. Extension requests must be In writhes and provide satisfactory reasons why
circumstances beyond the applicants control have prevented action from being taken.
In the event you do not call for the above inspection and receive an extension prior to 09/29/2007 , your permit will become null and
void and any further work on the project will require a new permit and associated fees.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
er Marshall,
Permit Technician
xc: Permit File No.1306.223
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665
March 14, 2007
George Hirai
15615 NE 62 Ct
Redmond WA 98052
RE: Request for Extension
Development Permit Nos. D06 -223, 224, & 226
City View Estates
Dear Mr. Hirai:
This letter is in response to your written request for an extension to Permit Nos. D06 -223, D06 -224, and
D06 -226. The Building Official has reviewed your letter and considered your request to extend the
above referenced permits. The City of Tulcwila Building Division will be extending the expiration date
of your permit an additional 180 days, through September 29, 2007.
If you should have any questions, please contact our office at (206) 431 -3670.
Sincerely,
City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
File: Permit No. D06 -223, 224, 226
P:Vennifet\Extension Letters \Penmts12006VM6 -223, 224 & 226 Permit Pxtension.doc
Page 1 of t
jem
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665
To: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development
RE: permit Numbers: D06 -223, D06 -224 and D06 -226 for Lots10, 11, and 13
Dear Permit Center
Due the delay in obtaining approval from the City of Tukwila Public Works Department
affecting the above building permits for the subject lots, I am asking for an extension on
the subject permits.
incerely,
rge Hirai
Permit Applicant.
I nrec
MAR 1 3 200/
PE RMITCz wER
« Q� gerr
�� =
p3- /3 -07
- 6cr 41
0 `112iIi-
03 -01 -2007
GEORGE K. HIRAI
15615 NE 62 CT
REDMOND WA 98052
RE: Permit No. D06 -223
13040 34 LN S TUKW
Dear Permit Holder:
In reviewing our current records the above noted permit has not received a final inspection by the City of Tukwila Building Division.
Per the International Building Code and/or the International Mechanical Code, every permit issued by the Building Division under the
provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not
commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or
abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days.
Based on the above, you are hereby advised to:
Call the City of Tukwila Inspection Request Line at 206 -431 -2451 to schedule for the next or final inspection.
This inspection is intended to determine if substantial work has been accomplished since issuance of the permit or last inspection; or if
the project should be considered abandoned.
If such determination is made, the Building Code does allow the Building Official to approve one or more extensions of time for
additional periods not acceding 90 days each. Extension requests must be In writinr and provide satisfactory reasons why
circumstances beyond the applicants control have prevented action from being taken.
In the event you do not call for the above inspection and receive an extension prior to 04 /02/2007 , your permit will become null and
void and any further work on the project will require a new permit and associated fees.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
ire
ii hall,
P Tee ermit Tec cian
xc:
Permit File No. D06 -223
City of Tukwila
Steven Al. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 • Fax: 206
August 16, 2006
George Hirai
15615 NE 62 Ct
Redmond, WA 98052
Dear Mr. Hirai:
City of Tukwila
Steven Al. Mullet, Mayor
RE: CORRECTION LETTER #1
Development Permit Application Number D06 -223
City View Estates, Lot 10 —13040 34 Ln S
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit(s) can
be approved. All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same time and
reflected on your drawings. I have enclosed comments from the Planning Department. At this time the
Building, Fire, and Public Works Departments have no comments.
Building Department: Brandon Miles, at 206 431 -3684, if you have any questions
concerning the attached memo.
Please address the attached comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans,
specifications, and/or other documentation. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised
plans, specifications and/or other documentation be resubmitted with the appropriate revision
block.
In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every
resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. I have also enclosed a Non - Residential Sewer
Use Certification that must be completed prior to issuance of the permit. Corrections/revisions must be
made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by a messenger service.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 433 -7165.
Sincerely,
end
File No. D06 -223
arshall
J""" —`
hnician
P:Vennifer\Conection letters12006 \DO6 -223 Correction Dr #1.DOC
1
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665
DATE:
CONTACT:
RE:
ADDRESS:
ZONING:
June 28, 2006
George K. Hirai
D06 -223
13040 34 Ln S
LDR
PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS
The Planning Division of DCD has reviewed the above permit application. Certain modifications
need to be made to the plans prior to approval of the above permit application.
1. The front setback for the home will be 20 -feet from TIB and the alley will be considered
a 2 front and will require a setback of ten feet. Please adjust the site map
accordingly.
2. As noted at our meeting on June 28, 2006, SEPA is required for the entire project. The
building permits cannot be released until the SEPA review is complete.
June 16, 2006
George K. Kirai
15615 NE 62 Ct
Redmond WA 98052
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
RE: Letter of Incomplete Application # 1
Development Permit Application D06 -223
City View Estates, Lot 10 — 130xx Tukwila International Bl
Dear Mr. Kirai:
This letter is to inform you that your permit application received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center on June 12, 2006 is
determined to be incomplete. Before your application can continue the plan review process the attached items from the
following department needs to be addressed:
Building Department: Allen Johannessen, at 206 433 -7163, if you have any questions concerning the
attached comments.
Planning Department: Brandon Miles, at 206 431 -3684, if you have any questions concerning the
attached comments.
Please address the comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans, specifications, and/or other
documentation. The City requires that four (4) sets of revised plans, specifications and/or other documentation be
resubmitted with the appropriate revision block.
In order to better expedite your resubmittal a 'Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every resubmittal. I have
enclosed one for your convenience. Revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by
a messenger service.
If you have any questions, please contact me at the Permit Center at (206) 433 -7165.
Sincerely,
ife M shall
t ician
Enclosures
File: Permit D06 -222
a
P:Vennifer\ncomplete Letters \2006\D06 -223 Incomplete Ltr #I.DOC
jem
Steven Al. Mullet, Mayor
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665
Determination of Completeness Memo
Date: June 15, 2006
Project Name: City View Estates, Lot 10
Permit #: D06 -223
Plan Review: Allen Johannessen, Plans Examiner
Tukwila Building Division
Allen Johannessen, Plan Examiner
A Building Division has deemed the subject permit application incomplete. To assist the applicant in
expediting the Department plan review process, please forward the following comments.
PLAN SUBMITTALS: (Min. size 11x17 to maximum size of 24x36; all sheets shall be the same size).
(If applicable, structural drawings and structural calculations sheets shall be original signed wet stamp not
copied.)
1 The site plan does not show a footing discharge system. Provide a site plan that identifies the footing drain
discharge system. The fooling discharge system will generally be separate from the roof drain system.
Coordinate any combined discharge systems with the Tukwila Public Works Department The intent is that
groundwater will not accumulate in the basement or crawl space.
Should there be questions conceming the above requirements, contact the Building Division at 206-431-3670.
No further comments at this time.
DATE:
CONTACT:
RE:
ADDRESS:
ZONING:
June 15, 2006
George Hirai
D06 -223
130xx TIB
LDR
PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS
The Planning Division of DCD has reviewed the above permit application. The application is
incomplete and additional information is required.
1. Provide individual site maps for each lot. There is simply too much information on sheet C6
of C6 to be able to evaluate setbacks on the property. Ensure that the site map shows the
proposed deck. Note: The deck must meet setbacks.
2. On sheet 8 label the elevations in terms of direction, for example, east elevation, north
elevation, etc.
December 8, 2004
Mr. George K. Hirai
George K. Hirai Inc. LLC
15615 NE 62 Court
Redmond, WA 98052
RE: PRE04 -022
Dear Mr. Hirai;
City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Fire Department Nicholas J. Olivas, Fire Chief
I have received your undated letter in regards to a variance for the Hammer Head Turnaround
for the proposed development reviewed by the Design Review Committee, # PRE04 -022. If
you provide approved residential fire sprinkler systems in all the residential structures that will
be built on lot's 9,10,11,12 and13, this office will accept the 16' wide West access drive with a
provision for a modified turnaround on lot 12. The modified turnaround should have the length
on lot 12 of at least 25' for emergency vehicle use. If you have any further questions please
contact me at 206 - 575 -4404.
Sincerely,
Capt. Don Tomaso
Fire Marshal
City Of Tukwila
dtomaso@ci.tukwila.wa.us
Headquarters Station: 444 Andover Park East • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -575 -4404 • Fax: 206 -575 -4439
ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06 -223 DATE: 09 -13 -06
PROJECT NAME: CITY VIEW ESTATES, LOT 10
SITE ADDRESS: 13040 34 LN S
Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter #
X Response to Correction Letter # 1
Revision # After Permit Issued
DEPARTMENTS:
Building Division
Public Works
Complete
Comments:
Documents/routing slip.doc
2-28-02
PERMIT COORD COPY
PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP
Fire Prevention
Structural
DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.)
Incomplete ❑
TUES(THURS ROU NG:
Please Route Structural Review Required
REVIEWER'S INITIALS:
APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS:
Approved ❑ Approved with Conditions
Notation:
REVIEWER'S INITIALS:
DATE:
DATE:
C _ 2647 "
Plahnfng Division
Permit Coordinator ❑
DUE DATE: 09-14 -06
Not Applicable ❑
Permit Center Use Only
INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED:
Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials:
No further Review Required
DUE DATE: 10-12-06
Not Approved (attach comments) ❑
Permit Center Use Only
CORRECTION LETTER MAILED:
Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials:
ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06 -223 DATE: 06 -22 -06
PROJECT NAME: CITY VIEW ESTATES, LOT 10
SITE ADDRESS: 13040 34 LN S
Original Plan Submittal X Response to Incomplete Letter # 1
Response to Correction,Letter #
Revision # After Permit Issued
DEPARTMENTS: n�G
���
B i g Division
Pu 21 K
DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.)
Complete
Comments:
PERMIT COORD COPY
PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP
Fire Prevention
Structural
Incomplete ❑
Permit Center Use Only
INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED:
Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials:
TUES/THURS ROU NG:
Please Route Structural Review Required
REVIEWER'S INITIALS:
APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS:
Approved ❑
Notation:
Documents/routing slip.doc
2 -28-02
REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE:
cimi
PI nning Divisio
❑ Permit Coordinator
DUE DATE: 06-27-06
Not Applicable ❑
No further Review Required
DATE:
Permit Center Use Only
CORRECTION LETTER MAILED:
Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping PW ❑ Staff Initials: /
DUE DATE: 07 -25 -06
Approved with Conditions❑ Not Approved (attach comments)
ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06 -223 DATE: 06 -12 -06
PROJECT NAME: CITY VIEW ESTATES, LOT 10
SITE ADDRESS: 130XX TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BL
X Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter #
Response to Correction Letter #
Revision # After Permit Issued
Bt ��
B II ing 'vision
Public Works
PERMIT COORD COPY
PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP
Comments:
a
g5I lw°
Fi revention
Structural
DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.)
Complete ❑ Incomplete
Planning Division i C611
Permit Coordinator ��❑
DUE DATE: 06-15-06
Not Applicable J
Permit Center Use Only
INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: tQ 1 R4dI LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED:
Departments determined incomplete: Bldg p5. Fire ❑ PingX PW ❑ Staff Initials
TUES/THURS ROUTING:
Please Route ❑ Structural Review Required
REVIEWER'S INITIALS:
APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS:
Approved ❑
Notation:
REVIEWER'S INITIALS:
Documents/routing slip.doc
2-28-02
No further Review Required
DATE:
DUE DATE: 07-13-06
Approved with Conditions ❑ Not Approved (attach comments) n
DATE:
Permit Center Use Only
CORRECTION LETTER MAILED:
Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials:
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206431 -3670
Fax: 206 -431 -3665
Web site: http: / /www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
1
REVISION SUBMITTAL
Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through
the mail, fax, etc.
Date: 0 Plan ChecklPermlt Number: D06 -223
❑ Response to Incomplete Letter #
® Response to Correction Letter # 1
❑ Revision # ` after Permit is Issued
❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner
Project Name: City View Estates, Lot 10
Project Address: 13040 34 Ln S
Contact Person: l IV , 1 g
Summary of Revision: 41
Sheet Number(s):
"Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision Including date of revision
Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by:
Entered in Permits Plus on
\applications\fornu- applications on line revision submittal
Created: 8 -13 -2004
Revised:
Phone Number•. 2 — elf
t
d'ut
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
CITY EC E h
SEP 1 3 2005
Pewit CENTER
City of Tukwila
Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through
the mail, fax, etc.
Date: Ili O in( at Plan Check/Permit Number: D06-223
® Response to Incomplete Letter # 1
❑ Response to Correction Letter #
❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued
❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner
Project Name: City View Estates, Lot 10
Project Address: 13040 34 Ln S
Contact Person: George Hirai n Phone Numbe at) (0--116-2q8/
Summary of Revision: /��4 ALkSI? -'ct)rri &c�1/n ? cPvar,(7 (y�`"� s ly tc
f �� St4� plate
Sheet Number(s):
"Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision
Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: i JA/tPlA,
I1U Entered in Permits Plus on 6112-24/10
\applicaoonsVornu- applications on Iinehrevision submittal
Created: 8 -13 -2004
Revised:
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Phone: 206 -431 -3670
Fax: 206 -431 -3665
Web site: http: / /www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
itECEIVED
Crrr of TUKWILA
JUN 2 2 2006
PERMIT CENTER
Part A: (To Be Completed by Applicant)
Purpciss,of Certificate:
Building Permit ❑ Preliminary Plat or PUD ❑ Other
❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Rezone
Proposed Use:
U Residential Single Family R esidential Multi-Family CI Commercial CI Other
/ ❑ J
Applicants Name: �r n hers 1 Phone: 2o& . 7_52s 1
Property Address or A proximate Location: Tax Lot Number.
130KX — PI/ S /3 596n - 0354-
Legal Description(Attach Map and Legal Description if necessary):
Lo+ /0 _bik 7 Qbha31 S /r /iy bs'x'
Part B: (To Be Completed by Sewer Agency)
1. a. Sewer Service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing to rr size sewer
?)!l - feetfrer i -the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use.
OR ❑ b. Sewer service will require an Improvement to the sewer system of:
❑ (1) feet of sewer trunk or lateral to reach the site; and/or
❑ (2) the construction of a collection system on the site; and/or
❑ (3) other (describe):
2. (Must be completed if 1.b above is checked)
❑ a. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive
plan,
OR ❑ b. The sewer system Improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment.
3. l ' a. The proposed project Is within the corporate limits of the District, or has been granted Boundary
Review Board approval for extension of service outside the District,
OR ❑ b. Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary to provide service.
4. Service is subject to the following: PERMIT: $ 100 -
a. District Connection Charges due prior to connection:
GFC: $ 85-0 dD SFC: $ 1900 eUNIT: $ TOTAL: $ Z1&) °°
(Subject to Change on January 1st)
King County/METRO Capacity Charge: Currently, $4250.70 /residential equivalent, will be billed
directly by IGng County after connection to the sewer system. (Subject to change by King Co/Metro
without notice.) 0 Required b. Easements: 'L Required CI May be Required C�OFTUKWILA
e. Other. JUN 12 70015
PERMIT CENTER
RXINGTOWARD ERENYIRONNlNr
By
-cad eq.
Title
No io mcutair mate •vum
P.O. BC9550
Tukwlla'WVA 98168
Phone: (206) 242 -3236
Fax: (206) 2424527
CERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABILITY /NON - AVAILABILITY
13 Certificate of Sewer Availability OR ❑ Certificate of Sewer Non - Availability
I hereby certify that the above sewer agency information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year
from the daje- o( sign gture,
3.9•Q$
Date
po& n3
CITY of TUKW /LA .
Community Development Department
Permit Center
6300 Southcenrer Blvd., Suite 100
Tukwila, WA 98788
ti ° l1`�` lrS 1 - + " 1 J. "
w q ml y� n r v
Biro ad eau (attach map and legal daacrlption showing hydrant location and tdge of main);
13 t4F n -_ Sit -
l3OXX t . S /0 ; 66
' 3i Wto,9ra04' �I»!;fl�A✓i�,'�,�N J1� {I n iE 'rV 1 i Qin1 1, :t. ,,;,
Name: t -alt
Address: S6l� f it e 6 - M ,Q
Phone 4 5‘.1-7c--
5 -t'C Cpc
This certificate is for the purposes of:
g Residential Building Permit ❑ Preliminary Plat
in Commercial/Industrial Building Permit ❑ Rezone
Estimated number of service connections and water meter size(a):
(Use separate sheet 19 more room la needed)
I hereby Certify
that the above Information is true and correct.
ut t-:4 CO. F.tli ita:.- t7 r'S? It / 2. .S"
Agency/Phbne
- 2.-e - 2— 7 — g5
CERTIFICATE OF WATER AVAILABILITY
Required only 11 outside City of Tukwila water district
Name; a erate,
Address: /chic it ` �) e r�
Phone:
sl
Vehicular distance from nearest hydrant td the closest point of structure is ft.
Area is served b ater Utility District): .L>` 12.0
1
By f)
Permit Center /Buil
106131.3079
Public Works Department:
206 - 433 -0179
Planning Division:
206 -431 -3670
2c>t. — ?SA ^ 24 vi C'6-C
Q
Short Subdivision
❑ Other
Th r 6 of
Data ,
1. The proposed project Is within t "*". " Cite q (City /Count')
5. Water availability:
CD/Acceptable service can be provided to this project
❑ Acceptable service cannot be provided to this project unless the Improvements In Item 13-2 are met.
❑ System Is not capable of providing service to this project.
This certificate is not valid without Water District No. 125's attachmem entitled
"Attachment to Certificate of Water Availability."
PERMIT NO.:
Y,I i V�1
Ash;
PI
2. QJ,n improvements required.
3. The improvements required to upgrade the water system to bring It Into compliance with the utilities' comprehensive plan or to
meet the minimum flow' requirements of the project before connection and to meet the State cross connection control
requirements.
4. Based upon the improvements listed above, water can be provided and will be available at the site with a flow of / 7 co
at 20 psi residual for a duration of 2 hours at a velocity of 11,A fps as documented by the attached calculations.
CIIYO
JUN 12 moo
PERMITCENTER
3 -6-04
Date
—(P - 07
gpm
DOl¢er2-2-3
License Information
License
BAZAL*163PR
Licensee Name
BAZALA INC
Licensee Type
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR
UBI
600540739
Ind. Ins. Account Id
a
Business Type
CORPORATION
Address 1
2416 32ND AVE W
Address 2
City
SEATTLE
County
KING
State
WA
Zip
981991031
Phone
2062863577
Status
ACTIVE
Specialty 1
GENERAL
Specialty 2
UNUSED
Effective Date
10/19/1984
Expiration Date
1/11/2008
Suspend Date
Separation Date
Parent Company
Previous License
Next License
Associated License
Bond Information
Bond
Bond
Company
Name
Bond
Account
Number
Effective
Date
Expiration
Date
Cancel
Date
Impaired
Date
Bond
Amount
Received
Date
a
CBIC
616241
12/28/2001
Until
Cancelled
01/01/1980
512,000.00
01/11/2002
Business Owner Information
Name
Role
Effective Date
Expiration Date
YOSHIKAWA, TERRANCE Y
01/01/1980
VANDERVELDE, PAUL M
01/01/1980
CARPENTER, SHARON L
01/01/1980
Look Up a Contractor, Electrician or Plumber License Detail Page 1 of 2
Washington State Department of Labor and Industries
General/Specialty Contractor
A business registered as a construction contractor with L&I to perform
construction work within the scope of its specialty. A General or Specialty
construction Contractor must maintain a surety bond or assignment of
account and carry general liability insurance.
https: // fortress .wa.gov /lni/bbip /printer.aspx ?License= BAZALI* 163PR 10/04/2006
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x