Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit 6946 - North Hill - Building
!"' A j 44% KlAw -RtLL City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director TO: Kim Hart, Finance FROM: Shellie Bates, Permit Center DATE: December 17, 1992 SUBJECT: Refund Please refund $1,099.60 to Gencor. The permit has expired prior to the start of construction and the building official is authorizing a refund of 80 percent of the building permit fee. The original transactions were November 21, 1989, Receipt #3692 and March 6, 1992, Receipt #7688. Please mail the check to the applicant at the following address: GENCOR Leon Grundstein 750 Sixth Street South, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 D 7lte 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax (206) 4313665 • BUILbiNG PERMIT CUSTOMER CHARGE TRANSMITTAL Awi I a - Dept. of Community Development Juthcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 ATE: USTOMER: Gi2 or EMPLOYEE'S NAME: (206) 431-3680 ..1::.;-::',:::::.•.,DESCRIPTIOINr:::::::::';i::::::?:::::::: .::::.ACCOUNT.:'..NUMBER 1::!: iR:::::::::!. AMOUNT.,:;:::::.:.:.::•::::: uilding Permit 000/322.100 $ (' 11-14, q__3 Ian Check 000/345.830 tate Building Surcharge 000/386.904 14 ,60 ivestigation • 000/322.800 ond/Deposit 000/386.908 8MITi'i...NPMB ".:i; :::::.: . i PAID BY: Cash Check # 3(p5ti '$ ti 4CT .,. Recnints #7169 $25.00 cash and #7168 for $25.0 cash already TOTAL $ d Total : 000.345.830 = $75.00 John W. Rants, Mayor 25.00 25.00 25.00 75.00 14111611iillUlbe I clA 1: C C ; -32C 8V2 • "1-17. 1:4 Currency $ TOTAL PROS MIER Tc A OVE 411.369.810 • GRA TOTAL $ DEPOSIT/RECOt4CILIATIO Coin $ - Checks $ '575:2--r:.- Subtotal $, Charge Cards $ 5-.41 "j TOTAL is • ;—) Y' Merchandise Charges 411.99.586.908.00 F „V,/ Gift Certificate Charges 411.99.586.908.04 4k\ BUILDI' -� PERMIT (POST WITH INSPECTION CARD AND PLANS IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATIONJ7(f CITY OF TUKWILA Dept. of Community Development- Building Division 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 (206) 431 -3670 BUILDING PERMIT NO. DATE ISSUED: LOcil-RD 3 (0'92 IMBIONVEMBENEIUMBIIMMEIIIIIIMBIPO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT _R_C_PT_# DATE BUILDING PERMIT.FEE 1,374:50 3692/ �'11 21$9/ PLAN:.CHECK FEE; 893 .43';: 3692 11 21-,8.9.: BUILDING SURCHARGE OTHER .Add . P.lan Rev. 3b 00 3892 TOTAL - 2.,302 43 PLAN CHECK NO.: 89-399 SITE ADDRESS 5900 Southcenter 81 SUITE it PROJECT NAME/TENANT North Hill TYPE OF (New Building Li Addition U Tenant Improvement (commercial) Li Demolition (building) U Grading /Fill WORK: 0 Rack Storage 0 Reroof 0 Remodel (residential) O Other: VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION - $ 309,636.80 ASSESSOR ACCOUNT it 359700- 0209 -09 DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE: Construct new concrete tilt -up building for retail use. a•Z.` r:�t PROPEkTY OWNER Gencor Incorporated PHONE 488 -1197 ADDRESS 11801 N.E. 160th, Suite G, Bothell, WA CONTRACTOR Gencor Incorporated PHONE ZIP 98011 488 -1197 ADDRESS 11801 N.E. 160th Suite G, Bothell, WA WA. ST. CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE # N/A ARCHITECT ADDRESS LOG Architects ZIP 98011 EXP. DATE N/A PHONE 283 -4764 1836 Westlake Avenue North, Suite 204, Seattle, WA ZIP 98109 .. CODE :c.omPLIArlCE USE •..4 FLOORSQUARE OCC. FEET LOAD ♦.wNH....+aHH SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE OCC. FEET LOAD TOTAL SQUARE FEET TOTAL OCC, LOAD TOTAL' TYPE OF CONS'fi.: V -N UBC EDITION (year) 1988 SETBACKS: N - S - E- W - FIRE PROTECTION: ®Sprinklers ® Detectors O N/A UTILITY PERMITS REQUIRED? Yes 0 No `Public Works) ZONING: C -1 BAR /LAND USE CONDITIONS? 0 Yes 0 N CONDITIONS (other than those noted on or attached to permit/plans) APPROVED FOR ISSUANCE BY: BUILDING OFFICIAL DATE: 5,4,6 -ye thereby certify that I have read and examined this permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of lave 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 provisions of any other state or local laws regulating construction or the performance of work. I am authorized to sign for and obtain this building permit. SIGNATURE: DATE: PRINT NAME: � L\). COMPANY: This:permit sha l becom- null`and Vol • if the work is not commenced :within 180days from the: date of issuance, or if the Work is suspended: or abandoned fora period of 180 days from the last inspection. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NO. DATE ISSUED: CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCE'NTER BOULEVARD, TUKWJ A, WASHINGTON 98188 PHONE # (2061433.1800 MEMORANDUM TO: - North FROM: * -e. \X -Q DATE: r u M V co-3q1 Gmp L. I'nn()Eisen, ,tirwor (psi 'qqQ SUBJECT: ok r o • r, _• 3'J\Wd!\c oxon mac; o ( rtt, iq.gy RJLkox\ q, log -to 19P-e- U -K) cl)(pLA0c11 3a . I a 30 q i c�r(c). %a 5vb 1:5/ Plan C:herk Sq fpur C�IAr � • � To al a , ala ,LL3 © O�._.! d i +ionoJ Plan R i cD;3DQ .1-43 �► I ? . Oa krflunt Pod kV a1 -M Receipt i l l /A 9 4113 e noun- 0u.� -e r,1 3togQ City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor N ot=e. o Popp Ircctior, Wi oc■8■11.0`\9 3o mitred on MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: G DATE: c� 5 1� I , [(No SUBJECT: i qI, (0 O n th R (10 /T2.MEMO) or BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION TRACKING PLAN CHECK NUMBER c& X99 PROJECT NAME M 0rkh i -■11 D" (C,2 SITE ADDRESS DATE NOTIFIED 2nd NOTIFICATION _ram C1 n SS�x _b[ (IY: ___L� BY: (snit.) SUITE NO. INSTRUCTIONS TO STAFF • Contacts with applicants or requests for information should be summarized in writing by staff so that any time the status of the project may be ascertained. • Plan corrections shall be completed and approved prior to sending on to the next department. • Any conditions or requirements for the permit shall be noted on the plans or summarized concisely in the form of a formal letter or memo, which will be attached to the permit. • Please fill out your section of the tracking chart completely. Where information requested is not applicable, so note by using "N /A ". BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE/OCCUPANCY INFORMATION (to be filled out by Plan Checker) �, _�� /,►� ELL. QUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD SQUARE FEET OCC. LOAD TOTAL SQUARE FEET TOTAL OCCU- PANCY LOAD DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW "X" In box indicates which departments need to review the project. ROY BUILDING - initial review 10-24-410 10--(q-ga ROUTED IA FIRE PLANNING QUIREMENTE MI CONSULTANT: Date Seni7671-7210 Date Approved - 10 -24 -10 I ?,t ti0 INIT: Al PUBLIC WORKS 0 OTHER FIRE PROTECTION: FIRE DEPT. LETTER DATED: / 0 / 2i } _ 6) C S -•a Inklers Detectors • N/A INIT: INIT: ZONING: REFERENCE FIL NOS.: MINIMUM SETBACKS: UTILITY PERMITS REQUIRED? PUBLIC WORKS LETTER DATED: ,2 -.2. INIT: INSPECTOR: )')7 0 BAR/LAND USE CONDITIONS? P tj • N- BUILDING - final review REVIEW COMPLETED TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: UBC EDITION (year): 19S6 PERMIT NO. CONTACTED DATE READY DATE NOTIFIED 2nd NOTIFICATION _ram C1 n SS�x _b[ (IY: ___L� BY: (snit.) PERMIT EXPIRES AMOUNT OWING - 3RD NOTIFICATION BY: (snit.) 1LFc1.L4 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development - Building Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 (206) 433 -1849 BUILDIt.-3 PERMIT APPLICATION PLAN CHECK scl NUMBER - 90 APPLICATION MIDST BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY i' FEES (for staff use only) DESCRIPT ON'..•.: BUILDING: PERMIT: »FEE. :» ENERGY SURCHARGE kNNEM ENIMENIBIIMINIESIESN SITE ADDRESS SUITE # Gel O L7 G 7La-n �I �+._S TEL B`/ if VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION - $ 'J %T : - - — _ g30q, to =. ding) PROJECT NAME/TENANT t-- lolz.T --I 4411. -L. or --tic. -4:3v1L.,=,i►.ae_,, ASSESSOR ACCOUNT # p 35q 700 -1 ?0 -• (commercial) Li Demolition (bud 0 Other TYPE OF [New Building • Addition • Tenant Improvement WORK: 0 Rack Stora•e O Reroof 0 Remodel (residential) DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE: -TT 1.---T" • LIP' e--- ra"..tG- . G- 7 L,_X 1 .. , 1 S 2_4 ' • . t.-- t rc -rp. BUILDING USE (office, warehouse, etc.) ---r -1 c:=. A _If r'- , %, '-, -TA ( <- t�- ,9 -{ NATURE OF BUSINESS: fir-- . WILL THERE BE A CHANGE IN USE? U No U Yes IF YES, EXPLAIN: kit:. SQUARE FOOTAGE - Building: 1 , raz. A- Tenant Space: Area of Construction: WILL THERE BE STORAGE OR USE OF FLAMMABLE, COMBUSTIBLE OR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN THE BUILDING? 21-No 0 Yes IF YES, EXPLAIN: PROPERTY OWNER ele_,.-r, GoIZ„ 1 ,...,c.oe.. s' es12...,,Arre.C› PHONE 4..8•23,. 1161 1 ADDRESS II e7e7 I Uf1 i 40 r ATE C.., f 'f30i1Et,t, ut)� PHONE ZIP q 6 p 1 1 'CONTRACTOR ADDRESS -„ ZI P WA. ST. CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE # EXP. DATE ARCHITECT I.-.j7 y I4%.I -i4 PHONE .2.t2, . 4 ?7 , 4.. ADDRESS 18474- IA- 1e. ipt1- '-S zsv. 13 '2-0 4-- ZIPl 1 HEREBY GERYIF TRUE .A CORR CONTACT PERSON b I Oct PHONE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL In order to ensure that your application is accepted for plan review, please make sure to fill out the application completely and follow the plan submittal checklist on the reverse side of this form. Handouts are available at the Building counter which provide more detailed information on application and plan submittal requirements. Application and plans must be complete in order to be accepted for plan review. VALUATION OF CONSTRUCTION Valuation for new construction and additions are calculated by the Department of Community Development prior to application submittal. Contact the Permit Coordinator at 433 -1851 prior to submitting application. In all cases, a valuation amount should be entered by the applicant. This figure will be reviewed and is subject to possible revision by the Building Division to comply with current fee schedules. BUIL DING OWNER / AUTHORIZED AGENT If the applicant is other than the owner, registered architect/engineer, or contractor licensed by the State of Washington, a notarized letter from the property owner authorizing the agent to submit this permit application and obtain the permit will be required as part of this submittal. EXPIRATION OF PLAN REVIEW Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitations, The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days upon written request by the applicant as defined in Section 304(d) of the Uniform Building Code (current edition). No application shall be extended more than once. If you have any questions about our process or plan submittal requirements, please contact the Department of Community Development Building Division at 433 -1849. DATE APPLICATION ACCEPTED --G'\ DATE APPLICATION EXPIRES 5 -moo -fin 03/30189 SgEIMITTAL CHECFLIST COMMERCIAL .......... ...... „. .... . „, .. .. : . NEW structure) • • •• Two sets (g).01 the foUowing •. 54 Structural 'calculations :Stamped by,a.WastlIngtorttatelicensed.:::!::::i,:.,. • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • . • ..,i:: . :::::::::•.::, . : . „...i ,•••;..::::::''''....'''''::::....:::l.::::..:.:::::::'''''.:Hi•:!':.!':'::::.:::::''.:":''lls::::;":::::::::;.ii:::"....'':.::"'::::.:1..::'....' Sella report ,starriPad by.iislWashingtoriState liCensed.eriglrieor ','•••:::'...-:: F1'1'OPO6F"PPPl..!!rYE!%/:<•::•:i......'''''':".;::.'..:.::.'i::''''::...:.:.:..:'::.:.:''''''''..... '':'''—''''''':':'''''''''' my stamped by a WaihingtOn.StateliCerised,':',;:,:•••:i:.:':: enginaar.Or,arohllOOtsi:::::::••••:-':'•:•'• ...... ''' ''''''''''''''''''''''''-'• .. ' . . .. :-.' ''......:.'''''' -••••• '-' • . - . icilit.iteticitiPtlO4:'::•:;:l 0/41tiCing.,d1:8*It103;"041mped bya:WashingtenStatelicanSed,;,.....:::::....4: ,irChltec,Wh!OH1!':!.',...,!„...,1!..:..:',:::....:1;••.•!:•::..•:,:•.:.::'::.:;',.:...:::,....,.:•:,:,:,::::•i,•::::..-:::'.::::•,',,,..:.:1::::5:.':!::::J::;P•:-j;:::-•:::::;; ■ S ArchiitO:011k.0 :':::::;:-:••••:••..r......:.::. drawings ' sudur0 .: .. ‘ tectural .orivgs tr••i.drawings•.,•.••,:. ..,••• . • . ...., . . • . .. . ii. Elevations , . 000 .. ‘ . ::.0;aiiipieted:oti ty permit ..... ........'.:. ?Inv. :. 1;ra...74...11171:711anp.. ............................................. :0.!1.....:. ••• ••••, . " . .•,6.• .::' i.....b:.:••..::'.,(E)s '.....•::!!:5'• ''.1v•':. ',::•'.•..!t •::- •,:.d•:•'r•••.:•' a::;.,...:y•...:,:..::.:::.In.•::„::gt•.:..•...:..i: :."•.:,"..•.-•.•:•.•.'„:•:•„•:•":-:.::.::'•:.':.1•,"....:.' : . : . ":. • . See it/*M knli' r!!Andchecklist ''.'...''.'.,.. ...:...e, i::.:. i *;, . . i::. 0i . 1:. ::: •: 7•:E! t y submhtal .000Trts:,: „:: . : ::.::,. ' .•:•;.:::: :::. : :::,':'::. •',... ••:.i. •:s:•••', ::.:.. : .:::',:,.:... • : . . .. .... . , ,..,.....•••••.„.....,:.::::...::::.•:•••:.;',"••••••...........• ' ''': • RACK S • ' - .. '.• ,... ... rmit.aopiiotig:n...... :..::::::.•.',.• •...,....,:,.....::,:.;..,::.:‘‘::.•:., , . . ..:••••••••••••,...:.,::.:•:•••..,•••:::::•.:.:.....::::::;,:.,:-::::-...:„...• .••..::::::.,:..-...:..•:.:•....... TORAGc.,:.::::•••••'•:•••'''''..:•: ..> ... .. '..00-iliiile,C!3...?!11.,..!..,:..,•„!);...3:•:i:•:.::::...f,;:::.....!:::.:.',.....:,..,.....,!:::............,....:.....:::.....:.,.....,.,.,..:,... . ...„,.„:.:....„.,„„„.........„......,.........:., ,,,,...... Aa ...sOr:A.Co OantNUnt00:... des••:. . ., ., ....::,;:... ' . 319' fati. intlg ....„!:::';'„.:,.p. . :.: . -.:•...., , . .... .......1.,...4))".:...?.':''''''''.1.. ,4:.;!:::::;:.:;',.i:::!,:::::t..:',!„„'....;:T: :•:ilioin, iitiot. plan showing • ‘ ......... be l J ocated ..,..... iiii„,i ,togf:s.i:"1,.".:iiiiiii.....an.....,.; ., "..,E;ICIiiti:eirisia00:)!1!!..:17r.;::'::...•(1::;4iif...:,..)t.,.?!..,....::111:illi:i.illi.to,...:.11..;i1:1; ••:,:::'i.:13a4:4 !.IP!!;.:-.P.:.!.r..:••••:•:,''';:;•;;44igl,.t.i:..1"t.",!::::';••!::: Teminh4k0q,!.,.„;:::::::::::R..:::::.•:•.:.:::::.'..'-' exits aix! e* ways cit plan Structural calculations stamped by a Washington State licensed ..... . .. engineer stora90 Wand over) . .. . . RESIDENTIAL .... NEW SINGLE-FAMILY DWELUNGS/ADDPTIONS " ....• :completed building permit application (one fOr Legal ...E ASseseerA9Count:Number:',..• .• • . ... . •••• Two sets (2) at working drawings which include .Sllplan ............ :. • • • • 1 '1•;•.:•..„."..,Foonilatio. • Roof Building elevations (all views) y.:61111c6ng cross sactict Say:stars :#0,11ylgtock State Energy Code data Completed utility Permit application :64:.(6)Sets of site plans showing . . „.. • NOTE Solidi:1g site plan and utility site plan may be COMOnect See permit application and checklist for specific submittal requlrcment& Adcifit:oitt:t9rograppoo:ami soils lnlOPPatiotfinak :" 611(aPPOdlplons.:: , • ....• • • COMMRCIAL TENANT IMPROVEMENTS ..„ Completed bulkfing permit application (one rot each structure or Essossor Account Number Two (2) sets of construction plans which include4 E Site plan • Location of tenant space E Overall building plan • Use of adjacent (common wall) • • .,: ::.• tenant 1 • I! "! uare foo Floor tenant space • Tenant space with use 01 each room labelled. te; patterns 'New existing ..... • : . • .. . COn... • ••••••,•:..... ct fto showing . . •••• Stru • ' '''••••• r Completed building permit applicatioi b wo (2) sets of plans which Include ....ourrad. • ... • • • ... ' . • • . .. • . . ..... • ••• •••• • • .. . . • . . NOTE If an' utthly Work Is to be donO, submit sepatat9 uti Ilty permit • • • • .................................... . . 61199•••••••••••••:•••••••••.iiid buitcing permit application . (one for Number each Structure) Asseseor Account Narrative describing existing roof, .... material NOTE A certification. an l�tt, is required prior to final inspection sign- ••••::::•:::::•,••'••:••••• • • -, E DISHES RESIDENTiAL REMODELS .„„ Completed building permit appfloaon (one for each structure) Two (2) sets ol working drawings, which include • Site plan • Foundation plan •.:.:.••• .•••• ••••,• •••• •• • • • • • • Roof plan . . . . . • • • • • • ....•••.• • " • . • •••• •••• • ••• ••••••.••••••••••• •• ••••.•:••••••••••••••••••••• • • .. • . . • • • . • ..• • •.:.• „ • .. • • • •.. „ • Structural framing plans .. . . ••• • • • • and plans must be submitted, ... .. . i'••• .... .. .. ........... . PE R.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...„... ••.• • • • • Pernplata4bdildiniparMitapPliCatiOn..(ene for each structure) WAC 197 -11 -970 ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Office to Commercial 'land a Rezone from Professional Office (P -0) to Neighborhood Retail (C -1). Proponent Ed Linardic Location of Proposal, including street address, if any 5900 Southcenter Boulevard; Section 232_ Township 23, Range 4E. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -21 -90 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse 'impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Q There is no comment period for this DNS fix This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by October 17, 1990 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Rick Beeler Position /Title Planning Director Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukw Date Signature Phone 433 -1846 You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 93188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS CITY OF TUKWILA ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE NORTH HILLS OFFICE BUILDING DATE: REVISED DATE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: APPLICANT: FILE REFERENCE: THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: 28 SEPTEMBER 1990 03 FEBRUARY 1992 Rezone from PO (Professional Office) to C -1 (Neighborhood Retail) 5900 Southcenter Boulevard, Section 23, Township 23, Range 4E. Ed Linardic EPIC- 21 -90, 90 -1 -CPA, 90 -1 -R This is a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance The environmental analysis consisted of review of the Environmental Checklist dated 28 September 1990. As a condition by Tukwila's City Council additional information was provided pertaining to the traffic count. This is reason for the revised MDNS on February 3, 1992. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposal consists of a 9,524 square foot office building and a 33 stall parking lot. The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Rezone. The property is currently zoned for P -O (Professional Office). While the Comprehensive Plan is designated for RMH (Multiple Residence High Density). NORTH HILLS OFFICE BUILDING MDNS EPIC- 21 -90, 90 -1 -R, 90 -1 -CPA DESIGN FEATURES Page 2 The proposal was approved by B.A.R. (Board of Architectural Review) on July 5, 1990. PERMITS REQUIRED * Utility /Street permits * Mechanical Permit * Building permit * Grading Permit CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Issuance of a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance is appropriate since the environmental review has been mitigated for this proposal. Staff's response to the Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance is as follows: TRANSPORTATION The site fronts on Southcenter Boulevard. Access to the site is via a shared (North Hills Apartments) access easement along the west property line from a driveway cut at the east end of the property. The turning movements to and from the site are restricted to a "Right Turn" in and out based on a previous condition of approval for the original 3 -story office building. A Traffic Impact Study was prepared by Entranco Engineers, Inc., dated 28 March 1990. The report indicated the project is expected to generate an average of 225 daily vehicle trips, with 27 trips occurring during the evening peak hours and 18 trips during the noon peak hour. The North Hills Rezone was approved, based on 430 ADT. The Traffic Impact Study prepared by Entranco Engineers, Inc., dated 28 March 1990 was revised on 09 January 1992 to show the correct average daily vehicle trips with the following conditions. NORTH HILLS OFFICE BUILDING MDNS EPIC- 21 -90, 90 -1 -R, 90 -1 -CPA Page 3 * Required monitoring of ADT peak on a quarterly basis for the first two years and annually thereafter. * If the monitoring program identifies the 430 limit being exceeded, the development shall be required to provide the necessary corrections to reduce the ADT volume below the 430 limit. The change in ADT does not have a significant impact nor warrant any SEPA modifications other than establishment of the monitoring program (at the developer's sole expense). This report recommended that the following be accomplished to enhance safety and operational efficiency: * Paint a crosswalk for the North leg of Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection. * Repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Blvd to clearly identify the center left turn lane. * Monitor the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection with future development to determine the implementation of a traffic signal. Storm Drainage To mitigate adverse water quality impacts to the storm water system from sedimentation, tire cleaning provisions shall be made and any existing catch basins where mud is likely to collect shall be protected by filter fabric. Water Provide looped system and secondary water source for reliable domestic /fire protection. The developer shall provide water extensions to existing mains to the south in Southcenter Blvd and west to the Arco /Mini Mart. Plants Proposed new trees shall not be planted in compacted soil unless gravel drain slumps are installed under each tree or the subgrade soil is rototilled. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Cit4 of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor MEMORANDUM CAni21. 1 ` oc. dD-eY )c 1 IQgo N o r i 11-(- QQc%3.Q do r u c.. u r o..1 re_ i i p-r u . . L. (10 /T2.MEMO) DATE CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD TUKWILA, WA 98188 * * REVISION SUBMITTAL 5 / yi PROJECT NAME ADDRESS CONTACT PERSON ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER PHONE PERMIT NUMBER (If previously issued) Q PLAN CHECK NUMBER )3 39 9 TYPE OF REVISION: r ( (1 c& c -I- -Ph D6 I\(,e_ce isjaat e/".. SHEET NUMBER(S) "Cloud" or highlight all areas of ? visi • ns and date r SUBMl rt ED TO: CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD TUKWILA, WA 98188 RECEIVED CITY OF TI IKWILA FEB 26 PERMIT CENTER * * REVISION SUBMITTAL * * DATE PROJECT NAME LS\AD( ADDRESS CONTACT PERSON k). (---tk -W li--(-L ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER Ohl PHONE 1-6-2- PERMIT NUMBER �(� (If previously issued) PLAN CHECK NUMBER _31:- JI 9 TYPE OF REVISION: SHEET NUMBER(S) "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revisions and date revisions. SUBMrnED TO: *lPe 2 "t- CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD TUKWILA, WA 98188 (206) 431 -3670 CIrY OF TUKWILA f 5 PERMI r CENTER * *REVISION SUBMITTAL ** DATE lo 4 ' t,O PROJECT NAME Po? .TV (L (Z) ADDRESS 4Q CONTACT PERSON - ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER LTD& 4 e- ..t1 PHONE O 2, -4:M4 4 PERMIT NUMBER PLAN CHECK NUMBER °I- TYPE OF REVISION: T,4z (If previously issued) . sew 4 — / qi .:1 eS z • i Sy '4 SHE 'T NUMBER(S) "Cloud" or high ght al H Ea - 1 -r-v s -C. SUBMITTED TO: 4,0 91- ‘15 A -� areas of rev sions an ate revisions. IR °N °au.6 LErr o N v$ rsa O J 41'1 N. k .1% n, v 1,0'f 1' LIN K1 LIN � � • -rr PAR Aci ;! s 4 uT' o N6R8 P Zl3o4-1'Z F�? E6e /ile • X45 4 1 . N6a•.15;r rY /04. #'5'. ti b /S Nm ti oq H ' .INGRESS— EGRESS PER 4.R # 73//2/O/03 ME�Vi" • /'ti`C'RESS- EGRE'SS E4SEMENT •: •fPER 4.if .# 73020/0/15 R. 459.45' L• /5/. 4B. Da/936'4r INGRESS - EGRESS E4SE°iyENj- A F. , 4.R s 7Z/03/0/48 AND 7908220496 84. L/0, 4:3.'43'00" 1 0.� PEGK R E5A• �' G S A 'F Da 75 E,M 8 E6SiZF T I 04,55 5 t - s q08 zZO6. \ ? 71, . . � • 0 \ • • �C Np�� 21;/3'1 1 33./4 198.1.9. N70.01'21 W . \; 3/1.09' FOUND ;"1.R (t. ANS WESTERLY FOUND REeAR (LE41/S SONJTRWESTERLY) I SET 60 d SP /KE Iv/ CAP STAMPED w S.1 A. L5 /5439." I `Sr.'T i/r "REEWR/y /THCAP I STAMPED " ?A. L•S, 15639 I JV 615. 39' �7 "W 335,03'" DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this t day of fe4 1992 by and between the CITY OF TUKWILA, a Washincston municipal corporation (the "City ") andChitOr (8 , ..:� /4.Prhereinafter referred to as ( "Developer "). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Applicant is the lessee with respect to certain real property ( "Property ") located generally east of Macadam Road on the north side of Southcenter Boulevard, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied for approval of a building permit for the construction of a retail /office building; and WHEREAS, the proposed development will produce additional traffic thereby resulting in the need for access onto Southcenter Boulevard. NOW, ,THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: -1- 1. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE APPLICANT A. A traffic monitoring program shall be established for the development to insure that 430 ADT for access limit, as specified in your engineering study., is not exceeded. This monitoring program will be provided as follows: Developer shall provide, at their own expense, monitoring of ADT peaks on a quarterly basis for the first year, by a qualified traffic engineer and transmit the results of each monitoring to the City Engineer. This monitoring will commence after receipt of the Certificate of Occupancy for building on site. After review of monitoring for the first year, at the City Engineer's discretion, monitoring for the second year shall be determined either on a quarterly basis or annual basis. The Developer shall provide monitoring of ADT peaks on an annual basis thereafter, by a qualified engineer and transmit the results of each monitoring to the City Engineer. A. If the Traffic Monitoring Study indicate any excess ADT beyond the 430 ADT allowed for this development, the Developer shall inform the tenancy and the use shall be either discontinued or modified to stay within the 430 ADT. The results of each traffic monitoring shall be submitted to the City within 30 days after its completion. B. At the time of the redevelopment or new development of the Denny's North Hill Apartments and /or AM /PM Properties to the west, the applicant will make a good faith and diligent effort to obtain an -2- agreement with the Denny's, North Hill Apartments and /or AM /PM Properties to provide for consolidated driveways serving the North Hill Office Property and the adjacent properties to the west. If this agreement is obtainable it should include the following: (1) The design and construction of a consolidated driveway serving the Applicant's property and the properties to the west at location(s) such that it reduces the number of access points. onto Southcenter Boulevard. (2) The Costs attributable to the consolidated driveway(s) between the Applicant and other properties shall be shared equally between the ownerships. (3) Applicant also agrees to a consolidation of the driveways if and when any or all of the other property ownerships to the west shall have this same requirement imposed upon them. 2. NON- WAIVER - EXTENSIONS Failure of either party to insist on the strict performance of the terms of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of that party's right thereafter to strictly enforce any such term, but the same shall continue in full force and effect. -3- 3. BINDING EFFECT This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their respective heirs, legal representatives, assignees, transferees and successors. This Agreement runs with the land. 4. RECORDING This Agreement shall be recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections, and the cost of said recording shall be paid by the Developer. 5. ATTORNEY FEES In the event that either party shall commence litigation against the other in order to enforce any term or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to recover its costs, including reasonable attorney fees. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE The responsibilities of Developer under this Agreement are contingent upon the issuance of the requested approvals for the project. No obligation will arise until the issuance of such approvals. If Developer elects to proceed with any of the improvements set forth herein before the issuance of such approvals and after installation of the improvements elects to abandon its development, Developer, its successors and assigns are entitled to the benefits set forth in this Agreement related to latecomer's agreements provided such improvements are approved and accepted by the City. Except as set forth in this section, this Agreement shall -4- become null and void if the project is abandoned by the Developer. is • — . - _ e CITY OF TUKWILA By By, ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: i-le& by Its 444j Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk By APPROVED AS TO FORM OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: By STATE. OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING Its I certify that there appeared before me persons that I know or have satisfactory evidence were JOHN W. RANTS and JANE CANTU, who signed this DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT, on oath stated that they are authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor -5- i♦ • and City Clerk of the City of Tukwila, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED: ,19 STATE OF SS Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My Commission Expires I certify that there appeared r- fore me - person that I know or have satisfactory evidence was who signed this DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT, on oath stated he is . authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument DATED ,199 de_A_01/ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My Commission Expires Jam- 9'-/999,0 UTILITY PROJECT TRACKING CHECK ST Control# 89 -399 SITE ADDRESS 5900 Southcenter B1 Project Description New Office Building PROPERTY OWNER Gencor Development Inc. Address 750 Sixth Street South, Kirkland, WA CONTRACTOR Gencor Development Inc. Address 750 Sixth Street South, Kirkland, WA CONTACT PERSON Ed Linardic Address 1836 Westlake Avenue North #204, Seattle, WA PROJECT North Hill Office Square Footage 9,500± Phone 828 -3700 Zip 98033 Phone 828 -3700 Zip 98033 Phone 283 -4764 Zip 98109 ROUTING DATE PLANS DATE ROUTED DATE PLANS DATE RESUB. RECEIVED TYPE OF REVIEW TO PWD APPROVED REQUESTED COMMENTS 10 -18 -90 Site Utility 10 -18 -90 PERMITS REQUIRED PERMITS Q Channelization /Striping/ Signing [[ Curb Cut /Access /Sidewalk Q Excavation (public) [[ Fire Loop /Hydrant El Flood Zone Control [[ Hauling Q Landscape Irrigation El Moving an Oversized Load [( Sanitary Side Sewer [[ Sewer Main Ext. (private) Q Sewer Main Ext. (public) Q Storm Drainage Q Water Main Ext. (private) [[ Water Main Ext. (public) Q Water Meter (exempt) Size: No. Q Water Meter (permanent) Size: No. APPROVED CONDITIONS PERMIT # PLAN /LETTER DATE ISSUED DATE FINAL Yes / No ❑ ❑ [El-Water Meter -(- temporary) ❑. _� _ -- Size: No. -.. Q Other 0 Q Q Other 0 El CONDITIONS OF PERMIT ISSUANCE OR FINAL SIGN -OFF OF PROJECT FINAL PWD SIGN -OFF APPROVAL (signature) (PW.UTILTRK) Date UTILITY PERMic APPLICATION CITY OF TUKVVILA Central Permit System - Engineering Division 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206) 433 -0179 PLAN CHECK NUMBER: G 9, PROJECT : Site Address: 0 0 INFORMATION. Name of Project: Po R l-t or-f-1 Property Owner: rPCil ?Fr-T.' I hlC- Street '1 S O o -114 �� • Engineer: ,p,-,Lk *4 far) 7e,p) 4 .1-4 17 f-4 S Street Address: ( orz e Phone No.: Cit /State /Zi•: D Contractor: Street Address: A r°1 0wri' a_ Phone No.: Z 5 - 4 t 41- Cit /State /Zi•: u1d '98102 Phone No.: Cit /State /ZI►: Kin • Count PERMITS REQUESTED Assessor Account Number: CU c. O 'tiff ChannelizationlStriping /Signing is Curb Cut/Access/Sidewalk jZi Fire Loop/Hydr. (main to vault) - No.: Sizes: ❑ Flood Zone Control (4 Grade/Fill cubic yards i Hauling Landscape Irrigation ❑ Moving an Oversized Load ❑ Sanitary Side Sewer - No.: Fl Sewer Main Extension Private ❑ Publicgi S o l Storm Drain g( Street Use 21, Water Main Extension Private ❑ Public Water Meter / Exempt: - No.: _ Deduct 0 Water Only ❑ )Z1. Water Meter / Permanent - No • ❑ Water Meter/ Temporary: - No.: ❑ Other: Sizes: — Sizes• — Sizes• WATER METER DEPOSIT1:':: >` REFUND/BILLING Street Name: ce"-rk MONTHLY Name: SERVICE • BILLINGS TO: Street l `J. Water 11, Sewer Z1 Metro ❑ Std DESCRIPTION OF .PROJECT.: ❑ SI Ing e-Famil ❑ Multiple- Family Dwelling ❑ Hotel No. of Units: ❑ Motel g Commercial/Industrial 0 Office ❑ Retail Residential Phone No.: City /State /Zip: Phone No.: City /State/Zip: o - :'- 32c nD ❑ Duplex ❑ Apartments ❑ Triplex ❑ Condominiums ❑ Other: ❑ Warehouse ❑ Church ❑ School/College /University ❑ Manufacturin ❑ Hos ital ❑ Other: ❑ Remodel/ Square footage of original building space: Addition Square footage of additional building space: MISCELLANEOUS.;: New Building INFORMATION Square too± King County Assessor's valuation of existing structures: $ Valuation of work to be done: $ (oo ,:,,0 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I H tE REALt' T IE APPLICA'TION: AND KNOW.771E 3Aig TO'RK TRUE ANQ CORRECT. Applicant/Authorized Agent Signature: ';°k. Print Name: 75-, Date: to( I I ( °t,o Phone: 2e,3 _ 474* Date Application Accepted: Contact Person (print name): s> L Address: Lk 36, W>=)--i l-P lc xt,.•-e-r� e + =ft col Phone: Z�3 - 4-76 f Date Application Expires: t4 — 1% _ 09/18/90 E- SUBMITTAL CH 'KLUST All site plans shall be provided in one submittal for review by the Public Works Department. Six (6) sets of plans stamped by a licensed engineer are required along with this application completed and signed by the applicant's representative. The following Information is necessary for Public Works Department evaluation and approval of site plans: • AU utility construction is to meet the City of Tukwila Standards • Indicate scale of drawing and show north arrow • Identify location by address or distance to nearest intersection CURB CUT /ACCESS /SIDEWALKS/ CHANNELIZATION /STRiPINGISIGNING O Dimensions O Type of surfacing - asphalt, crushed rock, etc.(and thickness) O Percent of slope or runoff direction O Size of curb cuts/location O Vehicular and pedestrian traffic facilities, including signing and striping, wheel chair ramps, curb cuts FIRE LOOP /HYDRANT O Type of pipe O Size of pipe /location O Location and type of all valves O Type of bedding and backfill materials /percent compaction O Distance from structures, storm and sewer facilities at minimum separation O Location and size of thrust blocking FLOOD ZONE CONTROL (Requirements are under Flood Ord. No. 1462 and can be obtained from the Public Works Dept.) O Lowest finished floor elevation O Contours and elevations per National Geodetic Vertical Datum LAND ALTERING (CLEARING, GRADE AND FILL) O Contour map (2' intervals) showing existing and proposed contours O Estimate of yardage, both cut and fill O Erosion control' plan HAULING O Copy of Certificate of insurance coverage (minimum $1,000,000) O $2,000 bond made out to the City of Tukwila for property damages caused by activities O Route map LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION O Location of DSHS approved double check valve O Type of pipe - copper, high density molecular plastic, ductile O Size and depth of pipe O Size of meter O Location and elevation of meter box (water meter - permanent and exempt). Clearly show whether tap is on main or domestic service O Location and type of tap O Type of bedding and backfill materials /percent compaction MOVING AN OVERSIZED LOAD O Copy of Certificate of insurance coverage (minimum $1,000,000) O $5,000 bond made out to the City of Tukwila for property damages caused by activities O Business Ucense with City of Tukwila O Route map SANITARY sir. SEWER O Type of pipe - . ,rete, PVC, etc. O Size of pipe/location O Percent of slope on pipe/length of run O Connection point(s) to public O Location of cleanout(s) and test Tec(s) O Type of bedding and backfill material/percent compaction O Invert elevations at structures and junctions SEWER MAIN EXTENSION O Type of pipe - concrete, PVC, etc. O Size of pipe /location O Percent of slope on pipe/length of run O Connection point(s) to public O Location of cleanouts O Type of bedding and backfill materia /percent compaction STORM DRAINAGE (including existing topography and proposed grading and surfacing) O Type of pipe O Size of pipe O Percent of slope /length of run O Location of all structures O Square footage of area to be drained, including roof area O Bedding material for pipe O Invert or flow line elevations STREET USE O Complete description of proposed activity O Map with address and outline of limits of activity relative to public right -of -way and easements O Proposed traffic control/detour (per Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices) O Proposed schedule (times and dates) WATER MAiN EXTENSION O Type of pipe O Size of pipe O Hydrant type and locations O Valve type and locations O Connection point(s) to existing system O Type of connection - live tap, tee, etc. O Location and size of thrust blocking O Size and location of mains, Including elevations (profile) WATER METER - EXEMPT O Diagram of domestic system/tie in of exempt meter O Number /account for existing domestic meter O Size and type of material of meter and service O Site address WATER METER - PERMANENT O Type of pipe - copper, high density molecular plastic, ductile O Size and depth of pipe O Size of meter O Location and elevation of meter box (water meter - permanent and exempt) O Location and type of tap O Type of bedding and backfill materials/percent compaction WATER METER - TEMPORARY O Address and hydrant location O Size of meter O Estimate of quantity and schedule After t e Pub c "o s ' epartment has comp et e r ew an • t e p ens are approv , t e app - t w • : notrf by letter concerning the necessary permits and requirements; an approved set of plans will accompany the letter. it the plans are not approved, the applicant will be notified by letter of necessary resubmittal requirements. t rev :I :.9 Cit . of Tukwila FIRE DEPARTMENT 444 Andover Park East Tukwila, Washington 98188 -7661 (206) 575 -4404 Fire Department Review Control Number 89 -399 (513) Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor November 1, 1990 Re: North Hill Office Building - 5900 Southcenter Blvd. Dear Sir: The attached set of building plans have been reviewed by The Fire Prevention Bureau and are acceptable with the following concerns: 1. The total number of fire extinguisFiers required for your establishment is calculated at one extinguisher for each 3000 sq. ft. of area. The extinguisher(s) should be of the "All Purpose" (2A, 10 B:C) dry chemical type. Travel distance to any fire extinguisher must be 75' or less. (NFPA 10, 3 -1.1) (UFC 10 -1 (3 -1)) Extinguishers shall be installed on the hangers or in the brackets supplied, mounted in cabinets, or set on shelves (NFPA 10, 1 -6.6), and shall be installed so that the top of the extinguisher is not more than 5 feet above the floor. (NFPA 10, 1 -6.6) (UFC 10.301) Extinguishers shall be located so as to be in plain view (if at all possible), or if not in plain view, they shall be identified with a sign stating, "Fire Extinguisher," with an arrow pointing to the unit. (NFPA 10, 1 -6.3) (UFC 10.301) 2. Exit hardware and marking must meet the requirements of Uniform Fire Code Sections 12.104 & 10.402(a). Exit doors shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. (UFC 12.104b) Exits serving more than 50 occupants shall be provided with illuminated exit signs. (UFC 12.108(d)) City of Tukwila FIRE DEPARTMENT 444 Andover Park East Tukwila, Washington 98188 -7661 (206) 575 -4404 Page number 2 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor ANNIONMENEWINONIMIP Exit doors shall swing in the direction of exit travel when serving an occupant load of 50 or more. (UBC 3304(b)) 3. A sprinkler system as outlined in N.F.P.A. 13 and City Ordinance #1528 shall be provided in this building in lieu of meeting normal access requirements. Maintain sprinkler protection for all enclosed areas. (NFPA 13, 4- 1.1.1) (UFC 10.302) All sprinkler drawings shall be prepared by companies licensed to perform this type of work. Drawings shall first be approved by the Washington Survey & Rating Bureau, Factory Mutual Engineering or Industrial Risk Insurers, then by the Tukwila Fire Department. No sprinkler work shall commence without approved drawings. (City Ordinance #1528 & NFPA 13, 1 -9.1) (UFC 10.305) Local U.L. Central Station Supervision is required. (UFC 14.105) An approved hose station requires plans review. (Plans must be submitted to the Fire Marshal for approval prior to installation.) (City Ordinance #1528) 4. H.V.A.C. units rated at 2,000 cfm require auto - shutdown devices. These devices shall be separately zoned in the alarm panel and local U.L. Central Station supervision is required. 5. Your street address must be conspicuously posted on the building and shall be plainly visible and legible from the street. Numbers shall contrast with their background. (UFC 10.208) Every exterior portion of a building must be within 300' of a fire hydrant, measured around the perimeter Cit Y y f Tukwila FIRE DEPARTMENT 444 Andover Park East Tukwila, Washington 98188 -7661 (206) 575 -4404 Page number 3 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor All required occupancy separations, area separation walls, and draft -stop partitions shall be maintained and shall be properly repaired, restored or replaced when damaged, altered, breached, penetrated, removed or improperly installed. (UFC 10.401) All interior wall covering materials shall be fire - resistive or shall be treated to be fire - resistive, so as to result in a flame - spread rating as required by UFC Appendix VI -C tables 42A and 42B. A certificate of the flame spread rating is required to be delivered to the TulIwila Fire Department. (UBC 4204) (UFC 10.401) Yours truly, The Tukwila Fire Prevention Bureau cc: T.F.D. file ncd f City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor Plan Check #89 -399: North Hill 5900 Southcenter B1 THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS APPLY TO AND BECOME A . THE APPROVED PLANS UNDER TUKWILA BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER 1. No changes will be'made to the plans unless approved by the Architect and the Tukwila Building Division. 2. Plumbing permit shall be obtained through the King County Health Department and plumbing will be inspected by that agency, including all gas piping (296 - 4722). 3. Electrical permit shall be obtained through the Washington State Division of Labor and Industries and all electrical work will be inspected by that agency (277- 7272). 4. All mechanical work shall be under separate permit through the City of Tukwila. 5. All permits, inspection records, and approved plans shall be posted at the job site prior to the start of any construction. 6. When special inspection is required either the owner, 'architect or engineer shall notify the Tukwila Building Division of appointment of the inspection agencies prior to the first building inspection. Copies of all special inspection reports shall be submitted to the Building Division in a timely manner. Reports shall contain address, project name and permit number of the project being inspected. • 7. All structural concrete to be special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC) . 8. All structural welding to be done by W.A.B.O. certified welder and special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). 9. All high- strength bolting to be special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). 10. Any new ceiling grid and light fixture installation is required to meet lateral bracing requirements for Seismic Zone 3. Phone: (206) 433.1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433.1833 North Hill Page 2 11. Partition walls attached to ceiling grid must be laterally braced if over eight (8) feet in length. 12. Readily accessible access to roof mounted equipment is required. 13. Engineered truss drawings and calculations shall be on site and available to the building inspector for inspection purposes. Documents shall bear the seal and signature of a Washington State Professional Engineer. 14. Any exposed insulations backing material to have Flame Spread Rating of 25 or less, and material shall bear identification showing the fire performance rating thereof. 15. Subgrade preparation including drainage, excavation, compaction, and fill requirements shall conform strictly with recommendations given in the soils report. Soils Engineer to inspect foundation excavations prior to pouring footings. 16. A statement from the roofing contractor verifying fire retardancy of roof will be required prior to final inspection (see attached procedure). 17. All construction to be done in conformance with approved plans and requirements of the Uniform Building Code (1988 Edition), Uniform Mechanical Code (1988 Edition), Washington State Energy Code (1991 Edition), and Washington State Regulations for Barrier Free Facility (1989 Edition). 18. Notify the City of Tukwila Building Division prior to placing any concrete. This procedure is in addition to any requirements for special inspection. 19. All wood to remain in placed concrete shall be treated wood. 20. Validity of Permit. The issuance of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or' an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. No permit presuming to give authority or violate or cancel the provisions of this code shall be valid. North Hill Page 3 21. Location of building foundation is the responsibility of the general contractor, in accordance with the admini- strative provisions of the specifications. The call for foundation inspection shall serve as certification by the general contractor that the building foundation has been located in accordance with the approved plans. 22. Approval of the building shell is based upon a proposed speculative tenant(s) space. Dividing the building into two or more tenant spaces, will require a minimum of two exits for each space. All tenant improvements shall be under separate building permit. BUILD1IC PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD (Post with Building Permit in conspicuous place) CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 (206) 431 -3670 BUILDING PERMIT NO. DATE ISSUED: SITE ADDRESS: 5900 Southcenter B1 SUITE NO.: PROJECT: North Hill CALL FOR INSPECTIONS AT LEAST 24 HOURS iN ADVANCE �3 "X" REQUIRED INSPECTIONS PHONE DATE APPROVED INSPECT. INITIALS DATE(S) CORRECTION NOTICE ISSUED x 1 Footings 431 -3670 X 2 Foundation 431 -3670 X 3 Slab and/or Slab Insulation 431 -3670 4 Shear Wall Nailing 431 -3670 X 5 Roof Sheathing Nailing 431 -3670 6 Masonry Chimney 431 -3670 X 7 Framing 431 -3670 X 8 Insulation 431 -3670 9 Suspended Ceiling 431 -3670 X 10 Wall Board Fastening 431 -3670 11 12 13 X 14 FIRE FINAL Insp: 575 -4407 R 15 PLANNING FINAL 431 -3670 X 16 PUBLIC WORKS FINAL 431 -3670 X 17 BUILDING FINAL 431 -3670 INSPECTOR COMMENT SECTION ON REVERSE) INSPECTION PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS All approved plans and permits shall be maintained available on the site in the same location. 1. FOOTING - When survey stakes and forms are set and rebar Is tied in place. 2. FOUNDATION - When forms and rebar are in place. 3. SLAB - If structural slab or if underslab insulation is required. 4. SHEARWALL NAILING - Prior to cover. 5. ROOF SHEATHING NAILING - Prior to cover. 6. MASONRY CHIMNEY - Approximately midpoint. 7. FRAMING - After rough -In inspections such as mechanical, plumbing, gas piping, electrical and fire stopping is in place. 8. INSULATION - After framing approval, but before installation of wallboard. Baffles must be installed to keep attic ventilation points clear. 9. SUSPENDED CEILING - Fasten diffusers, lights and seismic bracing. 10. WALL BOARD FASTENING - Prior to taping (see UBC Chap. 47 and Table 47G). 11, 12. 13. 14. FINAL FIRE INSPECTION - Contact Fire Department for their requirements. 15. FINAL PLANNING INSPECTION - Contact Planning Department for their requirements. 16. FINAL PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION - Contact Public Works Department for their requirements. 17. FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION - When all work, corrections, reports and other inspections are complete. OTHER AGENCIES: Plumbing (including gas piping) — King County Health Department — 296 -4732 Electrical — Washington State Department of Labor and Industries — 277 -7272 A preconstruction meeting with the Building Inspector may be scheduled prior to starting the job by contacting the Department of Community Development, Building Division at 431 -3670. Although not required, a meeting of this type can often eliminate problems, delays and misunderstandings as the project progresses. 0W1u90 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary 1. VanDusen, Mayor CONDITIONS The Planning Staff recommends approval of the North Hills office with the following conditions: 1. Access easement for use of the private driveway along the west property line to modified so as to extend to the north edge of the on -site driveway. 2. A revised site plan must be reviewed and approved and contain the followings Deletion of the proposed standard driveway near the east property line. As a substitute the plans shall include a paving material which will allow vehicles to safely use. Designation of loading space. 34' Design details for the walkway connection from the front of the office building to the sidewalk along the private access road (along west property line). prior to the issuance of a Building Permit the applicant must t_ f• - ew a _ • t. a .. _ . t 0 • 4. Provide a revised set of landscaping plans which provide the following: P' Shrubs to be used on south side of parking lot which will be thirty -six inches at the time of planting. (The proposed species of plant material may be changed Eb!)if necessary.) Irrigation plans for required landscaping. (Ref. 18.52.050, TMC) The applicant shall include in the scope of the required irrigation the Douglas Firs on the north side of the office building or a three year maintenance (water) agreement. . A minimum of a 3 -feet wide planting bed to be provided on the west side of dumpster enclosure with plant materials and sizes indicated. ph i FA9.4 1/43 , /ter Am' cp/Peareio.e024 STAFF REPORT to the B.A.R. uan • f a Bui • in P - rmi . • a • .li an mu u • mi f approval the following: 4. Provide a revised set of landscaping plans which provide the following: a. Shrubs to be used on south side of parking lot which will be thirty -six inches at the time of planting. (The proposed species of plant material may be changed if necessary.) b. Irrigation plans for required landscaping. (Ref. 18.52.050, TMC) The applicant shall include in the scope of the required irrigation the Douglas Firs on the north side of the office building or a three year maintenance (water) agreement. c A minimum of a 3 -feet wide planting bed to be provided on the west side of dumpster enclosure with plant materials and sizes indicated. Revised architectural plans for review and approval by Staff which contain architectural details for the mechanical equipment penthouse which is consistent and integrated with the architecture of the proposed office. 89 -17 -DR Page 8 i u •f_ r i f • want li an mu u mi f review and approval the following: 6. The landscape architect shall provide the City with a letter indicating he has inspected the site and the installed landscaping complies with the approved landscaping plans. If there are any deviations, the landscape architect shall note them on either the City's approved drawings or document them in a letter which must then be accepted by the City. STAFF REPORT to the B.A.R. 89 -17 -DR Page 7 D. The proposed development plans as conditioned comply with the Design Review Criteria as follows: 1. The height and sole of the proposed office structure is consistent with the adjoining structure. The project provides a 2 desirable transition from the steep slopes to the streetscape and provides for pedestrian movement. 2. The proposed project provides the appropriate landscape transition with other properties and the exterior design is harmonious with adjoining properties. 3. The proposed project respects the existing topography and with the exception at the height of the plant material along the parking lot provides the proper screening to adjoining properties. The landscaping also enhances both the natural and architectural features of the project. 4. The proposed project provides good quality development and avoids monitory. 5. The proposed accessory structure is compatible with the overall architectural theme. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the North Hills office with the following conditions: Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. the apps, licant must submit for review and approval the following 1. Access easement for use of the private driveway along the west property line to modified so as to extend to the north edge of the on -site driveway. 2. A revised site plan must be reviewed and approved and contain the following: a. Deletion of the proposed standard driveway near the east property line. As a substitute the plans shall include a paving material which will allow the lawn to grow through it and curb cut which will allow emergency vehicles to safely use. b. Designation of loading space. 3. Design details for the walkway connection from the front of the office building to the sidewalk along the private access road (along west property line). The options mentioned on page of this report shall be reviewed with the Planning Staff before design details are submitted. C Threshold Determination /Gencor, Inc. /EPIC A Traffic Impact Study was prepared (by Entranco Engineers, Inc., and dated 3- 28 -90) for this project. The report indicated the project is expected to generate a total of 225 average daily vehicle trips with 27 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour and 18 trips during the noon peak hour. The report recommended that the following be accomplished to enhance safety and operational efficiency: o paint a crosswalk for the North leg of the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection; o repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Blvd to clearly identify the center left turn lane; and o monitor the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection with future development to determine the implementation of a traffic signal. MITIGATION PROVIDED BY PROPOSAL The mitigation provided as part of the proposal includes: 1. Use of filter fabric to control sediment from leaving the site (Storm drainage note # 4, Sheet 2 of 3). 2. Hydroseeding with rye grass of areas where sod is to be removed (Storm drainage note # 11, sheet 2 of 3). 3. Use of oil /water separation features on catch basin (storm drainage note # 5, sheet 2 of 3). CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Issuance of a Determination of Non - Significance is appropriate since the environmental review indicates no probability of significant adverse environmental impacts from the proposal. ADDITIONAL MITIGATION PROPOSED The Design Review process may require additional mitigation measures not included below. Additional Mitigation required of the proposal includes: A. EARTH 1. No heavy equipment shall be used for any grading /construction activities beyond the limits of disturbance limits for the shotcrete wall on the north -4- Threshold Determination /Gencor, Inc. /EPIC side of the proposed building. Any construction activities in this area of the site shall be limited to hand work. B. WATER 2. To mitigate adverse water quality impacts to the storm water system from sedimentation, tire cleaning provisions should be made and any existing catch basins where mud is likely to collect should be protected by filter fabric. C. PLANTS 3. Proposed new trees should not be planted in compacted soil unless gravel drain sumps are installed under each tree or the subgrade soil is rototilled. D. TRANSPORTATION 4. The following measures shall be required to mitigate the traffic impacts of the proposal: a. paint a crosswalk for the North leg of the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection; and b. repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Blvd to clearly identify the center left turn lane. ACTIVI']t ` LOG Fall I!ll,�ll,�l1�'1 ii, _ .._ ' . .� D TE ASIMMI it/4Y ACTIVrrf LOG COMMENTS -igete_Se' zeekx ,e1 eieee* ..40‘ obi ''e)1 de:e:4/ive- ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR NORTH HILLS BUILDING # LOCATION OF BUILDING FOUNDATION IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS. THE CALL FOR FOUNDATION INSPECTION SHALL SERVE AS CERTIFICATION BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR THAT THE BUILDING FOUNDATION HAS BEEN LOCATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS. # APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING SHELL IS BASED UPON A PROPOSED SPECULATIVE TENANT(S) SPACE. DIVIDING THE BUILDING INTO TWO OR MORE TENANT SPACES, WILL REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF TWO EXITS FOR EACH SPACE. ALL TENANT IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE UNDER SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT. Plan Review PROJECTt: L.Lw_ aEscE .-yaoILcAj.44 ADDRESS 5"CiCO DATE 12-- 19 -q0 PLAN CHECK NUMBER AL A REOIELO Fb'g, CorAp_C(Uc-a_tiat- 6-TizocA-012AL R,eSILster-1.F t\AZ.N_TS_ IliEJ.101FORML)(1-iattACt V.,--t___Comet--rtle:D;*10(11:1-_Pcta'FoL4sW.D4A_Cs2EitAegra.___ 3vTE PLAN .ViPtr,_ -k.OLID 4 Lit1htitIUMEE15-, AC Dt AL. UWE) AT EAAvx- _p_sacer., 1-114E 5_432.5EU MRANC4..F012-__DI6(4151-ED P-__.e..sirt4pct It LL c0vy69 '5ec-‘ -750a (c) Ji4P -eSi4c)La .1144GE CaVV.-(1_ uo_ink_.'5C- •250a (c) o P5 "F:3._.-1141S 0 5AsE4Et.ir. OC EXItS At15._g_EaLligeD____ERONA "Fknpoce.o OEEt ELL Pcopiot=15 Foe. PRoPe-es -"r1- •*e ?R tma 601ite.A4 The fo_ VU2 reOator oemtiStwi A _0(--4RAP?_0_5.E.P)._ARE.__GoiNIsteaole.12t___Q81' 5-0 aPOLE e 13 ci34._ Tat w--NA-Nr Lt•4p.R.0e1A1S. C5rutat q:-6t_.3;74 -7._12"-GrAeue.3 c'.K. -2..etaaiadazad /214_171 CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT prepared by: , , • A PLANNING DIVISIO" Plan Review PLAN CHECK NUMBER eci-39 PROJECT i.„,lC . 44 (.�... °F IC L . J ADDRESS ..�,aL CeNtE& 131,- VD�J�__ p iL DATE I 0 .... -G10 OCCUPANCY GROUP `2 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION V44 __ l t F . LOCATION ON PROPERTY BUILDING HT. / NO. STORIES E� 'F�►C�F 2 FLOOR AREA OCCUPANT LOAD EXITING REQUIREMENTS DETAILED REQUIREMENTS OCCUPANCY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION_Y -N_ PART V, CHAPTER 23, U.D.C. W.S.E.C.- CHAPTER 51 -10, W.A.C. NOTES: CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY 1)EVELl)PMENT PLANNING DIVISION prepared by: _ PL AA REVIEW COMMEN L Plan Check No.: 61— Qq Project: 11,1,. ' S►i.p1I CD REQUIRED INSPECTIONS No changes will be made to the plans unless approved by the Architect and the Tukwila Building Division. Plumbing permit shall be obtained through the King County Health Department and plumbing will be inspected by that agency, Including all gas piping (296- 4722). Electrical permit shall be obtained through the Washington State Division of Labor and Industries, and all electrical work will be inspected by that agency (277- 7272). All mechanical work shall be under separate permit through the City of Tukwila. All permits, inspection records, and approved plans shall be posted at the job site prior to the start of any construction. When special inspection is required, either the owner, architect or engineer shall notify the Tukwila Building Division of appointment of the inspection agencies prior to the first building inspection. Copies of all special inspection reports shall be submitted to the Building Division in a timely manner. Reports shall contain address, project name and permit number of the project being inspected. All structural concrete to be special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). All structural welding to be done by W.A.B.O. certified welder and special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). All high - strength bolting to be special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). Any new ceiling grid and light fixture installation is required to meet lateral bracing requirements for Seismic Zone 3. Partition walls attached to ceiling grid must be laterally braced if over eight (8) feet in length. Readily accessible access to roof mounted equipment is required. Engineered truss drawings and calculations shall be on site and available to the building inspector for inspection purposes. Documents shall bear the seal and signature of a Washington State Professional Engineer. Any exposed insulations backing material to have Flame Spread Rating of 25 or less, and material shall bear identification showing the fire performance rating thereof. Subgrade preparation including drainage, excavation, compaction, and fill requirements shall conform strictly with recommendations given in the soils re A statement from the roofing contractor verifying fire retardancy of roof will be required prior to final inspection (see attached procedure). All construction to be done in conformance with approved plans and requirements of the Uniform Building Code (1988 Edition), Uniform Mechanical Code (1988 Edition), Washington State Energy Code (1990 Edition), and Washington State Regulations for Barrier Free Facility (1990 Edition). 18. All food preparation establishments must have King County Health Department sign -off prior to opening or doing any food processing. Arrangements for final Health Department inspection should be made by calling King County Health Department, 296 -4787, at least three working days prior to desired inspection date. On work requiring Health Department approval, it is the contractors responsibility to have a set of plans approved by that agency on the job site. 19. Fire retardant treated wood shall have a flame spread of not over 25. All materials shall bear identification showing the fire performance rating thereof. Such identification shall be issued by an approved agency having a service for inspection at the factory. Notify the City of Tukwila Building Division prior to placing any concrete. This procedure is in addition to any requirements for special inspection. 21. All spray applied fireproofing, as required by U.B.C. Standard No. 43 -8, shall be special inspected. 0 All wood to remain in placed concrete shall be treated wood. 23. All structural masonry shall be special inspected per U.B.C. Section 306 (a) 7. Validity of Permit. The issuance of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. No permit presuming to give authority or violate or cancel the provisions of this code shall be valid. 25. A Certificate of Occupancy will be required for this permit. 1. Footings 2. Foundation 3. Slab /Slab Insulation 4. Shear Wall Nailing 5. Roof Sheathing Nailing 6. Masonry Chimney 7. Framing 8. Insulation 9. Suspended Ceiling 10. Wall Board Fastening 11. 12. 13. 14. Fire Final 15. Planning Final 16. Public Works Final 17. Building Final No changes will be made to the plans unless approved by the Architect and the Tukwila Building Division. Plumbing permit shall be obtained through the King County Health Department and plumbing will be inspected by that agency, Including all gas piping (296- 4722). Electrical permit shall be obtained through the Washington State Division of Labor and Industries, and all electrical work will be inspected by that agency (277- 7272). All mechanical work shall be under separate permit through the City of Tukwila. All permits, inspection records, and approved plans shall be posted at the job site prior to the start of any construction. When special inspection is required, either the owner, architect or engineer shall notify the Tukwila Building Division of appointment of the inspection agencies prior to the first building inspection. Copies of all special inspection reports shall be submitted to the Building Division in a timely manner. Reports shall contain address, project name and permit number of the project being inspected. All structural concrete to be special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). All structural welding to be done by W.A.B.O. certified welder and special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). All high - strength bolting to be special inspected (Sec. 306, UBC). Any new ceiling grid and light fixture installation is required to meet lateral bracing requirements for Seismic Zone 3. Partition walls attached to ceiling grid must be laterally braced if over eight (8) feet in length. Readily accessible access to roof mounted equipment is required. Engineered truss drawings and calculations shall be on site and available to the building inspector for inspection purposes. Documents shall bear the seal and signature of a Washington State Professional Engineer. Any exposed insulations backing material to have Flame Spread Rating of 25 or less, and material shall bear identification showing the fire performance rating thereof. Subgrade preparation including drainage, excavation, compaction, and fill requirements shall conform strictly with recommendations given in the soils re A statement from the roofing contractor verifying fire retardancy of roof will be required prior to final inspection (see attached procedure). All construction to be done in conformance with approved plans and requirements of the Uniform Building Code (1988 Edition), Uniform Mechanical Code (1988 Edition), Washington State Energy Code (1990 Edition), and Washington State Regulations for Barrier Free Facility (1990 Edition). 18. All food preparation establishments must have King County Health Department sign -off prior to opening or doing any food processing. Arrangements for final Health Department inspection should be made by calling King County Health Department, 296 -4787, at least three working days prior to desired inspection date. On work requiring Health Department approval, it is the contractors responsibility to have a set of plans approved by that agency on the job site. 19. Fire retardant treated wood shall have a flame spread of not over 25. All materials shall bear identification showing the fire performance rating thereof. Such identification shall be issued by an approved agency having a service for inspection at the factory. Notify the City of Tukwila Building Division prior to placing any concrete. This procedure is in addition to any requirements for special inspection. 21. All spray applied fireproofing, as required by U.B.C. Standard No. 43 -8, shall be special inspected. 0 All wood to remain in placed concrete shall be treated wood. 23. All structural masonry shall be special inspected per U.B.C. Section 306 (a) 7. Validity of Permit. The issuance of a permit or approval of plans, specifications and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. No permit presuming to give authority or violate or cancel the provisions of this code shall be valid. 25. A Certificate of Occupancy will be required for this permit. CITY OF TUKWILA 3`161 PRE- APPLICAnoN PROCESS MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO. PRE - APP - 029-89 PROJECT: North Hill Office MEETING DATE' 11 -9-89 TIME: 2•3D pm SITE ADDRESS: CHECKLIST MAILED TO CONTACT PERSON (date): all I , -1 . INITIALS: STAFF PRESENT NAMES /TITLES X X Building (433 -1851) Fire (575 -4404) Duane Griffin, Building Official Planning (433 -1849) Rick Beeler, Director; Jack Pace, Senior Planner Public Works (433 -0179) O Parks & Rec. (433 -1847) _ Police (433 -1806) 0 Permit Center (433 -1851) Other ( - ) Phil Fraser, Senior Engineer, Ross Heller, Engineer APPLICANT /REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT Contact Person: Name Steve Freidman Company /Title Gencor Address i > ant NE 1Rnth.,_S.t,_, Suite G. Bothell. WA Zip 98011 Phone 488 -1197 Others Present: Name Fd lenardic Company /Title 'LOG Architects Address__1836 Westlake Ave. No., #204. Seattle. WA Zip 98109 Phone 283 -4764 Name Company /Title Address Zip Phone Name Address Name Address Zip Phone Name Company /Title Address Zip Phone Company /Title Zip Phone Company /Title Application forms, plan submittal handouts and other reference materials are enclosed for your use. If you should have any questions regarding the permit process or would like additional forms sent to you, contact the Permit Center at 433 -1851. (PREAPP2, 1/90) CITY OF 7UKWILA PRE-APPLICATION CHECKLIST MEETING DATE 11 -09 -89 TIME' 2:30 SITE ADDRESS: 5900 Southcenter B1 BUILDING DIVISION E 1. Comply with the Uniform Building Code, 1988 Edition. 2. Comply with the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1988 Edition. DZ 3. Comply with the Washington State Energy Code. Provide energy calculations stamped by a Washington State licensed architect or engineer (see attached format). 4. Comply with Washington State Barrier Free Code, 1989 Edition. 5. Apply for and obtain the following Building Division permits and approvals through the Permit Center: _Building Permit _Rack Storage jMechanical Permit _Demolition (Building) Grading /Fill Permit Other 13 6. All applications and plan submittals must be complete in order to be accepted by the Permit Center for plan review. Use the Plan Submittal Checklist provided on the reverse of the applica- tion forms to verify that all the necessary materials and information has been supplied. 7. Construction drawings must be stamped by a Washington State licensed architect. 8. Structural drawings and calculations must be stamped by a Washington State licensed structural engineer. XQ 9. A boundary and topographic survey prepared by a Washington State Registered Land Surveyor must be submitted as part of the Building Permit application. D 10 Temporary erosion control measures shall be included on plans. Normally, no site work will be allowed until erosion control measures are in place. El Dl 11. Rockeries are not permitted over 4' in height. Retaining structures over 4' in height must be engineered retaining walls, and requires a permit. [] 12. Rack storage over 8' high must be designed for Seismic Zone 3. A Washington State structural engineers stamp will be required on plans and structural calculations submitted for rack storage over 8' high. 13. Construction documents shall include special inspection requirements as specified in Sections 302(c) and 306 of the Uniform Building Code. Notify the Building Official of testing lab hired by architect or owner prior to permit issuance date. The contractor may not hire the testing lab. O 14. Demolition permits are required for removal of any existing buildings or structures. O 15. Comply with UBC Appendix Chapter 35, Sound Transmission Control (R -1 occupancy group). 51 16. Obtain approvals and permits from outside agencies: ELECTRICAL PERMIT /INSPECTIONS are obtained through the Department of Labor and Industries (872- 6363). Df PLUMBING PERMIT /INSPECTIONS are obtained through King County Health Department (Inspections: (296 -4767, Permits: 296 - 4727). DI KING COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT must approve and stamp plans for restaurants and food service facilities prior to submittal to the Tukwila Building Division (296- 4727). D FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS plans are reviewed through the Tukwila Fire Department (575- 4404). Dl 17. Minimum restroom requirements must be included in plans. 18. Q 19. 20. Checklist prepared by (staff) : ��/'� �,`�� Date 11 -9 -89 If you should have any questions regarding the permit process or would like to obtain additional forms and handouts, contact the Permit Center at 433 -1851. (PREAPP6, 1/90) City o d'ukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433-1849 PRE - APPLICATION CHECKLIST PLANNING DEPARTMENT (land use) FOR STAFF USE ONLY Pre -app File # (') Project Name: Meeting Date i / %36/1 ) Time_______ Site Address: Zoning LAND USE INFORMATION [[ 1. Compliance with the Zoning Code (Title 18). Q 2. Obtain the following permits /approvals: (applications attached) — Boundary Line Adjustment — Building Site Improvement Plan — Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Design Review _ Design Review- Interurban _ Environmental (SEPA) Planned Mixed Use Development Planned Residential Development — Rezone - Shoreline Management Permit - Shoreline Management Permit Rev. - Short Subdivision - Subdivision - Unclassified Use - Variance, for Q 3. Proposed use complies with zoning? ,L Yes No Q 4. Structure meets setback requirements? ',141. Yes — No Q 5. Proposal meetings minimum parking space standards? ?'es _ No Q 6. Roof -Top mechanical equipment screened? _ Ye s_ No Q 7. Site plan complies with landscape requirements. — Ye? + No Q 8• a 9. Co.41e, (E • 10. aakoire, 0 11. Q 12. Q 13. Q 14. Q 15. Q lb. Q 17. 0 18. o 19. Q 20. Checklist prepared by (staff): Date j/ANSO City of TUkwila 6200 Soulhcenler Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Public Works Department 433.1850 PRE - APPLICATION CHECKLIST PUBLIC WORKS (utilities) FOR STAFF USE ONLY Pre -app File # -APP -53 , Project Name: 11•...)i_•,.. Meeting Date 53'; Time r3 ; -, Site Address: �sLV CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION Q 1. Obtain the following permits: �. Channelization /Striping /Signing Sewer x Curb Cut /Access /Sidewalk ` Sewer Excavation (public) _. Storm Fire Loop /Hydrant (main to vault) _ Water Flood Zone Control Water Hauling (2,000 Bond, Cert. Ins.) Water x Landscape Irrigation Water Moving an Oversized Load 7 Water _., Sanitary Side Sewer — Other Main Extension (private) Main Extension (public) Drainage Main Extension (private) Main Extension (public) Meter (exempt) Meter (permanent) Meter (temporary) Q 2. Water and sewer assements may apply. and will be determined during the utility plan review process. Provide sidewalks per Ordinance #1158, #1217 and #1233, or obtain waiver. traffic analysis 12 c.upcHt,t�1,RATlt l uc rats, -RLvv A,` c.E. c S Provide developers agreement for: Provide Hydrological - Geotechnical analysis *`(SSE N,:),I1-I> Review traffic study prepared by •, ?L /1 PL& `. itl ��; 4,U'00AGVi [[ 8. Provide plan submittal per requirements on attached plan submittal handout. Q 9. [� 10. Q 11. Q 12. El 13. 14. Q 15. El 16. Q 17. El 18. 19. N��U T IN TZ L1 t-- i 4u-r- cu rtyl NWQ -rn ALL.)w S l,i h•. C 'A•-\) n A 'WI LAN • ••1, r'•./ PRi .i ('�l' �i �U 1 l_.c ! �! -1`•I nl�.y Lu(i Ci�1(� PcNA L 1.S � S `' • t U S' Q J u s'\ L= __4 t 1 ��u N 1.-4? IV k, ..1 N CN_u O� N ., . S 1'2 i 51; (b — TLS' 01(' \' \' r YW\ • FJ e F(1T(I12Z" Cs-) (OtN )Mr- or- ir, " U4ti. s\;;i- / (1-N\)A Cry. IN -vc ' _PCL(;)t;,;xo'''i • 1\ - (1.V• INA ' 1-4 /V m NJ i UT (_iNoC I /1' 1.- -' o r>,us, 'o�►s "t��•c�-' 'P�;v�s h.vf S\N'.0 q, t! (t\iCLutY, -. S CI20. St--:-' 1 c .,', ...,• 1 As-.4'a ...'IA -1 tmPiC.1 S Pa.1 \i;AP-."C'N: Li ill( lr' J1 "1C INC c 4 ;`.L.S . ,. Checklist prepared by (staff) :_.1 .._=- ' •-- or-) SI Date /1 /19 (c)`'t ENTRANCO October 16, 1991 Mr. Ron Cameron City Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS 10900 NE 8TH STREET, SUITE 300 BELLEVUE, WA 98004 (206) 454.5600 FAX: (206) 454.0220 Re: Supplemental Traffic Analysis for the Proposed North Hills Development Site in Tukwila, Washington Entranco Project No. 90809 -06 Dear Ron: RECEIVED OCT 1 6 1991 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS This letter documents the supplementary traffic analysis performed at your request for the North Hills Development site in Tukwila, Washington. The proposed site is lo- cated on the north side of Southcenter Boulevard west of the 61st Avenue South bridge and adjacent to the existing Arco AM /PM Mini Mart site. The existing North Hills Apartment access driveway separates the Arco site from the proposed site. (Refer to figure 1 of March 28, 1990 letter report; appended hereto.) A previous study for the site was conducted in March 1990 assuming a general of- fice use for the development (see attached March 28, 1990 letter report). The pro- posed use has been revised for general retail, thereby, constituting the request for this supplemental analysis. Access to the site will remain via a single access driveway that will ingress and egress the North Hills Apartment driveway. The previous study (referenced above) for the general office use mentions an additional access driveway on Southcenter Boulevard, however, this driveway has since been eliminated from the site plan for its current proposed use. Existing Conditions The existing conditions for the adjacent arterial street system has remained for the most part unchanged, although, it would not be unreasonable to assume that some background growth in traffic volumes may have occurred in the past year. A significant change, however, has been made to the laning designation for west- bound Southcenter Boulevard. Since the traffic impact analysis was conducted for the proposed general office use, the laning on Southcenter Boulevard has been modified to allow traffic in the westbound lane just south of the north curb lane ac- cess to northbound 1 -5. This revision is significant because traffic destined for 1 -5 now distribute more evenly between the curb lane and adjacent lane, thereby, lower- ing the traffic volumes in the curb lane and creating more available gaps to access Southcenter Boulevard from the North Hills Apartments driveway. This would be most beneficial for site traffic destined westbound on Southcenter Boulevard or from the North Hills Apartments. WASHINGTON • ARIZONA • CALIFORNIA - e 1- ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC. LAKE WASHINGTON PARK BUILDING (206) 827.1300 5809 LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD N.E.. KIRKLAND. WA 98033 March 28, 1990 Mr. Ron Cameron City Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed North Hills Office Building in Tukwila, Washington Entranco Project No. 90809 -06 Dear Ron: . This letter outlines the traffic impact analysis performed for the North Hills Office Build- ing in Tukwila, Washington. The proposed site is located on the north side of South - center Boulevard west of the 61st Avenue South Bridge and adjacent to the existing Arco AM /PM Mini Mart site. The proposed development will consist of 9,000 square feet of general office space. Two access driveways are planned to ingress and egress the site. One driveway will access the site from Southcenter Boulevard and the other driveway will access the existing North Hills Driveway. EXISTING CONDITIONS Southcenter Boulevard will provide the primary access route to the proposed site. It is currently a five lane east -west minor arterial with two lanes in each direction and a cen- ter left turn lane. The speed limit is currently signed for 30 mph. The existing North Hills Driveway serves the 54 unit North Hills Apartments complex just north of the proposed office building site and the Arco AM /PM Mini Mart. The Arco facility operates with two other existing driveways along with the North Hills Driveway. A noon peak (12:00 - 1:00 p.m.) and p.m. peak (4:00 - 5:00 p.m.) hour turn movement count was conducted for the North Hilts and Arco driveways on March 19th and 20th, 1990 by Entranco Engineers. The City of Tukwila Engineering staff provided the exist- ing traffic volume data for Southcenter Boulevard. Figure 1 shows the 1990 existing traffic volumes at the Southcenter Boulevard/North Hills Driveway intersection. Traffic flow operations were also observed during the noon and p.m. peak hours. The observations showed no significant operational problems except for the westbound queue from the Macadam Road /Southcenter Boulevard intersection which occasionally extends from the intersection back beyond the North Hills Driveway. This queue was observed during the noon and p.m. peak period, although the noon peak queue did not occur with the frequency or the length of the p.m. peak. No queues were observed in the center left turn lane during either peak period. Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Two The intersections of Southcenter Boulevard /61st Avenue South and Southcenter Boule- vard /Macadam Road are presently controlled by signalization. With a traffic signal lo- cated on either side of the North Hills Driveway, gaps are created on Southcenter Bou- levard which allow the outbound traffic from Arco or the North Hills Apartment to enter the traffic stream. The gap opportunities on Southcenter Boulevard, however, do not al- ways occur simultaneously for the eastbound and westbound direction, therefore, vehi- cles currently attempting a left turn eastbound from the Arco or North Hills driveways used the center left turn lane as a refuge before merging into the eastbound traffic. This behavior is not uncommon for driveways which access a five lane urban arterial facility. TRAFFIC FORECASTS Table 1 summarizes the total number of trips which the proposed office building will generate during the noon and p.m. peak hour. These p.m. peak hour trip generation values are based on the total gross square feet of floor area and the rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' "Trip Generation Manual", 4th Edition, Sep- tember 1987. The noon peak hour generation values were based on a 12 -hour (6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) driveway volume count at an existing office park. The proportion of noon peak trips to p.m. peak trips of the existing office park was applied to the North Hills Office generation to determine the noon peak project volumes. Figure 2 shows the project- generated traffic volumes for the noon and p.m. peak hours. General Office (ITE Code 710) (9,000 sq. ft.) P.M. Peak Hour Noon Peak Hour Table 1 Trip Generation Summary Daily Enter Exit Total 225 4 23 27 -- 9 9 18 The proposed North Hills Office Building will generate a total of 225 average daily vehi- cle trips with 27 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour and 18 trips during the noon peak hour. Trip distribution of the project generated trips were based on the existing turn move- ment volume counts conducted by Entranco for the Arco and North Hills Apartments driveways, and the reported trip distribution in the North Hills Apartments Traffic Study performed by Entranco in December 1987. The project generated trips were distribut- ed evenly (eastbound and westbound) on Southcenter Boulevard for the noon peak generated trips and approximately 60 percent westbound and 40 percent eastbound for the p.m. peak generated trips. Although the proposed project site has two planned ac- cess driveways, all of the project generated trips for either peak hour were assigned to the shared Arco and apartments driveway as a worst case condition since the planned Southcenter Boulevard driveway was designated for right -in /right -out access only. Fig- ure 3 shows the 1990 total traffic volumes with project generated traffic at the access driveway and study intersection. Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Three TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS A level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted for the intersection of Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway during the noon and p.m. peak hours under existing and future conditions. All LOS calculations followed the methodology outlined in the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual". Table 2 summarizes the results of the LOS analysis. Table 2 Level of Service Summary Peak Period 1990 Existing 1990 With Project Reserve Reserve Capacity Capacity Unsignalized LOS (veh. /hr.) LOS (veh. /hr.) Noon Peak E 71 E 83 P.M. Peak D 102 E 99 Delay Delay Signalized LOS (sec. /veh.) LOS (sec. /veh.) Noon Peak N/A N/A B 5.27 P.M. Peak N/A N/A B 7.02 The results of the LOS analysis shows that the intersection currently operates at LOS E and LOS D for the noon and p.m. peak hours, respectively. With the addition of the North Hills Office Building generated traffic, the LOS analysis indicates that the noon peak hour LOS will remain at LOS E. The analysis for the p.m. peak hour indicates that the LOS will deteriorate from a LOS 0 to LOS E with the project generated traffic. The LOS analysis for an unsignalized intersection, however, does not take into account the gaps created by the adjacent traffic signals on Southcenter Boulevard at Macadam Road and 61st Avenue South. The LOS was also analyzed assuming the intersection would be signalized. A LOS B was obtained for both the noon and p.m. peak periods. As a result of the LOS E obtained for the p.m. peak hour with project volumes, a signal warrant analysis was conducted for the intersection. Signal warrants I and II of the "Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices" (MUTCD) were analyzed for the intersec- tion. Since 24 -hour counts were not available for all approaches, the signal warrant analysis used the projected average daily volumes as the criteria for the analysis. The volume requirements for average daily traffic volumes were interpolated from the Wash- ington State Design Manual and the values given in the MUTCD. The analysis indicat- ed that the volume requirements for the major road would be met for both warrants, however, the projected volumes on the minor road (North Hills Driveway) with project generated traffic did not meet the volume requirements for either warrant. Therefore, signalization of the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection is not war- ranted nor recommended at this time. Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Four A queue analysis was also performed for the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Drive- way intersection under stop sign control and signalization. The analysis was conduct- ed for both the noon and p.m. peak hours using the projected future volumes with the proposed project. The analysis of the intersection under stop sign control assumed a "wait interval" of two minutes for the critical turn movements. The analysis of the inter- section under signalization assumes a cycle length of 60 seconds with green time allo- cated proportionally to the approach volumes. Table 3 summarizes the results of the queue analysis. Table 3 Queue Analysis Summary Queue Length Queue Length Critical Movement Peak Period Unsignalized (ft.) Signalized (ft.) Eastbound Left Turn Noon 44 22 Eastbound Left Turn P.M. 44 22 Southbound Left Turn Noon 66 44 Southbound Left Turn P.M. 66 44 The results of the queue analysis project that the eastbound left turn movement vol- umes from Southcenter Boulevard will create a queue of 44 feet for both the noon and p.m. peak hours under stop sign control. The southbound left turn movement volumes from the North Hills Driveway will create a queue length of 66 feet under stop sign con- trol during both the noon and p.m. peak hours. The queue analysis was also conduct- ed for the intersection assuming signalization. A projected queue of 22 feet will be ex- perienced for the eastbound left turn movement from Southcenter Boulevard during both the noon and p.m. peak hours. The southbound left turn movement from the North Hills Driveway will experience a projected queue of 44 feet for both peak periods. The planned access driveway from the proposed site at the North Hills Driveway is lo- cated 75 feet north of the intersection, therefore, the 66 foot queue created by the southbound left turn volumes will not interfere with the operations at the planned drive- way under stop sign control. The 44 foot queue projected for the eastbound left turn movement from Southcenter Boulevard will occasionally block left turning vehicles from Arco's East Driveway, however, the recent driveway counts conducted by Entranco for the Arco driveways indicate that 60 percent of Arco's customers use the Arco West Driveway, therefore impacts to the Arco East Driveway will be minimal. The Southcenter Boulevard extension to Grady Way will increase traffic on Southcenter Boulevard approximately 4 percent according to the "Southcenter, Boulevard Environ- mental Assessment Study" conducted by Entranco Engineers, February 1983. This growth will occur with or without the proposed North Hills Office Building. Since the trip generation from the project is minimal, the Southcenter Boulevard extension will have negligible influence on the distribution of project - generated traffic. Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Five SUMMARY The proposed North Hills Office Building will generate a total of 225 average daily vehi- cle trips with 18 and 27 trips occurring during the noon and p.m. peak hours, respec- tively. A level of service analysis was conducted for the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection during the noon and p.m. peak hours with the project generated volumes. A LOS E was obtained for both peak periods with the additional volumes. A signal warrant analysis was performed for both peak periods to determine if a traffic signal should be installed to improve the operations of the intersection. Signal warrants I and lI were evaluated for the future intersection volumes. The analysis showed that neither warrant would be met. The queue analysis performed for the eastbound left turn movement from Southcenter Boulevard and the southbound left turn movement from the North Hills Driveway showed that these critical movements would experience a queue of 44 feet and 66 feet, respectively. These projected queue lengths will have negligible impacts to the adja- cent driveway operations. Based on the above analysis results, we suggest the following recommendations to en- hance the safety and operational efficiency of the intersection and adjacent driveways: • Paint a crosswalk for the North leg of the Southcenter Boulevard/North Hills Driveway intersection. • Repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Boulevard to clearly identify the cen- ter left turn lane. • Monitor the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection with future development to determine the implementation of a traffic signal. We trust that this traffic analysis for the North Hills Office Building development will as- sist you and Gencor Development. Inc. in gaining approval for their proposed project. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the information in this document, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC. Sherman D. Goong Project Engineer Attachments: Figure 1 - 1990 Existing Traffic Volumes Figure 2 - Project Generated Volumes Figure 3 - 1990 Total Traffic Volumes with North Hills Office Bldg. LE 4Mt -4–>004 - NaoN s' r.- vownle.S - PM PEtA4e-- VowrwES e CUT'A.: NCO E`JGI?,E!:$ Inc PIGjU�L� L l°tv exls-rLt Tre-p.FFte_:vot -uslES e EUTRANco £ GINEB -IS, INC Przo C.. r- Ge-14c— *c 1 LW(' u E .-c....=-11-11=, NcvN PEW- VOLUMES E-0xx=0- PM PE - VOWMc`SS e Cure vCQ:VGH4E! ,tNC Ftyu 3 vc,u. N otz-rx ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC. LAKE WASHINGTON PARK BUILDING 12061827.1300 5808 LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD N E.. KIRKLAND. WA 98033 January 30, 1991 Mr. Ron Cameron City Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Trip Generation Comparison for Retail Land Use Versus Office Land Use Entranco Project No. 90809 -06 Dear Ron: This letter outlines the trip generation comparison conducted for the previously proposed 9,000 square foot North Hills Office Building in Tukwila, Washington. The site is located on the north side of Southcenter Boulevard west of the 61st Avenue South Bridge and adjacent to the existing Arco AM /PM Mini Mart site. A traffic impact analysis was previously conducted for the proposed North Hills Office Building in March 1990 by Entranco Engineers, Inc. The results of the analysis showed that the proposed site under a "general office" land use scenario would generate 225 vehicle trips per day with 27 occurring during the p.m. peak hour. In comparison, a trip generation analysis conducted for the same proposed site under a "general retail" land use scenario would generate a gross total of 430 (estimated via 10 times the peak rate, due to lack of a daily vehicle trip rate) vehicle trips per day with 43 occurring during the p.m. peak hour. However, under a retail land use scenario, the trip generation to the site includes 'new" trips as well as "passby" trips. Assuming a passby reduction factor of 30 percent, then the actual number of new "net" trips generated to the site is 301 vehicle trips per day with 30 occurring during the p.m. peak hour. A conservative 30 percent passby factor was assumed to produce a worst case value since the range of passby factors, according to studies conducted and publishea by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), have been found to be 30 to 60 percent, depending on the size of the facility. These studies have shown that the smaller the facility (e.g., retail strip mall compared to a regional shopping center,) the higher the passby factor. (Reference: "A Methodology for Consideration of Pass -By Trips in Traffic Impact Analyses for Shopping Centers ", Steven A. Smith. ITE Journal, August 1986.) Since the net number of retail trips generated during the p.m. peak hour (30) is only three trips greater than that generated by the originally proposed office use (27), then no significant additional impacts are expected with the conversion of the site from office to retail use. E1?H1'11 ∎nr CE :•'8 SE•A111, 1 ,11R, NATK'NAI PAN" flint 0 \1 .:M6r rl'.': Hi1t•rt- ..,111'E EVI"I" Mr. Ron Cameron January 30, 1991 Page Two We trust that this additional analyses will assist you and Gencor 'Development in gaining approval for the land use conversion proposal. Please call if you have any questions or concerns regarding the information presented in this document. Sincerely, ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC. Sherman D. Goong Project Manager SDG;ckm 11' -1' ..1 1 V . V V /A.. ENTRANCO L., I AA.,..44 November 4, 1991 Mr. Ron Cameron Traffic Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 ^ ^^ ILA rL "uAAS 4JUU. uui) ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS 10900 NE 8TH STREET. SUITE 300 BELLEVUE, WA 98004 (206) 454-5600 FAX: (209) 454.0220 Re: Collision Diagram at the Intersection Vicinity of Southcenter Boulevard/ North Hills Apartments Driveway Entranco Project No. 90809 -06 Dear Ron: Enclosed you will find the collision diagram summary for the Southcenter Boule- vard /North Hills Apartments driveway intersection and mid -block segments between Macadam Road and 61st Avenue South. This diagram was completed based on the request from Tukwila City Council for review of historical accident data In the study area. The data reviewed includes all accidents reported to the City of Tukwila during the three -year time period of OCtober 1988 to October 1991, The table below shows a summary of the accident analysis conducted for the refer- enced location. Accident Data Summary (October 1988 to October 1991) 12 Month Period Ending Accident Type October 1989 October 1990 October 1991, EB Rear End WB Rear End SB Left Turn SB Right Turn Miscellaneous 8 2 7 0 2 Totals 19 6 2 4 1 0 10 6 3 0 5 13 24 Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this information. Sincerely, ENTRANCO Sher - n D. G •'• ng / Project Engineer SDG:dcn Enclosures WASHINGTON • ARIZONA • CALIFORNIA w vi VI 0 O E Z O c i-2 W ,4 0 CL. T. AN W r V VU • :. o STORM DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS FOR GENCOR NORTH HILL OFFICE BUILDING SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD TUKWILA, WASHINGTON BY BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS, INC. 2009 MINOR AVENUE EAST SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98102 (206) 323 -4144 RED3E1WIE OCT 2 z 1990 MAHAN & DESALVO, INC. D BRH JOB NO. 89176.02 JUNE 22, 1989 RejtseL RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA OCT 5 1990 PERMIT CENTER CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 2019$9 PERMIT CENTER 6TDR'M 0flC- E iz_.cu 4 7o,vs FoR. GEM C OCR. 1/3 As 6 6.28-89 1 f\ - .1841(20)% #2'7) i = 43 IL! 8 SF F. 0,991 6cre.s IMP, toiRs A = \5s' 4.35x90 = a - cC9 sF _-0.624 Arses GFuruks = �.(5��)4 o.9t,6 ,591 =.. o, 404 osE 0,65 2 o r .TL c 1 O + 4� /Sec. 6o sew /mtn 14.5 m1A •C1Oyr = 1.32 tr /hr. ._ Q Ex .= O, ao (.1.3z) 0.991 0,.26'1 d4)5 o.z �z Qo o,991 (ogs) • 0.40`7 (..-Cs /ctc_re..C. T o - + `j 1161 ,40% ' 4( 0.8 v";\. Vs X40, + z s) :4). (b.431 40.8 ... 1084 ._-�- _.._...._ Volume ?e uli.eg ' 1064(0.q9 ( 0,65_ 6.9..8..E +I ) aL me ...f)rtmot,e& 5.7if (A.0')7-t 13 '1 0.01_.1 :7.44: rr oa6z _ d ame e(._.= (..07 ' .232. ()SE27t..��0...... MY U.` 1.) • -To .._....Gvk>✓ Y._ 0/4-45/ 74: i A ' " o t"�5 mot» •$T� '� ._. /`. -1) , 4 j ILlo /-/P6/2 V/o u S[.// iel cE • ~.., 7.71/S • 4,64.-Cr CJ�/ 014�fIG. J $1DF1LTR fl ) Su)flLE. 1/3 1.SB 6.28-89 • Q = 0, SS() ,4170 991 = 1,2.G cS5 (Assumes ove(ctow C.011CM4 01\ 5/3 z 'N)0,,O02 1,26 c. s. O, 1 &p +h ... (.I b €7`'.._ Free boatel. Pm` ; bec.Ct. LOCATION • INCRE— MENTAL AREA A ' • • AC • Z AC • TIME OF CONCEN— TRATION TC RAINFALL INTENSITY I RUN —OFF • Q (E AC •I) pIPE COEF. PIPE DIA. • SLOPE VELOCt AT DESIGI Q FROM • TO ACRES - C.F. S. IN. To F. R S • G8---P: a 0,75 >/2. 0,1�;• d, /`.' 7 1 e. ,> Z.d12 o'3'2 e4"..511' 1 .4 4- , a c- rvtp.c.) • • 11111111111111111111 .. _ LZ. S J r' /JILL • Z AC TIME OF CONCEN- TRATION TC RAINFALL INTENSITY I RUN-OFF • • pip pipE COEF. PIPE DIA. SLOPE VELOCITY AT DESIGN LENGTH FLOW TIME IN PIPE U.S.W.B. CHART STORM FREQUENCY. REMARKS '`r���`7�r} NO= �' .YR. . MIN. IN. /HR. F. P. S, FT. MIN. QCAP. VcAP. e)„/„6 37. / . o 2 , c17d 0 133, D,hGz/ .. 4, 2 7 3 , ( �� :�, ,"r r �� .''•' % (7 • . o/ p , ,2 /, 7. /z" /,G' 0, g7€ G. ' 3 1,96 l,7 / Q,OZ L / .6 . _ • • ?3 NORTH HILL OFFICE BLDG. Uo ,pLCULAT I ONS SOFT ROOF! 9524 ROOF! FRAMING CAVITY AIR FILM OUTSIDE 0.17 0.17 BUILT -UP ROOF 0.33 0.33 1 /a INCH PLYWOOD 0.6E 0.62 OTHER 0 0 FRAMING 0 INSULATION ... -- 30 OTHER 0 0 INSIDE SURFACE 0 0 OTHER 0 0 AIR FILM INSIDE 0.61 0.61 R- -TOTAL 1.73 31.73 UD =1 / R TOTAL % TOTAL ROOF Ur AVERAGE 0.578035 0.031516 0.1 0.9 0.086168 SOFT WALL 1 46¢5 WALL 1 FRAMING CAVITY AIR FILM OUTSIDE 0.17 0./7 7 INCH CONC. 0.56 0.56 OTHER 0 0 OTHER 0 0 FRAMING 0 - -- INSULATION 1 1 OTHER 0 0 GWB 0.56 0.56 OTHER 0 0 AIR FILM INSIDE 0.68 0.68 R--TOTAL 1.97 12.97 U =1 /R TOTAL % TOTAL WALL Uw AVERAGE OCT 2 2 1990 MAHAN & DESALVO, INC. DATE: 11/a1/09 PAGE 1 of RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 2 0 1989 PERMIT CENTER SOFT WALL 2 1729 WALL 2 FRAMING CAVITY AIR FILM OUTSIDE 0.17 0.17 7 INCH CONC. OTHER OTHER FRAMING INSULATION OTHER OWB OTHER AIR FILM INSIDE R- TOTAL_ 0.507614 0.077101 Uo1 /R TOTAL 0.1 0.9 % TOTAL WALL 0.120152 Uw AVERAGE 0.48 0.48 O 0 O 0 19 O 0 O 0 O 0 0.68 0.68 1.33 20.33 0.75188 0.049188 O 1 0.049188 ,.. NORTH HILL. OFFICE BLDG. Ua CALCULATIONS WALLS HEATING GROSS WALL WINDOW WALL 1 WALL 2 0 0 N Ua (INCL. GLASS) COMBINING COMPONENTS GROSS AREA WINDOW WALL 1 WALL 2 ROOF! 0 0 0 0 Uo ACTUAL COMBINING COMPONENTS GROSS AREA GROSS WALL GROSS ROOF EXPOSED FLOOR 0 Ua ALLOWED AREA S.F. 8176. `i 1842.5 4605 1729 0 0 0 U ACTUAL AREA S.F. 17700.5 1842.5 4605 1729 9524 0 0 0 GROSS AREA U RATIO VALUE UxRATIO 0.225341 0.49 0.110417 0.563199 0.120152 0.06767 0.21146 0.049188 0.010401 O 0 O 0 GROSS AREA RATIO U VALUE 0 0 0 0. 188488 UxRATIO 0.104093 0.49 0.260162 0. 1201 52 0.097681 0.049 188 0.538064 0.086168 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 U ALLOWED AREA S. F. 17700.5 8176.5 9524 0 0 % GL. TO GR. WALL' 22.53% GROSS AREA RATIO U VALUE DATE: 11/21/89 PAGE 2 of 2 0. 05 1006 0.031259 0.004805 0.046364 0 0 0 0 0. 13 34 33 0.461936 0. 538064 0 0 0.25 0.035 0.05 0 U >: RATIO 0.115484 0.018832 0 0 0. 134316 140/` n[f] irm) �d tandem -wiree pr rnel (inibh channel ConneCl ore for 1, 2 or 3 prirT Ion, surface or 24 n_ 76 0* �e 1' 6 4' 1 )1 S /rC /S-1 G(/' f-?/( j( k4‘.7 }l? /, ( ).() �; /• ei e( /6- 7)i /r f 1B_ ?"7 41 � E CEILING SP/ • ,June 24, 1987 RiEggilWig OCT 2 21990 MAHAN & DESALVO, INC. 01 °44\� cof et Mr. Leon Grundstein ,...11801 Northeast 160th Street, Suite G ,Bothell, Washington 98011 Re: Tukwila Apartment and Office Project Dear Mr. Grundstein: . With your authorization, I have investigated the subsurface conditions as they relate to proposed construction of 57 apartment units and an office building in Tukwila. We met at the site on 14 May, at which time you showed me several preliminary site plans and the approximate ground limits .• 'of the property. I sent you a proposal dated 18 May, and on the same day •, ,summarized the proposal to you by telephone and informed you that it was my intention that the office site be included in the scope of work covered by . the proposal, although the document did not specifically say so. You gave' Verbal 'authorization to proceed on 28 May, and I received your written • proposal on 30 May. On 1 June I picked up additional site plans at your ' ...office; these provided ground control points from which field measurements could be made. Field access preparation and subsurface exploration were ' accomplished on 1 and 2 June. ' This report describes the property the project proposed, the investigative' ,procedures and summarizes conclusions and recommendations applicable to site grading, subgrade drainage, foundation and retaining wall design, and., mitigation of earth - related hazards, whether those hazards are the•result, of development or not.'' ' Considering the steepness of terrain, generally favorable conditions were found. Exception Is in the vicinity of Building "A "; there a combination :, of steep terrain, shallow groundwater, and erosion- cavitated sand which '' require that Building "A" be supported on augercast piles.• Surface' evidence suggests that there has been a continuing problem of poor surface* . drainage, sloughage and erosion in that vicinity, especially toward the west end of the property. The pile - supported building will be as secure as'.• those on flatter terrain and more favorable subgrade conditions and to some minor degree, will bring about improvement of downslope surface flow and sloughage. JAMES EATON, PE (206) 682 -6942 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 RECEIVED, CITY OF TUKWtLA' NOV 2 0.19$9-' PERMITCENTEI:.. • ; ..•,.. Mr. Grundstein ;June 24, 1987 Page Two I am also advising you that have an accurate topographic survey made as a '.logical next step and that you and your architect consider revisions in the ..site and grading plan. With this letter are three copies of my report of findings. Yours very truly, EARTH SCIENCE Ws N. Eaton 7 -0431 JNE /rlb Enclosures' INTRODUCTION The property slopes moderately to steeply to the south and southwest; elevation differential is in the order of 100 feet. It lies north and east . of the intersection of Macadam Road and Southcenter Boulevard. Your south '' property line represents the approximate toe -of -slope and common property ' line with Denny's Restaurant and the ARCO AM -PM Market. It appears that the•' lower reaches of the slope were artificially steepened beyond their natural grades at some time in the past. This is especially the case behind the' :.:... AM -PM market and around the north and east peripheries of the trapezoidal parcel proposed for office development. ',Page nine of this report was prepared from a 22 May 1987 site plan prepared,.. by Azaria Rousso /Architects and from an 18 June 1986 office site plan ' ' prepared by Mithun- Bowman - Enrich Group, P.S. Note that page nine consists , of two separate plans, each to different scale; one is of the residential, portion and one applies to the office portion. An earlier undated site plan study prepared by Milbrandt Architects was used for its location of'. the existing apartments to the north. Some of the test locations plotted on page nine were measured from a demolished house which, for field purposes only, was scaled from a 1" =100 partial top sheet which you provided. Presently, the only improvements on the property are the basement floor and walls of the aforementioned house, the driveway which served the house, and several rockeries along or near the toe of the slope. A variety of trees exist in clusters at various parts of the property. The areas between clusters support a dense growth of blackberry bushes and other brush. Part of that brush, especially in the vicinity of Building "B" and "C ", was removed in preparing access for test equipment. At the time of field work, a spring emerged from the toe -of -slope area immediately north of your proposed office building. It ponded in a small "' :artificially created depression near the northeast corner of that building. area. Water was also noted emerging from the south of Building "A" ' location and north of Denny's. This water appears to originate as spring' , water from the general area around and north of Building "A ". It appears that shallow groundwater and associated surface drainage has been a problem for the existing apartments to the north since construction there. Several small ditches undermine the perimeter footings and transect the •': ..:,,, yard areas all directed to an asphaltic- cement lined swale which parallels your common property line. Some of the small ditches carried water when •; last observed less than a week ago and it can be presumed that flow varies., seasonably, but that it continues to some degree through the summer. As now proposed, the 57 units would be divided among five buildings. The • present grading plan shown as before and after contour shows Buildings "A ",', "B ", "E ", and part of Building "C" on cut with an apparent net removal of borrow from the site. The apartment buildings will be of wood frame construction with slabs on grade. The office building will consist of three stories of wood frame construction with a first floor slab on grade.;;., SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS • Page nine shows the approximate locations at which 12 test pits were dug.'.'. using a rubber -tire mounted construction backhoe. Log descriptions of ' conditions at each location were maintained from direct examination of.the freshly exposed strata. With recording of soil descriptions and . .groundwater conditions, the pits were backfilled in the interest of safety,. Summaries of the test pit conditions are presented on pages ten to twelve.:. '- The stratigraphically lowest material found and of relevance to development..., is sandstone bedrock, which was found essentially at the surface of • locations one and two, representing the north portion of the office building. The sandstone is fine grained, friable, and varies in color from ' white to gray or yellow- brown. It grades increasingly hard with depth, and within a yard of its upper surface it could be further penetrated only by repeated raking with the bucket teeth under the full weight of the backhoe. It appears that the uppermost one to two feet within the general area of the office building have been disturbed or artificially modified in association with unknown past utilization. To the depths 'explored, the entire residential area and part of the office • area are underlain by glacially associated soils. These soils are highly .• variable across the property, but range from clean sand or gravelly sand in.; the bank behind the AM -PM market and at locations 9, 10 and 12 to silt or. " • clay hardpan at locations 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 12. Most of the test pits exhibited layering of more than one type of glacial soil. Between the • •extremes of granular and find- grained are loam and mixtures of course and fine- grained soils; some of these mixtures include cobbles and boulders. 's: In general, the glacially associated soils exhibit moderate to high bearing 'strength and good slope stability. Exception is in the very shallow range of depth -- generally less than on. yard--where weathering and root action have'..',' .diminished the soil's strength and where the granular or partially granular :''.:;'' soils are saturated either by surface or subsurface flow. Also in general, :° J' after wasting the topsoil and root - ladened soils, the excavated borrow be suitable for compaction either on this site or on another. Most of the '•. .borrow .generatrrd will contain a sufficient fraction of fine - grained soil .'.place serious seasonal restrictions on compaction and to some degree on ' fresh cuts. Where there are alternating layers of permeable and highly impermeable . soils as on your site, there is potential to accumulate thin layers of saturation either seasonably or at more -or -less random locations. • .,,'.... i Groundwater was observed at locations 8, 10 and 11. The number 11 location •• •'.., :. • was significant. -2- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conditions are favorable for conventional footing support of Buildings "B" .:. "C ", "E ", and the office building. A deep foundation is advised for .Building "D" because of the proximity to a steep slope and the highly •. erosive nature of the soil. Unfavorable 'soil and hydrologic conditions :::..•�;; were found in the vicinity of Building "A ", and terrain there appears steeper than shown by the topographic map. Because of the steep slopes and'—: the erosive nature of the soil, unusual measures should be taken with 'respect to surface drainage and pressurized utilities. In its present condition, these are risks of falling rocks and accumulations of sediment'••.' ,or sloughage on downslope properties; surface evidence suggests that debris. removal is routine, especially on the Denny's parking lot. Due to the • considerable earthwork involved in this project and the potential risk to. neighboring properties, especially those downslope, review of appropriate.; plans and conscientious inspection during construction are imperative aspects of development. Office Building The foundation along the north side of the building will, necessarily, bear; on sandstone. At a depth of about two feet below existing grade in that area, the sandstone is sufficiently hard to support conventional spread footing, yet it can be excavated by means of an ordinary construction backhoe or tracked loader. Moving south across the building area, the sandstone gets deeper and it becomes overlain by over - consolidated glacial 'silt. Considering the relatively high structural loads and the desirability of having all footings bear on generally similar material, I recommend that all footings be excavated either into hard sandstone or glacial hardpan; this would require excavating to 4.6 feet at location three. Allowable soil bearing pressures of 5 ksf are advised, subject to inspection of the bearing surfaces. The 5 ksf figure could be increased by one third to accommodate seismic and similar loads. Those areas which are to support slabs must also be graded down to firm native soil, subject to good judgment and common sense. . Near the toe of the slope behind the office building, granular glacial. deposits rest on . relatively impervious silt and sandstone. This . permeable /impermeable relationship is the cause of spring emergence in that,:. area; The footing drain should be laid with its invert at least one foot''' below slab grade; the drain and its granular washed backfill should be shrouded in filtering fabric, and along the west and north sides of the building the backfill should rise to finished grade. A similar drain should follow the toe -of- the -slope and should parallel the east edge of the,;' parking lot to insure that the paving does not fail because of softening subgrade. A six -inch thick or greater layer of sand or pea gravel should separate the flow slab from natural soils. • -3- You or your architect should provide me with a copy of the foundation, 'grading and drainage plans for review when they are complete. I may advise. • removal of some of the existing rockeries, the collapse of which could damage the building. • You mentioned the possibility of raising grade on the office building ,• .'parcel using borrow generated from the residential area. If that is done, I recommend that the building still be supported by footings which bear on '» ' hard undisturbed natural earth. Fill which is to support paving or any '' other improvements should be placed and systematically compacted under inspection to assure quality. 'Topography and Grading, Residential It appears that the contour maps on which the site plans to date have been'• imposed was constructed from air photos and, in some cases, the contour.' lines do not accurately describe actual conditions. I recommend that a ' ground survey be conducted early on and that revisions be made in the site ' and grading plans based on the better information. There might be advantages to making major site plan revisions to avoid situating buildings.,' near the sides of steep bluffs and thereby eliminating the need for drilled' or unusual foundations. It appears that Building "D" and at least part of Building "C" are now proposed to rest on structural fill. I recommend that either floor grades be adjusted or that building locations be shifted to ' place all buildings on cuts. In view of the severe topographic as well as.,, subsurface restrictions at Building "A ", I am assuming that no part of the 'construction area will be filled and that no significant part of the ,building area will be cut below existing grade. Adjusting of locations may:, or may not necessitate additional testing or explanation. From the onset of earthwork, you are advised to contain all construction - related runoff within the property until it is. . control- released into the public stormwater system. Generally similar containment applies to the post - construction period. • In accordance with usual good construction practice, the areas which are to ..' support improvements of any type must be stripped of organics, topsoil, fills, or soft materials. It appears that there will be some filling in 'connection with parking lots. No unretained finished fill surface should .' -slope at steeper than 23:1 and then only if it is compacted to at least 95 ' percent'as defined by ASTM D1557. Compliance with this necessarily requires ' engineer inspection beginning with the stripped, unfilled surface. Cut.: slopes through any of the soil types described herein should be secure at:' ' ' •,.::;'' ,::: 11:1. Existing slopes steeper than that and falling outside the } construction area are to be left as they are. ' The basement walls of the demolished house must be removed and the basement' and surrounding area should be reshaped to a saucer - shaped section to ' facilitate placement of fill in feather -edged lifts; this, of course, :.,' . applies only if grade is to be raised above the existing basement floor'.:. level. Septic tanks, buried fuel tanks and similar voids if they exist are,;''., to be similarly removed, shaped, and filled under inspection. -4- • ,.Slope Stability The site is bel ieved stable with respect to deep or shear -type sliding., 1 t. ;:.That general applies to the effectively unweathered and nominally soils weathered so below the depths of dense roots. With respect to surface.. raveling sl hage under adverse climatic conditions and erosion those ar slopes which a now steeper than about 35° are no more than marginally.• pr stable under present .conditions. It appear§ that both sandy sediment and:. rocks gravitate onto the existing parking lots, particularly the Denny's..•:.' time from o time. The only way in which human activities are seen to st .'`. ,contribute i that the toe of the slope appears to have been steepened in with h past commercial development.. An asphaltic- cement lined .1 shallow ditch appears to be effective at intercepting surface runoff from property perty to the north and to all appearances, the present. and . . :,hydrologic condition is either natural or slightly drier than natural. ent With. implementation of all recommendations herein, the following. ..objectives w ill be accomplished: There will be no slope movement beneath foundations, parking • lots,, or other artificial surfaces; under natural conditions these soils will be retained, confined, or graded to safe inclines. 0 With respect to unnatural conditions, these are seen as incursions of surface water from offsite or from breached pressurized underground lines either onsite or offsite to the north. Both categories of water will or would be directed to and confined, within subtle swales designed into the asphaltic surfacing, where it would be directed to a relatively harmless location. along or near Southcenter Boulevard: The steepest slopes will be unaffected by development, except that they will be slightly desiccated by the upslope artificial•'• surfaces and that hazardous -sized rocks and other materials whic0," might roll or slide toward the south property 'line would be •.intercepted by a chain link fence. The slight desiccation would translate.to a slight improvement in stability, ° During the construction period, runoff from altered surfaces will''. not be permitted to enter unaltered surfaces. It will either be contained and pumped from temporary basins or sumps within the improved areas or it will be directed to a holding pond on thee: office building parcel. Underground Utilities Earlier reference was made to unnatural contributions to slope instability, and it was explained that this included accidental breaches of pressurized • piping. For practical' purposes this refers to water lines but could include sewers if they are pressurized and effectively have infinite ' reservoirs. The imaginable ways in which breaching might occur include, but are not necessarily limited to, faulty materials, faulty workmanship, seismic induced strain, impact by drilling or excavating equipment, and water hammer or pressure surges caused by human carelessness or equipment malfunction. • Several design alternatives have been considered in designing protection:..'.: against any of the above mishaps. Those include location of the largest . pressurized lines at unusual depth of burial or at plan locations where' some of the causal factors could be partially mitigated, using particularly.` flexible or durable materials, and using concrete or other conduits or :barriers. No one would provide protection against all causal conditions,., I recommend that the water system be so designed that the soil at depth is •protected from both saturation and scouring by an impermeable synthetic..,'; barrier in the form of a trench lining and that the force of leaking water • • be directed to the surface where it can be contained in subtle open channels in the•parking lot and driveway. I would expect to coordinate details of design with your civil engineer. Necessarily, the largest diameter lines would have to fall outside or near the edges of paving.' :Small diameter pipe might be exempt from location restrictions but would'.:: confine and channel leakage with the synthetic barrier. Apartment Foundations Building "A" will require an augercast pile foundation. For now I am'", assuming that this building will be terraced and underlain by crawl space. Terracing the building is not intended to mean terracing the slope. .I anticipate that there will be no retaining walls for reasons we discussed. I will coordinate with your structural engineer about lengths, vertical capacities and horizontal design. Depending on the outcome of your topographic survey, other units including "D" will require deep foundations to afford protection against undermining, which might be associated with encroachment of the nearby high angle bluff. To determine the proper foundation type for each building, I recommend that a 20 -foot horizontal:''' distance be maintained between the foundation and daylight, measured through native soil. Judging from existing topographic data, conventional,' spread footings will be appropriate for most of the buildings. With the diversity of soil type from point to point, I recommend that all footings be sized to building code specifications or to 2 ksf soil bearing pressure. If, after topographic mapping and revision of the site plan, the 20 -foot ' condition cannot practicably be•met using spread footings, I will provide your architect with parameters for pile design. These would derive capacity from both friction and end bearing; it would be assumed that there was no friction through fill or through erosion or slide susceptible soils. The piles would be in the order of 14 to 16 inches in diameter and'. would penetrate beyond the depths explored for this project. :'. For,either type of foundation, inspection during excavation is essential 'to :.verify compliance with the intent of these recommendations and to confirm:;;. continuity of soil conditions between and outside the test areas.:- In general footings will be poured on stripped soil in place. Under some , circumstances, it would be acceptable to support footings on compacted ' fill, and the recommended 2 psf allowable pressure is within generally.. accepted limits for such fill. It appears that, even after anticipated'' • site plan revisions, it will not be necessary for any foundations'to bear•.' on fill. -6- Retaining Walls All of the soil types found within the residential area are types which would exert lateral wall pressures of magnitudes within a commonly assumed- ;. range for this locality. Silt and silt - containing soils found at various,'.. locations across the site would exert pressures well beyond the assumed ;..`, range if used as backfill. Selectively, the cleanest of onsite spoils generated would be satisfactory as retaining wall backfill. ;. For'walls which are free to deflect sufficiently to assume an'active•• condition, for which the backslope angle does not exceed 20 °, and which. the:; , full height backfill is free draining, I recommend that P be taken as. 35 pcf. P as 300 psf, and that the coefficient of friction between soil: • and concrete be taken as 0.5. For the nonyieldable case, p would increase •° .to 55. Neither the 35 nor the 55 figure includes any surcharge load other:; :, than the assumed 0 -20° backslope angle. Your structural engineer should , coordinate with me about other parameters and assumptions. I. anticipate:, :'.: '.. that daylight basement walls will be of 'reinforced concrete and that cantilever timber bulkheads would be more practical in exterior areas. Rockeries, where used, will be limited to 4 feet height by City ordinance ' and they, of necessity, will not and cannot be engineered. Property Line Hazards Several unlikely but potential hazards could transcend property lines 'where,. the property bounds are in general proximity to steep slopes. In some cases they represent natural hazards, such as gravity movement of earth''' materials across natural slopes, and in other cases they could include collapse of already existing rockeries along the south edge of your . • property or the effects of a breach in a water main such as the one that is understood to run parallel to but outside your north property line. , • One of the objectives of, this report is to provide recommendations for. development without creating new hazards. To some degree both natural and': unnatural existing hazards will be reduced by development. The amount of water which percollates into the soil across the property will be greatly.' reduced, having a positive effect on spontaneous sloughage and superficial: slope instability. Plumbing mishaps from upslope properties, if not "controlled by the existing asphaltic -lined ditch, would become contained by''' the paving, curbs, and gutters of this project, designed specifically. for" such purposes. The fence recommended for protection of the Denny's and ARCO properties would be installed prior to any grading above. Hopefully it can be' installed along the edge of existing paving irrespective of whether it ; coincides with the property line. The fence is not intended as a retaining,'','' r: wall but as a catcher. Debris which assimulates behind the fence must be, •: periodically removed to preserve the effectiveness of the fence. . • • -7- . r. . LIMITATIONS AND USE ' •'•'.:This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the addressee and his ..., '•' "•design teams for use on the specific residential and office projects " ' , '' ....described herein. It is not public information and is not to be used by real estate agents, lenders, future owners, or neighboring owners. In case, ''::,• of significant revisions of the types of construction, finished grades, or ` building locations, the findings and recommendations of this report may be':`.';':,;"': :.inappropriate.. The_ undersigned should be consulted about the, implications ; ,'of'any revision. . Partly in recognition of the potential for creation of hazardous conditions,..; : by not 'strictly following the intent of the recommendations herein,,.:. inspection of all earthwork and related construction is imperative. Another reason for close inspection during construction is that the' ,.... undersigned assumes no responsibility for work performed at variance the 'recommendations of this report or which is of uncertain compliance; ' :•;� with foundations and earthwork it is usually not possible to determine . compliance after the fact.' •,The only express or implied warrant carried by this report is that the:.., ,professional efforts in developing and presenting the information in it were performed conscientiously, in good faith, and to recognized standards • of engineering practice as understood by the engineering community in•this area and at this time. SW- 24 June 1987. ," James N. Eaton, PE . JNE /rlb -8- TEST PIT LOGS Dark brown topsoil and organic matter (soft) Yellow -brown severely weathered clayey standstone (soft to.;..•':' medium) White to yellow weathered sandstone (hard) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered; dug with difficulty beyond 4' Brown silt associated with past excavation and rockery:.:;:. construction (soft) • Yellow brown severely weathered clayey sandstone (soft'to medium) White to yellow weathered sandstone (hard) 4.3' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater ." encountered; dug with difficulty beyond 3.5' • • • :> Brown silty fine to medium sand (dense) i ' 2.1' - Brown fine to medium sandy silt (stiff to hard) • 4.6' - Gray clayey silt with sandstone inclusions (hard) 6.4',- Completed and backfilled June 2', 1987; no groundwater encountered. Brown loam with fine roots throughout (soft) • •• • • • Brown fine sandy silt with occasional sandstone cobbles and small boulders throughout (medium to stiff) • . 5.9' - Gray to tan clayey silt (hard) 8.8' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered Brown slightly organic topsoil with roots (soft) 0.9' - Brown fine to coarse sand (medium dense) 5.6' - Brown silty clay (hardpan) 7.4' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered #6 0' Brown loam with fine and course roots throughout (soft) 3.0' - Brown fine sandy silt with occasional roots in upper 5',: sandstone and hardrock cobbles and boulders throughout :. •(medium dense) . 8.8' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater: encountered. #7 0' Brown loam topsoil with roots (soft) Brown silt (soft to medium stiff) Brown thinly bedded silt (hardpan) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered Brown sandy loan topsoil with roots (soft) Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) Brown slightly clayey silt (hardpan) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; slight groundwater,. seepage from 1.9 feet -11- 4.8' - 7.6' #11 0' MO 0.4' - Brown gravelly loam topsoil' with fine roots (soft) • Brown silty fine to coarse sand with sandstone and'hardrock gravel, cobbles and boulders (loose at 0.7' to dense at 4') Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater.. encountered Brown sandy loam topsoil with roots (soft) Brown fine to coarse sand (medium dense) Brown fine sand with trace of silt (medium dense) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; minor groundwater flow from 4/8' • Brown sandy loam with roots 1 •i Brown fine sand with thin silty strimers (medium to dense) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; moderate to severe groundwater flow from 3.5' to 5.5' depths Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) Brown thinly bedded silt (hardpan) Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater.' encountered; surface water across steep slope in near vicinity -12- July 12, 1989 Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Gencor, Inc. 11801 Northeast 160th Street, Suite G Bothell, Washington 98011 Re: Tukwila North Hill Office Building Dear Messrs. Grundstein 'and 'Smith: This letter presents newly developed information requested by the City of Tukwila for inclusion with''your permit .application documents for, your proposed office building. Earlier reports and correspondence from my office relevant to the project are dated June 24, 1987, June 16, 1989, and June 21, 1989. These latest requirements specify that a test boring be made and that the report be expanded in its explanations of groundwater presence, slope stability, bearing pressure, and backs1ope incline. These issues were raised in association with the north side of the building. The test boring was drilled at the . location shown on attached page five, taken from MGA's Sheet A -1 dated June 9, 1988. This is the approximate most critical temporary cut face location and is upslope from the approximate high point of the wall. It approximately coincides with Section "A" of Sheet A -14. A truck - mounted mobil drill B -60 hollow auger was used. Undisturbed samples were obtained at five foot intervals by means of a 3 in OD Dames & Moore type sampler. In brief, sand was found to a depth of 16 feet and sandstone bedrock was found below that. The boring was terminated at 30 feet deep, approximately. at proposed first floor elevation, because the hardness of the sandstone essentially precluded further drilling by this method. There were no noted indications of groundwater presence during or immediately following drilling, but a pizzometer was installed at the.depth where groundwater could most likely be expected; particulars of,pizzometer.installation, are described on the boring log attached. The driving resistances shown on the log are standard for Dames & Moore equipment, . but are not SPT numbers. Groundwater ' To date, the sand shroud surrounding the pizzometer top remains dry. A small spring emerges from 'the cut bank north and west of the test boring; the seepage flows several yards down the existing road before it evaporates. Seepage is also emerging from beneath the spoils pile and AiN JAMES EATON, PE (206) 682 -6942 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Page 2 July 12, 1989 maintaining wet ground in the unfilled area within the proposed building footprint. This is the same seepage which was noted on page three of the 1987 report, though the presence of the new spoils has caused the surface wetting to spread. One can reasonably postulate that development of the North Hill Apartments above has had some effect on springs and shallow groundwater of the lower slopes. Most likely the effect has been of diminution during winter months, but because of lawn irrigation, the summer effects are uncertain. There is indication that irrigation water has seeped beneath the board fence behind the apartment complex. Any natural or unnatural water which gravitated to the sand /sandstone contact would become a part of the aquifer system that includes the springs. Groundwater and /or springs would be important if a sloped soil mass were saturated in such a way as to become slide prone under the influence of hydrostatic or pore pressure, if it were present in such quantity as to hinder construction, or if its presence were not anticipated in the design of retaining walls or floor slabs. All evidence developed to date suggests that the only groundwater above approximate elevation 80 is the thin perched type along the permeable /impermeable contact, and that it will amount to nothing worse than a nuisance during construction. Typically permeable /impermeable surfaces are warped configurations and saturation is present or detectable only in the trough areas. The reasons that onsite soils are not being used as wall or drain backfill is that collectively they could obstruct natural subgrade drainage and /or permit dangerously high moisture conditions to develop behind retaining walls. The groundwater becomes effectively free from confinement or hydrostatic pressure buildings at the point where it enters pea gravel behind the walls. This is illustrated schematically on page 3. Slope Stability and Backslope Angle The sandstone and its weathered variations are vastly superior in strength to any of the glacial or post - glacial soils, and I suggest that maximum advantage be taken of this during construction. Note that 1987 test pit No. 2 and the recent test boring both fall near Section A of Sheet A -14; the depths to sandstone are 1 ft. and 16 ft., respectively, suggesting that some bedrock will likely be 'excavated. Where possible, you should cut vertical faces through the sandstone so that slopes through unconsolidated soils can be kept minimal. Implied by this is that the precise temporary cut configuration should be determined as the work is in progress. The recommendations I have provided to your ,civil and structural engineers, both in writing and verbally, provides for a worst case, no sandstone is excavated. Either natural or long - existing slope faces exist east, north, Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Page 4 July 12, 1989 I explained that to minimize differential settlement between sandstone - supported footings and other ,footings,' the .others would have to be excavated deeper than specified 'by code; the bearing surfaces are to be inspected for compliance before they are poured. Yours very Tuly, ames Eaton, P.E. 71 -3731 JE:ho'r /12 2 Attachments Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Page 3 July 12, 1989 and northwest of the building area and expose the same sand layers which you will excavate. These support varying densities of vegetation and are stable at 60° to 70° to the horizontal. for 20 vertical feet and higher. The type of strength upon which such slopes depend cannot be accurately measured in the laboratory,: but where field conditions permit can be calculated from critical height observations. I have recommended a 1:4 temporary cut. The wall will not be poured in place. Note that the 1987 report requires a six -inch granular layer beneath the slab and filter-shrouded granular wall backfill. The cut, drain, and wall are shown schematically below: moo 77 /I I have advised your structural engineers not to exceed 30° backslope for at least H horizontally behind the wall. Beyond that, steeper permanent slopes would not influence the wall and the excavation could merge with any now - existing slopes for the permanent case. The 30° figure is intended to be a maximum to which the wall will be designed and for which lateral pressures have been provided. To whatever the "close -in" angle can be kept below 30° even in exchange for steeper more - distant inclines, the greater the stability of the wall beyond that which was designed. tri6a-hp Bearing Pressure It will not be possible to pour the entire foundation system on soil of a uniform type. N values for the weathered and slightly weathered sandstone justify bearing pressures in the order of 20 ksf or higher. In recognition that it is desirable to design all footings to the same allowable bearing pressures, I recommended in 1987, that all foundations be designed to 5 ksf to stay within commonly recognized ranges of strength used for the other soil types which are likely to be encountered, i.e.; dense sand and hard silt -clay mixture. 0' 4 9 GENCOR.TEST BORING Brown F -M sand (4) (7) (8) (21 (16). (22) 14' (14 (24 (26 16' Yellowish brown weathered F -M grained sandstone 19' 15) 26) 45) 24' ( 500/4") 29' 50/4" ) Completed July 7, 1989; no indications of groundwater presence by drill cuttings, drilling progress, during sample intervals, or in the progress of stemming and backfilling:. Sealed with.Bentonite below 19 ft. Sand plug 14 -19 ft. Pizometer installed at 18 ft. Sealed with Bentonite above 14 ft. Mr.' Leon Grundstein Gencor • 11801 .Northeast 160th Street, .Suite• G Bothell', Washington. 298011,•:. . Re: Tukwila Office Bui,iltling :Dear •Mr. Grunds tein:.. One issue which, I •neglected.• to mention in:my June .16th letter was that of temporary slope stability: :: Fills, places! ;sine 1987, will be .removed prior to excavating .for retaining walls; and foundations�.and, i understand, • are •, not an issue.' fire -1987 natural soil s. 4may. be:.. excavated •at 1:4 (fl. to V) temporarily. with the toe two:• feet outside the ° north building wall . The upper edge of that slope., would merge with 1987 grade.. insomuch as there ;'may. be. safety regulations 'concerning placement of personnel . in•' •.t) a 'toe area ' I'. reccminend. that; any such regulation be Obser'ved... From; our,.ineetings with. the full desi,gn.;team, compliance can be achieved.. I do: 'not beli.ev.e..'that: the operatiop..oi`! excavating equipment would be hazardous..-, .I understand that there.: is no'. temporary.';, cut: issue • along the east side of the- building:: • • JAMES EA70NI. PE (206) 682 ;042' o cYTEcHN CAL .SRVICES Box 126.4. fiopfi.�t , : WA.98025 • I + i ': i' I' I I • r' I:I I; E , l.� l :Ti'" .. 7 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director December 17,' 1992 Mr. Leon Grudstein Gencor 750 Sixth St. S., Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 RE: Building Permit No. 6946, North Hill Retail Building Dear Leon: This letter is in response to your request of December 9, 1992 regarding resubmittal of the expired building permit and compliance with past SEPA and Board of Architectural Review decisions. I reviewed previous answers to these issues with the Building official and together we provide the following: A. This building permit is expired. Resubmittal of the application may occur providing the application complies with the applicable Washington Codes effective at the time of resubmittal. B. Eighty percent of the expired building permit fee. will be refunded to you as soon as possible. C. As long as the resubmitted building permit application conforms to the previously approved SEPA and Board of Architectural Review decisions, repeating those decision processes is not necessary. If you have any other questions please call. 'Sincerel L. Rick Beeler Director, DCD cc: Building Official Permit;-Coordinator'f 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431.3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 GENCOR 750 SIXTH STREET SOUTH, SUITE 200 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98033 (206) 828 -3700 December 9, 1992 Rick Beeler Director Department of. Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 RECEIVED DEC 1 11992 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Rick, I am writing this letter to follow -up our telephone conver- sation of December 3, 1992. It is my understand that the permit for the. North Hill Retail Building, #6946, will not be extended. However, we may resubmit the plans, with 1991 UBC updates, for review and approval by The City of Tukwila plan check process. Assuming there are no significant changes in the building, other than 1991 UBC adjustments, this process will not require committee and council approv- al. The review will not require SEPA review as well. This permit application procedure will remain in effect until the 1991 UBC is changed. The applicant for the new permit will be required to pay the building permit fee at the time of application. You have estimated that a new building permit will take 4 to 6 months for plan check to process. We are also entitled to a reimbursement of 80% of our . building permit fee on permit #6946. I am requesting that this money be returned.. Please let me know if you have any additional information to add to this letter. Since/rely, Leon Grundstein cc:. Duane Griffin C I should point out that the code provides for a 80 percent refund of the permit fee, when no work has been done under the permit. I verified by a site visit that no work had been started as of today. You may, therefore, upon written request, be eligible for a 80% refund of the permit fee for this project. Sincerely, Building, Official 2 It • • GENCOR 750 SIXTH STREET SOUTH, SUITE 200 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98033 (206) 828 -3700 RECEIVED SEP 2 91992 September 17, 1992 COMMUNITY DC NT Duane Griffin Building Official City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Request for Extension to Building Permit #6946 Dear Mr. Griffin: I am writing this letter to appeal the denial of our request for a 180 day building permit extension. I understand in the past, applications for extensions have been denied when the only reason was due to lack of financing. However, in the past the economic times were not a severe as they are now. Most projects cannot proceed on a timely basis, if at all, due to the lack of available financing or the increased requirements on borrowers to procure financing. This is the effect of the savings and loan crisis and all the ensuing legislative lending restrictions. Other municipalities, such as Bellevue and Redmond, have granted extensions to permits based upon a realistic understanding of the economic reality of today. They feel that the hard work of both the city and the developer should not go to waste. As a result the municipalities have given, in some cases, the developer up to three years to start their project. Gencor's rezone and permit process has taken years of hard work for staff, council, and developer. It would be a waste of tax dollars, developer dollars, and time if we were not granted an extension due to a severe economic climate. I am also aware that the City of Tukwila is concerned about the project not being reviewed under 1991 UBC codes. In order to alleviate this concern we would, without redesign- ing the whole building, have the project modified to meet the 1991 UBC codes, as well as current ADA requirements. Page 2 Given the above circumstances and conditions, I am formally requesting that our situation be reconsidered and an extension be granted. Leon Grundstein MEMO FOR RECORD DATE: 10/6/92 FROM: BLDG OFFL SUBJ: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION TO BLDG PERMIT #6946 (GENCOR LETTER DTD 9/17/92, SAME SUBJECT) In the above referenced letter Mr Grundstein states that "Other municipalities, such as Bellevue and Redmond, have granted extensions to permits based upon a realistic understanding of the economic reality of today. They feel that the hard work of both the city and the developer should not go to waste. As a result the municipalities have given, in some cases, the developer up to three years to start their project." Because of this statement I called Toni Cramer, Building Official (Asst Dir. Design & Development), in Bellevue. What she told me about what Bellevue's policy is doesn't coincide with what Mr Grundstein says. Ms Cramer states that when they adopted the UBC they amended it to delete the 180 day expiration date provision regarding plan check issuance and to allow a one year time frame instead. She said they do not extend the expiration date past the original one year time frame. When I mentioned that I was concerned about the expiration date of the permit, and not the plan check timeframe, she said she would consider the permit expired and require a complete new plan check and permit, and they would charge as if it was a new permit. Actually I thought her answer was a little vague and contradictory. 10 City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director August 28, 1992 GENCOR Attn: Leon Grundstein 750 Sixth St. South Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Re: Request for Extension to Building Permit #6946 Mr. Grundstein: Your request for a 180 day extension to Tukwila Building Permit Number 6946 is hereby denied. When we discussed this issue on the phone a couple days ago I explained to you that I thought the building in question had been designed and plan checked to the 1988 Uniform Building Code, and other associated codes in affect at the time the plans had been submitted. I further explained that if the plans had in fact been designed and plan checked under codes that have since been changed or amended, an extension could not be granted. At that time you said you thought the plans had been designed under the provisions of the 1991 codes, which became the State Building Code effective July 1, 1992. You were going to research that with your architect and said you would address it in your letter requesting an extension. The request you submitted, however, didn't mention this issue. I have since reviewed our file on this project and cannot find anything to indicate it was plan checked under the 1991 codes. In the past, applications for extensions have been denied when the only reason given for the request was lack of financing. This, by itself, with no further extenuating circumstances, was not considered as being a good and satisfactory reason beyond the control of the permittee, which are the justifications shown in the UBC as reasons for. granting an extension. Even if that was a reason, it could only be considered if there hadn't been any amendments to the technical codes subsequent to the date of the permit approval. In this particular case, there has been major amendments and changes to almost all of the technical codes since your permit was approved and issued. Therefore, an extension will not be granted. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite /1100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431.3670 • Fax (206) 431.3665 • • • i+./YN. ∎�/ 4IJS1VV1\ GENCOR 750 SIXTH STREET SOUTH, SUITE 200 KIRKLAND, WA5HIN(3 I ON 98033 (206) 828 -3700 August 27, 1992 Duane Griffin Building Officer City of Tukwila DCD 6300 Southcenter Blvd Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Griffin: Please use this letter as a formal•request for a 180 day extension for Building Permit #6946, issued on March 6, 1992. The reason for this extension request is due to a circumstance beyond our control. The ownership of the company is changing, with new shareholders buying into this organization, as well as its projects. As a result of this buy -in, all development has been temporarily stopped until the new ownership package has been finalized. Financing and development may proceed as planned after the reorganization. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated in this difficult. time. With your cooperation we can still create a viable and attractive project. Sincerely :2 Leon Grundstein ruz CITY OF TUKWILA • BUILDING DIVISION MEMO TO: NORTH HILL BUILDING FILE 89 -399 FROM: RSB DATE: 2/27/92 SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL PLAN REVIEW CHARGES ***************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** AS A RESULT OF THE CHANGE FROM A PROPOSED OFFICE USE TO RETAIL USE, ADDITIONAL CODE REVIEW AND. COORDINATION OF PLAN AND PERMIT REVISION WAS REQUIRED. FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL CHARGE SHOULD BE ADDED TO PERMIT FEE. BUILDING DIVISION: 1 - HR. @ $ 30. = $ 30.00 C City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Public Works Ross A. Earnst, P. E., Director M E M O R A N D U M TO: Rick Beeler, Nick Olivas, Jack Pace, Duane Griffin, Permit Coordinator FROM: Phil Fraserl�#? DATE: February 25, 1992 SUBJECT: North Hill Office Buildin• - Developer's Agreement Public Works staff met with Leon Grundstein, representative of the North Hill Office Building Development (retail) last week. Mr. Grundstein requested to meet with us on 2/25/92 to provide two signed copies of the Developer's Agreement he had received at the previous meeting. Mr. Grundstein has met with Public Works staff on 2/25/92 and gave us the two signed copies of the Developer's Agreement per the wording provided him. Therefore, I believe Mr. Grundstein has met the requirements for mitigative measures for traffic concerns. I will forward this Agreement to the City Engineer and Public Works Director for acceptance. This document may be routed to the Utilities Committee /City Council for final acceptance and Mr. Grundstein has been so advised at the meeting today. At our meeting with Mr. Grundstein last week, City staff from Public Works, Planning and Building indicated we would have a three day turnaround time for building permit issuance upon receipt of the signed Agreement. Later that same day the Building Official informed Mr. Grundstein and myself there was a problem since the building plans were previously reviewed as "office" and not as "retail ". The Building Official and Mr. Grundstein have been coordinating with respect to this and additional delay time to have the retail use structural reviewed. By 2/26/92 Public Works will have an approval letter out and signoff for recommendation to release the building permit. We referred Mr. Grundstein to Planning, Fire and Building staff for any other releases to secure the Building Permit. xc: John Pierog Read File Development File: North Hill Office Building Attachments (1) PF /amc:11:nohill 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 433.0179 • Fax (206) 4313665 CITY OF TCAWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO: %. ��FZi.� //�P/1EN7 JC1,Lf FROM: 4./A/4/ .4. ,D ,4oq DATE: SUBJECT: /MI:7 ,' i4 11-L BU'L JM (j ,' . 69-599 7- GALLID ,G a/V 7z2/ &Y TV l,0_.%1/.,c7 AR/11 ,e)/ wss 'e' / A7 nvA, -Ti: ANU 7,444 7 sURSarp 'ENT' Td OZ/ 42 .E.4iP1l�R .M�FTIN� �jk h4.96 8Y • bv,c22,? D _DAY 7ZdAt✓,4,f l//Z) /24/A- 7U 7V WEF4$ - 4 /I # A MEMORANDUM TO: FILE #89 -399, NORTH HILL OFFICE BUILDING FROM: RSB DATE: 2/20/92 SUBJECT: FINAL PLAN REVIEW BY BUILDING DIVISION PLANS RECEIVED THIS DATE TO COMPLETE FINAL REVIEW. THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE DEVELOPED FROM THIS REVIEW. 1. PERMIT APPLICATION FORM WAS SUBMITTED BY ED LINARDIC, ARCHITECT. THE BUILDING USE WAS STATED AS OFFICE. SOMEONE HAS CROSSED OUT "OFFICE" AND WROTE RETAIL (IN PENCIL). IT SEEMS THAT THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT SHOULD BE THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR CHANGING AN APPLICATION, OR AT MINIMUM THERE SHOULD BE SOME ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN THE FILE FROM THIS PERSON. 2. ORIGINAL PLAN REVIEW CONSIDERED THE BUILDING AS SPECULATIVE OFFICE LEASE SPACE. THE PLANS ARE NOTED IN SEVERAL PLACES AS OFFICE SPACE. THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED TO READ AS RETAIL SPACE, TO CORRESPOND TO APPLICATION. 3. INITIAL PLAN REVIEW CONSIDERED THE BUILDING AS SPECULATIVE LEASE SPACE FOR THE EXITING CONSIDERATIONS. SINCE THE SINGLE FLOOR OF THIS BUILDING MUST BE CONSIDERED (BY BUILDING CODE) A BASEMENT LEVEL, TWO EXITS WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ALL TENANT SPACES SUBSEQUENTLY DEVELOPED. THE ARCHITECT AGREED TO THIS AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT AN EXIT CORRIDOR MAY HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED TO THE REAR OF THE TENANT SPACES WITH EXITS TO EACH END. SINCE THE TENANTS WERE NOT ESTABLISHED, I CONCLUDED THAT THE EXITING WAS O.K. FOR THE ENTIRE SPACE PROVIDED NO DEMISING WALLS WERE BUILT UNDER THIS PERMIT. THIS IS TO BE A CONDITION OF THE PERMIT OF THIS SHELL. FINAL PLAN REVIEW COULD BE APPROVED WITH THE MINOR LABELING CHANGES. CITY OF TclICIVILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO' %5'E' /%E7'E 'P/7 /vr x/< FROM: �/�///V ,9 /-7/kA'ev DATE: f/9,90 SUBJECT: /Vo /ry/ -f/ .9 /l-. c,,4-74-/6- - 'vit zij,vG r/oC AV . B9 -399) A /I�E77,V Lr.9S , / /' 7.e)A S/ CONC-- /?/v //* i 77/. /?_t7/E2 D /),%.4-,v7; .S's o YsEGF .L-'/ .� A • AI . .j .' To"/1/ ' of .0 7- 14 z / /r1E s 44//) �ES i g < 1 / d- //t401.477-F1) 7 ' A 'Y/�= h/ .OND ./f'.fr-7UP/1/ 7:1,/ -1104/ //- i:cNT. L62/2/ /4/ .,,4T. -Z) /T .17 TL S ,o y/2 /2s1..4 TtiAT Bz.//.eD /NIBS ,O/ 14S /D.✓ 14yew4 O 774,f/1/ 4 /Pee/44:0,771V ,K1fr>04 / 09 7-/O// /°i9 C4%9 /V/T// //t/ T / /iC'.��" .UAYs /9•c'lz"� /'T /" :D 1'1 f'vBL /G .°A. . 2,e /4,/v. S4 /U 7-414 T T. i/•E" de."/".. /NCB PFR/' /T .Q.0.04 /C.4 T /ON OA7,ED /�ap /�9 //.4U, .84-4/1/ EX 7&-A/4 D Ov6 72� ,'/v ' NA,� ,'v /E"/it p ELAYS i°W /.L ,4-10i/v7-E1) '4'7 77Y.E• "CE,YT.GY . e'e°43 1/47.0 iPFZO/✓E /?.&77-04/77.0 72>W 7_ ,a1-4QL /G kW/fits- f1/4 4O ..6.4r-EA/ 6')/ .GEON 77 1-"/Z-71/ AGT /V /TY S.EY.E/fig? "7:e2/1/771/...r d4/774. 77/4 S7-.97T '5 14'95 4./.4 77/49.4 TEL j/ AEON CO/yFy p/yFD 7"/✓ /S /9x //// T /.�.L„C Y l aGL,i%6' D /i/ /47Y /off, /O /9/ 4 'r7 e 72:7 N/ . .411-1 -9-14/4- /Nd / /,OT.6I> 7-A1,97" 4/47741 y7�/ - .s�//D.°T /Or✓ D,� U�° 9117 Z� /T �"X7"47V.!"/ON.S l'YIJVI..D 67.E" ,E:Y77PF/i�L Y UJ°U42 D Cpli -S M/ W7 /4/ Fi9C7 s/S'Oh! x 4'47 77, /°/ lii0//S/,Y .S '. M' /T' .CAL /1 d !/✓� l�Es'/ F'/t/ Lb ' ,V' 7 o�1P.� Y l i� %Tf,� .G "s�y,�✓ C.p/rei' /A C,osES. CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO•.�_' FROM: c%yN /4'//9.01 DATE. SUBJECT: _ Air - / Ai 0,aF� C-0722 .,D - 'LISA- 1-1/' S' /.G . tti /Zt A7%A/`Z 7 Xc • f VAL, CITY OF 7"LKWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO. FROM: ` /..W A(, 4 ,iL';POr DATE* 2 //phi SUBJECT: / i I JAI Arg • A. ,4/ A 1/Q 44L r&- - _ ii 4 • 11.E r • / V.4-reY revary k f'f✓/ L. ,o:41/.sue E 4o 't''..'_r.J�: ,, i� .." • %'� "i4'v.i.ry ^.1 CITY OF 71 :11VIL4 C.t. 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 TO• FROM: i /Of/4/ A. /Eire DATE. z. 5'�9� MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: /!/D,f7W t< /.4 4 Df'A-ic" (mac Na . 89 - 99) 1¢'E7'9/ll/ .0E/? 77/.47' -.7.1ea" /i✓.G'�,a -�� //? 7 77.V.- .S//BJ 7 L►/e//. Tv c / 74",47' �-ii✓,y.C. . .4.OL /i✓� `✓.o c /YOT .yam / XG .' 20 �✓ 2 VA1/1/&-- ,Q4rP.ee/✓ E 44c-I x e'/ .c' /GE • • 1' C City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor January 20, 1992 Leon Grundstein 750 6th Street South, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: North Hill Office Building, 5900 Southcenter Boulevard (Plan Check No. 89 -399) Dear Mr. Grundstein: In order to further clarify traffic study requirements, per your discussion with Ron Cameron, City Engineer, the last paragraph on page 1 of the attached January 9, 1992 letter is revised as follows: The mitigated Determination of Non - Significant issued on October 1, 1990 shall include the changes in ADT from 225 to 430 ADT. Also, the applicant /owner shall provide, at their own expense, monitoring of ADT peaks on a quarterly basis for the first year, by a qualified traffic engineer and transmit the results of each monitoring to the City Engineer. This monitoring will commence after receipt of the Certificate of Occupancy for building on site. After review of monitoring for the first year, at the City Engineer's discretion, monitoring for the second year shall be determined either on a quarterly basis or an annual basis. The applicant /owner shall provide monitoring of ADT peaks on an annual basis thereafter, by a qualified engineer and transmit the results of each monitoring to the City Engineer. I hope the clarification of this matter reflects our conversation of 1/15/92. If I can be of assistance or if you have any questions concerning the above, please call me at 433 -0179. Phil Fraser, Senior Engineer Public Works Department xc: John Pierog, Associate Engineer Darren Wilson, Assistant Planner Duane Griffin,, Building Official Permit Coordinator: Development File: North Hill Office Read File Enclosure (1) PF /amc:l0:leon Phone: (206) 433.1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433.1833 CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO. 774/ A.:244t- FROM• ✓yN A. Pi17,4)09' DATE. ,/o /ga. SUBJECT: A 'Rr.S/ Nip e:PA; 'C1 f3u/LD /n/r• _A/0 89- 39) 4c ss r /4YTy •U /T CIAV/•9 D4EZ) CD/VTiQtNED /A/ Q7.21 7,.../T Ear , 4 .97-Eb _x1/L-7-4 / /._wiev4. /J2uitlE_A/r,171 rrUBrej /T A"7/0 .1AS 77147" Th' �s AV WeA, s Ex,vi pm=t . Y»4 0 Y s /A/ "7- 114-23- A/47- 1-1,7) 77r✓E- tpzi/r �1Arn o 2 4S A/ 7 - 46Y rvii,? t 4M -Z1. -. YE.S T�.2/�A /� fy�AT 7.x//5 i- A `2".4 CC z-515" v7,/ 4/ ?Y E 'E/'�EN�' 1�0 ' NoT Ex,37; ?w¢i�crir:�a {t : 1401014(7 ;ilf,1t1�'.fYerif•^i, 4411 tG tiri %4ftr.)11.4,,4,w{rf.1�!7.T.•4'. 477 ..,.,1tttr,v.14vu..•...�...... 1 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor January 9, 1992 Leon Grundstein 750 6th Street South, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 SUBJECT: North Hill Office Building, 5900 Southcenter Blvd. ,CPC No. 89-3991 Revised Submittal Deadline Dear Mr. Grundstein: It has come to my attention that past deadlines for the submission of the information and revised plans requested by John Pierog of this office, in his December 10th letter, will not be met. During a telephone conversation you had with John on 1/3/92 you indicated that you thought you could have your resubmittal ready by January 20, 1992. I realize that the vacation of the easement upon which the proposed building would encroach may take some time to finalize. However, prior to that time, a written commitment to that effect between the parties involved will suffice for our purposes. We are requesting that you direct whatever effort is necessary to have your submittal to this office no later than January 20, 1992. If you are not able to meet this deadline, the permit application package we now have will be returned to the City .Department of Community Development. Also, please note the Department of Community Development requires the Traffic Analysis be amended with the following: The mitigated Determination of Non - Significant issued on October 1, 1990 shall include the changes in the ADT from 225 to 430 ADT. Also the applicant /owner shall provide, at their expense, monitoring of ADT peaks on a quarterly basis for the first two years, then annually, by a qualified Traffic Engineer, and transmit the results of each monitoring to the City Engineer. Phone: (206) 433.1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433.1833 If I can be of assistance or if you have any questions concerning the above, please call me at 433-0179. Sincerely, Phil Fraser Senior Engineer Public Works Department xc: John Pierog, Associate Engineer Darren Wilson, Assistant Planner Duane Griffin, Building Official Permit Coordinator Development File: North Hill Office Read File PF /amc:9:office CITY OF Tir.IKWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO: 7,4/ .D. - //ELOP/9EA/7 FROM: , /n4)4/ P /--A201 DATE. _/2/.so/9/ SUBJECT: 4- 2- C1E7- _z/SS ?d/E c z ?vTS 4/Y/t ,PEG2 4',e - /474/7-s ldN7,4//V i.) //Y W /7Z✓ ,oFlAT 'I) 72' 7i1 ,s� 2I/L P�PO %EG7 /F-'A/ P/?C1/ /n E 772E• p /7FNT 4,l T.*// rt'"i2't 40/ TD 6'6"/ 77.i/ S /Yh/ D .f 1/ v.. ..r EFo • • r=o i T 77.04✓ J/// /6"W 1>EL /rl/EXTT5.5' 7 Y 2-4-/ 2 4 i sr .pR�oE. ry /,✓ . I - r 2 of 7- 1 S T/✓E e/ I A/ r 4 /lf/ 7745' l'L - /G1 /n/0' �•f'�AC� S, CL DN ,r-Vo _.os ,4 , 'Y D. f TN /, 5 . Qg'`�r�?� tiYo ion/ r ,Srrs OAF /CE A/✓ /f✓Dl/2 5EN )..9 Z' /') .�✓a,�'4 V 7 /✓�" • i r. f ! j :1{!i tM�f tr !iii'}ih'lr�iVii .4i, i' . t. ;.:r.��1•:ih�r,ti'�dr:.; h:.r. •.r,•.(::•r!%...:n . i:. 'U1f'..::'i i ' :'.r:.dirl.:.i...l. r.:.i,•,).. •••• • ••••. ... /.. .. 1/4/4/4...f<170 r,' 4r• /T M4 J // /S /4/7-2--ii/77.4./ Ta //41)/--- 7X//5 17,9c 'r�D SG 7Y44'7 77 BG- 'LV/ruq /W7- 7Z Mcz.)/ //. -D. ,ON //v ,"t'4V As 72, ,Vow /r j,,/AS .pcss /B.c ?Z /5,4g&-- T� , W/2.D //✓q /° /�i'7 /SSU.EO 4YNE2(/ hi/q•• --2vc/ee).4c.-4///fr r',v.. ' 0774/77/' 9cc4 4S' EA.c , /vE/Vr I 7-4/1.3 // //7 T /✓ /S . 4f/4S iV077 /�Gtf s /b'lt S //✓G,� r°UR. L /G. .AKee,eS.: TD. S /55W -• '/ A aN 77</E' /e/ea/ Z 7 ��ciCD � 7 4� 67C.' /4G' /r1/!' ✓r.6XV-/ /7" y/,<2..r /5--12/.4V- re - /4/D /G.v7ED. 7-;<647- fir 44.00 C412.S' t % ?'/' c )ez /,v97N, .4s, y4/4 /v',4) /✓ 9-D/A/ " 7D ca/yE'" To /4-'/e.4- /✓ /s .°r �/`i'7 Z To�.O A///v /✓ /'/FD44&y cC7 G..A-' 14,4/47' .b 44J F. /A/ 4.5-A" =D �FON" 7z/- 9 /:r TAW' 77/4- O. S.4'N ,4,V) e-,t ■v,e/r`" /G' .4T /OW • ,',' '.PESSED //j: / /Y. 44-"TlE'C` / v 'i D .,�'E f' .c::)- Ah'd.b=D '" 7 '77/.7 P IE' ACT /W: ...7 eps) /N' ,PLO- 1..1.5-04/ r9S -A"SZ' /.' R,ultin /. e7 l ✓CC✓z2) 4 f'K- 7-7:4//''4'l 7%/2E - A/-7.7/1- JCO frD 4,s .14/ ,5'17' et,- .7- 7e,-;27 /✓M/ :_7" 7J4/97 7N47 7-444--Y /142/4/..& /y,E" $41.o 774'/7 /(/A' 57/44 &/.94/7":0 7v Aa-CUSS ✓.E' ,��"Q�i nr/`> 7 CITY OF T KWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM 10: 7 FROM: ,/D,yN .9..47/Ex'01' DATE: /o2j91 SUBJECT: /1/D,e1Z1 fV/1-4 nF.�"/�E 171-1/L0//1/ &3P-,?9'9 ca,V774/U D E- C/7 • S 7- _ 37.4 i TE r - -. -J_ ar/ a -.7- i'u�/l/.53 - /GN Dom x- pl��.rT =1> //Vs"GA' /17/ON AN1) PL iVS IFDd/ ,S4 /.) r A Jig �~N� .c"/,P..rr �.0 1.e R//7 A 4't' h/1. /_ —E.0 77/A17 Z 4' FA �r 1 2V7 i //dC v7 /ory / /1.41P 7-.1,/.MM- r..P/. T G✓/LL .r4GVLLG1 ✓ 1201> J46 7N fl 2 ddE T /,PU2 4774'/ " .4 f /NNL 47Fr9/.3 /. //11 407E' AIIIMIIIIMMINA 1111111111b 'iY �I?;•!;i!l'r':!-ri+tt t'! I . "y r,: tir I: {' ('•.i'i:,',' • "t' �' .. � r,ririt"i•A irh�tS!trt. .t�•i: !'. {�rttt:':n:rJtt�r,x.l.,.t.i�- .il• +ta ;'t1i1N,:},•. {..1.;�; • • City of Tukwila PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -0179 Ross A. Earnst, P.E. Director MEMORANDUM TO: Rick Beeler, Planning Director FROM: Ron Cameron, City Engineer DATE: November 19, 1991 SUBJECT: North Hills Office Rezone The North Hills rezone was approved based on 430 ADT. The approval recommendation is based on that limit. As stated 4 -5 times to Council. We need to approve future development with that limit and require monitoring of A-4 ADT, peak on quarterly basis first 2 years, then annually. Correction to limit to the 430 required. RMC /kjp Attachment: North Hills Study Collision Diagram presented at Council CC: Phil Fraser John Pierog Jack Pace File: North Hills Office Development "40-7-00,a4>"4-0,-e-te/fr.e..,e x-30 • .,. ��.,� . its 524 CITY OF it KWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 MEMORANDUM TO: TyE ,22.-'DP/1 /T F/Gt- FROM: DATE. SUBJECT: de I 41. 454 - !P .i _ / a .,g0 /. 22on/ W /1c aA/ c/P/irvt).sTf-in ., i of 4 X'L9 1/7T.4j 4F' A .�l11'�Y�Y �Li47 AV/? Thy ...fcaz')' .e2e1,/"f it'7 72 /✓ EVA/cERN / . zr A T" GAT /Ord/ S/X sFJS �f= OY /.2 /&c /91. .yam"" J/! /DASD 7g/. 4 T A? /1AO AMY /OVSLY SUB /./ / / I • .r _ . 7%0-''i a ■ / 4 C2i°Y vim" 7'/.47 747 /0rt/ iONU 27/� .s!/ //"Y .4924=1 r.{/F f30, 7Y DNS' 1G2%i47FJ ) O/t/. "Gtr" 7:4/-- / F ,rEil5M ' s.C/1?1�✓N ,,//' AN 49.eX /in ...://E7' svrsfr / ?Y .47/7A/hie /V,rF " OR S L/A/4 D ✓G . �/J ,y "x //" .rM 7 co/Y-C T /?V D 4 PoRT /O/✓ c/. .Q 6 PLAT" iii,e,/,GH /S �/.�'. sv/P�!6Y.fv�. Tfi/�' �°/E'a��-�rY, .,f..�pi✓,. , �pEL. vY� /?..R..1.�T.:DF /y/o�i7�,T /ON. Y.E7R9.g12Y O/Y 'Av.ps�.�NT.5 ?NAT /4/ C.GA /i/5 !- '/PC/9T.6,p TaGO /1///61 /1/.-2) ,Gbcr.J//N77724/ 7C 7XV4 T ����c� , ,,QN.d , w 'p i Re N S,4/Dl1✓ /4/4 /ST /Ar4 Ei9S4241. A/T ,//YPD /f/-14 77ON , h/�' 7ZJfi 4 / oN 7•41. � . � V' /T.�rli 0 co/>/47/1/2-.)- rZ 9 /4/ D //✓ /Y).' • //140/407: 670 T7-,,.9T yE 1140/I9 7A1./f 74 SON c. 7,V4 DAY -Z 7 7Z 3f //✓o% ,yE ,4.4S0 /NO/CAT,EO 77447- /T frve, C0 ea" ,OJF "/c ..GT' TO ,-'�7 /2/22/9/ 9 1,774- /4". '. • /c;to •Y /OUS GoN?/�/ r47.i.D/YS /y /TFY /// /•G 047' Y/, 47 f3P�".• .1/-./.9.1(//v4 •4 'k 6 .Ei4S JENT.S �„/�.� /VE� Pi �o/LIP.G /�D PP/7W. •rc ; ,t)a//"Cn W, '04 f /e4-.1o/ /5/G gon C. P CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER IIOULEVARD, TUIi N7LA, li ASHINGTON 98188 December 10, 1991 Leon Grundstein 750 6th Street South, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 11IONE # /206) 433.1800 Cary L. YanDusrn, Mayor SUBJECT: North Hill Office Building, 5900 Southcenter Blvd. (PC No. 89 -399) - Current Status and Requirements for Utility Permit Issuance Dear Mr. Grundstein: In reference to our telephone conversation on December 6, 1991, I am updating status and requirements, from the Public Works Department perspective, for permit issuance for the subject project. Your rezone request from PO to C -1 was approved on November 4, 1991. You had previously requested that we delay our project review until the rezone effort was concluded. After rezoning was approved, the North Hill Office Project was scheduled for and reviewed at the Public Works plan review meeting on November 19, 1991. What follows in this letter is in part a direct result of that meeting. The Utility Permit Application originally submitted for this project expired on April 18, 1991 and needs to be resubmitted with updated information; i.e., contact person, etc. King County Assessor's Map SE 23 -23 -4 (Revised 1/91) is probably not current and does not reflect the easement information on the survey sheet (copy enclosed) provided to us previously by either yourself or Ed Linardic. We have a copy of the easement documentation contained in A.F. No. 7403040470, but do not have that contained in A.F. Nos. 7908220469, 8012160685, 7502130412 and 6007217. We need copies of this missing documentation to verify the types and limits of the existing easements, which are located upon or which influence your property. Also, the bearings and distances on the foregoing survey sheet do not agree with those on the assessor's map. Please provide a copy of the recorded survey for this property. The comments below address the four plan sheets which were submitted to Public Works on May 14, 1991. We have not received any more current plans to this date. The comments are as follows: 1. The building footprint or any other development cannot be located in an easement that has been designated for other purposes. Your current plan shows that the proposed building encroaches on an ingress /egress and utility easement. 2. The easement described in A.F. 7403040470 is not long enough to accommodate your driveway development. 3. You need to increase the width of the sidewalk to at least five feet within the public right -of -way. 4. The drainage that would otherwise run across the sidewalk at the west property line needs to be provided for by either a catch basin or an underdrain pipe. 5. Reinforced concrete pipe is required within public right - of -way for 12 inch diameter or greater; otherwise non - reinforced concrete will suffice and is required. 6. A double check valve asssembly is required on the line to the irrigation meter. 7. On sheet 2, identify where Section A -A is taken at. Some of the information requested and design comments made above were previously communicated to your office. However, I find no responses in our files. The rezone request for this property was approved after testimony by the City Engineer that the development needed to be focused to provide no more than 400+ (actually 430) trips per day. This was the figure derived at by Entranco Engineers, Inc. in their trip generation analysis under a general retail land use scenario. The City Engineer also stated that, if the rezone was approved and in the event A.M. /P.M. applied to the City for approval of some type of redevelopment, that the North Hill Office property owner, via a developer's agreement, would be required to cooperate in driveway consolidation. When a Council member inquired about the possibility of other traffic mitigations, that might be needed in the future, being included in the developer's agreement, the City Engineer indicated it was possible to do so. The Council member, at the time, preferred that such mitigations be tied into the rezone approval process; however, he stated he would favor the motion if staff was confident in its methodology for mitigation measures. As a condition of approval for permits for this project, Gencor will be required to enter into a developer's agreement with the City to provide quarterly monitoring of ADT and peak volume for the first two years and annually thereafter. If the ADT is found to exceed 430, the agreement will stipulate that either the building use must be altered or other mitigative measures be taken for any excess traffic volumes to satisfy SEPA requirements. Such mitigative measures might include signalization, etc. The current Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS), approved October 1, 1990, only addresses an ADT of 225. A Traffic Impact Study was prepared by Entranco Engineers, Inc. for this traffic volume and this report recommended that the following measures be accomplished to enhance safety: 1. Paint a crosswalk for the north leg of Southcenter Boulevard /North Hill driveway intersection. 2. Repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Boulevard to clearly identify the center left turn lane. 3. Monitor the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hill driveway intersection with future development to determine the implementation of a traffic signal. It would appear that an amended MDNS is required for a 430 ADT and it is suggested that this be undertaken immediately. Please submit the above requested information and six (6) sets of revised plan sheets to the Permit Coordinator by December 20, 1991. If you have any questions, please call me at 433 -0179. Sincerely, S44 042' John A. Pier P.E. Associate En•i.neer Public Works Department xc: Darren Wilson, Assistant Planner Duane Griffin, Building Official Permit Coordinator Read File Development File: North Hill Office JP /amc:9: NHoffice • Mahan&DeSaivo Ily CONSULTING ENGINEERS November 21, 1990 Duane Griffin City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWIIA Nov Z11991) PERMIT CENTER Regarding: 90 -T -25 (North Hill Office Building) 4S9-'599 1411 Fourth Avenue Bldg. Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 624.8150 RECEIVED r TYOFTUKWIIA 7 1 1��U PERMIT CENTER Dear Mr. Griffin, We have received information on the proposed project and have reviewed it for compliance with the structural portions of the 1988 Edition of the Uniform Building Code. We have no additional comments. Enclosed are drawings, calculations, soils report, specifications, storm drainage and energy calculations for your use. Sincerely, Carl A. Geig CAG:2 • cc: Linardic Design Group 1836 Westlake Ave N. Suite 204 Seattle, Washington 98109 Mahan &DeSalvo CONSULTING ENGINEERS ?ff-- 3961 1411 Fourth Avenue Bldg. Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 624-8150 November 1, 1990 Duane Griffin City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Regarding: 90 -T -25 (North Hill Office Building) Dear Mr. Griffin, We have received information on the proposed project and have reviewed it for compliance with the structural portions of the 1988 Edition of the Uniform Building Code. Our comments follow. Structural 1. In the General Notes, under Foundations, clarify the 6" minimum material used as subgrade under the vapor barrier. 2. Revise Section L -4 to show the brace on the diagonal as designed on calculation sheet R -14. 3. The drag strut connection at panel #1 is not adequate for the forces found on calculation page L -4 (see section R -4). 4. The force on the grid F drag strut connection at grid 5 exceeds the manufacturer's recommendations (see Section J -4). 5. Revise Section B -1 to call out the length of welded headed studs used in the footing embed. Also, call out the weld of the #5 bars to the 3x3 angle in the panel. 6. Provide calculations for the panel #11 columns and the top and bottom connections. Show adequacy to resist lateral forces due to seismic and wind. 7. Call out the weld between the spandrel embed and the column top plate in Sections M, N, and P on S4. Also, call out the weld at the column plate to vertical reinforcing steel and the weld at the drag strut connection in Section N -4. 8. Call out the vertical reinforcing steel in precast wall panels #6, #8, and #9. 9. In Section C -6, call out the anchor bolt embedment length and the type of anchor used with the LTT 20B tie. 10. Call out the end welds of reinforcing steel to the plate in connections type A and type D. November 1, 1990 Re: 90 -T -25 Page Two Please have the applicant respond to the above comments in itemized letter form and resubmit two copies of revised drawings and one copy of revised calculations, as required. All status inquires are to be directed to our receptionist. Sincerely, /4reeGei Carl A. CAG:1 cc: Linardic Design Group 1836 Westlake Ave N. Suite 204 Seattle, Washington 98109 Mahan &DeSaivo