Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit MI99-0220 - FOSTER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION - DETENTION VAULT
MI99 -0220 51 Ave. So. & So. 146t'' St. Foster Heights Subdivision City of Tukwila (206) 431 -3670 Community Development / Public Works • 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT WARNING: IF CONSTRUCTION BEGIN'S BEFORE APPEAL PERIOD EXPIRES, APPLICANT IS PROCEEDING AT THEIR OWN RISK. Parcel No: 004000 -0539 Address: Suite No: Location: 51 AV 5 & S 146 ST Category: OTI-iR Type: MISCPERM Zoning: Coast. Type: Gas/Elec.: Unit=: 000 Setbacks: North: Water: 125 Wetlands: Permit No: Status: Issued: Expire=.: Occupancy: UBC: Fire Protection: .0 South: .0. East: .0 West: Sewer: VAL VUE Slopes: Y Streams: Contractor License No: ANDERRH037OC OCCUPANT FOSTER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION Phone: OWNER TRIDOR INC Phone: 206- 443 -7735 2226 ELLIOTT AV, #A,, SEATTLE WA 98121 CONTACT SCOTT WIKLOF Phone:-206-443-7735 •2226 ELLIOTT AV, #A, SEATTLE WA 98121 CONTRACTOR ANDERSON RICHARDSON HARTLEY Phone: 425 -644 -9505 14400 BEL -RED RD #203, BELLEVUE, WA 98007. * k*'k *'k'. ***************•k***********• k***** * *•k* * ** *** *'**** * *•k * *'k * * * *•k k** ** **•k **** * *k* ** Permit Description: CONSTRUCTION OF A UNDERGROUND. DETENTION VAULT. PUBLIC WORKS ACTIVITIES INCLUDE: •k** *•k *'k ******** kk k****:**** *** ** * *'* * ******* * * *'k* k **'k*** *•k *•k** * *'k * * **** **•k* k*•k ** k k **'k k t Construction Valuation: $ 40,000.00 PUBLIC WORKS PERMITS:' *(Water Meter Permits Listed Separate) 'Eng. Appr: MPC Curb Cut /Access /Sidewalk /CSS: N Fire Loop Hydrant: N No: Size(in): .00 Flood Control Zone: N Hauling: N Start Time: End Timer Land Altering: N Cut: Fill: Landscape Irrigation: N Moving Oversized Load: N Start Time:. End Time: Sanitary Side Sewer: N No:. Sewer Main Extension: N Private: Public: Storm Drainage: Y Street Use: N Water Main Extension: N Private: Public: * **'k•k*** *'k* **** ** * *** *******•k****** **'k *** k•k * * **** ******* 1***** *•k ******* *•k* *'k **** k'k*ki TOTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FEES: $ 829.34 *•k k** **** ** *•k*** ****** ** *** k*********' k****' k**************** *'k*** *•k * *****•k * *•k* * * * ** * *i MI99 -0220 ISSUED 05/09/2000 11/05/2000 .0 Permit Center Authorized Signature:_ Datezt--Cf I hereby certify that I have read and examined t`fiis permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of law and ordinances governing this work will be complied with, whether specified herein or not. The granting of this permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provision of any other state or local laws regulating construction or the performance of work. I am authorized to sign for and obtain this development per r}r�' t. Signature: Print Name: sc0rr/t% Date: S ^3 --C' ' This permit shall become null and void if the work is not commenced within. 180 days from the date of issuance, or if the work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days from the last inspection. CITY OF TUKWILA Address: Permit No: MI99-0220 Suite: Tenant: Status: ISSUED Type: MISCPERM Applied: 12/07/1999 Parcel #: 004000•0539 Issued: 05/09/2000 *1.**1:***AAA**A****************************4:*.A40,A*A****************AI*A***A** Permit Conditions: 1. No changes will be made to the plans unless approved by the •Engineer and the Tukwila Building Division. 4. When special inspection is required-eithersthe 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 containaddress, project .name, per 1111 number and type of inspection being performed: 3 The speal inspector shall submit a final signed report stating whether the work requiring special inspection ,was, to the best of the inspector's knowledge, in conformance with approved plans and specifications and the applicable workmanshipprovisions_of the UBC. 4. All construction to be done in conformance with approved plans and reciuirements of the Uniform,Building Code (1997 Edition) as amended, Uniform Mechanical COde (1997 Edition) and ',Washington State EnergY Code (1997 Edition): 5. All 'permits, in5pection records, and approved plans shall be avatlable at the job site prior to the start of any con struction. These documents are to be maintained and avail- able unttlrfinal inspection approval is granted. G. All ,structural concrete shall be special inspected (UBC Sec.' 306(01). 1. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL .NOTIFY PUBLIC:WORr,S,UTILTiYINSPECTOR MO.? GREG VILLANUEVA GOC206)433-01790F COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION OF WORK AT LEAST 24 HOURS IN -ADVANCE Temporary erosion control mea'SOres:. Shall be imOemented as the first order ofbU.sAness to prevent sed4MOOtti on Off site or into draina9e 9. The site shall have permanent erosion control measures in place as soon as possible after final gradinghas been • completed and prior to the Final Inspection. 10.. The on-site storm drainage system shall be turned„over to the City along with appropriate turnover document . prior to the Final inspection. CITY OF i 1KWILA Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 431 -3670 Miscellaneous Permit Application Application and plans must be complete in order to be accepted for plan review. Applications will not be accepted through the mail or facsimile. Project Name /Tenant: /--- Description of work to be done (please be specific): / �/, (Vii, /e?,t_,>' %�Ci1't L cz r... /7' �1i:1.7 S h'L.et e_ Cr).1 Will there be storage of flammable/combustible hazardous material in the building ?,f - ❑ yes ❑ no Attach list of materials and stora e location on separate 8 1/2 X 11 aper indicating quantities & Material Safety Data Sheets Valu f Construction: Site Address : 7L 5-7--b � S , q 4,e)) c. i 4/6' City State /Zip: S/" Tax Parcel Number: L)OtfGbO - Otoef 0 I .C1-74 t67400 Property Owner: .-- .-- Uc_ ,��(, Phone: (2b6 ) ¥ (4 3 7 -7 -15 Street Address: / Z -2-2- �! �f ,�// Ol7" ■I`ei 4 /Y' City State /Zi '„twe, Fax #: (1) `Etf 3 y.-.-----7 Contractor: ,/! -,� - 4 y/.7.-/ Phone: ( ) Street Address: City State/Zip: Fax #: ( ) Phor ne: ( ) Architect: Street Address: City State/Zip: Fax #: ( ) Engineer: Phone: (I2 ) — -- O 2-5O Street Address: �, S g /a0 e".-eryt 5 4-c-e� S � ee,.._ City State/Zi 9V2,2-- � Fax #: (c/z 5") 'Y / - 7C s 5 Contact Person: - Scoff /��� G�o�� Phone: (266 ) W3 .7 7 3' C'// 2. . •v Z-<-9 ea Street Address: ZZ2-G- /'Y//r..� // / .. Y4... ,S�'a/7'�: City State/Zip: ,r15.._ 9,j /2/ Fax #: (206 ) «>?' y• X �5 MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT REVIEW AND APPROVAL REQUESTED: (TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT) Description of work to be done (please be specific): / �/, (Vii, /e?,t_,>' %�Ci1't L cz r... /7' �1i:1.7 S h'L.et e_ Cr).1 Will there be storage of flammable/combustible hazardous material in the building ?,f - ❑ yes ❑ no Attach list of materials and stora e location on separate 8 1/2 X 11 aper indicating quantities & Material Safety Data Sheets ❑ Above Ground Tanks Antennas /Satellite Dishes Bulkhead /Docks ❑ Commercial Reroof ❑ Demolition ❑ Fence ❑ Manufactured Housing - Replacement only ❑ Parking Lots ❑ Retaining Walls ❑ Temporary Facilities ❑ Tree Cutting APPLICANT REQUEST FOR MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC WORKS PERMITS ❑ Channelization /Striping ❑ Flood Control Zone El Landscape Irrigation Storm Drainage ❑ Water Meter /Exempt # ❑ Water Meter /Permanent It ❑ Water Meter Temp # ❑ Miscellaneous ❑ Curb cut/Access /Sidewalk ❑ Fire Loop /Hydrant (main to vault) #: El Land Altering: 0 Cut cubic yards 0 Fill cubic yards 0 _sq. ft.grading/clearing ❑ Sanitary Side Sewer il: ❑ Sewer Main Extension 0 Private 0 Public ❑ Street Use ❑ Water Main Extension 0 Private 0 Public 0 Deduct 0 Water Only Size(s): Size(s): Size(s): Size(s): Est. quantity: gal Schedule: 0 Moving Oversized Load /Hauling MONTHLY SERVICE BILLINGS TO: Name: rte./ n/c,/,-- L tie . Phone: 2,06" • VV?..-77C---- V s ' S Address: `r,..' // Uc_ ,��(, City /Sta S 61 4.)67_ 9 ftZ-1 0 Water 0 Sewer 0 Metro 0 Standby WATER METER DEPOSIT/REFUND BILLING: Name: Phone: Address: City /Sta e/Zip: Value of Construction - In all cases, a value of construction amount should be entered by the applicant. This figure will be reviewed possible revision by the Permit Center to comply with current fee schedules. Expiration of Plan Review - Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days upon written request by the in Section 107.4 of the Uniform Building Code (current edition). No application shall be extended more than once. and is subject to by limitation. The applicant as defined Date application accepted: Date application expires: ken by: (initials) I D ALL DRAWINGS SHALL BE AT A LEGIBLE SCALE AND NEATLY DRAWN > BUILDING SITE PLANS AND UTILITY PLANS ARE TO BE COMBINED • ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS REQUIRE STAMP BY WASHINGTON LICENSED ARCHITECT • STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS AND DRAWINGS REQUIRE STAMP BY WASHINGTON LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER > CIVIUSITE PLAN DRAWINGS REQUIRE STAMP BY WASHINGTON LICENSED CIVIL ENGINEER (P.E.) n SUII■I1 APP11(A1ION AND RE WARM ( 111(KI ISIS 1OR Above Ground Tanks/Water Tanks - Supported directly upon grade exceeding 5,000 gallons and a ratio of height to diameter or width which exceeds'2 :1 PFRMII REVIEW Submit checklist No: M -9 in Antennas /Satellite. Dishes Submit checklist No: M -1 BulkheadlDock Submit checklist, No: M -10 Print name: �l'GCD ( (j, G�i Commercial .Reroof Submit checklist No: M -6 `7 7 Demolition Submit checklist No: M -3 ❑ ;Fences - Over 6,feet in Height Submit checklist No: M -9 ❑ Land Altering/Grading/Preloads Submit checklist No: M -2 ❑ Miscellaneous Public Works Permits Submit checklist No: H -9 ❑ Manufactured Housing (RED INSIGNIA ONLY):'. Submit checklist No: M -5 ❑ Moving Oversized Load /Hauling '_' Submit checklist . No M -5 ❑ Parking Lots ''"', . Submit checklist No M -4 ❑ Retaining Walls. - Over .4'feet in height Submit checklist No: M -1 ❑ Temporary Facilities Submit checklist No M -7 ❑ Tree Cutting Submit checklist No: M -2 Current copy of Washington State Department of Labor and Industries Valid Contractor's License. If not available at the time of application, a copy of this license will be required before the permit is issued, unless the homeowner will be the builder OR submit Form H -4, "Affidavit in Lieu of Contractor Registration ", BuildingOwner /Authorized Agent If the applicant is otherthan'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 t°f permiapplication and obtain the permit will be required as part of this submittal. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE UNDER PENALTY OF PER JURY BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND I AM AUTHORIZED TO APPLY FOR THIS PERMIT. BUILDING .OW OR AUTHORIZE E Signature: �,e,-✓ It Date: ,.2...... -7`g7 Print name: �l'GCD ( (j, G�i Phone: (x.e6 ) (F e4 3 • `7 7 3 S Fax #: (zd &) rf 14-7 • tsb4 Address: ,2- 7 6. l ✓ /ifQ (f. u ,City /State/Zip: S. y' • 9/9/99 rekrnmf_dnr INSPECTION RECORD Call for Inspection - 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM (206) 431 -3670 for Building/Mechanical Inspections (206) 433 -0179 for Public Works Inspections When calling for inspections, please state the permit number, project name, site address, type of inspection, date inspection is needed (AM or PM), contact person's name and phone number. Call for Inspections at least twenty -four (24) hours In advance. Permit Number: Mien-02W ALL FIRE INSPECTIONS MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO FIRE FINAL. " ALL PLANNING INSPECTIONS MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO FINAL. ` " ALL UTILITY PERMIT INSPECTIONS MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO PUBLIC WORKS FINAL. BUILDING DATE INSP. COMMENTS ' 4 S • ecial Inspection.. �':, Pre - Construction Meetin • Pre- Reroof Pre -Demo Foundation Footin • s Foundation Walls Concrete Slab Slab Insulation Shear Wall Nailin • Roof Sheathin • Nailin • Exterior Wallboard / Sheathin • Mason Chimne a..rox. mid •oint .Framing (rough -in electrical, mechani- cal, .Iumbin• to be com•Ieted •rior Glazing Wall Insulation Floor Insulation Ceiling /Roof Insulation Interior Wallboard /Fastening Suspended Ceiling Li. htin • E • ui • ment/Controls Fire Rated Assembly MECHANICAL Rou • h -in Pipe /Duct Insulation Mechanical Equipment/Controls Smoke Detector Shut -off PUBLIC WORKS 433 -0179 Curb Cut/Access /Sidewalk Channelization /Striping Fire Loop /Hydrant Flood Zone Control Land Altering Hauling /Moving Oversized Load Landscape Irrigation Sanitary Side Sewer Sewer Main Extension 4 Storm Draina•e 11 O f .I- i Street Use Watermain Extension Water Meter Exempt Water Meter Permanent/Temporary Fire S•rinklers Fire Alarm Fire Final* 575 -4407 Is 4_4 Planning Final ** 431 -3670 Public Works Final * ** 433 -0179 mammy MEIN L? Mechanical Final 431 -3670 Buildin • Final**** 431 -3670 ALL FIRE INSPECTIONS MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO FIRE FINAL. " ALL PLANNING INSPECTIONS MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO FINAL. ` " ALL UTILITY PERMIT INSPECTIONS MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO PUBLIC WORKS FINAL. ';++*+*+*+»*A***�*+^***kk+Ah*+^»A***w^h*+A.bAk*^4«****+a+^++^** :I[Y OF [UKNILA, WA ~^^^^^��^��^^�^^�-=`�` • TRANSMIT (�******��**f�+���+�*�a h +\* ****1.*h+*+1+*+4+*+;* TRANSMIT`Nu/ber: R9800280 Amount: .514.25 05/09/0. 09x30 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: SCOTT NIgLUF ` ' Init: TLU ' Permit Ho: M199~0220 Type: NI8CPE8M NISC[ILANEOUS PCHMlT parcel. No: 004008'0539 Lorntion: 51 AVS & 0'146 ST Total Fees; 829.34 This P'44yment 514.25 Tota| 'AiL Pmts: 829.34 ^ ` ` Balance:.�OV • ‘b**a+halk^A*A+**a^*a+ki*^*a*k*��+AA*++++*++),a*+*+*k+**++.+**A.** Account Code 000/332.100 000/345.830 000/386,904 412j|4'2.40O Description BUILDING - NOHRES PLAN CHECK - UTILITY STATE BUILDING SURCHARG�E INSP FEE - STORM DRAIN ANuunt 484.75 .,i0.00 • 1S.VA' _ -^ '. • °�^.`'` �,'. r` *� � , , in ;;ss4L�5' :np'sfl II ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** CITY OF TUKWILA, WA TRANSMIT ********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** TRANSMIT Number: R9800200 Amount: 315.09 12/07/99 10:39 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: SCOTT WIKLOF Irtit: BL:H Permit No: MI99 -0220 Type: MISCPERM MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT Total Fees 804.34 This Payment 315.09 Total ALL Pmts: 315.09 Balance 489.25 ********_************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Account Code Description Amount 000/345;830 PLAN CHECK - NONRES 315.09 (1-r q r) inO .;'.'ThTAI : -Z nn INSPECTION NO, ot,?:x µ:4%.:F', lieu .iris%'.= :+`iK'DJi*'^*.."„' INSPECTION RECORD Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 LA( '— PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 P.# (.0;. , A /6 ( Type of Inspection: Address: Date called: Special Special instructions: ii Date wanted: /0 -23– / i llir Requester: Phone: Approved per applicable codes. COMMENTS: required prior to approval. Inspector: El $47. REINSPECTION FEE R UIRED. Prior to inspection, feg must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection. CJ INSPECTION NO. II r CTION RECORD Retain a. copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 9818 1 PI 0-022e PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Project: ` Type of Inspection:,. Address, ' 1 <IL re C /4Kc Date called:'" f.... �`---. -e9 Specia instructions: / Z Wit`. Date wanted: _ 1j 4/ rran3. Requester;,.- 0// , ,, �+-� Phone: ElApproved per applicable codes. Corrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: 4.4 rs z e D y wv 7 . _.a Inspector: p Date: 7--a-- 0 $47.00 REINSPECTION E REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reins ection. INSPECTION NO. INSPECTION RECORD Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 1141yZ1-6 PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Pro'e Type of Inspection: Address: ,575radue S,Iti. Na Date called: i oiod Special instructions: Date wanted: I ` I a.m. "pjestiutodozd/ 4p.m. P -5 357 Ws Approved per applicable codes. ElCorrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: 11 09 /a) addreGtetzoI Itiat t ,-kcd {)VS _ 4i / ..0_ 0 0.-RekEthik ,-",-A.Iii-e4 A.:, 7z--S41..i 5dc.tiA 63„20" I (C'• e 91 1 1 e. .(A2 )e ap `. - - 1/ %. "� 2 r 1' tO 4A El $47.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection. Receipt No: Date: INSPECTION NO. INSPECTION RECO Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 Proje er �( / `,- Type of inspection: co �+f','' Address: Date called: 7/27166 Special instructions: Date wanted: a.m. %f ,� p.m. Reqwe/46,1/64rd am Phone: 0 Approved per applicable codes. 0 Corrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: our ,Sd ?Cie Inspector: • At2"; Date: .7/3�u 0 $47.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection. 1 Rarnint Nn: ) Date: INSPECTION RECO Retain a'copy with permit C.) INSPECTION NO. CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Rroject: *o �a �`/ Type of Inspection: iy O /4 X , n („J Address: i S/?' -r V a. Date called: f� 6 I l & u.ri,4 N" Special instructions: . Date w kited: ^ "' a.m. p.m. Requester: ., Phone: 67 ! 46 a omJ ad Al rAwhacr Approved per applicable codes. El Corrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: 7 ..2r `$)L) edt/ iy O /4 X , i S/?' -r V a. �%� t.iri f� 6 I l & u.ri,4 N" K,La 'Cl l /� . 11 i. is / . ./1 -. e / ... tv �_ "444, -.-4 c It oc6 di, a f' F. 7 — a i'' 67 ! 46 a omJ ad Al rAwhacr t v t,(�t A A. 1 • /fit' 7/2$ Inspector: Date: 0 $47.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection. Receipt No: Date: 1 INSPECTION NO. INSPECTION RECORC Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Project: i %t3 Type of Inspection: Address: Date called: IVO() . Special instructions: i,11 Vac.. 5 U Date wanted; a.m. /724 Cd P.m. n �{ Requeste /14 Phone: //2– LL/if —'7 O 0 Approved per applicable codes. COMMENTS: Corrections required prior to approval. 7 / / bd edn ¢ ? cum f'n t rTCOA 7 54 /kat& 6j idAt7 44_ 4.44 5herbd .,i ca ( ) x.021- s -h (1 , Ad 1.6 a t ,7 (,l J- f0d' i o, c/44,49L9 (A 14i LI A 7` L d S la/ r catu4 f �x tpt vet, Inspector: 6V ) t / gradt COL1,424 >1 Date: 7/L U $47.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection. Receipt No: 1 Date: Cr. INSPECTION RECORD INSPECTION NO. Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 • PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Prgjrect:T2 /�? / /t Type of Inspection: SD , / V Address: 5�/5 ( Sv l4/G14 Date called: W � stp £ / / y T Lt/i C�J?�t..?it -p . Special instructions: J Date wanted: a.m. p.m. Requester: ft .�1 4t t,CF.v� f l s /Ditto 1 �.•t.ilc+ , v,`i.a.'C,,r.,( Phone: 0 Approved per app(itable codes. 0 Corrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: 7 /iOC) , t4 —¢Or iutZ. 0- f 0 SC[ imAl t 112,a Lp g [ I ��,,//.�4 W � stp £ / / y T Lt/i C�J?�t..?it -p . 0 //a) 12e...e €A4,ed Y1/100 i-jte fAgw. ft .�1 4t t,CF.v� f l s /Ditto 1 �.•t.ilc+ , v,`i.a.'C,,r.,( /rt 1,C f a cL.Ci( mid e -1,4- 4. Inspector: 6 Date: —7/(//C0 $47.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. CaII to schedule reinsp_ ection. Receipt No: Date: INSPECTION NO. INSPECTION RECORD Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 i.. PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Project 1_ o Type of Inspection: s pt_iJ Address: S1 S. 1 S (Ark Date called: e7/1j7c.), Special instructions: Date wanted: a.m. ‘ Li p.m. Requester: Sc_o` (- W f Kf OF Phone: to) Ej Approved per applicable codes. COMMENTS: �' I/J I Cam" C4 -e.40 , Corrections required prior to approval. t /01 -(k."--‘.4 Inspector: Date: ..7j If 1) Li $47.00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. Callao schedule reinspection, 1 Recaiot No: 1 Date: 1 Approved per applicable codes. E Corrections required prior to approval. t. INSPECTION NO. INSPECTION RECOL.. Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Pr srrie � /.� Type of Inspection: �� A 5/- / fv lg. / 6 Date called: /L&t s fall `6J iiiG} . Special ins ructions: Date wanted: a.m. p.m. Requester: /f Phone: - -oed COMMENTS: AO Sit V1211 -10 wi ca"i t LU11 & a 4-ow"1 /L&t s fall `6J iiiG} . 10 ^74t-t;, 1, 1 A bJ4 �sue(.. /f II Evict);'-:0-74.63 (i4.4 - -oed �fel f 3Y wL .,. fay 7� 4/410 0 ' /3 P. ,,,a--a col S v , Inspector: Date: $47,00 REINSPECTION FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100. CaII to schedule reinspection. 1 Receiat No: 1 Date: INSPECTION NO. INSPECTION RECORD Retain a copy with permit CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 PERMIT NO. (206)431 -3670 Pr )1 .4F c Type of Inspection: Date called: op Date wanted; (o (c ( CO a:m.� 1W p.m. Address: cif f \uP �.s r►'I{•brh Special instructions r ,) .--.3 )DA . r (�� � (,.% c) to:I.�Vt.Lry I Requester. II nn .�/ Phone:a0�]'i� 1 (� 0 Approved per applicable codes. Corrections required prior to approval, COMMENTS: /25.-x"- /) l/-lif' ! t ti / %915i rt 1« -' i7 «f /4 14t9) fir, at J2 ii==7 v Jam'' 4 (2e2.07/0) /4-k- ` 45,4 ' Gi /1 ---, ..,,,,,,„„...,....................... . r ector: / .. .4 • //./4f Ls Date: NSI�ECTI FEE REQUIRED. Prior to inspection, fee must be paid at 6300 Southcenter B vd., Suite 100. Call to schedule reinspection. 1 Receipt No: l Date: KLEINFELDER An employee owned company May 8, 2001 Kleinfelder File No. 60- 2083 -01 Mr. Scott Wiklof Tridor, Inc. 2226 Elliott Avenue, Suite A Seattle, Washington 98212 Subject: Final Summary Letter Geotechnical Construction Monitoring Foster Heights 16-lot Subdivision Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Wiklof: INTRODUCTION RECEIVED AUG 17 2001 BUILDING DEPARTMENT This is Kleinfelder, Inc.'s final summary letter for geotechnical construction monitoring services for the Foster Heights 16 -lot subdivision project located near the intersection of 51' Avenue South and South 146th Street in Tukwila, Washington. Kleinfelder has been providing general construction monitoring of earthwork (geotechnical) related portions of the site development since May 16, 2000, as described below. BACKGROUND Earthwork Related Construction Monitoring - Kleinfelder has completed our review of test data, field reports, and other information that we have in our files relative to the Foster Heights project. Kleinfelder is one of two geotechnical consultants that have provided construction monitoring and consultation on the project. We have reviewed a February 10, 1998 report by Geospectrum Consultants entitled "Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed 16 -Lot Foster Heights Plat Subdivision, South 146th Street and 51" Avenue South, Tukwila, Washington, Project No. 98- 103 -01." We understand that Geospectrum provided limited geotechnical inspection of the stormwater vault backfill material (see below). It is unclear to us whether they may have provided geotechnical monitoring for other areas of the site. Kleinfelder visited the site 13 times during our monitoring of earthwork- related activities. Our visits began on May 16, 2000 and were completed on May 4, 2001. Kleinfelder visits are 60.208301/6011 L134.doc Page 1 of 3 Copyright 2001 Kleinfelder, Inc 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I. l l 1 I summarized in our Daily Field Reports Nos. 1 through 12 for the dates described above. Copies of the Daily Field Reports, along with pertinent sketches and compaction test results, are attached to this letter. Kleinfelder monitoring included observation of the placement, testing of compaction, and consultation for utility trench backfill and road fill. We also observed proof rolling of road subgrades using a loaded dump truck to evaluate the performance of cut and fill road subgrades. Stormwater Vault Construction Monitoring - As part of our earthwork monitoring, Kleinfelder observed and evaluated the foundation excavations for the stormwater vault located adjacent to 515` Avenue South. Kleinfelder did not observe or evaluate the backfill placed around the vault at your request. We understand that Geospectrum evaluated the backfill material for the vault just prior to backfilling activities. The City of Tukwila requested that the backfill placed around the stormwater vault be removed and replaced with free - draining rock as this backfill may have contained a significant amount of fines (soil material smaller than the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve based on that portion passing the % -inch sieve). Kleinfelder reviewed photographs of the fill removal and replacement activities (as you provided to us on April 4, 2001.) We also examined records you provided to us of the tonnage and type of rock fill, and geotextile (filter fabric) placed against and behind the vault's exterior walls. As discussed in our April 12, 2001 "Summary Letter, Stormwater Vault Backfilling, Foster Heights... ", the replacement backfill should provide an adequate, free - draining pathway behind the vault. SUMMARY AND OPINION Kleinfelder is familiar with the site earthwork - related construction, including roadway subgrade preparation, site utility trench backfilling, and excavations /slope conditions next to the stormwater vault. Although we were not asked to evaluate the original vault backfill, Kleinfelder reviewed the backfill replacement records and photographs you provided, as described above. Based on our review, it is our opinion that the geotechnical aspects of earthwork at the Foster Heights project that Kleinfelder observed, monitored, and tested, have been accomplished in general accord with the geotechnical recommendations contained in the February 10, 1998 Geospectrum report, and with geotechnical recommendations that we provided during the course of our monitoring services. 60208301/6011 LI34.doc Page 2 of 3 Copyright 2001 Kleinfelder, Inc .: r. .+;::s;ii:i:�:;;ia�i�<;i:�riSi. �:51:•.t*:.�it�n�pw..:e... CLOSING i rnmusn.,yr; If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call us at 425 - 562 -4200. Thank you for asking Kleinfelder to assist Tridor with this project. Sincerely, KLEINFELDER, INC. Gary D. Beckham, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist Project Manager 60- 2011301/60111.134.doc Copyright 2001 Kleinfelder, Inc 1 i 111111KLEINFELDER TECHNICIAN'S DAILY REPORT 00. 2- 1 Date 37'f/0( File No 0 - 20Q-3. 01 Miles 42,0 Project feofer Oaticynnartf 1 1 Hours a,5- Weather Cloudy Diary krisi!eack oh-.6i4e 44- 12100\pm1 Examleect coiNyk2-4-ed eibpile.414-1c, cobice6 4e X/I CLVP '7C .1 ciortc...fte cmitgi cal 04 ob,s6rve V4(414- area also pi'ctvo in rt-,1 5iicazvs. NC obVIal.stplesbiewl_ L•tier. 0106ervecl cL4- Wie Ape4Pfeol 4hg 314191 12130ym 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 a I i I i 1 1 i KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT The following was noted: No -1I Page of DATE 1 1/2 I /oo JOB NO. co- 2o73 J PROJECT ros4 -41r f't'e 7L%+-s Budd :v SI c 7 LOCATION 14k, 6 Iq WA- CONTRACTOR' AdVcutCeot £4tole.grbNrtofl'A OWNER WEATHER Clear'1 SL4VK%/ TEMP. nat AM r l{S' 'at 12 :16 PM PRESENT AT SITE /! Adva4cwd wislarrbu rid Inc. eirsorosel Hydroseec! i 0 �0 w r 0 a W cr H -J II& W a 0 1 big W • W Q W IZ W Z MIN W Y 1- z 0 0 STANDARD Cif w c- = r 6 d O t 0 uJ DENSITY TESTING ❑ MPACTION CONTROL rir Remarks 4. i 1 1 .1 . .a t O O Q Q 4 4, d d A Approximate Location Mi-414 Sde oir N+e ITss - trend: n9 cal do sac l oc o fec( horh cF S{46Ek .5♦., necu's+o drGIA „lvi- [est. orC cold ,pcefdr•A 4S, 641 040 c:dl efi S/sf• AJe $ norfl► e+,d of net✓ ;rrke dic.,,dow`4u S (*AA ie Side i aarsoiekof f# (3 •es; -side I 1 1 NFELDER vt d 0 z 0 z w MPACTION CONTROL Remarks uo } ;oedwop pa }3 }cads 'Q g O A Q1 c ,E AO L'� • uo4 ;oedwoo % n: o q„ Q'' g .�• � s M wnw}xgw qui ON aAJn3 A';} suap pup tr: 2 \ n Az n N bo E2 iI G ase;ua3.1ad a.an ;s}ow rt, M O 4; .,, . `Q ; 0; M )100 tM (ld) 9SJ Motaq y ;dap � r ^^ 1V Q O }suap ;aj C. r.• H O M ` y Approximate Location o$ VI vi t Ses of t I-71 wrs4 side o4 ai-/bcf if + I 3 g f .** t.). �� tr apow h eq V) CLL Vi CO VI in V1 Ca V) m 'aN lsa1 .:9 Cr. C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 A 1 t 1 1 i KLEI NFELDER 2405 - 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 562 -4200 (206) 562 -4201 (FAX) Email: gbeckham @kleinfelder.com FIELD REPORT Introduction PROJECT: Foster Heights Development FILE NO: 60- 2083 -01 CLIENT: Tridor, Inc. DATE: 11/1/00 LOCATION: Tukwila, WA REPORT NO: 10 WEATHER: Sunny, cool PERMIT NO: ARRIVAL TIME: DEPARTURE TIME: PREPARED BY: Gary D. Beckham, P.G. REVIEWED BY: PURPOSE OF VISIT: Road subgrade Evaluation Gary Beckham of Kleinfelder visited the Foster Heights project today to evaluate the condition of the road subgrade. Specifically, we visited the site to evaluate road subgrade repairs that we recommended yesterday (see our October 31, 2000 Field Report No. 9). Scott Wiklof, owner, Ted Dahm and crew of Advanced Underground Inc., and Greg Villanueva of the City of Tukwila were at the site during our site visit today. Background Although in generally fair condition, our October 31, 2000 field report (No. 9) noted that several areas of road subgrade on the site were muddy, yielding, or otherwise were not ready to accept aggregate base and top course. We used paint to identify areas where we recommended specific repairs be made. This included removal of mud and yielding soil and re- compaction of soil fill around catch basins, manholes and water valve cover boxes. Observations We observed that site conditions today were considerably better than noted yesterday. Crews completed, or were in the process of completing a number of the recommended repairs. We noted that despite repairs, some areas were still soft, yielding or muddy. We marked these areas with paint and showed both the owner and Mr. Dahm each area. The areas included: • The north end of the dead -end road extension between two catch basins. This area was re- compacted but still exhibited slight yielding under foot pressure and probed easily (with 1/2-inch dia. steel rod) 3 to 8 inches deep. We recommended that this area be covered with a heavy weight geotextile fabric (Mirafy 500X was used.) This will help spread the wheel Toads. • The center of the road at the intersection where the roadway turns east and the dead -end road extends north. This area has several water valve covers and a deep sanitary sewer manhole. This area was wet and muddy, yielded under foot pressure, the backfill around the manhole's east side was poorly compacted to 23- inches deep, and grass and other weeds were observed on the subgrade. We recommended that the weeds be pulled, the wet, yielding soils be removed and replaced with pit run fill, and the manhole's east side be excavated and new fill placed. • The center of the road from the entry to the turn was wet and muddy. We recommended removing from 1 to 2 inches of the muddy soil at subgrade. 1 • The center of the road, from about 80 feet east of the downhill turn for a distance of about 50 linear feet, was still wet and yielded under foot pressure. Probes with a steel rod showed easy penetration from 3 to 6 inches deep. We recommended re- compaction of this area (static roll, no vibrations), and placing geotextile fabric over the soft soils to help spread vehicle loads. • Several shallow, relatively small pockets of wet, yielding soil were observed, mostly along the south side of the east down hill road. Probes indicated that the wet soils extended only about 2 to 3 inches deep. We recommended excavation and replacement of the existing fill with pit run, 5/8 -inch minus crushed rock, or road aggregate. We did not observe removal of all the fill at the entryway. We noted, however, that pit run fill covers rock spalls at the entry at its west side (by the sidewalk). 1 Conclusions It is our opinion, at the time that this field report was prepared, that the road subgrade has been prepared as I best as possible and practical considering the upper few inches to maybe 12 inches of subgrade soils are wet. II The subgrade has been repaired as best as practical and to our general satisfaction. tHowever, it is noted that the upper portion of the road subgrade cannot be compacted to a dense condition or . to 95 percent of the maximum dry density (following ASTM -D 1557 methods) because of the high amount of moisture in the fill subgrade soils. At best, the road subgrade is firm- to - slightly yielding under heavy loads. In the current state (as of 1:00 PM today), the road subgrade should, in our opinion, provide suitable support for passenger vehicles and occasional medium- to —heavy trucks if the following recommendations are followed: f• All un- necessary vehicles must leave the site so as to not disturb the subgrade; • Complete repairs as recommended verbally yesterday and today; • The last vehicle to leave the site is the roller compactor, which should be backed -out so as to not leave wheel ruts; • That base (8 1/2 inches) and top course (1 1/2 inches) aggregate, consisting of crushed rock as specified in the plans, is placed by dumping and pushing with a bulldozer to advance the aggregate over subgrade (do not let trucks drive on the subgrade); • The aggregate is placed in the thicknesses shown on the plans and is compacted with a vibratory roller compactor (lightly compact the aggregate; do not over compact); and 1 • After paving is complete, do not drive upon the new asphalt concrete roadways for a least 5 days to allow the pavement to cure and the subgrade to drain and re- stabilize. Closing IWe understand that today's field visit likely completes our geotechnical construction monitoring services at the site. If there are questions regarding this field report, please call us at (425) 562 -4200. This report presents opinions formed as a result of our observation of activities and site conditions relating to our contracted scope of services with respect to construction. We rely on the contractor to comply with the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the presence of our representative. Our work does not include supervision or direction of the actual work of 1 the contractor, his employees or agents. Our firm will not be responsible for job or site safety on this project. Attachments: Distribution: Scott Wiklof (Tridor) & Ted Dahm (Advanced) Signed: 1 Gary D. Beckham, P,G. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 s t 1 L i 1 l 1 1 ralKLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT The following was noted: Itr172 as) Ucrro►J NO. 9 Page t of 'yam DATE 10/.11/60 JOB NO. etaO ^221$6 —is 1 PROJECT 5 -M12. E - S . l 4 tt- TS N v Al q9 T LOCATION T .k1.4. L./ l L ti ,'.,) P.- CONTRACTOR Ar DV"PJ cft 0 OWNER `Tr. t Dora. IN C . WEATHER C L_Cul Di) C o D I_ ) TEMP. 1745 'at /adra AM 'at PM PRESENT AT SITE -cc b DA t-t M - y4,f0).0..4zh D uND &24 ��/r7 • 1 G R 2 S y, rr,4l•C w� c. , D M/'02 bC ‹ya.s. 0 TYPE OF INSPECTION 1 .of, -© SuE.412.ADr e_ OAl. 1 ^my C tt44 AM h s l -rte A,/ -r -r-Not R>T atNisr 6F "T 0 1)4%1 M of Ao 04-r r) un10RPC, a Wa(2- K Carl t,J.r• ,42e. -r S,-r,. f? AD r 12-e P p 73t, .56 JS s6- ae, 4 R F e: k i r . " S c1FLIp "T'v 66 SLaua eRo of 20L -L/r% &r D-F' S ut3 01L -ran. ( 7'02 n1n L fZvAOL„, L•bS rn/ar 2 c, A L L p L. 0 �[ Q (_ °. t�' 0 0 �1 ) bump TR l.L e tc W R ti4 L_ S V Lt r t �i 4 "2 c 4i17Ltit_ 12- Ab 'Co ?(1O(3(2_ Sufi /1.r4 04,. Q(..C.6.2.).A1-; on1S PZ o o.F Rou./t Gr• l F R oa t, j If..) €A :6 S 1"-(4,4 < Muc/-I 413 s o S 2 Rt Y2 a a 0 S G t O 4 A Ali a p eL ∎ p R n t.7 p R Ptp a -r A f A .,i RC et c U I) CA to S aftD (?-O[ t+C . (1-2-0P-P Sti. c tc o ,.l P C-'r•q c 5 t+e../ T' H A T 4,c I, 5� 'r o •1 w t L L Q R A c. p o,m. Mli.fr ► z vfe 0 to /04s c t2v...o41.1) R oct< 6721 It gt ,r 4{R/ MINUS L' 2 L seta f3A- -. p, P- 24' Of for )21.0. vAri J2 S►re_„s",J -rs"c ^ T Pa- cc7F r oLt_I,- G t i72 U!3,,Jcr I►,14LC C ti ii ()AStJfi.RAL_ 06eilaAs W t<►L. &AA D p e : 1.1:7 (C L Rr-r(2 < e A I_ ? ) p c rc t-i4 5 C A. 0 s s T��e E'01-S r(.0 h; 11 fpeeno.) of aaAg:)w#. t . i- G A -2RiAS d4nID irinlc4 4s 1 W I'c.t wtt..t 00y SaIL ak 11 3+�rrt.Cf•Ic Lit h)T Z) M0PT Gnrct••F 504 5 /NI., t1ALysS Received 8 Acknowledged by: Signed. J1I). 1 KLEINFELDER .,,)_ 1 _J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I e I i 1 1 1 k9 KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT Oa • The following was noted: Page of DATE 16 /3tAd JOB NO. 6o- ioe3 -a 1 PROJECT - osr' -2 He c4 r j- LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. 'at 'at AM PM PRESENT AT SITE TYPE OF INSPECTION /I ft WI AR G,iti/ *t.Ly C3 -Ore II 1LLF1 C�.FL. F'�t_ .4i10 ,.1p T115 SR /'5 as e/41_ woo J 3) Rfl o nil 1 Tv G. ti o ttuo eaL/t'j2s 5p 4.c LA- Ain_ P_`/F-S T (DOw11/4) 44 cLI B O,D Li �7C JPI.A.#L S,%1 ALL. P o c Ks. "r s net-Li a v 5141 c. s" ,assn- NJ F ASS FLoAA A/ J 9 rtiuc po 1-0 L.-+4A Pan •co.,.1 - D — 5 n c r s viffiy t.4u4D y / ALow c, w/ C. rC+f 3As,4,,rJ A "JD SF40/Cr Ptire -d St. D 20�D a QTR. s i o ►J (rarH rz v +t A 5 C c.)at 10 1 2 ,44D S d (6- k A-7 Six RP0ti - -L&E) . 7' -$' Wr, to7:Fco r $'C4 /2I D you i R0INo Su & ANA wa) /4/t.4sc is faoL,U1 or.! a/?r4 -ot Ars t 40_0 LA ►-) P O o2 t, r5o,eIL -Ft L LSD C4 C'E'} IBS /�Us�' Ca t/vRx. . PE aAIS W C F. n1C 77€4-el-7- A LL rwAD p Loom 5 o 'L.. 6fL j? Pit- 0 UR.D To SLic;4- PL r-f T-(4"T c Own r a .K "ST C 1) g �S4) Sa' -/f l'- f: I3 6.4/' u al rtlUC C T+± tS $40„ RF, is2 a.% ,tit__ pNLY irk) 1nl r+4 as 77-4.)o rt1 S AftRA S Stu QAL_ t►JC i-43e.5 1►) ,As'tA,AF 14* .3L. 41- CCaMetuL-At&/ rAtAD NJo c Or■J of 1-2. I p o are 6f C_o MO 4C Vt /r/t VA, (,�t . ty -17tR,,►t4cs Ar4n A42-06,4 c.. .73 , s/ v.,Lvc cow zs. Rap L -n c4 /co44p rc-rnz p t i RLflJ F 1t_L_ on ea (AS titD 2ocil . At-e.. So$ 10 ,7 *NO2 7 cr>") - &I R It; W U 2 514-0 "JIv TO T A 1D At-4 M d D ASR o f/2 0r M t o M M e N DA T; c».L( -foil (WA (2 wilit M4f Received & Acknowledged by: Signed EtNFELOER 1 1 1 1 1 II KLEINFELDER 2405 - 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 562 -4200 (206) 562 -4201 (FAX) Email: gbeckham@kleinfelder.com 1 1 Introduction 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 FIELD REPORT PROJECT: Foster Heights Development FILE NO: 60- 2083 -01 CLIENT: Tridor, Inc. DATE: 6/12/00 LOCATION: Tukwila, WA REPORT NO: 8 WEATHER: Sunny, mild PERMIT NO: ARRIVAL TIME: DEPARTURE TIME: PREPARED BY: Gary D. Beckham, P.G. REVIEWED BY: James M. Schmidt, P.E. PURPOSE OF VISIT: Observe existing condition of slope above storm water vault pit Gary Beckham of Kleinfelder visited the Foster Heights project today to evaluate the existing condition of a cut slope situated immediately above a new storm water storage vault construction pit. The new vault location is adjacent to 51st Avenue South and just south of 144th Avenue SE in Tukwila, Washington. Several recent Kleinfelder field reports have discussed the condition of the cut slope including our field report No. 6, which we submitted to Tridor, Inc. and the contractor (Advanced Underground Inc.) on June 2, 2000. A copy of this June 2 field report is attached to this field report. Our site visit today followed a weekend of moderate to intense rainfall in the Puget Sound region. The rainfall last night (June 11) was heavy. Rainfall this morning (and during the site visit) consisted of Tight to heavy rain showers. Only Ted Dahm of Advanced Underground Inc. was at the site during our site visit. Background Jur June 2 field report (No. 6) concluded that the slopes above the storm water vault pit were unsafe and we provided six specific recommendations to improve the stability of the slopes. We visited the site today to see whether our June 2 recommendations had been implemented and to observe the condition of the slopes following the rain storms described above. Observations Tarps - We observed that the slopes above the storm water vault pit are only partially covered with plastic tarps. Roughly the upper half of the west slope was covered with plastic tarps that were fairly well secured using old tires and heavy rubble from other portions of the site. However, the lower portions of the west slope and none of the north and south slope areas had been covered with plastic tarps. As such, our June 2 recommendations to cover the entire slope had not been implemented. Unfortunately, only covering the upper half of the west slope means that rain falling on the tarps becomes a concentrated surface flow as the water flows off the downslope end of the tarp. The concentrated flow causes rill erosion and undermining of soils (see below). Earth Berm - The top of the tarps along the upper half of the west slope were not protected by an earth berm as recommended in our June 2 report. The purpose of the berm was to deflect surface water from going under the tarps or over the top of the slope. Water in Vault Pit -W e noted that the sump pump(s) were not operating and the pit had filled with apparently 2 to 3 vertical feet, or more, of muddy water. Our June 2 report recommended that the pump(s) be hooked up and turned on so that there would be little or no standing water in the pit. Extremely Muddy (Soft) Conditions — The slopes surrounding the vault pit are extremely soft and muddy. We observed water sheet flowing downslope on the ground surface and in tire and bulldozer tracks. As mentioned above, some of the water was flowing under the tarps, leading to soft muddy conditions under the tarps also. We noted significant rill erosion actively occurring as the slope steepens at the crest of the cut slope above the pit. We observed sloughing of muddy soils into the flooded pit. A portion of the slope at the northwest corner of the pit has caved into the pit. Several large boulders have also fallen into the pit. We noted that with each footstep taken on the north slope a small debris flow of mud, water and soil slurry would cascade down to the vault pit. We also observed some undermining of the weathered glacial till at the southwest corner of the excavation at an elevation about 20 feet above the grade of the pit floor. The undermining seems to be caused by the concentration of surface water running off of the tarps on the upper half of the west slope. Most of the rill erosion on the west slope below the tarps seems to be from concentrated runoff from the tarps. We also noted that most of the site was muddy, holes left open for utility work were flooded, and that several silt fences had over - topped. Erosion control, for the most part, is not functional. We observed that Mr. Dahm was walking on the plastic tarps above the pit in an attempt to place more plastic tarps on the west slope. The soil under the tarps was undermined in some locations (see above) and extremely muddy. The tarps were wet and slippery at the time of our observations because of the rainfall. We noted also that workers had stockpiled (vertically) dozens of long pieces of rebar (reinforcing steel rod) along the edge of the vault's west lower cut slope, creating a very high risk of impalement should a worker fall from the slope above onto the rebar. As such, we notified Mr. Dahm that it would be safer if he was to immediately leave the slope and finish placing the plastic later after the rebar had been moved and the slopes were drier. Conclusions It is our opinion that the slopes above the new storm water vault pit are in a very unsafe condition at the time hat this field report was prepared. Recommendations We strongly recommend that the following measures, and those presented in our June 2, 2000 field report, be implemented immediately: 1. Notify all workers, especially personnel who will be working in the vault pit, of the unsafe condition of the slope above the pit. 2. No personnel should be on the slopes above the vault pit until such time as the ground stabilizes. Kleinfelder will make a determination of when it is safe to be on the slope and re -enter the pit based on weather, slope, water and soil conditions. 3. The vertically stacked rebar must be moved to a safe area. 4. The entire slope must be covered with plastic tarps as described in our June 2 field report (No. 6). This specifically means all of the north, south and west slopes above the pit. The plastic tarps must be laid in such a manner as to not allow water to flow under the tarps (i.e., lay the tarps like overlapping shingles on a roof.) 5. The berm must be installed to deflect surface water away from the tarps as described in item 6 of our June 2 report. The berm may best be constructed as a cut ditch and earth berm. Kleinfelder can assist with the ra;•. +r ts.sr,,rn.:cz.»s.�u:, sit. f(: rs; .xrdctML-vs�`1r.;vslc+vnrmnv.. ram..,. vc,,:., �_.«.. .., .:................�_.._..... design of this feature. The berm should convey surface water flow away from the slope to an appropriate storm water discharge location. 6. Drainage measures must be implemented to effect the safe conveyance of surface water away from the plastic tarps and slopes above the pit. Kleinfelder is available to assist Tridor and the contractor regarding these measures. This, in part, is item 5 from our June 2 report. Wet, muddy conditions now dictate expansion of these measures. 7. Water must be pumped out of the vault pit. The sump pumps must be fully operational and be capable of removing water as it accumulates (i.e., the pumps must be connected to positive drainage and have electricity to run the motors.) This is item 4 of our June 2 report. 8. Collect and convey to the pump water seeping from the bedding around the plugged pipe at the northwest corner of the pit (this is a portion of item 5 from our June 2 report.) 9. Install and maintain erosion control measures as shown on the City of Tukwila approved plans and drawings. This may include installation of new silt fences, berms, ditches, straw bales, erosion control fabric or tarps as necessary and required by the grading permit. 10. Repair existing erosion control facilities as necessary. Closing We strongly recommend that Tridor, Advanced Underground and Kleinfelder meet at the site to discuss our .observations, conclusions and recommendations prior to continuation of work in the vault pit area. If there are questions regarding this field report, please call us at (425) 562 -4200. This report presents opinions formed as a result of our observation of activities and site conditions relating to our contracted scope of services with respect to construction. We rely on the contractor to comply with the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the presence of our representative. Our work does not include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor, his employees or agents. Our firm will not be responsible for job or site safety on this project. Attachments: Distribution: Scott Wiklof (Tridor) & Ted Dahm (Advanced) Signed: Gary D. Beckham, PG 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 k9 KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT Ob , 7 The following was noted: Page DATE 6/5/ex) JOB NO. 6o- Zog -0/ PROJECT FO (he4505 LOCATION CONTRACTOR { I ,-� �LLL t✓ l/WJ'V7 WEATHER OWNER n _^ ! a- L est '- TEMP. (� (., 'at 'at i O>] AM PM PRESENT AT SITE l Scvrvt,� -C iii GLC S TYPE OF INSPECTION Ovl 6/5 /c r_ 1 c4r4 '0) sde 4o c1 -L5.k .tom Je.5o,.,:4e-, Ike. cL,(4,dcw- Id 64e- e-,444 tA odi- c) ✓1 t.e-. 5 l✓ Co r n t1' cat I'^. o icr2/- 4 ae , 144, 'ibo t 1•24t-64-- 8 -favv, 6A/00 . r 4ey{v‘1 h +ma 1,,v) \ne „,, Lie-- gille) ovei 14A4,-/- e . ! i YT-- wns M iLLt IT L' S 1 - exi,1447 f'? Terse 4.cs45 c111 {ohs +k< 9570 Cow'i cI a Ct4 -rc., a 'Eo cL tJTT v/nS elfrovtuill I/ -buck [nhrl GO+v, Ibteki i i Received & Acknowledged by: Signed. 1 r INFELDER �� N' ✓� /1 I _� dpa1GL. Woo 1 a m ❑ 1O111NO) NOI1)VdWO) ■ ONI1531 ALISN30 -J19 031}3135 SNOILV)01 1531 z 01 0311d0d38 S111S38 GO G` !.1 s \N — Test No. Mode 'V 7 .� .� ,, C .4.._ 1 C } s U `O — .,` :- �.. ^" � (E' 4 ' {�--r v z, ; J, ._ Q■ r .1- -� '; S ; 3 J' E. i 1 `n r' •-t. - ^ a__ 4- `' 4 ., -`o �`0 r .J - Th ..1 r 1_._ 1 )^ ) eN S Z.— -/ .n ; "— 8- — 1 " r p ; o, ��1 n ∎ 00/ 2/ I Y') '`"1 S 0 rO P r r. Approximate Location ',.7. ''� N Ni Wet Density c---, Cr." Cr" - 6" Co 00 GQ, - Depth below FSG (ft) ,■a -.0 --- \N J W -D .m oo "•-• w v — oo 00 Moisture Percentage 5 W W cp N CL = u'. U1 `V -.o N ' r. - ._ Dry Density (_ ( -1n.. k> 0 Curve No. C0 loo d -.I 0 U Lab Mbxlmum VI V1 . 6�-. " '1 Compaction ..1 V\ `\ 4, " n 'E' 411 —T) kAt -..1.) Ln --Q 0 ,S) V'i Specified Compaction aln 0 r n1 " a m ❑ 1O111NO) NOI1)VdWO) ■ ONI1531 ALISN30 -J19 031}3135 SNOILV)01 1531 z 01 0311d0d38 S111S38 1 1 1 1 1 1.. 1 1.. i t i 1 1 kKLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT NM . The following was noted: Page of a-± 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 k9 KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT The following was noted: Page "Z of DATE , 6 a - /o0 NO. 6o— 0g3 -01 PROJECT 7%2-/ n ea- - r0sTRa IJ75_ LOCATION CONTRACTOR OWNER WEATHER TEMP. 'at at AM PM PRESENT AT SITE TYPE OF INSPECTION 4 r+ou 414 7?-i# Lo (Ada Z C l4 7) le oar? 0-4_s • }C S L °pc. .¢/9 a vi' pcT f) pi 2 /2A" 7", u M 770f -23 i. A .v P WIZ/7X C1,11- A-e c 02 P».r 4- 7 /2T C o.v+ric Dn7 cw5 i,J ac r . - 3-41/0 0 Fik .t_1) Rffedgy 7 ,b w7A $ , 7rte f ( C_ ,e} 7 7iqd_ "re. to OF .- ' dx If•d5 el-7 ?a 7.6P d-F 5 L r) i. w 41.ci4 c_cx.t e-nA -o 1:75 STA/3 o<z 7o 2ao ctrPL 2 - o- 5c deg PA /Ga /24_ 2 a co,,,t.,..t/ OS 716c 1t i t) La, Se i L. i1 7 Ta P OF SGaP - 13 Y G.t ll M i� .31-4 1% /�CUi�} Z�o.J �fZo nn T f /LLWBSrwa4_A /- r 2) - Of 'i, ] LCOS/2��•!/Bi'fSa� r S dies CUFF c'F tU AfZi. Y 511p•V 64 A T T0f c`F _car- 4C-, LL... 3) 1 s/ '7- O 4 d J c nl &- F l LL A..., f> c 4.15A av /ev -4 L6 asof M Pre-4' t o t TEyvts A3642 -) -WoR /4x1.5 13utL20/AJ4 VAttLr //J Pi T 7-0 4 ►� E Pt7 02 2FiM -6 (IFL 7-e-/--i2 COL_u'£I 'Tv •A ! #L a4it -E.ss- Ah Abat /2Z- 5'44 !i&f 01N110 1 5 71.t2,decO 0.4 . 1, c_ i4 uP m- ,. Y 50'. 12.-",>I $1,4-7/2- Jo-) S,W,tt L- L > 51144440w 6 /7-c p/!Z S 03-., n cool g 1 Lrk ,z A-,,v # 7 / P' a OA- s va_ . (p J ca va,2- .221!/Z0 SG_0 / 7L -1,112 PS A'7" .504 -,zreF 13t1r2M lla" ki} A? upPs fz 70(0 F ■e D A A do. a L i u,v 'c R TI4 el.. e Received & Acknowledged by: Signed: 7 -2 I s Zo .be pc. a Cr 7,1 .Z KLEINFELDER K L E I N F E L D E R Daily Field Report (DFR) Project Name E0_14 14 45 Project No. _6_o Zla$ 5- Q I Project Location `` L i \- ContractorJ ')r.,-.A-e, Uh5)"trye Technician °j Weather PM2TL -y_ L.o -A Earthwork Equipment Observed __1A-X0-1‘ i 4044,J fu^) "*""/ 1 ivil-f/oz -,r DFR Given to (or left at) — 9LLM1c12.1) ' op/'LAIQQ -- Reviewed by.—OkQ Cs.. -iCtik -- Date lz/oo 10 Li 5-- Time Arrived Time Departed 1,5 Travel Time Mileage DFR No Na Date Reviewed zl Observations /Remarks: be' 07100 )e.. —e�n 44 +0 .ks+s w -h.z- tucl_or_c1L-,0i ei- ,oeLP t5o_ +6E 1L�-u11-__S e by_ l r_i eioAc5 cy Itek,c) «1�iv �. +�� C,-k�b � , �►►e- N U corm e� _ _���xc �� Dire_ - j'wc 4- (45T 19=L5:51 � r)nr_ e�� �s�► m P�rc yes ks — b Te f P. H.� �Q � �.�.. I !oti —Csz �' -- -d,, r 136k e v,,a- 4 t . ? ����lzj+�.,�t� � r�v�s tuts.- _v.- ct -4Ls_a iy kS L—f lye- • 5„c-ir re '�Ltlz�. ( / _ gam- c) 1 _C-� / 4 r +4.4,11 ck.iJ1-7 6- 4a11 bc--- ca-c -Plh 4o , -5-)Ns m.41_40. (c,,.- l ..m . 444 /5_. N aTa- G/5 5 /00 — A -Fran. (21E1/4 cfi. LA) ©F- ft ti Li> P'-P CL9' "rnS chr4pAa.tsa,1 1,,1 zT 1vt 22 2asw P-124 AA 71.12A A l t 1 s Aill clot •.J eN '%4 -r v.J AZitrL SIz-11 J L c t';i 114 4-/QL r;\ ft. S t.. ... TR r eras n ua,nh- Cons PA er -tt) £ Pt . s . o - cZ s WregaR o41-y/ k r -rbop su 2A1 ca. "% Y DOA) 4(40 kelfv12 N o7 Tme&L J .A? .Pap7W ', NOTE: Observations, pass /fail evaluations, and /or recommendations (if applicable) provided herein have not been reviewed by an engineer and, therefore, should be considered preliminary and subject to change. 1.--(---- K nfelder Representative tgnature -1.0, le__ C glee a ONIJ.S31 AlISN30 'AS 0313135 SNOI1V)01 1531 X O H GD') m OBVONV1S z ci n D = m rS O w z m T r m z 0 01 031Hod3N S11f1S32i 1.I1 r W N Test No. \ \ i r t r- Mode .J1 %' r A" I- —.5 C " . - _ - Or . 1 r: -Lj s c ,�.. i � „.,.,, i'" .J\ t r 4): � 1M t , ✓ ,n A .• ' r ti "ti r' h l C .,J e e.,p Z 4-ler 41e—,1-) N 4;Je �r s�rce+ ^ .. t_ .- �' . C r s z v � LA s- `■/ Ohl fe; • Not JF• - 4,1 e frd (4..3P S' Approximate Location . / A— r' s ) De g- '1•JJ�...4�. 5rk t — CAIND 144-tic 4,.u.8-1 rna 4.''4 G :11 = �1 N N � 6'` N _i - N (v vJ N N v 00 _c •,4 v' Wet Density oa' 4-� 6 OQ 6� °q 00 P ^ Depth hel ow FSG (ft) cgt, N -a `nl O (y 'd 0 o a o LA �, �\s ;� L N r rr Moisture Percentage N O ``i vl v N .J oa w Dry Density 4- Curve No. ,r J (NJ J N .J ..,-,,1 J 'v J. -J •.J N ` Lab MAximum v • 0 v v --p , . n j S Compaction Specified Compaction •0 3 0 o f P1 V b "g41 fr 1 N N `n b a ONIJ.S31 AlISN30 'AS 0313135 SNOI1V)01 1531 X O H GD') m OBVONV1S z ci n D = m rS O w z m T r m z 0 01 031Hod3N S11f1S32i 1 1 1 1 s B 1.. 1... t i i 1.. 1 1 1 r k9 KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT Nos 4- The following was noted: Page __L of DATE 5/2-4/00 JOB NO. ('o - 2083 -o I PROJECT —ua - I. Dda - Fot'rwL HLS. LOCATION TU. (.4uJ1Lw i vVAt CONTRACTOR A- 0 j A,c.A.() OWNER —1-(2--t. 0 a2 WEATHER • P A -0-71 C 1.-0L.J TEMP. °at °at AM PM PRESENT AT SITE // C 16.,2- `/ i 72 C Lc E.+ A-AA c.o../ CA. A-c -tati- TYPE OF INSPECTION V A LA. L-r FnL1/4r.t0A-T0,..) -LAB CD , vJ € J c S t -r D T t4 s t 'tomDA-7 ,rt T T ia. T F T (2i 002) 12.4 I N to "T i _ 7-0 f04-4 #40 A ?c 011 S c.1 /3 et. /z ,n otr. -rail- 171,1P i■rcAAJ 5.7 i- ri c d f k T' R-R V A c 'L- -r / t3 c -z- A T X4-0 bA -ca vJT rd S 15 S Ta6F T• Sourrl fr s r C7 'b-f.. S 17-r Ai 5 iv a i c D i 0 , t4 Pit - S f- 11 R R-T S Ti-! - VA Lccr X.c AL) irrr O 1 t S SC rut A TI D ! hl Dh T 7Rv -1I1� Tc� \)F R T rti\is E lA N we to re d er (0. c r `Tr L Cf t Du az PR-6 s I 4 ra Tr-(e. bi ." "r J A (4 L7 5 lie G' /2. AtDc WI C 4( 4 172- � S L f & S1 -1 (1•-OD S f-lo t-r P. fl p fT rJ r? eft,. A ?'c d 'JS OF Lacs -1 -441A I". 'rS t T IS a tr -. op 0r,) -r4AT• THE c,t l2Ai Sa►L -eAsr LI w t..6 -T P20 FzcT PFi.Cr c (47( (WS M (t`.1 I d v o P S F XL c_4(...../ Aia L-Fi. di C A/, A C /T-/ .. we (i_ Co cam+- f-d B t r-4PE F 7<Pri5.F' 7 U A LLLT S r c6 tiADJI. PAL re cT / /7 F ('z- O M WE. AT (-M a i DC S 77.412 D •AoJC1E C�Jfa-2- c (� tt OF %ZdcCc SPAt_Lc. Received & Acknowledged by: Signed: KLEINFELDER t- / i ht—it 0 1 I 1 1 1 i t k9 KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT No, 4- a The following was noted: Page 1 of DATE SlaG(op JOB NO. 4o0 - -2-083 -01 PROJECT -.T L L () d 2- foci-rat. ti ZS LOCATION TctLLL4)tLA , 0./ A' CONTRACTOR A- 0 kl Ac.JC.rt 1) OWNER --t'e2- I. D a2 WEATHER • P k(2-T1 � c t..,Q4.J0k1 TEMP. °at 'at AM PM PRESENT AT SITE 1 C 44- --/ 32 G Lc t-{ h•M e..0 .-.1 C,t.. a-c—z.vt — TYPE OF INSPECTION vA►c.A,t_T FOttN0 -1orJ SLA a CD , \ J S t T R_ D T t 2 s tom, �p� rr T Te-i, n u s r DP 772 t 0 0 (2) T J t2. J •A L LA 4 T T H& ' f e,-c r1 D A 7 e 0 S t,4 !3 r /a i\ 0 ft Taft 7-.1.-JP /\ic4.t.) S Tan- N A - U%f T f t.R- V A cif l- T / O c T A T i /1- s r =1"..n �� S (Tr A-0 bA- cFf.J -' '-d 51 s'4. sT'?-r T Sot,trr.l A 5. M a <c dF,.l1.. r) 1,4 pa J (ou s 1 t r L O R r ar>r r s -r-t4gs- vA u c,T XC AL) FIT rdr1 (S 7 tATVD IIJ Or -r- IL) ro i) QS R% 1rt i / LAM t,Je et to r e! d er i Q e r_ Tt L L, OU R Pi2_oAh c 1,. ry e4.5@ `" c-(L? ADE WcTA% 12 Sr- F L PikS4 -1 (2 D S640t_rfi.0 PctriF 72AreoJC OF Lacs . - r t - - 4 4 PJ 1 " . /t- S S c.� c� I t T LS 3 cA r2-- y 4 A T Trl1i ct f\ /Y.; saIc. s -eAst w e.-T pa07 076c? Spa. ct I (4?,o "JS 1 Po C'L M ItJ , ), d v to A L 6a CA/0ACtC #.. 1 W 2 0...0 cc c\A- nA fyd 14fe F xP Oss J A-. LLL T S r 4.0Aort 1 1 Pf o C7-6 / F 1LO nn ki6. ATI-174R i^)G. Qf Dc S7 tP •AQJCa 3y fi ck1 F.r- of 4, tt OF _4. 00 /dc && SpALCS. Received & Acknowledged by: Signed r KLEINFELDER / _ . he.. ■ 1 1 1 1 A i 1 i KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT IO.4 A The following was noted: Arr,r/al /0:•W Page,_ of _t-- DATE ,e-�% tC /2.8100 JOB NO. 600 `2,L,' PROJECT / .972‘' IP/' ii LOCATION CONTRACTOR ?Kc-P OWNER Tr %4a^ WEATHER // ref r-1-$/ �04t1�/ TEMP. 'at 'at AM PM PRESEN�TJJAT SITE 4/. S- L1 % fS PZee1 TYPE OF INSPECTION u , PALspvrd ce..eC.7'O:S a"7 3, e*J e74. Lk) ..tt e-XCOOR?/;nN /M fh Trt C--NIs -(O eedYCQ e- 0Ne[. II/iP west s 40 44.40e. M'JLtb . L94.0 �' VevetIG. t i aew a: douse_ fit_[t wm4 6-i-141- ici \i4 -,5441/7 � A*. ree+w•reP.e%a, sue. ot�e. topes 'f hmvr s hvoitt tifsrig. ripe. , t'> toe+ar e 94P wrS* teziat .9,/erP L AA B v A}[Ce P rG�tefotP•.it!O7ktoati of sat' /tI P•^ B 1 64-72 00 k/e_ At'c.s.561 fLe K e e i i( or leC / : / .$L.N 1 SoAltitaveit e'7 tit trate) .1.14 „�l.� c 2- ltn� a� 7 —t4L re..:c`a( s i CS 9 %e ev 1!' •fC ✓O_tA+ 7Z e P o'cre2`0/ fir AmP /H e.X CA'caf icse. nQp sowf t So u7 4 1 1 1 1 1 itelhG eats ;Ur Nat aD�,dctL$i,.tr �L419 L� Ofd utjNq o�` �Larst f ! - eel COON aft°.1 Z1 DO Lfi J nt e u ah/t? JCl4•.Stott C7 4 11 Ada 110 try time Ltd_. , ',&44.40. r 471- %Aw.A7t` r/� "r Ye- hJU //� A ( 4� ft°1 v •tv S71r4//e �� ••i ,p 3 atic 1: r te° /t! 1,4.sa/ rove_ H des 7 4G /el dy teluccwe. ee t .. 0 tX1( .se t[ezzos °C�. sNQ ?P . / KrO••q 00400/4/ It t --'t 1r' k,10 P v a l e , /IC la it /aft', •e 074- aObaO eic f• Sa..�ps .1 Ito e t / t o e asp •ya s&Vats by .04_2 /gpJ�1. MCM f1t ;MIPI•r Steel Yo Ales eY_ ?W NatVe 410 �M� le�IaiQ .RaSe re.e�. fries.a0 «tro. a'f� rspot �S Received & Acknowledged by: CO . I ■TCrwr+%/dl• l •\.T tC.( /' ''r --l- Signed: KLEINFELDER /"�ti,fl }-177-13 s-ia ``oo KLEINFELDER PROJECT Focj. SUBJECT l)i tJf &-A-cur v4f c, SHEET OF PROJECT NO. BY L9 5 Z— DAT Er/ a,r/Qo REVIEWED BY DATE WAS 11 )C. Sec +roi, 1t1.e ,,eicP• .J. -mss i 84 —68'6/ PI etote, UGc‘411— k e /C <E'K — WG co my O f kS on y Jats iiscos$ %eaeof -1, You. /7t. .14.-h ;e r atio.ttf 1,/ o.d .hou /d be a44.1..4e `11 f7OwPtJP�rJ_ -..f s e ;¢ se4,5; 0.4d 6 I - . fr. .,tc cok.o f 6e_ .e put, a ''-' {..at s q kd v45- .bte-.... ar.c -•i at... hf — Tti/S ea.. vw+E'aw ftiAt tu.1a t.3 /,..t 74o 4 P ..o/eciee 4 /.�.rt se i,1.1 )J 000 /bs/ ■, #-- So/ /'v*, 12dic &4 /c & D o ce at -5 640 - Ct4o( it2 e- oa '04'006)d C u 6 et. isork%P.1 ltAfrJP a + ti !S &41 ("4"';':. .$�!� • 1 1 1 K LEI.N FE , .fl r,.M, �'.. n.rx. ,� .. wvix' is ,.%.>;�.?M1"s;�`A:Vi.'!:Y!:r`kK, 4rtt t+. fi4: tr: f�pcM1Rt. r. n'.. xtin. ��w• uf. .�w...�ar.�..-- ...�•...._____.. . p,ROJECT AA DATE- :Z� Gt7 'gY ...; 5 23 d0 REVIEWED DATE • t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1._ i 1... 1 Received & Acknowledged by: Signed. I Page KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562 -4200 DAILY FIELD REPORT N10- 3 The following was noted: of DATE Sect PROJECT 571■Sft."P Aieikt JOB NO. hb -2 ©R'3 .-o1 LOC�ATION j .7-1415P CONTRACTOR ) CA^5 OWNER`, TEMP. 'at °at AM PM WEATHER C /1yv 4. RAOr4si PRESENT AT SITE j/� �, £4,i t°h.f Leef/ /'.S TYPE OF INSPECTION took o•r/,oh oe 14e east- s/e ft e,,,c I 1� �° 9 Ie ht?e..t_ et„t- G>7,e tP. -ct %fy Qt dad ( --C123/00 s. SW ad, /f ex mrJafiroy � t 11:5'0 hill s lop e LA �f *ITeicAlOU hi. of I l I G� e rcc t / /Otit S/ l �j - /WY to `uA✓ o- ' e 74y At.;// eu7 4), . 47 — 40440,011,1� t �� e0t,p M4g) VII. . GlAZ w i /f e(MA•i41'O 7L e‘cp -ue, c,4147iea1 ct•� KLEINFELDER At/ 17,2 44 /Merl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 KLEINFELDER 2405 - 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 562 -4200 (206) 562 -4201 (FAX) Email: gbeckham © kleinfelder.com FIELD REPORT Introduction PROJECT: Foster Heights Development FILE NO: 60- 2083 -01 CLIENT: Tridor, Inc. DATE: 5/22/00 LOCATION: Tukwila, WA REPORT NO: 2 WEATHER: Sunny, mild PERMIT NO: ARRIVAL TIME: DEPARTURE TIME: PREPARED BY: Gary D. Beckham, P.G. REVIEWED BY: James M. Schmidt, P.E. PURPOSE OF VISIT: Observe existing condition of cut slope for storm water vault Gary Beckham of Kleinfelder visited the Foster Heights project today at the request of Scott Wiklof of Tridor, Inc. and Ted Dahm of Advance Underground Construction. The purpose of our site visit was to evaluate a cut slope for a new storm water storage vault. The new vault location is adjacent to 51st Avenue South and just south of 144th Avenue SE in Tukwila, Washington. The vault area is at the easternmost location of the Foster Heights project. It is also the lowest elevation on the site. The new storm water vault is to be about 14 -feet wide by 82 -feet long and about 8 -feet high. It will be of cast - in -place concrete construction with a concrete lid. It will use conventional spread footings for wall foundations and will have a slab -on -grade floor. The vault excavation will be backfilled and the top (lid) of the vault mostly covered with fill upon completion of construction. Scope Tridor and Advanced Underground Construction asked Kieinfelder to evaluate the safety of the existing cuts 'or the new vault excavation and provide recommendations to improve the stability of the cut slopes if necessary. Field Activities and Conclusions We visited the site on May 22, 2000 to observe the existing cut slopes in the vault excavation. The excavation measured 24 -feet wide by 40 -feet long upon our arrival in the morning. The length of the excavation will likely extend to over 90 feet. We observed that the slopes (sidewalls) within the excavation were cut vertical. The vertical cut slopes range from 5 -feet high along the east side of the excavation to 15 -feet high along the west side of the excavation. The south wall of the excavation tapers from 15 -feet high down to about 8 -feet high. The north wall of the excavation was sloped at about 3H:1V (horizontal to vertical) during our site visit but the excavation is extending northward. The grade is nearly level from the east wall of the excavation to the edge of 51st Avenue South. The slope above the vertical south wall of the excavation extends upwards to the south property line at a slope exceeding a 1 H:1 V inclination. The distance from the south wall to the south property line is perhaps 15 to 20 linear feet. The slope above the vertical west wall of the excavation slopes at roughly 1 H:1 V upwards about 20 to 30 feet (slope distance). 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i i i i i s The geometry of the existing excavation is shown on Sheet 1, attached to this report. Soils exposed in and above the vault excavation consist of loose fill along the tops of the west and south slopes, weathered glacial till below the fill, and dense gray glacial till below these surficial units. Minor seepage of ground water was observed at the contact of the fill and weathered glacial till, and at the contact of the weathered glacial till and dense glacial till. We noted that the gray till is a heterogeneous mix of clayey silt, silty sand, and sand with silt. This unit is quite strong. The weathered till and overlying fill materials appear to be loose to medium dense and thus are not as strong as the underlying glacial till. Conclusions It is our opinion that the vertically cut slopes for the new storm water vault present an unsafe condition for workers building the new vault. We understand the vault excavation will stay open for 3 1/2 to 5 weeks. As such, there is a risk of spalling, sloughing and erosion of the vertically cut slopes during the period of construction. Recommendations We recommend that the side slopes of the temporary vault excavation be re- graded to reduce the risk of slope instability. Sheet 2, attached to this field report, shows our recommendations for reconfiguring the west slope Jf the excavation. The purpose of the additional cuts, as shown on Sheet 2, is to remove much of the overburden and fill soil immediately above the excavation. Additionally, the south wall of the excavation should be re- graded to no steeper than 1 H:1 V from the existing crest of the south cut slope upwards to the south property line. We recommend that Kleinfelder periodically evaluate the cut slopes during vault construction activities, especially the south and west cut slope areas. It may be necessary to make modifications to the actual cut slope inclinations (shown on Sheet 2) based on the performance of the slopes at the time of construction. This may include re- grading to somewhat flatter slope inclinations if necessary. The contractor should also observe the slope for signs of erosion, sloughing or spalling throughout the entire excavation and construction process. Kleinfelder can assist the contractor in identifying these signs of instability. Under no circumstances should earth compaction devices such as large vibratory compactors be used in the )xcavation as the vibrations from these types of machinery may induce slope instability. Once the vault is in place and the lid installed, backfilling of the space between the vault and excavation sidewalls can proceed. However, under no circumstance shall workers be allowed to work in the space between the vault and excavation sidewalls. Closing If there are questions regarding this field report, please call us at (425) 562 -4200. This report presents opinions formed as a result of our observation of activities and site conditions relating to our contracted scope of services with respect to construction. We rely on the contractor to comply with the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the presence of our representative. Our work does not include supervision or direction of the actual work of t'kti the contr�Y�,�, ployees or agents. Our firm will not be responsible for job or site safety on this project.'° xistino Cut Slope Conditions) & Sheet 2 (Recommended Slope Improvements? ^ 1L--. ridor & Ted Dahm Advanced Signed: Gary D. Beckham, PG 1111KLEINFELDER PROJECT T2 I D 4512, SUBJECT Pos- 2 N i S ,' T eyttST_ cotv0lTloNS W SHEET __1_ OF 1- PROJECT NO. 420- 2043 -o 1 L _ BY AIL a Kt4,4M yAUL'• cur REVIEWED BY S. 5 g4 454 813T r' • 1 a I..g at N� 0 • J J • r' 1 5 DATE_1AV DATE 5/23/60 Iti 0 3 fl. • EL KLEINFELDER PROJECT T2 I Del SUBJECT POST SR N i S . DE11GL EXIST_ SHEET. OF :— PROJECT NO. (,O- Z& -o► BY 'alt 14.4 AA DATE 5/22/47 �cND�T�o�1s -� w VAULT cur REVIEWED BY S. 5c 14 M IDJT DATE 5/23140 1 1 1 1 i 1 i t a i d t l 111 KLEI NFELDER 2405 - 140th Avenue NE, Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 562 -4200 (206) 562 -4201 (FAX) Email: gbeckham@kleinfelder.com FIELD REPORT Introduction PROJECT: Foster Heights Development FILE NO: 60- 2083 -01 CLIENT: Tridor, Inc. DATE: 5/16/00 LOCATION: Tukwila, WA REPORT NO: 1 WEATHER: Sunny, mild PERMIT NO: ARRIVAL TIME: DEPARTURE TIME: PREPARED BY: Gary D. Beckham, P.G. REVIEWED BY: Gary D. Beckham, P.G. PURPOSE OF VISIT: Site meeting and observe existing condition of pavement subgrade Mr. Gary Beckham of Kleinfelder visited the Foster Heights project today at the request of Scott Wikiof of Tridor, Inc. in order to observe the existing condition of the new road pavement subgrade. Mr. Wikiof authorized our services during a telephone call with Mr. Beckham on May 15, 2000. Scope Kleinfelder's services on this project are being completed on an On -Call basis. Specifically, the scope of our services include: 1. Review a February 10, 1998 geotechnical report for the site prepared by Geospectrum Consultants, Inc. for Mr. Richard Schroeder of Happy Valley Land Company. 2. Review project drawings and plans as provided to Kleinfelder by Tridor, Inc. 3. Provide on -call geotechnical consultation and earthwork - related construction monitoring at the site as specifically requested by Tridor, Inc. This may include evaluation of pavement subgrades, testing of backfill in utility trenches, consultation regarding site drainage (mostly the newly constructed rockery), and other earthwork - related issues as they arise. 4. Summarize our site observations, testing, conclusions and recommendations in field reports following each site visit. Field Activities and Conclusions Pavement Subgrade Conditions Kleinfelder observed the pavement subgrade for the new interior roads that are being constructed on the site. The subgrades are within 3 to 10 inches of planned subgrade elevations according to Ted Dahm of Advanced Underground, Inc., the earthwork contractor. The site soils comprising the pavement subgrade consist of fine to medium silty sand with fine to occasional coarse gravel and a few cobbles. The subgrade surface was mostly dry and dusty upon our arrival at the site today. We estimate that from 1/2 to 2 inches of loose silty sand dust covers most of the subgrades. We observed a considerable amount of woody debris in the subgrade. This material appears to be mostly roots and portions of tree and brush rootballs that have not yet been removed because the subgrades are still somewhat high (3 to 10 inches high as discussed above.) The woody debris occurs as scattered clumps and organic masses in the subgrade. The woody debris will cause unacceptable flexing of the pavements and must be removed prior to placing base and top course aggregates and pavement. Kleinfelder recommends that the existing subgrade be cut down to planned subgrade elevations and the exposed subgrade re- evaluated. If any remaining woody debris would risk pavement deflection and cracking in the future, we will recommend the removal of the woody debris. The earthwork contractor can visually inspect the subgrade surface and make necessary repairs as appropriate. Excavations to remove the woody debris should be backfilled with structural fill compacted to 95% of the max. Dry density (MDD) of the fill based on ASTMD -1557 methods. We observed proof rolling of the exposed pavement subgrades today using a fully - loaded (80,000 # plus) dump truck. We noted generally good subgrade conditions with little deflection of the subgrade soils under the weight of the dump truck. However, several areas were identified that exhibited vertical deflections greater than 1 -inch. These areas were either wet and /or contained woody debris. We also noted that an area of subgrade located at the north end of the entryway road (by the iorthernmost catch basin) consists of very wet to wet fill and /or native soils in a loose, yielding condition. These soils are not suitable for pavement subgrade support. We understand that Advanced Underground will make repairs to the wet, yielding areas as identified during proof rolling of the subgrade. We recommend that Kleinfelder re- evaluate the exposed subgrade after the subgrade has been graded to near subgrade elevations as described above. Any soft/loose, excessively wet areas remaining must be repaired prior to placing aggregate and pavement. Repairs should consist of removal of no more than 2 vertical feet of wet soil and replacement of the soil with structural fill compacted to 95% of the max. Dry density (MDD) of the fill based on ASTMD -1557 methods. We recommend that dust accumulating on the pavement subgrades be minimized. If more than 1 to 2 inches of dust accumulate, this material should be removed. If Tess than 2 inches of dust collects, then the contractor can water the subgrade, let the water stand for a minimum of 30 minutes (to allow the dust to soak up the water), then static roll the subgrade (no vibration) to firm the subgrade soils. Rockery along West Side of Site We observed a recently constructed 2 to 6 -foot high rockery along the west side of the property. We noted that the slope above the rockery has not yet been graded to a 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical) inclination and currently is vertical in some areas. We recommend the slope above the rockery be graded in accordance with project plans as soon as possible as the current vertical inclination is, in our opinion, susceptible to failure. If the slope cannot be graded to specifications soon, we recommend the slope be protected from rainfall and that no stockpiling of soil or cutting of trenches at the crest of the slope be permitted without geotechnical review of existing slope conditions at that time. We also observed a significant amount of water seepage coming from the toe of the rockery. This water will tend to soften the existing pavement subgrades and will always be a source of possible problems if not conveyed to approved storm water drainage facilities. We recommend that a shallow trench (no deeper or wider than 12- inches) be cut along the toe of the rockery and backfilled with compacted clear (clean) 1 1/4-inch crushed rock. The trench bottom should be sloped at a minimum of 1% to gravity drain towards the nearest catch basin. It may be necessary to place a perforated pipe in the trench to convey the water to the catch basin. In no way should washed rounded rock be used for the trench backfill. The trench should not remain open (without crushed rock backfill) for more than a few minutes at a time to reduce the risk of rockery movement. Recommendations We understand that the previous geotechnical consultant recommended that the entire pavement subgrade be over - excavated about 12 inches to remove unsuitable subgrade soils. In our opinion, this recommendation is premature without evaluation of the subgrade once it has been cut to planned subgrade elevation. We recommend that Kleinfelder re- evaluate the pavement subgrade after the subgrade has been cut to planned grades and the repairs recommended above have been made. Closing Thank you for the opportunity to assist you with this very interesting project. If you have additional questions or problems, please don't hesitate to contact us. This report presents opinions formed as a result of our observation of activities and site conditions relating to our contracted scope of services with respect to construction. We rely on the contractor to comply with the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project Irrespective of the presence of our representative. Our work does not include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor, his employees or agents. Our firm will not be responsible for Job or site safety on this project. Attachments: Distribution: Signed: S Gary D. Beckham, PG 1 C.,aA • VAL) L.T. 121*(24 CirOaAL FT t L 77 „--.. . ,---6 ,T77:-./ :1 that the Plar. subject to errors and ornispr;;i1 pp,rovol of plans does not authorize tl-i )10 adopted code or ordinance. Receipt of n- tractor's copy of approved plans acknowledged. By---... V.* 1■•■•11.11.10. Date. Permit No. CITY OF TUKWILA APPROVED MAY 0 8 2000 As rio I 1..1) BUILDtNTEIc10N. Miles Consulting 14400 Bel-Red Road Suite 105 Bellevue, WA 98007 ifY\ rinetieZe7. flfl MAR —82000 REIO MIDDLETON -P 0220 roect 60c-isc location Lp, UJk cl.enl RECEIVED APR 2 5 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • RECEIVED CITY OF TI net DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CEtv YEA; sneel no COO lit job no DETENTION TANK DESIGN: Design loads are for the actual dead loads, an HS20 vehicle, ASSHTO distributed, and soil depth has determined from the Civil Engineering Plans. Construction work to be in accordance with latest edition of UBC Reinforced Concrete & include inspections per Sect 108; 1. All concrete work phases and strength. 2. Special inspection by Geotechnical Engineer confirming assumed soils parameters. 3. Any fill placed below footings or slab has sufficient compaction to at least 95% ASTM D -1557. Prior to excavation the Contractor will determine if any underground utilities exist in the area of work. Tank foundations have been designed based on; Allowable Bearing 1000 PSF Soil Weight 120 PCF Active Earth Pressure 35 PCF (Retaining) Active Earth Pressure 65 PCF (Restrained) Passive Earth Pressure 250 PCF (50% when saturated) Coef. of Friction .40 (SF= 1.5) Foundation excavation shall extend into undisturbed soil. Should filling occur it will be place to 95% compaction and shall be inspected for adequacy. Back- filling of the walls shall be accomplished using a free draining material. When required, a sub -drain should be installed to carry away any local ground water which might accumulate in the back -fill or pond behind wall. Raise fill evenly around tank to prevent overloading walls at any specific point. Concrete construction for cast -in -place concrete shall be inspected and tested. The concrete shall attain a minimum 28 day strength of fc'= 3000 psi. Use of add mixtures shall have Owner approval. (Strength required to back - fill.) Reinforcing steel shall conform to ASTM A- 615 -68, Grade 60. Lap splices shall be a minimum of 30 bar diameters. Fy= 60,000 psi. All horizontal reinforcing bars in walls shall be lapped around the corners. The reinforcing shall be protected by minimum cover as detailed on the plans, or when not detailed per UBC Concrete Construction. Finish of exterior walls exposed to view shall be free of defects, detrimental cracks, or honey combs and where required shall be sacked finished for uniform appearance. Corners shall have chamfers or radius finished edges. CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER 1 .1 (0NSITE • THE INV= 380.00 ( ) ' INV= 377.00 ( ) •E'r;!$Tn d_1.,2.x: STORti4:.D AIN • Fr'CCSS :PAVING. :A /; • YARD / DRAIN e 8', FOOTING � I ACCESS ■ANHOLE. TYP. z w a. i T [RAIN VALVE 1 1 • • BLICI I d,1 ' fir! {, t 125' PUBLIC � � 40.----... i DRAINAGE • _ • ASEN)T riN / C5k•2,TiiPEI' -145 RIM= 384/0± INV =37�j .67 (12'_V IN's!= 3)3.28 (6 dy ZEE) RECEIVED // ( CITY OF TUKWILP •1 SAWCUT ANC MATCH EMS' PAVING' 'C8 1, TYPE I CON .STRUCT OV EXISTIt'IG SD /'" RIM= 376.23 (l / INV = 373.0*'. (V TO VAULT CON i WM j )EC 71999 O vi A n 0 W O J z� O J Z > ZO 0 a zo ~ U O 0� 00 O 01- • m 0-1"10 ce .0 ?a • Q z� V) UJ F- La v c• 33 W W ce a Ire t••- 0 Z � O IY 2 O w2 8 W -a• fnVf U uj o l2 c o Z "via9,1-. W QYmzi ' _.apOCr zva�0- Z IWa��'' O•••�-•v'x • Onp00. ZZUV. QwaO pm <O 0 J <c40‹" W CL CL OQOO,N .. jttJ a�±m0. wav) 5. N N • a'JQ� -1 0.> > >a • - >cV >r4 RECEIVED ,CITY OFTU <WIL-A ',- DEC, 7'1999. PERMIT CENTER . RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA ,appy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 allowable static passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth may be used for the sides of footings poured against undisturbed dense /hard natural soils or properly compacted structural fill above the water table. Where passive bearing soils are saturated, the above passive pressures should be reduced by 50 %. The vertical and lateral bearing values indicated above are for the total dead load plus frequently applied live loads. For short duration dynamic loading caused by seismic or wind forces, the vertical and lateral bearing values may be increased by 33 percent. Drainage Control Surface drainage from the adjoining upslope areas should be controlled and diverted around the site area in a non - erosive manner. Adequate positive drainage should be provided away from the structure and on the site in general to prevent water from ponding and to reduce percolation of water into subsoils. Granular backfill should be capped with at least 6 inches of onsite silt soils. A desirable slope for surface drainage is 2% in landscaped areas and 1% in paved areas. Design wall pressures given above assume no water pressure behind the walls. We • recommend that a drainage zone be provided behind all retaining walls and a adequate drain system be provided at the base of all retaining walls. As a minimum, the drainage zone should be at least 1/2 the wall height. Backfill within the drainage zone should be a clean sand /gravel mixture with less than 5 percent fines based on the sand fraction. A membrane of Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent should be provided between the drainage zone material and onsite silty soil backfill. Wall drains should consist of a four -inch diameter perforated PVC drain pipe placed in at least one cubic foot of drain gravel per lineal foot along the base of the wall. Drain gravel should be washed material with particle sizes in the range of 314 to 1-1/2 inches. The drainage zone backfill should be capped with 12 inches of silty sand soils to reduce surface water infiltration. Silt ladened water from dewatering operations should be discharged into a de- silting basin located in an undisturbed site area. The de- silting basin should be constructed using Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent material supported by a fence structure capable of supporting 3 feet of water. The lower edge of the filter fabric should have "J" shaped embedment in a trench extending at least 12 inches below the ground surface. If the filter fabric becomes plugged with silt to the point that outflow seepage is less than required, a second identical filter fabric barrier should be constructed around the primary basin and the water allowed to spill over the top of the inside wall into the secondary filter basin. This procedure should be repeated as required during the course of the construction. Project No. 98- 103 -02 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT cjgydr 8 'nappy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 . encountered in Boring 1, our stability analyses indicate that the construction excavation cut should be made no steeper than 1.75:1 (h:v). As recommended above, close observations of the exposed subsoils and cut slope stability should be made by our office during the construction excavation to further evaluate the conditions so that supplemental recommendations can be provided if warranted. Although no measurable ground water levels developed while the bore holes were open during drilling at the site, we did encounter very moist and wet soils near the base of the fill soils and within the deeper soils in elevation range of about 386 to 376 feet. Therefore we expect that there will be some seepage from the construction cut slope primarily in the lower elevations. The saturated soils may also be unstable at the cut slope surface, requiring more gentle slope gradients or surface treatment. Control of seepage and erosion will be the contractors responsibility but typical methods include collection trenches and pumped sumps and surface stabilization with quarry spalls or similar material. Design of the detention vault must include a drainage system and the backfill must include a drainage zone to collect and discharge subsurface seepage water. RECOMMENDATIONS The following subsections present our geotechnical recommendations for site grading, retaining wall design, site drainage and erosion control. Also included are recommendations for final plan review and observations and testing during construction. Site Grading Site grading is expected to be limited primarily to excavation for detention vault construction and backfill of the detention vault retaining wall. Construction Excavation Design: Subsoil conditions at the site are variable and may differ from those encountered in the borings and therefore our office should observe the excavation in progress. Based on the conditions encountered in our borings it is our opinion that sloped temporary construction excavations should be no steeper than 1.75:1 (horizontal:vertical) and flatter slopes may be required to control sloughing from saturated soil zones. Where there is not enough room for sloped excavations, shoring should be provided. It should be noted that the contractor is responsible for maintaining safe construction excavations. Structural Fill: Excavated onsite sand /silty sand soils are considered suitable for general wall backfill but may not be adequately free- draining for use in the retaining Project No. 98- 103 -02 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC Flag Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 wall drainage zone. The onsite silt materials are considered unsuitable for wall backfill. Imported granular fill should consist of clean, well - graded sand and gravel materials free of organic debris and other deleterious material. In general imported material should have a maximum particle size of 3 inches and less than 15 percent fines but material for the wall drainage zone should have less than 5 percent fines based on the sand fraction. Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D1557 -91 test method. Loose and disturbed soils, formwork and debris should be removed prior to placing structural fill or backfill. Permanent Slope Design: All permanent cut and backfill slopes above the water table should be made no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). All permanent fill slopes should be constructed using properly compacted structural fill. Graded cut slopes and any other exposed soil areas should be planted immediately with grass and deep rooted plants to help reduce erosion potential. Retaining Walls Cantilevered retaining walls as referred to in this report are walls which yield or move outward during and after backfilling. Actual wall movements will depend on the wall design and method of backfilling and can range from 0.1% to 0.3% of the wall height. Design pressures for cantilevered walls given below assume that the top of the wall will deflect at least 0,2% of the wall height. 9 Static design of permanent cantilevered retaining walls which support a horizontal surface of properly compacted clean free - draining granular backfill surface with a gradient 2:1 (h:v) or flatter may be based on an equivalent fluid density of 65 pcf. These pressures assume that there is no water surface behind the wall. A uniform lateral pressure due to backfill surcharge should be computed using a coefficient of 0.4 times the uniform vertical surcharge Toad. Seismic design of retaining walls should include a dynamic soil loading. Dynamic soil pressure should be assumed to have an inverted triangular distribution. The dynamic soil pressure at the top of the wall should be at least 20H (psf) where H is the height of the wall above the footing base. The dynamic soil pressure should diminish linearly to zero at the base of the wall. Combined static plus dynamic soil pressure should be used for seismic design of the walls. Project No. 98- 103 -02 i •.- �.CIVCI. '. TY OF TUKW DEC 7 1999 • PERMIT CENTER CEN 6 1 Nappy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 Care should be exercised in compacting backfill against retaining walls. Heavy equipment should not approach retaining walls close enough to intrude within a 1:1 line drawn upward from the bottom of the wall. Backfill close to walls should be placed and compacted with hand - operated equipment. Recommendations for placement and compaction of structural fill are presented under "Site Grading ". Design wall pressures given above assume no water pressure behind the walls. We recommend that a drainage zone be provided behind all retaining walls and a adequate drain system be provided at the base of all retaining walls. As a minimum, the drainage zone should be at least 1/2 the wall height. Backfill within the drainage zone should be a clean sand /gravel mixture with less than 5 percent fines based on the sand fraction. A' membrane of Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent should be provided between the drainage zone material and onsite silty sand soil backfill. Wall drains should consist of a six -inch diameter perforated PVC drain pipe placed in at least one cubic foot of drain gravel per lineal foot along the base of the wall. Drain gravel should be washed material with particle sizes in the range of 3/4 to 1 -1/2 inches. The drainage zone backfill should be capped with 12 inches of silty sand soils to reduce surface water infiltration. Conventional spread footing foundations founded on undisturbed dense to very dense /hard natural soils may be used for support of retaining walls. Design of wall foundations should be in accordance with the recommendations presented below under "Spread Footings" Spread Footings Conventional spread footings founded on undisturbed dense to very dense natural silty sand soils or very stiff /hard natural silt soils should provide good support for the proposed detention vault. Footings should be deepened as required to penetrate any loose /disturbed soils or fill to bear on undisturbed dense to very dense /hard natural soils. The depth to bearing soils may vary and all footing excavations should be observed by this office to verify the bearing soils. All footings should be founded at least 12 inches into the bearing soils and at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Continuous wall footings should be sized by the structural engineer as required for stability but should be at least 24 inches wide. Footings should be stepped as necessary to provide a level bearing surface. Based on the likelihood of submerged conditions developing below the wall foundations wall footings should be designed based on a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 1000 psf which includes a reduction for submerged conditions. Resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be assumed with the net dead load forces in contact with on -site sand §q.i .TU r,I Project No. 98- 103 -02 DEC Pals "r9 PERMIT CENTER tt. • 1 •.Sn.a.. +v.••wvini +(WIYI •Y•� +MnrPy.�,t.m..r.y...._ ,..�.......... RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER . t i ;3 4N\ —.� _...._....,,..r.....axww.nubti Q VALL.Le Cfrord Co . _ (3-0 tic 1 t t4 , .63 AQ44 -V C-A- q�c z7 OA' GlAvoict r•, t.0 (L 8z .745 \Z1 CITY OF TUKWIIA DEC 71999 SEA :Ps 38z•Go bezc , • 1' y ,E, -mil, Rt V /UL' w\\ c-4- Avilot A L l Arc eQteD 1,i A.* A)LeT 2A tc LLCIL., "T a %AO CA' 10 g Z l S Z( _.�.. O 2�iy �. 8 CITY OF TIUKWILA aEee) (1 44 c2?--eviaZt tC:CD:Deo.5: -21162)-r- &./e) tAl/t, k.k 2,o) L.. L. DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER 41 1 c11,17:6 tilft zo% .......5749.5 600 (1) 10 t -5o i-Fo C.$) -.( ) �(LA on c veN-Loz- 446 (\c‘.,(...ca, L.-tit/NO-a 02DittIVA &SC, C080 i) X 7 73 iL3 :it CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 71999 koc,o (26.-E o (4) 2 500 't.loc R.c/r o 't *� :� 2D( 2zcD 42ric L Pegr6L-V2A(i, • qp? 220 (t6 z etv .5cAS4 +6C1 Crz.l Cpco'5 d_` r �h Z k .1 w05 --1 `Z 10 iCp os2 (� �- `.� DYZ `zt.2 v t N. (-€J-N-Yv iturro vz. .4i!)ce) 15 L4S)-A-r0 W■PrTttle-. 2-01 1/14%, CAW- rig- 3-7 (5 %4) `I t)t--t) (' 7.1-7 (vat --a,S) (V\C, e ti€ ` O eo t toL v2`` WAt✓L cl t©" t'z (to GoccpcD c .tv. 4.29 zo'b Nea 4, 9(.i icy @ it" .44 rtCVGVUKINCV CITY OF TILA DEC 7 1999 PEPAAIT •rr.rTPP 1 y <t `. ToP (c) Z ( vi Lt t/ Lt. L c •61 m P(.. pri CO/ V O ck Kji,1 V iSc.. '(1, 11/441) Ls Z1 4%000705 q(c)0047vI 6tAt Co' LAIR. lv(tZo) = 7 ( 6d L. \fix. iguva - 1(* fri a) z .,42`-zc� ScApd f7ZU4'I r:22Y) Z, z i 4 301 cD 5 ADL- VVIy T.. 6(-)A..70 4 \Z 4 r..:... ..ci.e... rt..' };3<•`!)hnfl4.,y.y;..:., r�.eaann rlwv.+m .e.nr.a, L� vet.. 1... 6/(9-me i 1". --rco --rcz..t4rc FAC.: , AMMTO Lqo 01-64-e-x.. 41-e0c-N) 117. Aid 2-tD :T?2-u CAC.. w :OD 4 L 1Cc - 4,0 L • L 'Z` q© S°2 1c. (V.Z. +' `z , �i�) 47.0 (0 14.C14 -7,n =. s1,c��', VwC 4}00 cc T. C42AtA46& r 51/7. (4w 6 7•_-Cl-in) Z. 12(6Y * St Pi sC4 ►z t4) 1.9 6 woo) &D t'�CS���L Y F TU/_ y CITY O KWILA „el Cod Ti.as co" _ /OP DEC.. 7 1999, PERMIT CENTER � �L- � 000 T. k J I 2.10Z )CD 12 ((O' 4.kt 60)4. rz: tt6 6" I (r w‘A' . ,/ LS z =. e► DL _1 �� q�. z LL .�'ZbQ. s56 e..144(te21q 4(.7 '% J I (4(o (PcD -= 17.45( 4L z 6-7G1) 10.456/1 175J62,.t5�1E &Drv. I5cD C 2' 6(--) kik) Xe6,L,Ao_0.7...,,C344::)C4E3 1d(� c)ate)(tz)(t'z, • 2(c. tel LAr‘ez g I ""a RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 .1999 loc4'U c.J 11) (' L&y ,L. ©o 11--01/.\ 00 is (r ) lip,) peref-c 6 Z� �Cp , r A) l vn J ►c'1 (ti6 ,0‹, O (GAL c Wit z. cQdcco. x,41 rtkce/ , fccl aeg,7T" (•� (7J_ 14" cLakt1 (rvz 170 • `Z,(aiA-1 (17)(4 7."(t) t4 c(? � 2� c at `-2) 224 CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER 601 -_-- 1 (0-0C. . ,WA-W2 (17g1)(11) 6,0cD "1z96 2411-04e1.* Cm 4f) INC-6-c(C:VO — 0•CI -CD 2-oL.A i)ttuG g)re....cAt 1a� cui Pik-i.1(/(1- Zlii-e)te-011\-rvOric.- ec \--70& 2� t � < < 42-5S4-4- <o c5 Cvo 4 67`) 7 (4) scrE V- 6) 30(0v, ,-!I TA' TUK4u11.� DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER eil so0Q rlektWt- B5 (Z)/ 4+nca ( 1 2 t.4-1 Csttoc. AszistD all so («.J c, Do∎B� to • Joet, @ lz" P • 1 &kJ ( • gvg 00‘217/)(m) E 1 '5g id` 4t5(z..- RECEIVED OF TUKWILA Cliy DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER i 414 HIGHWAY BRIDGES App. A LOADING HS 20-44 TABLE OF MAXIMUM MOMENTS, SHEARS AND REACTIONS. - SIMPLE SPANS, ONE LANE Spans in feet; moments in thousands of foot - pounds; shears and reactions in thousands of pounds. These values are subject to specification reduction for loading of multiple lanes. ' Impact not included. End shear End shear and end and end Span Moment reaction (a) Span Moment reaction (a) 1 8.0(b) 32.0(b) 42 .. 485.3(b) 56.0(b) 2 16.0(b) 32.0(b) 44 520.9(b) 56.7(b) 3 24.0(b) 32.0(b) 46 556.5(b) 57.3(b) 4 32.0(b) 32.0(b) 48 592.1(b) 58.0(b) 5 40.0(b) 32.0(b) 50 627.9(b) 58.5(b) 6 48.0(b) 32.0(b) 52 663.6(b) 59.1(b) 7 56.0(b) 32.0(b) 54 699.3(b) 59.6(b) 8 64.0(b) 32.0(b) 56 735.1(b) 60.0(b) 9 72.0(b) 32.0(b) 58 770.8(b) 60.4(b) 10 80.0(b) 32.0(b) 60 806.5(b) 60.8(b) 11 88.0(b) 32.0(b) 62 '842.4(6) 61.2(b) 12 96.0(b) 32.0(b) 64 878.1(b) 61.5(b) 13 104.0(b) 32.0(b) 66 914.0(b) 61.9(b) 14 112.0(b) 32.0(b) 68 949.7(b) 62.1(b) 15 120.0(b) 34.1(b) 70 985.6(b) 62.4(b) 16 128.0(b) 3R.0(b) 75 1,075.1(b) 63.f(b) 17 136.0(b) 37.7(b) 80 1,164.9(b) 63.6(b) 18 144.0(b) 39.1(b) 85 1,254.7(b) 64.1(b) 19 .. • 152.0(b) 40.4(b) 90 1,344.4(b) 64.5(b) 20 160.0(b) 41.6(b) 95 1,434.1(b) 64.9(b) 21 168.0(b) 42.7(b) 100 1.524.0(b) 65.3(b) 22 . .... 176.0(b) 43.6(b) 110 1,703.6(b) 65.9(b) 23 184.0(b) 44.5(b) 120 1,883.3(b) 66.4(b) 24 192.7(b) 45.3(b) 130 2,063.1(b) 67.6 25 207.4 (b) 46.1(b) 140 2,242.8(b) 70.8 96 222.2(b) 46.8(b) 150 2,475.1 74.0 27 237.0(b) 47.4(b) 160 2,768.0 77.2 28 252.0(b) 48.0(b) 170 3,077.1 80.4 29 267.0(b) 48.8(b) 180 3,402.1 83.6 30 282.1 (b) 49.6 (b) 190 ... 3,743.1 86.8 31 297.3 (b) 50.3 (b) 200 4,100.0 90.0 32 312.5(b) 51.0(b) 220 4,862.0 96.4 33 327.8(b) 51.6(b) 240 5,688.0 102.8 34 343.5(b) 52.2(b) 260 6,578.0 109.2 35 361.2(b) 52.8(b) 280 7,532.0 115.6 RECEIVED 'Iry Or TUKWII A 36 378.9(b) 53.3(b) 300 8,550.0 122.0 37 396.6(b) 53.8(b) DEC 7 1999 38 414.3(b) 5 /.3(b) 39 432.1(6) 54.8(6) 40 449.8(b) 55.2(b) (a) Concentrated Load is considered placed at the support. Loads used are those stipulated PERMIT CENTER for shear. (b) Maximum value determined by Standard Truck Loading. (One HS truck). Otherwise the Standard Lane Loading governs. BHP Steel Building Products USA Inc. B -36 Roof Deck B -36 — Allowable Reactions fpif) Gauge Bearing Length Gauge S- (1n3) 1" 11/2 ") 2' 121/2" 0.180 3" 31 :2" 4" 0.220 P2 416 468 520 572 625 677 729 3.36 1007 1103 1213 1363 1513 1663 1813 20 700 776 853 929 1005 1082 1158 65 1495 1617 1739 1897 2088 2280 2472 18 1443 1568 1693 1818 1943 2068 2193 28 2734 2909 3084 3258 3436 3710 3985 16 2434 2608 2782 2957 3131 3305 3480 49 4350 4578 4806 5034 5262 5490 5786 1. The top value reflects the allowable reaction at the panel end supports. 2. The bottom value reflects the allowable reaction at the interior supports. 3. Values are in pounds per linear foot. 0 4 Welds 0 7 Welds The B -36 profile has been "enhanced" via physical testing to give you the highest dia- phragm shear values of any of our prior B- series profiles. These values are also among the highest in the industry. Nestable sidelap condition available; coverage equals 35 1/4 ". B 36— Section Pro erties Gauge I Weight (psf) 1 S+ (1n4) (In3) S- (1n3) 22 1.68 0.178 0.180 0.195 20 2.04 0.220 0.235 0.246 18 2.70 0.302 0.321 0.336 16 3.36 0.379 0.407 0.415 1. Section properties are based on minimum 38 ks1 steel (Fy). ED C " . "`VILA cl'DEC 7 1999 B 36— Allowable Total (DL + LL) Uniform Load (psf) �' rtnMl qtr Span Gauge Span trcr „l try i tr Condition 5'0” 5'6" 6'0' 6'6" 7'0" 7'6" 60" 66" 9'0" 9'6" 10'0" 22 Stress 109 90 76 65 56 49 43 38 34 30 27. Ddiection 93 70 54 42 34 28 23 19 16 14 12 20 Stress 143 118 99 85 73 64 56 49 44 40 36 Single Deflection 115 87 67 53 42 34 28 23 20 17 14 Span 18 Stress 195 161 136 115 100 87 76 68 60 54 49 Deflection 158 119 92 72 58 47 39 32 27 23 20 16 Stress 247 205 172 146 126 110 97 86 76 69 62 Deflection 199 149 115 90 72 59 49 40 34 29 25 22 Stress 119 98 82 70 60 53 46 41 37 33 30 Deflection 119 98 82 70 60 53 46 41 37 33 28 20 Stress 150 124 104 89 76 66 58 52 46 41 37 Double Deflection 150 124 104 89 76 66 58 52 46 41 35 Span 18 Stress 204 169 142 121 104 91 80 71 63 57 51 Deflection 204 169 142 121 104 91 80 71 63 56 48 16 Stress 252 209 175 149 129 112 99 87 78 70 63 Deflection 252 209 175 ' 149 129 112 99 87 78 70 60 22 Stress 148 122 103 88 76 66 58 51 46 41 37 Deflection 148 122 102 80 64 52 43 36 30 26 22 20 Stress 187 •155 130 111 95 83 73 65 58 52 47 Triple Deflection 187 155 126 99 79 65 53 44 37 32 27 Span 18 Stress 255 211 177 151 130 113 100 88 79 71 64 Deflection 255 , 211 173 136 109 89 73 61 51 44 37 16 Stress 315 261 219 187 161 140 123 109 97 87 79 Deflection 315 261 217 171 137 111 92 76 64 55 47 4 nn A I. -1 @Ai L•■• .......1J..J } • 1.2.6 DESIGN 17 cent, respectively, of loading 11 20. Loading HS 15 is 75 per cent of loading HS 20. If loadings of weights other than those designated are desired, they shall be obtained by proportionately changing the weights shown for both the standard truck and the corresponding lane loads. HS20 -44 HSIS -44 1,000 LDS. 1,000 LDS. s) di Cf 32,000 LaS.* 14,000 LDS. V 32.000 LBS.s 14,000 LOS. .1 1 MI • COMBINED WEIGHT ON THE FIRST TWO AXLES WHICH IS THE SAME AS FOR THE CORRESPONDING N TRUCK. V • VARIABLE SPACING — 14 FEET TO 30 FEET INCLUSIVE. SPACING TO DE USED IS THAT WHICH PRODUCES MAXIMUM STRESSES. I0-0• CLEAR ANO LOAD LANE WIDTH STANDARD HS TRUCKS 3C. 'T • 'rte FIGURE 1.2.56 • In the design of timber floors and orthottopie steel decks (excluding transverse beams) for BS20 loading, one axle load of 14,000 pounds or two axle loads of 11.000 pounds acb, spaced 4 feet apart may be rued, whichever produces the greater strew, instead of the 11,000 pound axle shown. •• For slab design the center line of wheels shall be assumed to be I toot from face of sorb, (Bee Alt 1.1.2(B) ) *Note: An HS 20 Lane Load is 640 # /LF for' 1p-:bo 10 feet +/ -. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER • .y A Q -Maxi System with B -36 Roof Deck Q -Max & — Allowable Reactions (pif) Gauge Bearing Length 1" 1 1 112" 2' 2 1r2" 1 3" 13 1/2"1 4' 22 416 1007 468 1103 520 1213 572 1363 625 1513 677 1663 729 1813 20 700 1435 776 1617 853 1739 929 1897 1005 2088 1082 2280 1158 2472 18 1443 2734 1568 2909 1693 3084 1818 3258 1943 3436 2068 3710 2193 3985 16 2434 4350 2608 4578 2782 4806 2957 5034 3131 5262 3305 5490 3480 5786 1. The top value reflec s the allowable reaction at the panel end supports. 2. The bottom value reflects the allowable reaction at the interior supports. 3. Values are in pounds per linear foot. BHP combines B -36 with our 16 gauge Shear Resistance Angie to offer a very cost effective roofing system which provides excellent resistance to lateral Toads. Q -Max®— Section Properties Gauge Weight 1 S+ S- Gauge (psf) (In4) (1n3) (1n3) 22 1.68 0,178 0.180 0.195 20 2.04 0.220 0.235 0.246 18 2.70 0.302 0.321 0.336 16 3.36 0,379 0.407 0.415 1. Section properties are based on minimum 38 ksi steel (Fy). RECEIVED CITY OF TUICWILA DEC -` 199# Q -Max® — Allowable Total (DL + LL) Uniform Load (psf) r't1 M17 CENTER Sian Condition Gauge 5'0" 5'6" 6'0" 6'6" 7'0" 7'6" 8'0" 8'6" 9'0" 9'6" 10'0" 22 Stress 109 90 76 65 56 49 43 38 34 30 27 Deflection 93 70 54 42 34 28 23 19 16 14 12 . 20 Stress 143 118 99 85 73 64 56 49 44 40 36 Single Deflectior 115 87 67 53 42 34 28 23 20 17 14 Span 18 Stress 195 161 136 115 100 87 76 68 60 54 T 49 Deflectior 158 119 92 72 58 47 39 32 27 23 20 16 Stress 247 205 172 146 126 110 97 86 76 69 62 Deflectior 199 149 115 90 72 59 49 40 34 29 25 22 Stress 119 98 82 70 60 53' 46 41 37 33 30 Deflection 119 98 82 70 60 53 46 41 37 33 28 20 Stress 150 124 104 89 76 66 58 52 46 41 37 Double Deflection 150 124 104 89 76 66 58 52 46 41 35 Span 18 Stress 204 169 142 121 104 91 80 r 71 63 57 51 Deflectior, 204 169 142 121 104 91 80 71 63 56 48 16 Stress 252 209 175 149 129 112 99 87 78 70 63 Deflection 252 209 175 149 129 112 99 87 78 70 60 22 Stress 148 122 103 88 76 66 58 51 46 41 37 Deflection 148 122 102 80 64 52 43 36 30 26 22 20 Stress 187 155 130 111 95 83 73 65 58 52 47 Triple Deflection 187 155 126 99 79 65 53 44 37 32 27 Span 18 Stress 255 211 177 151 130 113 100 88 79 71 64 Deflectior 255 211 173 136 109 89 73 61 51 44 37 16 Stress 315 261 219 187 161 140 123 109 97 87 79 Deflection 315 261 217 171 137 111 92 76 64 55 47 1. Stress based on allowable flexural stress of 22.8 ksi. 3. Adequate bearing must be provided. 3HP Steel Building Products USA Inc. F'cor Oeck Accessories and Standard Cetails Profile Closures We offer steel small void and large vcid closures for cur !loot deck profiles. Small Void "Z" Closure 1" 1 1/2" I (--- 4- 1 Varies (Based on deck height) T Edge Form at the Parallel Condition , Stud locations Edge Form Filler Plate 1" I Varies Based on Gauge) Filler Plate 1" E- Varies Not to exceed 8" (clear span) t Va ies (Based on slab height) 1 . 0 . , 0 Cell Closure 1" Varies (Based on deck height) 1 4--- Edge Form at the Perpendicular Condition •7''� 0 •0. C 0. c1TY of TuKV j, Cell Closure DEC 7 'v: •• : . G 1999 : • o•• • 0 •.•:O r 00 0' o : • :o. I� PER. ERMIT CENTER i 11,1 0 Cell Closure 1" Varies (Based on deck height) 1 4--- Edge Form at the Perpendicular Condition •7''� 0 •0. C 0. c1TY of TuKV j, Cell Closure DEC 7 'v: •• : . G 1999 : • o•• • 0 •.•:O r 00 0' o : • :o. I� PER. ERMIT CENTER GEOSPEOT RUM CONSULT TS, INC. Gec techr,/00/ ri rth Sc/ July 5, 1999 Mr. Richard Schroeder Happy Valley Land Company P.O. Box 1324 Issaquah, WA 98027 SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATIONS Proposed Storm Water Detention Vault Foster Heights Plat Development 51st Avenue South and South 146th Street Tukwila, Washington Project No. 98- 103 -02 Dear Richard, RECE0yE MAR - 8 2000 REID MIDDLETON This report presents the results of our geotechnical evaluation of the subject proposed detention vault. Our work was performed in accordance with the conditions of our proposal dated May 19, 1999. The purpose of our work was to provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed detention vault retaining walls and foundations. We were provided preliminary plans of the proposed vault structure by Baima & Holmberg, Inc. which were used as a reference for our subsurface exploration program. The preliminary plans indicated three possible vault configurations with invert elevations ranging from about 375 to 380+ feet. We were subsequently provided a final vault configuration which will be a rectangular cast concrete structure approximately 12 feet high and 12 feet wide by 80 feet long. The final subgrade is indicated to be about elevation 372 feet. We have previously prepared a geotechnical evaluation report for the general Foster Heights development dated February 10, 1998 which we used as a reference for our site evaluations. We were also provided a copy of a recent report of subsurface conditions within South 146th Street, dated March 3, 1999, prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., which was also used as a reference. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 71999 .... •, ___I _.o... ,._.., ....,� r, LJ Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 SCOPE OF WORK Our geotechnical evaluation included site reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, engineering evaluations and the preparation of this report. The scope of work included the following specific tasks: o Reviewed our previous report for the general plat development and the referenced recent report by Geotech Consultants. o Performed a site reconnaissance to observe the surface conditions at the detention vault site. o Drilled two borings at the site to explore the subsurface conditions. Approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2' and logs of the borings are included in Appendix A. o Performed engineering evaluations of the site conditions observed and encountered in our explorations to develop geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed detention vault. o Prepared this geotechnical report summarizing our findings and recommendations. OBSERVED SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The detention vault site is located within Tots 10 and 11 of the Foster Heights development (previously lots 15 and 16) at the east edge of the property adjacent to 51st Avenue South. The site vicinity is moderately to steeply inclined down to the east. The topography of Figure 1 approximately depicts the local pre - development site conditions as well as our understanding of the proposed detention vault location. However at the time of our explorations, the site topography had been significantly modified by your contractor reportedly during installation of a drain line just west of the vault location approximately at the drain location shown on Figure 1. The cut and fill grading has essentially obliterated the pre- existing driveway and created a terrace -like bench along the drain alignment. Project No. 98- 103 -02 CITY RECEIVED T WILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER Page 2 Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 Subsoils Subsurface conditions were explored by drilling two exploratory borings within the site area. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 1. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at each boring as well as laboratory test results are presented on the boring Togs in Appendix A. Our observations of the soil samples from the borings indicated that the slope is generally composed primarily of upper granular soils which overlie deeper silt soils. The shallow soils at the boring locations were loose silty sand and appeared to be fill soils. In Borings 1 and 2 we encountered 3.5 feet and 5.5 feet .respectively, of loose silty sand fill soils with organics and debris. In Boring 1 we encountered dense to very dense natural silty sand and gravel soils below the fill soils, however at a depth of about 14 feet we encountered a strata of loose, wet clayey fine sand with gravel that extended down to a depth of about 20 feet. Below the loose clayey sand, silt soils were encountered to the maximum depth of the boring (31.5 feet). The silt soils were soft and wet at their upper surface but became very stiff /hard within 5 feet of the top of the strata. The natural soils encountered in Boring 2 below the fill were generally medium dense to very dense silty fine sand with gravel to the maximum depth of the boring (14 feet). The boring was terminated due to practical refusal of the drilling auger in the very dense silty fine sand with gravel. Ground Water Conditions No measurable ground water accumulation was observed in either of the two borings during drilling although we did encounter very moist to wet soils in both borings near the base of the fill and in the elevation range from about 386 to 376 feet. Moisture contents of selected subsoil samples were measured to be in the range of about 8 to 26 percent of dry weight. Generally the moisture content of fill soils was high (15+ percent) as was the very moist/wet soils and the underlying silt soil samples (15 to 26 percent). Subsurface Variations Based on our experience, it is our opinion that some variation in the continuity and depth of subsoil deposits and ground water levels should be anticipated due to natural deposition variations and previous onsite grading. Due to seasonal moisture changes, ground water conditions should be expected to change with time. Care should be exercised when interpolating or extrapolating subsurface soils and groundReogtgg CITY OF TUKWILA conditions between or beyond our borings. DEC 7 1999 Project No. 98- 103 -02 Page 3 PERMIT CENTER Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 SITE EVALUATION Site Geology The geologic map referenced in our previous report does not indicate any known landslides in the site vicinity and our observations of the existing site revealed no indications of recent or current instability. The geologic map referenced in our previous report indicates the site to expose glacial till (Qt) soils. The referenced map describes the Qt soils as intimately graded mixture of clay to gravel sized soils. The glacial till was deposited during the advance of the Vashon glaciation, the last glacial advance into the Puget Sound area, approximately 13,000 to 16,000 years ago. The soils encountered in our borings are generally appeared to be glacial till -like soils consistent with the geologic mapping however there appears to be significant variations in the subsoil conditions over relatively small spatial distances in the site vicinity. Our previous explorations of the upper portion of the development west of Tots 10 and 11 encountered sandy silt and silty very fine sand soils which were typically weathered, soft/loose and very moist to wet in the upper 2 to 3 feet becoming very stiff to hard below those depths. Review of the boring logs from the referenced Geotech Consultants report drilled only about 150 feet to the south encountered primarily very stiff /hard silt soils to depths of 20+ feet with only 5 feet or Tess of overlying silty sand soils. In our Boring 1 we encountered very dense silty sand soils overlying an anomalous strata of loose, wet clayey sand and soft, wet silt soils which was underlain very stiff /hard silt soils. In addition, although Boring 2 was drilled only about 45 feet from Boring 1 and extended to an elevation of about 10 feet below the top of the loose clayey sand strata, and 4 feet below the soft silt strata, no loose /soft soils were encountered at that location. The subsurface information developed to date leads to the conclusion that the wet, loose /soft soils encountered in Boring 1 are either an anomalous localized condition or that soil strata are steeply sloped down to the east in the site area. Close observations of the exposed subsoils and cut slope stability should be made by our office during the construction excavation to further evaluate the conditions so that supplemental recommendations can be provided if warranted. Construction Considerations We understand that the base of the proposed detention vault will be at approximately elevation 372 and assume that the construction excavation will most likely will extend to about elevation 370. Considering the presence of the loose /soft, wet soils Project No. 98- 103 -02 CITY RECEIVED Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 encountered in Boring 1, our stability analyses indicate that the construction excavation cut should be made no steeper than 1.75:1 (h:v). As recommended above, close observations of the exposed subsoils and cut slope stability should be made by our office during the construction excavation to further evaluate the conditions so that supplemental recommendations can be provided if warranted. Although no measurable ground water levels developed while the bore holes were open during drilling at the site, we did encounter very moist and wet soils near the base of the fill soils and within the deeper soils in elevation range of about 386 to 376 feet. Therefore we expect that there will be some seepage from the construction cut slope primarily in the lower elevations. The saturated soils may also be unstable at the cut slope surface, requiring more gentle slope gradients or surface treatment. Control of seepage and erosion will be the contractors responsibility but typical methods include collection trenches and pumped sumps and surface stabilization with quarry spalls or similar material. Design of the detention vault must include a drainage system and the backfill must include a drainage zone to collect and discharge subsurface seepage water. RECOMMENDATIONS The following subsections present our geotechnical recommendations for site grading, retaining wall design, site drainage and erosion control. Also included are recommendations for final plan review and observations and testing during construction. Site Grading Site grading is expected to be limited primarily to excavation for detention vault construction and backfill of the detention vault retaining wall. Construction Excavation Design: Subsoil conditions at the site are variable and may differ from those encountered in the borings and therefore our office should observe the excavation in progress. Based on the conditions encountered in our borings it is our opinion that sloped temporary construction excavations should be no steeper than 1.75:1 (horizontal:vertical) and flatter slopes may be required to control sloughing from saturated soil zones. Where there is not enough room for sloped excavations, shoring should be provided. It should be noted that the contractor is responsible for maintaining safe construction excavations. Structural Fill: Excavated onsite sand /silty sand soils are considered suitable for general wall backfill but may not be adequately free - draining for use in the retaining RECEIVED CITY OF TUKW L A DEpage751999 Project No. 98- 103 -02 Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 wall drainage zone. The onsite silt materials are considered unsuitable for wall backfill. Imported granular fill should consist of clean, well - graded sand and gravel materials free of organic debris and other deleterious material. In general imported material should have a maximum particle size of 3 inches and less than 15 percent fines but material for the wall drainage zone should have less than 5 percent fines based on the sand fraction. Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM 01557 -91 test method. Loose and disturbed soils, formwork and debris should be removed prior to placing structural fill or backfill. Permanent Slope Design: All permanent cut and backfill slopes above the water table should be made no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). All permanent fill slopes should be constructed using properly compacted structural fill. Graded cut slopes and any other exposed soil areas should be planted immediately with grass and deep rooted plants to help reduce erosion potential. Retaining Walls Cantilevered retaining walls as referred to in this report are walls which yield or move outward during and after backfilling. Actual wall movements will depend on the wall design and method of backfilling and can range from 0.1% to 0.3% of the wall height. Design pressures for cantilevered walls given below assume that the top of the wall will deflect at least 0.2% of the wall height. Static design of permanent cantilevered retaining walls which support a horizontal surface of properly compacted clean free - draining granular backfill surface with a gradient 2:1 (h:v) or flatter may be based on an equivalent fluid density of 65 pcf. These pressures assume that there is no water surface behind the wall. A uniform lateral pressure due to backfill surcharge should be computed using a coefficient of 0.4 times the uniform vertical surcharge load. Seismic design of retaining walls should include a dynamic soil loading. Dynamic soil pressure should be assumed to have an inverted triangular distribution. The dynamic soil pressure at the top of the wall should be at least 20H (psf) where H is the height of the wall above the footing base. The dynamic soil pressure should diminish linearly to zero at the base of the wall. Combined static plus dynamic soil pressure should be used for seismic design of the walls. Project No. 98- 103 -02 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 Page 6 PFPAAIT n�.�. Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 Care should be exercised in compacting backfill against retaining walls. Heavy equipment should not approach retaining walls close enough to intrude within a 1:1 line drawn upward from the bottom of the wall. Backfill close to walls should be placed and compacted with hand- operated equipment. Recommendations for placement and compaction of structural fill are presented under "Site Grading ". Design wall pressures given above assume no water pressure behind the walls. We recommend that a drainage zone be provided behind all retaining walls and a adequate drain system be provided at the base of all retaining walls. As a minimum, the drainage zone should be at least 1/2 the wall height. Backfill within the drainage zone should be a clean sand /gravel mixture with less than 5 percent fines based on the sand fraction. A membrane of Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent should be provided between the drainage zone material and onsite silty sand soil backfill. Wall drains should consist of a six -inch diameter perforated PVC drain pipe placed in at least one cubic foot of drain gravel per lineal foot along the base of the wall. Drain gravel should be washed material with particle sizes in the range of 3/4 to 1 -1/2 inches. The drainage zone backfill should be capped with 12 inches of silty sand soils to reduce surface water infiltration. Conventional spread footing foundations founded on undisturbed dense to very dense /hard natural soils may be used for support of retaining walls. Design of wall foundations should be in accordance with the recommendations presented below under "Spread Footings" Spread Footings Conventional spread footings founded on undisturbed dense to very dense natural silty sand soils or very stiff /hard natural silt soils should provide good support for the proposed detention vault. Footings should be deepened as required to penetrate any loose /disturbed soils or fill to bear on undisturbed dense to very dense /hard natural soils. The depth to bearing soils may vary and all footing excavations should be observed by this office to verify the bearing soils. All footings should be founded at least 12 inches into the bearing soils and at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Continuous wall footings should be sized by the structural engineer as required for stability but should be at least 24 inches wide. Footings should be stepped as necessary to provide a level bearing surface. Based on the likelihood of submerged conditions developing below the wall foundations wall footings should be designed based on a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 1000 psf which includes a reduction for submerged conditions. Resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be assumed with the net dead load forces in contact with on -site sand soils An CEID CITY OF TUKVOLA Project No. 98- 103 -02 DEPagf X999 Happy Valley Land Co. July 5, 1999 allowable static passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth may be used for the sides of footings poured against undisturbed dense /hard natural soils or properly compacted structural fill above the water table. Where passive bearing soils are saturated, the above passive pressures should be reduced by 50 %. The vertical and lateral bearing values indicated above are for the total dead load plus frequently applied live Toads. For short duration dynamic loading caused by seismic or wind forces, the vertical and lateral bearing values may be increased by 33 percent. Drainage Control Surface drainage from the adjoining upslope areas should be controlled and diverted around the site area in a non - erosive manner. Adequate positive drainage should be provided away from the structure and on the site in general to prevent water from ponding and to reduce percolation of water into subsoils. Granular backfill should be capped with at least 6 inches of onsite silt soils. A desirable slope for surface drainage is 2% in landscaped areas and 1% in paved areas. Design wall pressures given above assume no water pressure behind the walls. We recommend that a drainage zone be provided behind all retaining walls and a adequate drain system be provided at the base of all retaining walls. As a minimum, the drainage zone should be at least 1/2 the wall height. Backfill within the drainage zone should be a clean sand /gravel mixture with less titan 5 percent fines based on the sand fraction. A membrane of Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent should be provided between the drainage zone material and onsite silty soil backfill. Wall drains should consist of a four -inch diameter perforated PVC drain pipe placed in at least one cubic foot of drain gravel per lineal foot along the base of the wall. Drain gravel should be washed material with particle sizes in the range of 3/4 to 1 -1/2 inches. The drainage zone backfill should be capped with 12 inches of silty sand soils to reduce surface water infiltration. Silt ladened water from dewatering operations should be discharged into a de- silting basin located in an undisturbed site area. The de- silting basin should be constructed using Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent material supported by a fence structure capable of supporting 3 feet of water. The lower edge of the filter fabric should have "J" shaped embedment in a trench extending at least 12 inches below the ground surface. If the filter fabric becomes plugged with silt to the point that outflow seepage is less than required, a second identical filter fabric barrier should be constructed around the primary basin and the water allowed to spill over the top of the inside wall into the secondary filter basin. This procedure should be repeated as required during the course of the construction. Project No. 98- 103 -02 RECEIVED CITY OF TUK'1'Ii DEC 7 1999 PER lage6R • Happy Valley Land Co. Erosion Control July 5, 1999 Onsite sandy materials are expected to be highly erodible when exposed to concentrated runoff on slopes. No excavated material should be wasted on the slopes. Soil stockpiles and exposed slope areas should be covered during heavy rainfall and siltation fences or other detention devices should be provided as required to control the transport of eroded material. Graded cut and fill slopes and any other exposed soil areas should be planted immediately with grass and deep rooted plants to help reduce erosion potential. Where localized seepage areas occur on the construction excavation slopes, the contractor should consider placing a surcharge layer of quarry spalls with geofabric underlayment to help control surface erosion. Plan Review This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation of this site and to assist the owner and his consultants in the design and construction of the project. It is recommended that this office be provided the opportunity to review the final design drawings and specifications to determine if the recommendations of this report have been properly implemented and to make any supplemental design recommendations which may be required. Observations and Testing During Construction Subsurface conditions on the site very likely may vary from those encountered in the borings and therefore our office should observe the conditions exposed by the construction excavation so that supplemental recommendations may be made if' necessary. All footing excavations should be observed prior to placement of steel and concrete to see that footings have proper embedment, are founded on satisfactory bearing materials and that excavations are free of loose and disturbed materials. Installation of wall drains and other subsurface drains should be observed before they are backfilled. Proper backfill placement and compaction should be verified with field and laboratory density testing by a qualified testing laboratory. Project No. 98- 103 -02 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWIIA DEC 7 1999 PiskiteE9TER 1 Happy Valley Land Co. CLOSURE July 5, 1999 This report was prepared for specific application to the subject site and for the exclusive use of the Happy Valley Land Company and their representatives. The findings and conclusions of this report were prepared with the skill and care ordinarily exercised by local members of the geotechnical profession practicing under similar conditions in the same locality. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. Variations may exist in site conditions between those described in this report and actual conditions encountered during construction. Unanticipated subsurface conditions' commonly occur and cannot be prevented by merely making explorations and performing reconnaissance. Such unexpected conditions frequently require additional expenditures to achieve a properly constructed project. If conditions encountered during construction appear to be different from those indicated in this report, our office should be notified. Respectfully submitted, GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. / \1‘4 James A. Doolittle Principal Engineer Encl: Figure 1 Appendix A Dist: 1 /Addressee 2 /Baima & Holmberg, Inc. Project No. 98- 103 -02 `EXPIRES /19/ g B -1 ; __— —W 1 1 J._._L m 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 L — ► I EXIT IC CR 1 1 1 wv -3isnc 1 I I 1 ' r -, CD/ 3. 14x1 - 46" R u deb 1LoiAINC L13 INV.36o•4100 ( 1 INV- 375.40 1 f0' +12' S2 • L00% YARD DRAIN 1 5' PRIVA13 ORANAC .ASCUCNr / :7 1 'cxJSnNd 12•' SIQRIJ DRAIN 1 . :1; .1 1 , . 1. ;.1 UAl TCNAlACC ^C.. 5 PAR INO IkRCA w 4' RUSNfO,R� SuRtACC , , •1 / • 1 / 1 1 ■ YARD• �1 DDRAIN I 1 1 i ' t' ---- - J. 1 1 i • � . 1^ l • �( \ I , 1 \ ` \ � 1 (1ANNOLC(C1TP \ •• 1 1 1 / 1 / \ \.\ 1 1 / \ \ 1 1 / \\ I. \ 1 1 / / \ 1 1 1 1 \ 1 I \ 1 1 1 1 1 1. \ 1 I 1 1 1 / / 1 I 1 1 1 1 , / 1 1 1 1 / I 1 1 2. 4D 1 1 1 1 E2. 1 / BLI �/ / 1 '25'PUDI]C 1 DRANACCCC££££ Eg'4T./ / 1 I CO/ 2. 1/CPC111 - 11 dR1u•36yot u1V.37Q.67 (12'w 'INV. 3/3.26 (6' - 2 11 iWtl 1 Lji 1 I ►, I 1 1 I 1 I , —1, I 1 1 I 1 >r I 1 1 1 1 ; 1 1 1 , I 1 1 1 , 1 1 , , 1 1 , 1 ... I ref: Detention /Water Quality Vault Site Plan Sheet 5 of 8, Foster Heights Notes /Details Prepared by Baima & Holmberg, Inc. dated 2/10/98 rev. / /3, 6/9/99 • • CONSTRUCT OVER / EXISTING SO PRIM -376.21 (MAIN OAD)1 tNV.373.0A\ (vtRIIY RIOR/ TO VAULT CQNS1RUCilON)/ ' / () / I C) 1 "= 20' RECVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 7 1999 PERMIT CENTER SITE EXPLORATION PLAN GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. oatochn /a a/ Erjpinoorinp and Earth Sciatica, Proposed Storm Water Detention Vault Foster Heights Plat Development Tukwila, Washington Proj. No.98_103I Date 7/99 I Figure 1 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Our field exploration included a site reconnaissance and subsurface exploration program. During the site reconnaissance, the surface site conditions were noted, and the locations of the borings were approximately determined. Elevations of the borings were based on an assumed elevation of 398.0 for the southeast corner of the existing shed on the site. Borings were advanced using a special portable power auger equipped for soil sampling. Soils were continuously logged and classified in the field by visual examination, in accordance with the ASTM Soil Classification system. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed in the borings using a standard (1.4 -inch inside diameter, 2 -inch outside diameter) split spoon sampler and 140 -pound driving hammer falling 30 inches. Blow counts for each 6- inches of penetration were recorded in the field. The number of blows required to advance the sampler from 6 inches to 18 inches of penetration is the "N" value of the SPT shown on the boring summary. Logs of the borings are presented on the boring summary sheets A -1 and A -2. The borings summaries include descriptions of the soils and pertinent field data. Soil consistency and moisture conditions indicated on the Togs are interpretations based on the conditions observed in the field. Boundaries between soil strata indicated on the logs are approximate and actual transitions between strata may be gradual. Date: 6/17/99 Depth Blows Class. Soil Description 0 2— 4 6— 8— 10— 12— 14— 16— 18" 20— 22— 24" 26— 28— 30— 19 72 SM BORING NO.1 Silty sand w/ asphalt debris Elevation: 398.4' Consistency Moisture Color W( %) Comments • loose moist cKObrn to 50/6' 63 13 10 36 53 SM Silty fine Sand w /gravel to V+ & sand (gravel in tip) SM SC Silty fine Sand w /trace clay & gravel Clayey fine Sand w /gravel dmedium ense dense loose ML Silt & Sandy Silt soft sti to hard to moist st moist It brown brown & &rredbbrn reeybrn wet to, v. moist moist gray dark gray 15.0 13.2 9 :9 18.2 23.1 22.3 26.0 FILL 32— 34— 36— 38— 40— Maximum depth 31.5 fee No measurable ground w 3ter accumu ation. CIT RECEIVEC ( OF TUKI DEC PE 7 MIT CEN' 'ILA 999 ER GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. •`Itj���GKf irt.:,u AOSMF MEN Geotechnical Engineering and Earth Sciences Proposed Storm Water Detention Vault Foster Heights Plat Development Tukwila, Washington Proj, No. 98 -103 1 Date 7/99 I Figure A -1 BORING NO.2 Date: 6/17/99 Elevation: 387.8 Depth Blows Class. Soil Description 0 2— 4— 6— 8— 10— 12— 14 15 20 33 51 .84 SM Consistency Moisture Color W( %) Comments Silty fine Sand w/ gravel to 4" w /organic & wood debris loose to medium dense SM Silty fine sand w/ gravel dedium ense dense moist v. moist to wet gepbm bray -brn aK-bmm ML clayey Silt soft/firm SM Silty fine Sand dense wet moist gry/red- 23.1 15.1 13.2 tam dark gray -brn 7.4 FILL 16— 18— 20— 22— 24— 26— 28— 30— 32— 34— 36— 38— 40` Maximum depth 14 feet. No measuable ground water accu niation. CI RECEIVED `Y OF Tint DE P D 7 aRMIT CEN NILA 1999 rER GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. Geofechnical Engineering and Earth Sciences Proposed Storm Water Detention Vault Foster Heights Plat Development Tukwila, Washington Proj. No. 98 -103 I Date 7/99 Figure A -2 To: sAlArCil-rfL- rbi-aCWZ— VAItt.C.v*M (4AAA-1 IthtLAW'b From MEMORANDUM Job No.: AA Date: St nOWL Project: r-oe-actAuL_ APR 25 2000 eeottattizarr- EIEVELOPIENI... * cemitia-eLfD \/Atpt..:( (27,c (4-414 -1'%D <<U)(,L r\ , k..LJ/ • NW- 'Loco � 9e MM. IIMPlair =sm. o • , c A • X84 C �w�a✓L.7 S 1 t A2 1� 1 Z. �� ?atDomPA\ Crs • r dtt:(0i @ it" Ovv4 • ax.A s 71.4 2 . ( .1; (IC @ `uk- •3 '1'i (cqd -e,c.Y 1LL-• f h r •. Ff►-AM Go.ovt • (cz.ovv 14611_ 171. N (1,0 trltTlV' - Ort/it.,3 C0-131e", C Oau.ce 7c. . -;vomoeh (ra ,Vt d l o• 4 C► zbb o✓ (.1?)" qtr Al . g 6," L-ACD Q' 00t3644 apoo to- LlJbit. L_4_ . 02 AA coop LeAt4 e(2_i_Lc szo �. too ��Z, f'zo40,i)) L*Z. /500 4- 2 445 4b 1h. r uti . tb0G Z tot 44 s t&) 1. tP14.4)4. (.iC4 d) z 1-7t + 6)54 =2I,9 _L90 �o Wtit "T'b e ' L ( ' 444' g cp" To:: k CAD (rf�r7 , From Via• 1� r' Subject: _CAL C..A.) lr (a C (C9-4■34D I`!1 EiMOAr \N0IJ?il Job Vo.: c3\C1• 2.2°C) Date : Val ik2eL 2©OcD Project: O/ AcerslC'k .4 mac_ f?.,lar-V) C. i� t `'c-C� (S4 • 1 _ G _[1`f.; iji,A1 E LI! APR 19 .2 REID'MIDDLETON s "<% W ei 0 >OW p t- Q¢WO wZ~ LL • 0 La i= 0 Z j Z Z j p D < f- Z V 0 O }} L.4 WUd1- <QVQ Z1- co 01 Z 1- 0xo xv w En o 0SQU VUZ= QZQW ocQ01n IYOhZW ¢ � VAo 0 CU uicrZ a / U 1- to X / / / • ....••unom elem22.12.... • 12•••••••••••••••••••••••.•11::: ISI S•SSSiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iii 7 •1,••••••••.••••••••••••••• ,:4 / - -1 W VJ Ct 0 0 Z p U < W < a0 CC U0 z o0 0 N U1/4.2 �w 1 Q a0 0 Q I m 0 0 cn N iZ I Z N N NN FIRM SUBGRADE IJ CV ct 11 0 LLl W L 0 -H O cvz Z K) ,. S: '' cox OnIz< ^•-•I OM <O IOC > Q p ce Q® Maa'a. Cr o O 1 03 0 J SURFACING BASE COURSE FIRM SUBGRADE 9 04/17/2000 14:29 3913055 UD MARKED EAIMA HOLIVIEERG It IC PAGE 01 b > Ps fir) V) ELEV= 376.75 0 Id CD O< O CV ri ) O N M w 0 V) 1•- z w w T 4 ELEVATION rz . . . . . . . ' .. . • . . , , . . . . . . . . . . P - t,ev.,..",:crt...5,-Ts'XN!'.1:$4111Nr?,.V.,!4.r.riz?vstr.,:aisrovrovi.................-....--_.......... ...... ............: : '......... . ma, WHIMIMI re_ov 1D t"t. PrC= -L.& 1■A r -C4-LEA.. c , 0c4 8..a .75 c1 x`.( ,040) mar -cz) *CC S-74. 75 of goo ic z4. 0o CLT , ` t' 64.m ' &D 66 WyQ 4/4o 4' 1L 4D , s S'O(oc� "/K o i '6 ,1 6h4 372/5Z) • Drvt 1 tt.z' 4 Q �� cicD Ci`z-) 6.4.15cD4 lap g(D l 4, zotO Pi tdr v (4L..- 1'r"►= . op4`40% 6.04: ‘/( L . co (.3(412)) .015, OLD I%» (V'$ L @Awn �•orco) tree EA. el. a =cam (k) ��. $,c�C««o) z3' tz C`)6 co ruwz.. cz- ,fit. X33 7 (Ai ' - ' s on t0111. OGiL aP 141° 3? ?t!1 C;(:)(D sc.1 Z 19` d = e Let,Z t 4)Ciz000 Z1z It (W.- 9rt co4A,.% 4 . V) ...N.... Ne-re- 1S. 'b. -c- eci. , tl iliee.41% ,,,sc4. .216(.)zz)(6: -= t)P C..D + 4`3.5 LokSc-\ ;‘"- 4,1 . L(/ �4 (a) L � �` Jam- OitvL t co-4 4- 44 SoC_, ak-r. (.4 to, 744 5bcco C4,Z5 @C,( •3( • tilflf {eke' L. ( (4 1 nth- ■ . as C t.)j3coo C17360� 1-kbcr) (e) t c17.o �.2 Citp)(17-0) z c) '3 u40 NGv+ ccizo Go7 o .71‘k3 `z( 106) x(46 t'( + 1%(1)6`5()) le8P6Go)C,) ` n 4- t 1-i ' t 600 -f Z 706 `lS Z Lo C146:.`2,4) = -� 4 bib = a (, 7 z Q1 21�Z t".' IZD71 /rt. tyjki 1 ak0c,11) �37G,0 izubsAniors AUG 10 '01 12:23 FR PSI SEATTLE 206 282 645? TO 4438957 'iii information To Build On saMn eng • Consulting • Threw August 10, 2001 File No. 712 -00116 Attn: Dave Larsen Building Inspections City of Tukwila Building Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 P.02/07 Subject: Project Name Foster Heights Vault Project Address 5000 South 146t Street Permit No. 14 �a =0j�2Q f s We have completed the requested special inspections on the subject project, WORK INSPECTED Reinforced concrete (cast in place) To the best of our knowledge, all work inspected conformed to approved plans, specifications, UBC, and related codes, and /or verbal or written instructions from the Engineer of Record. Sincerely, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. Scott J. Thomas, P, E, Project Engineer cc: Scott Wiklof, Tridor Inc. RECEIVED AUG 17 2001 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Professional service industries, Inc. • 3257 16t Avenue, West • Sallie, WA 98119.1708 • Phone 200/202.0880 • Fax 208/282.0710 AUG 10.'01 12:18 FR PSI SEATTLE 206 282 6457 TO 4313665 P.01/07 Professional service Industries, Inc. Information To Build On FAX From: Scott J, Thomas, PE Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) 325716' Ave. West Seattle, WA 98119 AUG 1 0 ZOGI DEvELop,mF :Nt E. TEL; 206 - 282 -0666, X -108 FAX: 206 -282 -0710 Date: 08/10/01 Number of Pages: 7 Re: Foster Heights Vault 5000 S. 146th Street, Permit MI99 -0220 To; Dave Larsen / City of Tukwila Fax: (206) 431 -3665 cc: Scott Wiklof / Trldor Fax (206) 443.8857 Attached please find our final letter and special inspection report(s) for the subject project. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (206) 282 -0666, x -108 should you have any questions regarding the attached information Scott J. Thomas, PE Project Engineer, Construction Services Department The documents accompanying this facsimile transmission may contain confidential client information or attorney work product which Is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the redpient named. above. If you have received this fax In error, please notify us, and you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of this transmitted information Is strictly prohibited. regwam Information .To Build On Engineering • Consulting • Testing August 10, 2001 File No. 712 -00116 p7 Attn: Dave Larsen Building Inspections City of Tukwila Building Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Project Name Foster Heights Vault Project Address 5000 South 146th Street Permit No. MI99 -0220 a� AUG 13 2001 COMMUNITY DEVEI.opmEil t We have completed the requested special inspections on the subject project. WORK INSPECTED Reinforced concrete (cast in place) To the best of our knowledge, all work inspected conformed to approved plans, specifications, UBC, and related codes, and /or verbal or written instructions from the Engineer of Record. Sincerely, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. Scott J. Thomas, P.E. Project Engineer cc: Scott Wiklof, Tridor Inc. Information !To Build On Engineering • Consulting • Testing CLIENT: REPORT OF FIELD INSPECTION AND CONCRETE COMPRESSION TEST Scott Wiklof Tridor Inc. 2226 Elliott Ave., Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 DATE: .rune 6, 2000 TECHNICIAN: R. Teglund PROJECT: Foster Heights Vault 5000 So. 146th St. Tukwila. WA PERMIT NO.: .IOB NO.: 712 - 00116 -1 REPORT NO.: CR8I43 FIELD DATA LOCATION OF PLACEMENT: Storm vault foundation slab Samples were taken at 9.00 cubic yards of cubic yards placed total. Date Placed June 6, 2000 Time 12:05 PM Delivery Ticket No. 164264 Slump, In. 5.00 Air Content, % Air Temperature,' 62 Concrete Temperature, °F 72 Date Received In Lab June 7, 2000 FieIJ Data Submitted By PSI /R. Teglund Mix Data Submitted By Glacier Northwest NOTE: APPLICABLE ASTM STANDARDS. UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED: MAKINO SPECIMENS: C31.96 (EXC. SEC. 9.1.1): SLUMP: C143.971EXC. SEC. G): TEMPERATURE: CIII6l•K6493): SAMPLING: C113.97 Supplier Glacier Northwest Mix Number and Proportions 3220 Cement 4650 Ibs Type I Water Fine Aggregate 12720 Ibs building sand Coarse Aggregnte 17680 Ibs 3/4" Flyash Admixture 169 oz WR64 COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS Sample No. Cylinder Diameter (in.) Cylinder Area (in.') Date Tested Age (days) Load (Ibs.) Compressive Strength (p.s.i.) Fracture Type 1A 4.00 12.57 6/13/00 7 57500 4570 Shear 1B 4.00 12.57 7/4/00 28 72000 5730 Shear I C 4.00 12.57 7/4/00 28 71500 5690 Shear ID 4.00 12.57 Discarded • Design S rength Specification: 28 4000 ASTM Test Method: © C31 ❑ C39 ® CI43 ® C 172 ❑ C23 I C 1 064 REMARKS: Inspected reinforcing steel and witnessed concrete pour. All cylinders were capped in accordance with ASTM C617 -94. Concrete placed by pump and consolidated by vibration. All items inspected conform to approved plans and specifications. ❑ C1231 OBSERVATIONS ® Cylinders made by PSI representative. ® Cylinders picked up by PSI representative. ❑ Test results comply with applicable specifications. ❑ Test results do not comply with applicable specifications. • Reinforcing steel was found to comply with plans and project specifications. ❑ Reinforcing steel does not comply with plans and project specifications. ❑ Reinforcing steel not inspected by PSI representative. 10 gallons of water added on site. WORK CONFORMS: ® YES ❑ NO ❑ Other: Respectfully submitted, fessinnnl Service Industries, Inc. Sam Yaghmaic, P.E. Department Manager. Seattle Construction Services cc; City ol'Tukwila THESE TEST RESULTS APPLY ONLY TO THE SPECIFIC SAMPLES TESTED AND MAY NOT SE INDICATIVE OF THE ENTIRE CONCRETE PLACEMENT, aft /rte Information .To Build On Engineering • Consulting • Mating REPORT OF INSPECTION ACTIVITIES CLIENT: Scott Wiklol' PROJECT: Foster Heights Vault Tridor Inc. 5000 So. 146th St.' 2226 Elliott Ave., Suite A Tukwila. WA Seattle, WA 98121 PERMIT NO.: M 199 -0220 DATE: June 20. 2000 J013 NO.: 712 - 00116 -3 INSPECTOR: S. Schweyen REPORT NO.: FR9061 REMARKS: • SS /erh A representative of PSI arrived at the above referenced project to perform an inspection of reinforcing steel. He inspected the resteel for the vault perimeter walls, including the middle baffle wall: work is in progress. The contractor has to complete the trim at the openings, add the intersecting corner bars at the baffle wall ends, and adjust the resteel to the proper clearance at the front and back sides of the resteel wall mats: also, the slab dowels were not in place at the time of the inspection. Otherwise, the resteel conforms to approved plans. A final check and verification o1'the above noted items will be performed prior to concrete placement. cc: City oI "I'ukwila WORK CONFORMS TO APPROVED PLANS: YES I I NO Respec 'illy submitted. P e FESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. Sam Yaghmaie, P.E. Manager, Seattle Construction Services Ni tovews Inforri _ :lion .To Build On Engineering • Consulting • 7esting REPORT OF FIELD INSPECTION AND CONCRETE COMPRESSION TEST CLIENT: Scott Wiklof 'I'ridor Inc. 2226 Elliott Ave., Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 DATE: June 22, 2000 TECHNICIAN: E. Bauman PROJECT: Foster Heights Vault 5000 So. 146th St. Tukwila, WA PERMIT NO.: M199 -0220 JOB NO.: 712 - 00116 -4 REPORT NO.: CR6261 FIELD DATA LOCATION OF PLACEMENT: Perimeter and interior walls for entire water retention vault (80'x I4'X 11' high) Samples were taken at 10.00 cubic yards of 85.00 cubic yards placed total. Dote Placed Time Delivery Ticket No. Slump, In. Air Content, G. Air Temperature, °F Concrete Temperature, °F Date Received In Lab Field Data Submitted By Mlix Datn Submittal By June 22, 2000 10:50 AM 149102 5.00 65 71 June 23, 2000 PSI /E. Bauman Stoneway Supplier Mk Number and Proportions Cement \Voter Fine Aggregate Coarse Aggregate Flyash Admixture Stoneway 4852 450 Ibs Type 1 1450 lbs 1950 Ibs 7/8" 80 Ibs 21.2 oz WRA 64 NOTE: APPLICABLE ASTM STANDARDS. UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED: MAKING SPECIMENS: C.AI.'K, (EXC. SEC. 7.2.21: SLUMP: CII3-77 (EXC. SEC. 61: TEMPERATURE: CI0146031: SAMPLING: C17247 COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS Sample No. Cylinder Diameter (in.) Cylinder Area (in.') Date Tested Age (days) Load (Ibs.) Compressive Strength (p.s.i.) Fracture Type IA 4.00 12.57 6/29/00 7 50000 3980 Cone and Split 1B 4.00 12.57 7/20/00 28 71500 5690 Shear IC 4,00 12.57 7/20/00 28 73000 5810 Shear • Design S rength Specification: 28 4000 ASTM Test Method: ® C31 ® C39 ® C143 ® C172 ❑ C231 ® C1064 REMARKS: Inspected reinforcing steel and witnessed concrete pour. All items noted on FR9061 dated 6 -20 -00 were addressed. Concrete placed by pump and consolidated by mechanical vibration. All cylinders were capped in accordance with ASTM C617 -94. All items inspected conform to approved plans and specifications. OBSERVATIONS ❑ Cylinders made by PSI representative. ® Cylinders picked up by PSI representative. �]C Test results comply with applicable specifications. ❑ 'Test results do not comply with applicable specifications. • Reinforcing steel was found to comply with plans and project specifications. ❑ Reinforcing steel does not comply with plans and project specifications. ❑ Reinforcing steel not inspected by PSI representative. 0 gallons of water added on site. WORK CONFORMS: YES 0 NO ❑ CI231 ❑ Other: Respectfully submitted, Pro/.essional Service Industries, Inc. am Yaghmaie, P.E. Department Manager, Seattle Construction Services cc: City of'Tukwila THESE TEST RESULTS APPLY ONLY TO THE SPECIFIC SAMPLES TESTED AND MAY NOT BE INDICATIVE OF THE ENTIRE CONCRETE PLACEMENT. Information .To Build On Engineering • Consulting • Meting x:muvt:xrwtir Yn.^am++er++nrr_a �o�.r.•.w� REPORT OF INSPECTION ACTIVITIES CLIENT: Scott Wiklof Tridor Inc, 2226 Elliott Ave,, Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 PROJECT: Foster Heights Vault 5000 So. 146th St, Tukwila, WA PERMIT NO.: M199-0220 DATE: Jul 3, 2000 JOB NO.: 712- 00116 -6 INSPECTOR: C. Monacelli REPORTNO.: FR8502 REMARKS: A representative of PSI arrived at the above referenced project to perform an inspection of reinforcing steel at the detention vault lid. Upon arrival, she found that the contractor was not on site. No inspection was performed this date. CM /erh cc: City of Tukwila WORK CONFORMS TO APPROVED PLANS: Respectfully submitted, SSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. YES U NO Sam Yaghmaie, P.E. Manager, Seattle Construction Services arrA71 Informanon ItimeAliTo Build On Engineering • Consulting • Testing o REPORT OF FIELD INSPECTION AND CONCRETE COMPRESSION TEST CLIENT: Scott Wiklof Tridor Inc. 2226 Elliott Ave., Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 DATE: July 5, 2000 PROJECT: 'Poster Heights Vault i 000 So. 146th St. 'ukwila, WA PERMIT NO.: '- -•M199 -0220 JOB NO.: 712- 00116 -5 TECHNICIAN: S. Thomas REPORT NO.: CR7452 FIELD DATA LOCATION OF PLACEMENT: Level 2 slab on pan deck Samples were taken at 10.00 cubic yards of 40.00 cubic yards placed total. Date Placed Time Delivery Ticket No. 150715 Slump, In. 4.00 Air Content, '%, Air Temperature, °I? 60 Concrete Temperature, °F 65 Date Received In Lab July 6, 2000 Field Data Submitted By PSI /S. Thomas Mix Datn Submitted By Stoneway NOTE: APPLICABLE ASTM STANDARDS. UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED: MAKING SPECIMENS: C31•96 (EXC. SEC. 9,2.2): SLUMP: C142•97 (EXC. SEC. fl: TEMPERATURE: Cli) .EN97): SAMPLING: CI72.97 July 5, 2000 Supplier Stoneway Mix Number and Proportions 4853 Cement 450 lbs Type 1 Water 2205 Ibs Fine Aggregate 1290 Ibs concrete sand Coarse Aggregate 1920 lbs " Flynsh 80 Ibs Admixture 2 lbs AEA 14 lbs WRDA64 COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS Sample No. Cylinder Diameter (in.) Cylinder Area (in ?) Date Tested Age (dnys) Load (Ibs.) Compressive Strength (p.s.i.) Fracture Type I A 4.00 12.57 7/10/00 7 28500 2270 Cone and Shear 1B 4.00 12.57 8/2/00 28 55000 4380 Cone 1C 4.00 12.57 8/2/00 28 53500 4260 Cone 1 D 4.00 12.57 Discarded Design S renal Specification: 28 4000 ASTM Test Method: ® C31 ❑ C39 ® C143 ® C172 OBSERVATIONS Cylinders made by PSI representative. ® Cylinders picked up by PSI representative. © Test results comply with applicable specifications. ❑ Test results do not comply with applicable specifications. ® Reinforcing steel was found to comply with plans and project specifications. ❑ Reinforcing steel does not comply with plans and project specifications. ❑ Reinforcing steel not inspected by PSI representative. 0 gallons of water added on site. WORK CONFORMS: ® YES ❑ NO ❑ C23 I ® C1064 ® C1231 ❑ Other: REMARKS: Inspected reinforcing steel, per drawing details 3/1, 4/1, and 5/1. and witnessed concrete pour. All cylinders were capped in accordance with ASTM C6I7 -94. All items inspected conform to approved plans and specifications. R . ectfully submitted. rofessio - Service Industries, Inc. ,/ Sam Yaghmaic, P.E. Department Manager, Seattle Construction Services cc: City of Tukwila THESE TEST RESULTS APPLY ONLY TO THE SPECIFIC SAMPLES TESTED AND MAY NOT BE INDICATIVE OF THE ENTIRE CONCRETE PLACEMENT. JUL 21 '00 10 28 FR PSI SEATTLE IMiEnvir+ .vn ntai De technicai Construction Consulting • Enpintwing • Testing DATE: To: From: -1(2k (co 206 282 6457 TO 4313665 P.01/04 TIME: Mail: Yes / No PIN Facsimile Tr *nsmittal Sheet am/pm TOTAL NUMBER. OF PAGES 4 IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES PLEASE CALL SENDER ASAP. NAME: NOTES: v,• U Lc.A N\. CITY: e L Lac FAX: 2 cc.) 43/ - 3 (5 VkititAkP)'S NAME: PLEASE DELIVER, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. OPERATOR INITIALS: Writer's direct fax: (206) 282 -0710 C vAtoesi— eKse-vf -' cr Mraq - O2 S lr* Sr. *The documents accompanying this facsimile transmission may contain confidential client information or attorney work product which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient named above. If you have received this fax in error, please notify us, and you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of this transmitted information is strictly prohibited. Information T Build On JUL 21 '00 10:29 FR PSI SEATTLE aiNiEjInformatior To Build On, En9l1/►ssrfnp • ConeuI ,g • Tirtlna 5E,TTLE DIVISION (20(i) 282.0+66 FAX (2116 282.0710 EASTSIDF. IIVISION (425)4854261 FAX (625) 485-4611 206 282 6457 TO 4313665 P.04/04 TACOMA DIV1$10N (253) 519.1801 PAX (252)589.2136 CR 8143 PORTLAND DIVISION (503) 254.8418 FAX (503) 252.5608 SrOKANE DIVISION (509) 3354571 FAX (500) 335.1307 PENINSULA DIVISION 140> 297.6931 l'AX 1360) 297.19 ' % %%% t l) . ;, !; 21 4 "‘—�r'P /iC' . ?R4J 9e ;pEnMtT;. 0 �1E.f ''�. F) apI /k DAT 9 y 2?.0 w .o_. S7. �-.-- 4 COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE I.D. SIZE AREA (SD. IN.) DATE TESTED AGE AT TEST !nr ULTIMATE STRENGTH 4 CHECKED FRACTURE TYPE • LBS, PS.I -' -- 000 5 -3' ?....it n �t00 5, a,416 X24£/ --#i- 05' SAMPLE AND TESTED FIELD SPECIMENS SLUMP SAMPLING AIR TEMP BREAK NEO CAP OTHER IN ACCORDANCE WITH: ASTM ASTM ASTM ASTM ASTM ASTM ASTM ASTM C -3t C•1a3•� C -172p C-2310 C10 C -39 D C-12310 0 TIME. TEMP. & /f " DATE _.. 4( �,®0 MIXING / DE IGN SAMPLE WEATHER C T PLANT STRENGTH F -ate TYPE EZ47 iti�a �� r0/9( PROPOR110 : CEMENT C'SE AGG, Z41 4 FINE AGG.Aw. WATER ADDED ADMIXTU ADMIXTURE ADMIXTURE . c6 174716% / 2 16,9 ___LT, o 9 TYPE OF CEMENT CONC. TEMP. 7-Z SLUMP Ina AIR % QUAN11P Cu. Yd. TRUCK /' / TICKET M �O 7 2 64 SUPER PLASTICIZED SLUMP �-..-• MIX II 7Z Zo POUR LOCATION AND NOTES; DATE RECEIVED: 42-w ' 1 A •r/ . ,.� V l / j' 5'J ♦ /J! .. /L r f , 4i ,o r M.. G • Gl . , L .71:. .; r14. ='D 1.--2-, ' +, d - --r r w {; T JP' �/'1 . ,..., I 1 *s'.' iy�, / EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION AND S/N#: - -'' COPIES TO ED: , INSPECTOR: • I ATE: % "% % ' :',.!% .•%:: i* : :: %; �/ i P. = '; ::::IL ARCHITECT BUILDING D E PT. SUPPLIER DA Z. -6Y ! . i f id i w %, This report Is provided for the Inlormatlon of Ina client only. TI» reproduction of Ilya report ty Dry method, and its Vt ON Mai ST OT MILES transmittal to a mud perry, by any means, &rapt in lull, without the lull permission of Professional Simko Industries. �Apwmii FiF�E- _ 1 Inc., is prohibited' -7Fk certification attest. to the accuracy of mo ronulu ootaln.d from tn. actual tam and/or obs.Nalioru performed _ made within the 0 5r,t( uwp4 uI the wart, c.nillo.Uan ones not oo corutn d to remount in (np.won, &pp(oral or TOTAL HOURS INII Certified Report by Professional Service Industries n ar wor.adlid aI 1h• epeetncsrlon r.0uir m.nle. JUL 21 '00 10:29 FR PSI SEATTLE j1JIn/ormatio n WIWI To Build On Engineering • Consulting • Tasting S EATTLS DI V1S ION (206) 262.0666 FAX (206) 2B20710 EASTSIDF.10/1310N (123) 4854244 FAX (423) 4654611 206 282 6457 TO 4313665 P.03/04 TACOMA DIVISION (253)5 09.11at PAX 1233)569.2136 CR 6 2 PORTLAND DIVISION (503) 25..6410 FAX (503) 252.5600 Sl'UKANE DIVISION (509) 535.3571 FAX (008) 515.1267 PENINSULA DIVISION (360) 2974821 PAX 136))) 797.6026 /%.',..1 'SO S47 ,r , ,p ;,,, 7 ..- o (_ IA 2.224 /I 1 .A L /1 V ` �� i T ' %j i - ! 0 W.0- d /,. :4,.m/,•;, / f 4/ S awl 98 r a c ,� :,�' -. la �) lei 4 /%b 03E' S . /�i/ /A• .. / 7L e f �1 4144 ter /51:4. I SbO 0 _ COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE I.D. SIZE AREA ISO. IN.) DATE TESTED AGE AT TEST ULTIMATE STRENGTH LBS. P.S.I. C FRACTURE CHECKED TYPE cf i� -..'1 7 a a. 7 -aO 2g 63 -20 28 soa -1264.000 5; o . 51g'10 SAMPLE AND TESTED FIELD SPECIMENS SLUMP SAMPLING IN ACCORDANCE WITH: ASTM ASTM ASTM C•31 C -u3[2 C -172X TIME. TEMP. // ( DATE / MIXING WEATHER F/ .�.e n y CAST 6- Z Z PLANT l�5 6O' SOq PROPORTIONS: CEMENT /BO Fe/ C'SE AGG. FINE AGG. WATER A ys� 056 8 1 Y50 AIR ASTM C -2310 TEMP ASTM C•1066 BREAK ASTM C -39 ta NEO CAP ASTM C-12310 OTHER ASTM DESIGN [p. SAMPLE STRENGTHFC I gy b00 TYPE rcc J P_ DED ADMIXTURE ADMIXTURE ADMIXTURE 21.2w60 Ins. AIR __ZAL % QUANTITY /46 Cu, g.s Yd. TYPE OF CEMENT CONC,, TEMP 7/ SLUMP C TRUCK quo o TICKET N /Y 9/0'k POUR LOCATION AND NOTES: e l It t, W Q r r P 4,t vt f i e l., Vi1 Lt l f' (SOX /Y 11 kill ft (di t b t s 4lo ✓ v‘ lr Vi o v.S _Axis F*/1 yf) e.,rt. al,D, e f c$ SUPER PLASTICIZED SLUMP MIX • DATE RECEIVED: ca l cr , EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION AND S/N#: COPIES TO: MAILED: OWNER CONTRACTOR ENGINEER BUILDING DEPT. ARCHITECT SUPPUER INSPECTOR: FIELD CONTACT I This neon Is provided for the Information of the client only, The reproduction of tide repon, by any method, and Its Vans/real to a Wed party, by any means, except In lull, without the lull perm(esion al Proleaalonal Service Indust/in, Inc., to prohliated " l Ma cenkicatIon 000011 to me accuracy 01 the results oDlalned (ram the actual teat performed andfo• observations made within the dolined.cope of trio work. Corlilicelion shed not ba construed to represent In Inapec8o1, approval or acceptance or other es:otialee work or a mummy of design or workabIliry of lha spedreadon requirements.' NAME DATE: DATE: iIM SP, irv.R+wy? ON OFF ST OT PILES TOTAL HOURS JUL 21 '00 10:28 FR PSI SEATTLE 115:0TPTI " 3 Information To Build On En9lnsertng • ConsuM,g • Mating SEATTLE DIVISION EASTSR)F.14VISION (206) 2824666 FAX (206) 282 -0710 (423) 4054244 FAX (425) 4854611 206 282 6457 TO 4313665 TACOMA DIVISION (253) 589.1006 FAX (2.53)589.1136 F'. 02/04 CR 7452 • PORTLAND DIVISION (5031,2354118 FAX (3U3) 232.5600 SPOKANE DIVISION 1500)535.357I PAX (SW/ 535. 1167 PENINSULA DIVISION 13601297 -8821 FAX (36012)17 -8828 ti.r7' %; � � 5 •_•,r . ; 9,1N fJAR,T; r• 0011 DATE -5- g �1: t %/ ,~ -�'1 .o ,� /./' �•. � • 0 .[ iii{ -'i i /� om T ,A / , %'� • Q�jj : ZZ4h = ice : • �Y2 I' - , - , COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE I.D. SIZE AREA ISO. IN.) t A- IZ•51- 4,547sr t,cq' 5 DATE TESTED AGE AT TEST LBS. UIMATE STRENGTH P.S.I. CHECKED FRACTURE TYPE 22 rrI2 SAMPLE AND TESTED FIELD SPECIMENS IN ACCORDANCE WITH: ASTM C -31 Er*... 1TIME, TEMP, & �SCQa DATE WEATHER ._001 CAST PROPORTIONS: SLUMP SAMPLING ASTM ASTM C-14313072 C -231 0 AIR ASTM TEMP BREAK ASTM /► C -1066 —� C•38.39 (] NEO CAP OTHER ASTM ASTM C•12313 0 C 4' ' SAMPLE f x r PLANT STRENGTH F TYPE MIXING DESIGN CEMENT.,"( C'SE or. FINE AGG, WATER ADDED ADMIXTURE ADMIXT,JINE DMIXTURE ' So 7i' ta2o • CAS L9,) 225.1115. ' 2'" �i�o, fir. l4 ``�'` I �^'�°''� SLUMP 4 4 ins AIR �� % QUANTITY AI d � O Cu. Yd, L� �V SUPER PLASTICIZED SLUMP •••••••''.-'• MIX M TYPE OF CEMENT - CONC. TEMP. 'TRUCK �"2,..Q TICKET 1r POUR LOCATION AND NOTES: 2 DATE RECEIVED; t tv.i as 4 PIZ V CO EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION AND S/N#: ''7( se COPIES TO: 1 MAILED: 1 WNER _ENGINEER ARCHITECT F.9,AcHirACTOR BUILDING DEPT. SUPPLIER INSPECTOR FIELD CO 'Tills rrpart Is providod for the information of the client only. The reproductlon of 06a report. 4y any monied, and ha Iranimihal to a intro puny, by any mane, except In full, Without the lull permiselon of Professional Service Induatrios, Inc., 19 proNDlleO• 'this certification attests to the accuracy el the results obtained from the actual tell penoImsd andfor opservallons made within eta defined erode of the work Csndkatlon shad not be confined to represent In Instigation, approval or acceptance of other associated work or a wsrranly of designer workability 01 the speNllcallon requirements." Certified Report by NAM§ • 7w T�+�i +�. ON OPP ST OT x1171 _ _ Y►i�l•1211111- TOTAL HOUR MILKS Sent By: HUDSON & ASSOCIATES; 2063246248; Aug-13-01 14:16; Page 1/1 RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Rick Hudson. RE CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12th AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 EMAIL: diudson@hudsonengincors.com 206-324-6160 FAX 206-324-6248 August 13, 2001 Dave Larson, Senior Building Inspector Department of Community Development City of Tukwila Fax No. 206-431-3665 Re: Nordstrom Warehouse, 1000 Andover Park West Dear Dave, Chuck Morris, P.E. •,., ...•, .• • • •, ,3 , 1 Z)Cii visited this facility this morning to observe the condition of the building following the discovery yesterday of the broken sprinkler supply pipe which allowed a considerable volume of water to flow beneath the building slab. The floor slab has been pushed up in some locations due to the movement of gravel and soils beneath the slab. 1 did not observe any damage to the building structure beyond minor non-critical cracking in a wall panel, 1 believe the building is structurally sound and safe to occupy. Y rs truly, 114sititk cm/ ick Hudson, P.E. cc; John Pedrini, Nordstrom Fax 206-233-6688 Fran Michie, Powell Development Fax 425-822-8297 Reid iddleton April 24, 2000 File No. 26 -00- 005 - 012 -03 Mr. Duane Griffin City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Building Permit Plan Review - Final Submittal Foster Heights Detention Vault (MI99 -0220) Dear Mr. Griffin: We reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the structural provisions of the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Building Code as amended and adopted by the City of Tukwila. The applicant has responded successfully to our comments. We made the following red -mark to the drawings per Item 7 of the Engineer's response: • A 2 -inch clear distance to the inside wall reinforcement is called out in Section 3, Sheet 1. Enclosed are the drawings, structural calculations, geotechnical report, and correspondence from the engineer for your records. If you have any questions or require any additional clarification, please call. Sincerely, Middleton, Inc. David B. Swanson, 'I .E. Ky to K. amatsuka, E.I.T. Director, Structural Engineering Group Pla Review Engineer bjr\ 26se\planrevw \tukwila\0(>\1012r3.docVcky Enclosures cc: Scott Wiklof, Tridor Donald Miles, Miles Consulting RECEIVED APR 2 5 2000 CQMMUNITY ncvcc AuJi nrr Engineers Planners Surveyors Washington Oregon Alaska Reid Middleton, Inc, 728134th Street SW Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 Ph: 425 741-3800 Fox: 425 741 -3900 Reid iddleton April 10, 2000 File No. 26- 00- 005- 012 -02 Mr. Duane Griffin City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RECEIVED APR 11 2000 /V COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Subject: Building Permit Plan Review - Second Submittal Foster Heights Detention Vault (M199 -0220) Dear Mr. Griffin: We reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the structural provisions of the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Building Code as amended and adopted by the City of Tukwila. Several of the previous review comments (review letter dated March 16, 2000) have not been addressed completely in the recent submittal. The following revised list of review comments supersedes the previous review comments and outlines remaining issues that require additional consideration: 1. The following list of comments should be responded to in itemized letter form. The permit applicant should have the Engineer of Record respond and resubmit two copies of revised structural drawings and one copy of supplemental calculations. All information should be submitted directly to Reid Middleton, Inc. 2. We understand revisions have been made to the Civil Drawings that affect the loading conditions and structural design of the vault. Therefore, two copies of these revised drawings should be submitted for our review. The drawings should be sealed and signed by the Engineer of Record per UBC Section 106.3.4 and WAC Section 196.24.095. 3. The General Notes should reference the soils report by company name, date, and report number. The submitted report (Project No. 98- 103 -02) was prepared by Geospectrum Consultants, Inc., and dated July 5, 1999. 4. The submitted vault sketch of the revised final grade over the proposed vault shows a 5 -foot distance from the inside face of the concrete curb to the bottom of the fill. The following comments regarding this revision should be addressed: a) The 5 -foot clear distance should be called out in Section 2. b) The revised calculations indicate a 4 -foot wide triangular load distribution on the end of the 12 -foot wide top slab due to the backfill. if the backfill begins 5 feet from the curb, a 7 -foot wide distribution should be used for design of the slab. c) The revised calculations assume a 360 plf peak triangular load at the edge of the top slab due to the 2:1 sloped backfill. A 120 pcf soil weight and a 7 -foot wide distribution corresponds to a 420 plf (120 pcf x 772) per foot peak load. Engineers Planners Surveyors Washington Oregon Alaska Reid Middleton, Inc. 728134th Street SW Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 Ph: 425 741 -3800 Fax: 425 741-3900 Mr. Duane Griffin City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 File No. 26 -00- 005- 012 -02 Page 2 5. Revised soil bearing pressure calculations should be submitted for our review. The bearing pressure below the wall footing should consider all dead and live loads (including the soil to the outside face of wall). If the full slab width is considered in resisting vertical loads as originally done on calculation page 2, the slab dead load and superimposed loads due to a water -filled vault should be included in determining the maximum bearing pressure. 6. We commented in our last letter that several components of the vault were designed assuming 4000 psi concrete compressive strength; however, the General Notes specified 3000 psi for all concrete. The structural Engineer of Record has indicated that only designs using 3000 psi concrete strength are to be constructed. The intent of the response should be clarified. It appears the vault slab, walls, and shear keys were all designed for 4000 psi strength per calculation pages 5A, 7, and 9. Therefore, either the General Notes should specify 4000 psi concrete for these elements or revised calculations should be provided. 7. A 1 1/2 -inch concrete cover over the #6 vertical bars is called out in Section 3. The inside face of the vault wall is exposed to water; therefore, a minimum cover of 2 inches should be provided over bars #6 and larger per UBC Section 1907.7.1. The review comment listed above should be responded to in itemized letter form. We recommend the permit applicant have the Engineer of Record respond and resubmit two copies of the revised set of structural drawings and one copy of the supplemental calculations directly to our office. Corrections and comments made during the review process do not relieve the project applicant or designer from compliance with code requirements, conditions of approval, and permit requirements; nor is the designer relieved of responsibility for a complete design in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. This plan review check is for general compliance with the Uniform Building Code as it relates to the project. If you have any questions or require any additional clarification, please call. Sincerely, Middleton, Inc. . wan ,13 Director, Structural : : , eering Group bjr\26se\planrevw\ ukwila'00\1012r2.dock ky cc: Scott Wiklof, Tridor Donald Miles, Miles Consulting Ky 'e K. amatsuka, E.I.T. Pla Revi w Engineer Reid iddleton MILES CONSULTING (425) 747 -4421 SUITE 105 14400 BEL -RED ROAD BELLEVUE, WA 98007 -3952 Ried Middleton 728 134th St SW #200 Everett, WA 98204 Ref: Storm Water Vault (MI199 0220) Foster Heights Tukwila, Washington a J t APR 1 9 200D L REU) MitD1 ETON 16 Apr 2000 —J The following comment, calculations and 2 copies of the vault construction plan sheet are submitted with respect to the project review letter of 10 April 2000. 1. Refers to the submittal to Ried Middleton which this is. 2. Refers to the Civil Engr Plans which are being sent by Bima- Holmberg Civil Engr's on the project. 3. The data on the Soils Engr has been added to the project plan sheet. (Company, report & date of report) 4.a A 5' distance has been added to the plan sheet advising of the location of the toe -of -slope of fill. A good detail. 4.b The soils loading has been reviewed and shape revised. The roof reinforcing remains the same. 4.c The soils loading has been reported, dead load stress in the roof reviewed. The roof reinforcing will remain the same. 5. Additional information is provided showing the calculated pressure on the soil at the bottom of the vault and that it will accommodate the load of vault & water. Of course the footing should be inspected prior to pouring the footing as the plan calls for. Previous information provided advised the allowable bearing pressure of 1000psf was at 18" below the surface. And that a column of water at 62.4 PCF replacing a column of soil at 120 PFC could be accommodated. This information exist in all submittals. 6. The project was designed for the use of fc' =3000psi concrete. The concrete strength has been revised to fc' =4000psi to satisfy the review for approval! 7. The reinforcing clearance has been increased to 2 ". RECEIVED Initially there was no dead storage affecting bars. APR 2 5 2000 COMMUNITY M' The enclosed information is provide for the review and approval for construction of the subject storm water vault. If there are question relating to the vault design or detail they may be directed to Miles Consulting. Sinc- Mil.��,:�� ifro_ Don 'ales PE cc Bima Holmberg April 3, 2000 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Scott Wiklof 2226 Elliott Avenue, Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 RE: CORRECTION LETTER #2 Development Permit Application Number MI99 -0220 Foster Heights Retaining Wall 51st Avenue S and S 146th Street Dear Mr. Wiklof: This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit can be approved. All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same time and reflected on your drawings. I have enclosed comments from the Public Works Department. At this time, the Building Division, Fire Department and Planning Division have no comments regarding your application for permit. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. If your revision does not require revised plans but requires additional reports or other documentation, please submit four (4) copies of each document. In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `revision sheet' must accompany every resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections /revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by a messenger service. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206)431 -3672. Brenda Holt Permit Coordinator encl ac: File No. M199 -0220 Reid iddleton March 16, 2000 File No. 26 -00- 005- 012 -01 Mr. Duane Griffin City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Building Permit Plan Review - First Submittal Foster Heights Detention Vault (MI99 -0220) Dear Mr. Griffin: RECEIVED MAR 17 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT We reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the structural provisions of the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Building Code as amended and adopted by the City of Tukwila. The permit applicant should address the following comments. A copy of this letter was forwarded to the project contact for your convenience. 1. The following list of comments should be responded to in itemized letter form. The permit applicant should have the Engineer of Record respond and resubmit two copies of revised structural drawings and one copy of supplemental calculations. All information should be submitted directly to Reid Middleton, Inc. 2. The Civil Drawings (Sheet 5) should be signed by the Engineer of Record per UBC Section 106.3.4 and WAC Section 196 -24 -095. 3. The General Notes, Sheet 1, should reference the 1997 Uniform Building Code. Special inspections should be in accordance with UBC Section 1701.5. 4. The General Notes should reference the soils report by company name, date, and report number. The submitted report (Project No. 98- 103 -02) was prepared by Geospectrum Consultants, Inc., dated July 5, 1999. 5. A 588 plf tributary dead load of the vault cover is indicated on calculation page 2. It appears the 7 -foot tributary width has been considered; however, it is unclear how the 84 psf dead load was determined. A 108 psf dead load is calculated for the concrete - topped metal deck on page 5: 6. The 818 psf bearing pressure calculated on page 2 includes dead load only. Refer to Comment 5 for revised dead load calculations. In addition, superimposed loads due to a water -filled vault should be included in the calculation of the maximum bearing pressure. Engineers Planners Surveyors Washington Oregon Alaska Reid Middleton, Inc. 728134th Street SW Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 Ph: 425 741 -3800 Fax: 425 741 -3900 Mr. Duane Griffin City of Tukwila March 16, 2000 File No. 26 -00- 005- 012 -01 Page 2 C 7. The 1751 plf uniform load on the underside of the vault slab should be revised for adequate dead loads. Refer to Comment 5. 8. Several components of the vault have been designed assuming 4000 psi concrete compressive strength. Refer to calculation pages 5A, 7, and 9. The General Notes specify 3000 psi compressive strength for all concrete. 9. A 1 1/2 -inch concrete cover over the #6 vertical bars is called out in Section 3. The inside face of the vault wall is exposed to water; therefore, a minimum cover of 2 inches should be provided over bars #6 and larger per UBC Section 1907.7.1. In addition, concrete cover for the slab reinforcement should be specified. 10. The 38335 ceiling elevation called out at several locations on Sheet 1 does not correspond to the 382.75 elevation called out on the Sheet 5 of the Civil drawings. Corrections and comments made during the review process do not relieve the project applicant or designer from compliance with code requirements, conditions of approval, and permit requirements; nor is the designer relieved of responsibility for a complete design in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. This plan review check is for general compliance with the Uniform Building Code as it relates to the project. If you have any questions or require any additional clarification, please call. Sincerely, Middleton, Inc. avid B. Swanson, P. ..E. Ky 'e K. amatsuka, E.I.T. irector Structural E ering Group Pla Revi w Engineer Director, bjr\26se\planrevw\tukwila\ON012r 1.doc\dcy cc: Scott Wiklof, Tridor Donald Miles, Miles Consulting Reid iddleton PUBLIC Vi RKS PROJECT REVIEN'.COMMENTS Project Name: Location: F-65T1°7Z File #: /'7.1 °I°1 -- D 21..c.) Action: Dery i s L Date: Ii-- / Zoo c) Reviewed By: ice`): ex:* L_...47 /i PRIOR HISTORY AND CORRESPONDENCE FRANCHISE UTILITY COORDINATION CODE REQUIREMENTS COMP PLAN CIP OVERLAY PROGRAM MISC. STUDIES MAINTENANCE NEEDS RFA WD 125 VAL -VUE PW STANDARDS PRE -APP PROBLEM AREAS d) .- I • .SEL 07 c:6,vc Ea ^^ n>%5 0i/1-1 . 2 1 12124.4.1.0e ti r�t�y► , T' March 8, 2000 Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Dave Swanson, P.E. Reid Middleton 728 - 134th Street SW, Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 RE: Structural Review Foster Heights Detention Vault — (M199 -0220) Dear Mr. Swanson: Please review the enclosed plans and documents for structural compliance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (206)431 -3672. Sincerely, (41411 Brenda Holt, Permit Coordinator encl xc: Permit 'File No: ^,M199 0220``:: c BAIMA & HOLMBERG INC. February 29, 2000 Mike Cusick City of Tulwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Concrete R/D Vault Review — MI99 -0220 Dear Mike: We revised our concrete R/D vault plans per your 12/22/99 redlines and our 2/10/00 telephone conversation as follows: 1. The floor of the vault was made flat as you suggested. We added a baffle about 1/3 of the length from the inlet per the 1998 King County SWM Manual as you requested. We will get the structural plan revised when we know that this is OK. 2. The paved maintenance access parking area was enlarged as requested. A paving section was added. 3. The street name was added, bearings and distances were added to property lines as requested. 4. Additional vault dimension were added, a valve box callout was added, and the vault steps were called out as galvanized. 5. TESC was added to this Sheet. In addition to the above Public Works issues, the Fire Department issues are addressed as follows: 6. The old residential driveway that crossed where the vault will be is going to be removed. A note on the plans now explicitly states this. 7. There will be no vehicular access to the top of the vault, therefore the vault need only be able to withstand earth loads and construction loads, not the fire equipment loads. If you have any questions or comments please call me at 425- 392 -0250. Sincerely, BA1MA & HOLMBERG, INC. I-4'441Z IN/ It Tom Redding TJK.61d 1 116001 MikeCwick CORRECTION ororriggsNA APR 2 9 2000 NWT CENTER Cizy of Tukwila Steven M.- Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director January 19, 2000 Scott Wiklof Tridor, Inc. 2226 Elliott Avenue; Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 Dear Mr. Wiklof: SUBIECT: CORRECTION LETTER #1 Miscellaneous Permit Application Number MI99 -0220 Foster Heights 51ST. Avenue South & South 146th. Street This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your revision to this miscellaneous permit can be approved. All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same time and reflected on your drawings. I have enclosed review comments from the Public Works Department and the Fire Department. At this time the Building Department and Planning Department have no comments regarding your application for permit. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. If your review does not require revised plans but requires additional reports or other documentation, please submit four (4) copies of each document. In order to better expedite your resubmittal a Revision Sheet must accompany every resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections/revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by a messenger service. If you have any questions please contact me at the City of Tukwila Permit Center at (206) 431- 3671. Sincerely, 5t1YYVYY1A6 Tammy Beck Permit Technician Enclosures File: MI99 -0220 To: From: Subject: Date: City of Tukwila Fire Department Jan Illian Chief Olivas Foster Heights-MI 99-0220 December 15, 1999 John W. Rants, Mayor Thomas P. Keefe, Flee Chief These plans are not approved for the following reasons: • It appears as though the detention vault is being placed in an existing vehicular access road. Planning has requested they provide more detailed information on the exact location of the detention vault as it relates to the existing access. • The H2O load is not sufficient for our largest piece of equipment. The vault would need to be designed to hold 67.7# per square inch (9748.8 #s per square foot). Ca .v..><s nr�.. �+' A^ M1�i�vt: n' rv!•. Shh+'. �* p•.+ F' J':`=F lt;1\ iH% Ca+' M13lrv: rACIii. Y4w: �ylrgiµ..✓.�M1.�,,,,,,• „�•,�.�.. .. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Project Name: - ( \-\ < <s 1 CVS Location: File #: IN■1 9 — 0 2 'z..O Action: Date: 12. — is Reviewed By: PRIOR HISTORY AND CORRESPONDENCE FRANCHISE UTILITY COORDINATION CODE REQUIREMENTS COMP PLAN CIP OVERLAY PROGRAM MISC. STUDIES MAINTENANCE NEEDS RFA WD 125 VAL -VUE PW STANDARDS PRE -APP PROBLEM AREAS 0-‘4_ WL1 l5 4142- C -`1-1"-' 4 -` W CC- S-w. ? 'DRS u- •• ' *L. • 1 5 iZe ' ” " ~' i •-- 1 / �,, w pr rte.- CAc.5 , V °`ca U-42Gk. "n.-..` • s l ? - M.13 LAOS LO Y\ COvt t (e-co I-- byi pfm, s v • ,n,oY C 001"A- VS1-10 VC-CZ 11/18/1994 05:09 206 -443 -8857 TRIDOR INC . 'MAR -14 -2000 12:27 FROM TRANSNAT1ON $ELLEUUE ESCR TO 2064438857 %l/ Tridor, Inc. wlns... i=ce Li nvLZ ave., aulte A Aline ea e, a Referenced (If applicable): Gruhtor(s):(t) Nappy valley Land Co.,LLC (2) Grantee(s):(1) Tridor, Inc. (2) Addit. Grantor(s) on pg. Addit. Grantees) on pt. Legal Description(abbr•): PAGE 02 P.02/03 fr1i'ls WCTAq'Oy2Q. Addit. legol(s) on pi. Assessors Tax Parcel IDn 004000- 0539 -02, 004000 - 0550 -06, 004000-0554-02. 004000 - 0560 -04 STATUTORY WARRANTY. DEED •741! GRANTOR Nappy Volley Land Co., LLC a Valhi ton Limited Lability ScReffnY•.firudigfok..6498 tIlgeenef atioe igiigiligalifil'iRL4 !' situated in the County of Rini, State of Mss ington: See Legal Description attached hereto and marked Lahibit "A ". 31j 10T T0: w t to enter said praises to make repairs, under Rec. No. 1112140721. • ts_Ppr C. lament, tens conditions, der Agee No. 190 012 .3lei Ai men, term � eoMitioos under Rec. Pe. Dated: January 13, 1000 STATE or YASHINGTOP COUNTY or King ', On this Wile; of before se, thr ► •reigns , a Wash tni du y,1e • a n d ► , %Mb M� valley Land Co.,LLC, [r s$oin$ • &rumens watery' pv Il 1M 10.ft a ' v s ewe n, • JOA(ltlf. F. 1-!4 :: t• r ;: 1 t#Y Ctfi' it 't's1 i,, •,, • n ►: ur the �i of ersonally appeared c pany that executed tne" y ,and ask le led the said instrument to be the and dee4 of said company, for the rasa and u on oath stated that be is authorized to • sent. 20000/ 2060 j 0-11 11/18/1994 05:09 206- 443 -8857 TRIDOR INC TRIDOR Inc 2226 Elliott Ave., Suite A Seattle, WA 98121 206. 443 -7735 fax 206 - 443 -8857 TO: „greof* #O /t- PaOM: Scott Wikiof DATE: 3 -/ LA-41P PAGES: RE: SO574.r- 4<s-4 G� � Coevnta: S GT' /44, /Gs /4=04. ci Y MILES CONSULTING (425) 747 -4421 SUITE 105 14400 BEL -RED ROAD BELLEVUE, WA 98007 -3952 Ried Middleton 728 134th St SW #200 Everett, Wa 98204 Ref: Storm Drainage Vault Foster Heights Tukwila, Washington RECEIVED APR 2 5 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 31 Mar 2000 The following is provide with respect to the 16 March 2000 correspondence providing plan check & design review on the subject project. 1. The re- submittal includes two copies of the revised plan and a copy of information relating to the design calculation and comments. 2. This submittal includes only the storm water vault from the structural designer and no civil revisions. Civil Plans revisions will be by Bima - Holmberg Civil Engineer on the project. 3. The General notes related to an initial start, not naming the current UBC Edition. The reviewer is correct that the present code section on inspection is Section 1701.5. The previous code section was called out. Call out revised. The section is revised, the current code remains. 4. The Soils Engineering report reference is correct and is added as requested. 5. A 7 foot tributary width, or half the vault was considered when loading an exterior footing on one side. Initially the vault was designed considereing 12 1/2" hollow core concrete plank used in many vaults. That unit has a weight 84 PSF. The hollow core plank concept was dropped when the section considered could but the plank on the vault top in tension. The top slab was changed to a solid section whose weight was 108 PSF. The cover on the vault was then revised by reducing the expected cover also possibly having an uncovered section on which one could walk. A review of the slab loading confirmed a lessor load and the solid section was considered adequate. (See Sketch) 6. See the enclosed calc sheet advising of the re- detailed top slab superimposed loading. With its review the t 1atr- - ..,____� reinforcing was still considered adequate from th n1 't rile D 1Y/ tte_vdtA-3 -DV ! APR - 1 2000 design. D 7. Under the new vault configuration furnished to us the loads considered on the underside of the slab are adequate. The vault should preform okay as designed. 8. It was the intent to use only fc' =3000 psi concrete although certain parts of the design were reviewed with a higher strength. Only designs using the fc' =3000 psi are to be constructed. 9. Concrete cover of reinforcing has been reviewed and revised as required. 10. Various vault elevations have been reviewed to coordinated same with the latest Civil Construction Plans received from the Civil Designer. The design review is a good consideration of details to bring better conformance with the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code. If there is a need for additional information please feel free to contact •t (425)747 -4421. Don` i es PE cc Baima - Holmberg PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: MI99 -0220 DATE: 4 -17 -2000 PROJECT NAME: FOSTER HEIGHTS RETAINING WALL SITE ADDRESS: 51' AVENUE S & S 146th STREET Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # XX Response to Correction Letter # 2 Revision # _ After Permit Is Issued DEPARTMENTS: Building Division Public Works Y l n i .A1n , I1- ) Fire Prevention Structural Planning Division Permit Coordinator DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Incomplete DUE DATE:4 -18 -2000 Not Applicable Comments: TUES /THURS ROUT G: Please Route Structural Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: n No further Review Required n DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: (ten days) Approved Approved with Conditions REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE 5 -9 -2000 Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: CORRECTION DETERMINATION: DUE DATE Approved n Approved with Conditions Not Approved (attach comments) REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: \PRROUTE.DOC PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: M199 -0220 DATE: 2 -29 -2000 PROJECT NAME: FOSTERVIEW ESTATES - RETAINING WALL SITE ADDRESS: 13400 42 AV S Original Plan Submittal XX Response to Correction Letter # 1 Response to Incomplete Letter # Revision # After Permit Is Issued DEPARTMENTS: ing Division IX -I -a) �` P blic Work, Nv� * 3-19 -00 ►rub Fire Prevention 3-1 -0() StRturalZ5" u0 Planning Division V 3 -7-P° Permit Coordinator DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Incomplete n DUE DATE: 3-7-2000 Not Applicable n Comments: TUES /THURS ROUTING: Please Route REVIEWER'S INITIALS: Structural Review Required No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: (ten days) Approved Approved with Conditions DUE DATE 4 -4 -2000 Not Approved (attach comments) REVIEWER'S I■ITIALS: DATE: COVveat 611 L4'V 2l 3 CORRECTION DETERMINATION: Approved Approved with Conditions REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: NJ PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: MI99 -0220 PROJECT NAME: FOSTER HEIGHTS XX Original Plan Submittal Response to Correction Letter # DATE: 12 -7 -99 Response to Incomplete Letter # Revision # _ After Permit Is Issued ��DEEP�PAAQRTMENTS: 1C� Buildi ent g givisiork blic Was 'a► /Jo Fie Prevention Structural Plann g Division w --- Permit Coordinator ou DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Incomplete n DUE DATE: 12 -9 -99 Not Applicable n Comments: TUES /THURS ROUTING: Please Route Fr Structural Review Required nNo further Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: n DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: (ten days) Approved Approved with Conditions n REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE 1-6-2000 Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: CORRECTION DETERMINATION: Approved Approved with Conditions ❑ REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE Not Approved (attach comments) ❑ DATE: \PRROUTE.DOC C City of Tukwila Department of Community Development - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670 Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: Plan Check/Permit Number: MI99 -0220 ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # ® Response to Correction Letter # 2 ❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued Project Name: FOSTER HEIGHTS RETAINING WALL Project Address: 51st Avenue S and S 146t1i Street Contact Person: Scott Wiklof Phone Number: Summary of Revision: Kit 11■J a Q. Ut S L c9-N -1-2, 5 S Aiv 4ULT stru ,cTUI1P L L4 N RECE(vul, CrTY OF TUKWLA MR 7 MI QQ Sheet Number(s): 5 oF �1 � O �' 1 "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: Entered in Sierra on Lj i too 04/03/00 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, eta Date: /0C1 (e, 0 Plan Check/Permit Number: MIcici' 0220 0 Response to Incomplete Letter # X Response to Correction Letter # ' Revision # after Permit is Issued • Project Name: 1b511eP1 H e i ht5 Project Address: .6 1 s't AV S 1411 Contact Person: Phone Number: Summary of Revision: VTUIs5D 17- k/tLC w ,Gs F. P Sheet Number(s): "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: Er Entered in Sierra on 06/29/99 May -08 -O0 02205P a 4256441145 4 P.O1 DEF'ARTIWRN'C OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES REGISTERED AS PROVIDED BY LAW AS CONST CONT GENERAL 'REGIST. # EXP, DATE CCO1 ANDERRH037QC 09/29/2000 EFFECTIVE DATE 11/03/1997 ANDERSON RICHARDSON HARTLEY 14400 BEL -RED RD #203 BELLBVUE WA 98007