Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-19-88 - GENCOR INC - NORTH HILL OFFICE BUILDINGNORTH HILL OFFICE BUILDING (GENCOR, INC.) CONSTRUCTION OF THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING 5800 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. EPIC 19 -88 A F F AVIT O F 0 ISTRII0UT I0N DIANN MARTINEZ hereby declare that: Notice of Public Hearing 0 Notice of Public Meeting [I Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Q Board of Appeals Agenda Packet C1 Planning Commission Agenda Packet Q Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Q Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit Q Shoreline Management Permit 0 Determination of Nonsignificance 0 Mitigated Determination of Non - significance 0 Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice C1 Notice of Action Q Official Notice Other C1 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on SEE ATTACHED JUNE 14, 1990 , 19 . Name of Project NORTH HILLS OFFICE File Number EPIC - 18 - 88 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary 1. VanDusen, Mayor City of Tukwila PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila, Planning Commission and Board of Architectural Review will conduct a public hearing on June 28, 1990, at 8:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, to consider the following: OLD BUSINESS - Board of Architectural Review Public Meeting CASE NUMBER APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: NEW BUSINESS - CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: 90 -5 -DR EAGLE HARDWARE REMODEL PROJECT Sconzo Associates New construction of 22,140 S.F. of retail /office space in an existing bldg & addition. 101 Andover Park East; in the SE 1/4 Sec. 23, Twn. 23 RGE 4; Tukwila, WA. Planning Commission Public Meeting 90- 19 -SPE CHERIE'S FLORIST Heath Signs Special Permission for wall sign review 343 Strander Blvd. Sec. 23, Twn,23 RGE 4; Tukwila, WA. Board of Architectural Review Public Hearing CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: 90 -7 -DR Bon Marche Distribution Warehouse Allied Stores Corporation Construct a 31,700 S.F. addition to existing Bon Marche Distribution Warehouse. 17000 Southcenter Parkway Sec. 22 Twn. 23 RGE 4; Tukwila, WA. • Public Hearing Notice Page 2 CASE NUMBER: 89 -17 -DR Office Building APPLICANT: Gencor Inc. REQUEST: Construction of on story, 9,524 S.F. office building; 33 parking lot and installation of landscaping LOCATION: 5800 Southcenter Blvd. Sec. 23, twn.23 Rge. 4E CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: 89- 14 -DR, 62nd Ave Apartments Southcenter Associates Construction of 72 unit apartment complex (6 blgs.), 2 recreation center, surface and garage parking for 150 vehicles and landscaping. 62nd Avenue South and Sunwood Drive (Private Street) Sec. 23, twn. 23, Rge 4E. Persons wishing to comment on the above cases may do so by written statement or by appearing at the public hearing. Information on the above cases may be obtained at the Tukwila, Planning Department. The City encourages you to notify your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above items. Published: Valley Daily News - June 17, 1990 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File MICHIO KATO 9316 39TH S. SEATTLE, WA. 98118 TOM AND KAZUE KATO 15419 62ND AVE. S. SEATTLE, WA. 98188 TONY S. KATO 133 S. 168TH SEATTLE, WA. 98148 OLD STONE REAL ESTATE 2495 140TH AVE NE #101 BELLEVUE, WA. 98005 DENYS RASH #200 -47 -01695 P.O. BOX 1600 ROWLET, TX. NORTH HILLS JOINT VENTURE 11801 NE 160TH STE G BOTHELL, WA. 98011 ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO. 963125 PS &T TAX. DEPT. SS #06155 -11 P.O. BOX 2485 LOS ANGLES, CA 90015. • A F F I. v I T I, D I ANN MARTIN Z E] Notice of Public Hearing Q Notice of Public Meeting EI Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Q Board of Appeals Agenda Packet O Planning Commission Agenda Packet Q Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Q Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit Q Shoreline Management Permit O F D I S T R I E O T I O N hereby declare that: Q Determination of Nonsignificance (i Mitigated Determination of Non - significance O Determination of .Significance and Scoping Notice C1 Notice of Action Q Official Notice O Other Q Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION CENTRAL OPERATIONS PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY CAMPUS MAIL STOP PV -11 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 -8711 Name of Project NORTH HILL OFFICE File Number EPIC 18 88 JUNE 13, 1990 , 19 . WAC 197 -11 -970 MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal Construct a one story, 9,524 square foot office building and a 33 stall parking lot. Project also includes landscaping and a storm water runoff system. Proponent Gencor. Inc. Location of Proposal,- including street address, if any 5800 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, Washington; SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23, RANGE 4E Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -19 -88 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. [l There is no comment period for this DNS Ej This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by 5 P.M., JUNE 28, 1990 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Position /Title Address Date Rick Beeler Planning Director 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tu,. OlfP '8188 Phone 433 -1846 Signature You may appea l this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATED DECLARATION OF NON SIGNIFICANCE North Hills Office DATE: June 13, 1990 PROPOSAL: 9,524 square foot, 1 story office building LOCATION: 5800 Southcenter Boulevard APPLICANT: Gencor, Inc. FILE REFERENCE: EPIC -19 -88 THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW RECORD The environmental review consisted of analysis based on the following documents included in the environmental record: * Application for Design Review received 11 -22 -89 * Environmental Checklist (dated 3- 22 -90) * Letter from Geotech, James Eaton (dated 6- 24 -87) * Letter from Geotech, James Eaton (dated 6- 16 -89) * Letter from Geotech, James Eaton (dated 6- 21 -89) * Letter from Geotech, James Eaton (dated 5- 10 -90) * Letter from Geotech, James Eaton (Stamped 6- 12 -90) * Traffic Impact Study prepared by Entranco Engineers, Inc (dated 3- 28 -90) * Development plans (originals) * Revised development plans: L -1, A -1, A -2 and A -7 (dated 6- 11 -90) * Letter from Landscape Architect, Ken Loney (dated 3- 12 -90) * Preliminary Title Report ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW BACKGROUND A previous environmental review was conducted for an office building on this site. An Environmental Checklist for a larger office project (3 story, 16,821 square feet) was prepared and dated July 1, 1988. A Determination of Non - Significance was issued by the City on August 18, 1988. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposal includes the construction of a one story, 9,524 square foot office building and a 33 stall parking lot. Project also includes landscaping and a storm water runoff system -1- Threshold Determination /Gencor, Inc. /EPIC DESIGN FEATURES The proposal includes a painted concrete structure, asphalt paving for the parking area, and landscaping. Access to the site Southcenter Boulevard is via two driveways. PERMITS REQUIRED * Design Review * Grading Permit * Building Permit * Utility /Street Use Permits * Developer Agreement (for potential off -site improvements) CHECKLIST ITEMS A. EARTH The original Geotechnical Report prepared by James Eaton, PE., (dated 6- 24 -87) indicated presence of sandstone bedrock and several types of permeable and highly impermeable glacially associated soils. That Report concluded that the sandstone bedrock is hard enough to support conventional spread footings. The report also concluded that sand or pea gravel should separate the slab from the natural soils. The design of the proposed project was revised after the initial submittal. The revised design of the structure provides for the use of "Shotcrete" to construct in particular the north wall of the office. The use of this material (and technique) substantially reduces the amount of the bank to be cut. The Geotech of record has submitted documentation indicating that the hillside is stable. He has reviewed the civil plans and indicated that the short term impacts are properly mitigated and the long term impact of the proposal will not appreciably affect the hillside's stability. The revised proposal involves the excavation of cubic yards of soil and the removal of some spoils. The temporary impact of the spoils removal can be partially mitigated through the controls as a part of the issuance of a Street Use permit. During site grading activities there is potential for erosion. The civil plans contain mitigation measures to control such erosion. Additional mitigating measures, however, may be imposed as part of the Design Review approval process. -2- • • Threshold Determination /Gencor, Inc. /EPIC B. AIR Short term impacts to air quality would occur as a result of construction activity. These impacts include: dust generation and truck and equipment emissions. Although not evaluated for this proposal, there is substantial existing traffic along Southcenter Boulevard and within the Southcenter Mall area which generate emissions. The long term impacts to air quality for this proposal are not considered to be significant. Dust control measures;. i.e., water spraying the site during hot and dry weather as well as sweeping and flushing the roadways would adequately mitigate temporary impacts to air quality. C. PLANTS The site is vacant, however, most of the site has undergone previous extensive grading except for the most northern portion of the site containing the steep slopes. Some storage of spoils from other parts of the nearby apartment construction has occured on the site so that little indigenous vegetation remains. The existing vegetation which consists largely of alder on the upland portion of the site. The grading activities necessary to construct the office structure may encroach into portions of the existing vegetation and steep slope. D. NOISE The project will generate short term noise impacts to surrounding residences during construction due to operation of construction equipment. Limiting construction activities to the week days as provided under TMC 8.22.160 will partially reduce noise impacts to the surrounding residences. E. TRANSPORTATION The site fronts on Southcenter Blvd. Access to the site is via a shared access easement along the west property line (shared with the North Hills Apartments) and from a driveway cut at the east end of the property. Turning movements to and from the site at this driveway location are restricted to "Right Turn" into" and "Right Turn" out of based on a previous condition of approval for the original 3 -story office building.. -3- • • Threshold Determination /Gencor, Inc. /EPIC A Traffic Impact Study was prepared (by Entranco Engineers, Inc., and dated 3- 28 -90) for this project. The report indicated the project is expected to generate a total of 225 average daily vehicle trips with 27 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour and 18 trips during the noon peak hour. The report recommended that the following be accomplished to enhance safety and operational efficiency: o paint a crosswalk for the North leg of the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection; o repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Blvd to clearly identify the center left turn lane; and o monitor the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection with future development to determine the implementation of a traffic signal. MITIGATION PROVIDED BY PROPOSAL The mitigation provided as part of the proposal includes: 1. Use of filter fabric to control sediment from leaving the site (Storm drainage note # 4, Sheet 2 of 3). 2. Hydroseeding with rye grass of areas where sod is to be removed (Storm drainage note # 11, sheet '2 of 3). 3. Use of oil /water separation features on catch basin (storm drainage note # 5, sheet 2 of 3). CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Issuance of a Determination of Non - Significance is appropriate since the environmental review indicates no probability of significant adverse environmental impacts from the proposal. ADDITIONAL MITIGATION PROPOSED The Design Review process may require additional mitigation measures not included below. Additional Mitigation required of the proposal includes: A. EARTH 1. No heavy equipment shall be used for any grading /construction activities beyond the limits of disturbance limits for the shotcrete wall on the north -4- Threshold Determination /Gencor, Inc. /EPIC side of the proposed building. Any construction activities in this area of the site shall be limited to hand work. B. WATER 2. To mitigate adverse water quality impacts to the storm water system from sedimentation, tire cleaning provisions should be made and any existing catch basins where mud is likely to collect should be protected by filter fabric. C. PLANTS 3. Proposed new trees should not be planted in compacted soil unless gravel drain sumps are installed under each tree or the subgrade soil is rototilled. D. TRANSPORTATION 4. The following measures shall be required to mitigate the traffic impacts of the proposal: a. paint a crosswalk for the North leg of the Southcenter Blvd /North Hills driveway intersection; and b. repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Blvd to clearly identify the center left turn lane. M. FItil prase City Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southoenter Blvd Tukwila; WA 90188 Re: North Hill Office Building Dear Mr. Fraser, RECEIVED JUN 1 2 1990 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS E ercor has related to me your request for additional information �rrnr;t.ic'n on soils aspects of desigi: on !Ns office project. 1) Separate linos will carry ;,r:rtace and roof drainage !rem the ayabm which collects "clean" •vaier from footing and backwall drains. For the latter a six inch line will coincide wilt: the WEst, Noll, and East pc-riiao :er lines. Sin face !Ines will he sized by the civil engineer. The st:i iz ;e and cubs•: taco systems ca.n;oin at CB's tiff the Southwest and /or Southeast building corners. 2) Trcc West end of the North perimeter wall and the `JCrth end of the West perimeter wall wilt be of si,otcrete CernGti auction for combined length of about 100 feet. Miradrain 6000 or equivalent will be laid against the cut face before shotcrete is applied. ►wo feet :vide strips oil six foot centers will be used :n permeable above the Water table as deter mined at the time of excavation. There will be ! 0t percent coverage beiow any water table of arty soil of potential Iritcrm!'itc t satluratio , as determined at the time of e.Y:avat!on. This system will assure that there will t'e no ihycro tatic col 'tribal:on to the lateral pressure against the wall. The shctcrate portion of the wail will i,.Je an "L" or modified "!_" configuration. Nc,n shotcrate portion will he conventionally bac'ahlied with gianu!ar material and 1..;orl:'entonal!y drained into the six inch system. The si:eNth beik'w" wa`; copied from a Mitadrain publication and shows .cheinaticaily how the. Miradrain l . iitstalkid init is not tepresentaiive Cad the footing eon iiitlr at n. V :.rlriCAL WALL AND UNDE^ FLOOR SLAB COMBINATION OPTION rouNtWlCN WALL MiCAC AIN 1! • a 1 : \, /•,,v rAtirclC -- —.i E4.•' O < .pf l•v . kti. I> • 0 4 • C'iSCH. f'P S JAMES EATON, PE pa GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (206) 682 -6942 WI Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 r oi , have examined architectural sheet A -1 and ^ l : ! s ltft s 1 1':1: '�. :• r. 1 i+�..t:,d Q- � !. 1 :tt: r y; �:.•I:t t• i gec:cchnic al dotall, I concur with iiiete drawings. 4) i have been a4ked ity Gencor to De available to make whatti'er inspections 4,• t'6iuli ed. + I aNe 3o agreed and expuet to make inspection trip on request 5) Exploration done in 1987 and 1989 revealed on evidence of part sliding or inctab ll:ty at as ,y vi ry test iocation or at anti visible features. Any existing fill will he removed and its stabil ity the r e,ors irrelevant. No evidence of Scarps or slide debris were noted and the sa!!s iV„E+ti zotit; t'io described are types not normally associated with instability. The only grout.dwater ; ;i1 tip to is a thin perched horizon %ibove the bedrock: or weathered bedrock. it is ri,y o;..0!tvin That there nothing unique or a hazardous nar!lre about the slope condticn which wcu1d tig, ie into the feasibility of safety of the pre. jee t proposed. ::ubseai ent to you meeting with Gencor last Friday the existing West property line reteinirrj wall has =ever, de!ered. That modification has no bearincd on any of my conclusions or recommendations. .?%.1.0;:i. vary truly, y.. JUN 1 2 1990 TtKvot-'. • , • .PUBLIC W 7403040470 PLANNING DEPT. COURTESY OF NORTHWESTERN TITLE CO. (206) 625.1952 .GRANT OF CASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN SY THESE PRESENCE.: Restaurant Industries, Inc., an Oregon corporation, the Grantor, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant'unto.Tony 6.; Kato and Darla M. Kato, husband and wife, an easement over and across a parcel of land located in Tract 35 o': Brookvale Garden Tracts, ea per plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plata on page 47, Records of Kinq County, Washington, and of the unplatted strip Of land adjoining on the East, lying between the East line of said Tract 35 (said Cast ling being also the Fast line of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M.) and the West line of the interurban Addition as per plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, on page 55, records of Geld County, described ass Beginning at the intersection of the Neat line of said Interurban Addition with the Northerly line of Primary State Highway No.1 RE as described in King County Superior Court Cause No. 6007261 said point being the true point of beginnings thence Northwesterly along said northerly line a distance of 25 feet, thence Northerly a distance of 60 feat on a line parallel to the West .line of said Interurban Additions thence Southeasterly a distance of 25 feat on a line parallel to the said Northerly liae of Primary state highway No. 1 RR: thanes Southerly along the Neat line of said Interurban Addition to the true point of beginning, for purpose of ingress to and egress from contiguous lands owned by the Grantees. This easement shall be perpetual in time, shall run with the successors and assigns of the parties. Dated this , 1 /21( , day of January, '1974. 1',; Exciga T au Mot ReQuired lf::IR v. 1'404;14211. tine Co. ComPItotter R ,•r!, !.1!!.,C,l c,... rf!Paty RESTAURANT INDUSTRIES, INC. By •4110-1-- I.F. ati-s Pres dent 1 11 ay rotary .:,..•:. • • ' . t A • f.g. • • • 'STATE OF OREGON , -COUNTY Or MARION ) .ft eth Day al' January, 1074, before me, the undersigned, a Notary PubliC in and for the State of Orogon, duly commissioned and sworn, personalty appeared C. Robert Altman and Arlen Smith to me known to be the President and Secretary, Tespectively, of pgttirnt, IndUetiii7C—InC: the corporation that executed the t foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to bethe•free-anct voluntary act ad deed:of said corporation, for 11 the uses and purp6iee therein mentioned, and on oath Stated that they authorised1.to •xeciate the said instrument and that the Seal affixed is the'cOrporate seal of said corporation. ' Witness my..hand and official seal hereto Affixed the day and year firit above written. . — ■ • • • k■ orErrlirtiaiirrrrid- for the Sta.W77)—. Oregon residing At Salem My Commission expires C,c./. . 7): 1 • IJUN 1 2 1990 [11.11M JUN 1 21990 CTYOr u vv PLAINUMG OPT.. .'1 t:i r' 10 '90 42:06 FROM BSC-BEL 2 May 10;.1990 Mr. -Dale jo'hnson LB.G. Architects ',... Fax No. 283- 1293. • :. RE: North: Ii11. Office Building: (Gencor) .. . Dear Mr 3obzon Sinee my:last 'coitrespondence•on the above :referenced :project: about ten rnonths ago, the • .retaining.-wall systtem:has, been rOiSed, to include shotcrete construction; and. greater- height than . earlier proposed. °.Bush, • Roed `4.1iitchings, Inc.: has provided, :me with an erosion • control sheet, a ;grading, and storm. drainage sheet, and '`a : sanitary sewer. acid : water plan. • Substantially: the same conclusions and recommendations .given :for.the conventional: poured • walls -are.: applicable. to .the:shotcrete system: The main geotechnical•di£ferences are that .1) the temporary excavation wi ll be steeper and Will be shored- by: soil nailing; and :2), there will ;be 'no bacl tk .. Jse of;the:design parameters recommended irl.earliei.correspondence requires that : PAGE . 003 IVTr:. Dale: Johnson ... . Page 2 .MMy,10 ;:.1990.: It :appears -that:;sheet 3, :'also: last revised:':4 /20/90, contains. any.geotechnical provisions or issues not already addressed. 1 ,concur.with the notes; regarding, utility,bac}thll, ' est.. tliat you provide me` with: relevant structural sheets. when they.: available. :I.s letter:-is ?not. to' :Ere'ius:'e : out. Of-Context with the follgwing•letters_and rep irts signed by. xrcyself and ha;ag • pplication os bj ect project J4ne. :::8; 19.87. • : ie.;. 6;4989 June, 21, 1989 • July 42, 1989 • :letter; to Leos. Grundstein. lettee,to Leon Grundstem letter to. Le on Gru.udstein letter:to LeonGrundsteiz ..and Walter .Smith May 10, 1990 Mitch and Hisako Kato 9316 39th Avenue South Seattle, Wa 98118 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kato: I am writing this letter to inform you that we are going forward on the development of a 9,000 square, foot building on the property adjacent to your land in Tukwila. This is also to let you know that we will disturb 30 feet of the southwesterly portion of your property. Due to the steepness of the slope at this corner, the only way to effectively retain the soil is to grade the slope of your property and put in a retaining wall along our southeasterly corner. I can further describe what we are doing in a personal meeting with you. I would also like to talk to you about an easement to do some additional grading on your property. This would allow us to avoid placing a twelve foot retaining wall along our abutting property lines. If you grant us an easement for slope grading, instead of Gencor building a retaining wall, we can prevent your site from having serious restrictions on access. These restrictions could seriously affect the future value and marketability of your property. I will be calling you in the near future to further discuss these issues, and answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Leon Gxundstein Gencor Development Inc. 750 Sixth Street South Suite 200 Kirkland, WI 98033 ) r v t L i i'i TITLE--' A Mlnndso0 TNB Compwiy 250 Arctic Building • 700 NO Avenue SoatUo. Wiishlnptan 981041849 tam 8261•12 PRELIMINARY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Our Order No.: NT038851 Unit: 3 Leon Grundstein 750 6th Ave S. #200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Attn: Leon {our Reference: KATO "affective Date: May 1, 1990 at 8:30 a.m. 'olicy.or.Policies to be issued: ILTA Loan Policy X Amount: Later Standard Extended X Premium: Later Tax: Later Rate: Later "roposed Lender: Later 'ITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MINNESOTA agrees to issue on request and on ::•ecording of any appropriate documents, its policy or policies as :applied for, with coverage as indicated, based on this preliminary commitment that title to the property described herein is vested on 1.he date shown above in :ATOME KATO, who is identical with TONY KATO and DORIS KATO, husband nd wife :.object only to the exceptions shown herein and to the terms, s:onditions and exceptions contained in the policy form. 'Phis report and commitment shall have no force or effect except as a tasis for the coverage specified herein. Jack Hagen, Title Officer Colleen Barnes, Assistant Phone: 625 -0313 and 625 -1952 FAX: 292 -8057 ::EE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION. ( CONTINUED ) ORTHWESfiERN ITLE " A Minnesota Title Company 1. GENERAL TAXES, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY AFTER DELINQUENCY; 1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1: For Year: Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Parcel No.: Levy Code: 1990 $12,225.92 $ 6,112.96 359700- 0202 -09 2380 ASSESSED VALUATION PER KING COUNTY Land: Improvements: 2. DEED OF TRUST, Grantor: Trustee: Beneficiary: Amount: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: $268,100.00 $675,100.00 OFFICE OF AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS David Hudesman and Linda Security Title Insurance Peoples National Bank of $150,000.00 December 14, 1972 December 29, 1972 7212290083 FINANCE: THEREOF: Hudesman, his wife Company Washington The address of the lender or the last assignee, as disclosed of record is as follows: 1903 Third Aveune Seattle, Washington 98101 2. LEASE, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Lessor: Tony Kato and Doris Kato, husband and wife., Landlord Lessee: Vip's Restaurants, Inc., Tenant Disclosed by Memorandum thereof Recorded: February 13, 1975 Recording No.: 7502130412 (Copy attached) Lessee's interest in said lease assigned To Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation Recording No.: 8712030050 and 8712030051 Subsequently assigned to: North Hills Joint Venture Partners, a Washington joint venture comprised of Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation, and North Hills Apartments, Inc., a Washington Corporation by assignment of Lease recorded June 22, 1988, under Recording No. 8806220636. UT038851/813 Page 2 ORTHWESTERN' TLE " A01 :i A Mu nesoip 77Ue Company 4. COMMERCIAL DEED OF TRUST AND SECURITY AGREEMENT WITH ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Grantor: Trustee: Beneficiary: Amount: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: North Hills Joint Venture Partners, a Washington joint venture comprised of Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation and North. Hills Apartments, Inc., a Washington corporation Northwestern Title Company Key Bank of Puget Sound, a Washington banking corporation $1,700,000.00 March 1, 1990 March 27, 1990 9003271406 Affects this and other property 5. FINANCING STATEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Secured Debtor: Party: Key Bank of Puget Sound North Hills Joint Venture Partners, a Washington joint venture comprised of Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation and North Hill Apartments, a Washington corporation Personal property on real estate descri:ped herein March 27, 1990, in the office of the County Recorder Covers: Filed: Uniform Commercial Code No.: 9003271407 Affects this and other property 6. CERTIFICATE. AND AGREEMENT: Lessor: Lessee: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: (Copy attached) Satomi Kato, AKA Tony Kato, and Doris Kato, husband and wife North Hills Joint Venture Partners, a Washington general partnership March 1, 1990 March 29, 1990 9003290169 T038851/813 Page 3 OETHWESTERN Allti A Ma nesota Tde Company 7.. ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS AND /OR LEASES, GIVEN AS SECURITY, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Assignor: Assigne: Amount: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: VIP's Industries, Inc., an Oregon corporation Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation Not disclosed December 1, 1987 December 3, 1987 8712030052 Affects portion of said premises. 8. ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS AND /OR LEASES, GIVEN AS SECURITY, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Assignor: Assigne: Amount: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: VIP's Industries, Inc., an Oregon corporation Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation Not disclosed December 1, 1987 December 3, 1987 8712030053 Affects portion of said premises. 9. FINANCING STATEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Secured Party: Debtor: Covers: Filed: Uniform Commercial Code No.: VIP's Industries, Incorporated Gencor, Inc. Personal property on real estate described herein December 3, 1987, in the office of the County Recorder 8712030054 Affects portion of said premises. 10. Pending action Cause No.: Plaintiff: Defendant: in King County Superior Court 89- 2- 12421 -1 Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation Ostergaard- Robinson & Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation; David 0. Ostergaard and Jane Doe Ostergaard, husband and wife; and Kent L. Robinson and Jane Doe Robinson, husband and wife., third -party plaintiffs: 4T038851/813 Page 4 • QRTHWESTERN LE '" A Minnesota Title Company Geo- Dimensions, Inc., a Washington corporation; Ed Green and Jane Doe Green, his wife; North Hills Joint Venture Partners, a Washington joint venture comprised of Gencor, Inc., a Washington corporation, and North Hills Apartments, Inc., a Washington corporation; Key Bank of Puget Sound, a Washington banking corporation; and M. A. Segale, Inc., a Washington corporation, Third -party defendants Being an action for: Money due to Engineering malpractice Attorney for Plaintiff: Robert B. Spitzer Attorney for Defendant: Dale J. Galvin NOTE: Lis Pendens thereof recorded September 19, 1989 & February 12, 1990 as Recording No. 8909190571 F, 9002120667. NOTE: Further information will be provided by supplemental report. 11. LIEN FOR LABOR AND /OR MATERIAL AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Claimed by: Ostergaard-Robinson F Associates, Inc. Against: Gencor, Inc. In Amount of: $10,514.67 Work Commenced or Material Delivered: June 15, 1987 Work Ceased: February 22, 1989 Recorded: May 17, 1989 Recording No.: 8905171183 12. Unrecorded Leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and holders of security interests on personal property installed upon said property, and rights of tenants to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. 13. Questions of survey, rights of persons in possession, material, equipment and labor liens. Upon completion of our inspection of the premises, we will report by supplemental the matters disclosed. thereby. NOTE 1: Address of Property: To Follow NT038851/813 Page 5 �UK" Ir WtkN A Minresote.Y7roe fi, ompany NOTE 3: The language contained in the printed Exclusions from Coverage and Conditions and Stipulations of the policy committed for may be examined by inquiry at the office which issued the Commitment, and a specimen copy of the insurance policy form (or forms) referred to !in this commitment will be furnished promptly upon request. NOTE 4: Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance, or connection charges for sewer, water or electricity. NOTE 5: In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be,charged for services rendered in accordance with our schedule. , NOTE 6: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B" FOR FURTHER EXCEPTIONS BL /hc 813 NT038851/813 Page 6 EXHIBIT "A" ORTHWESTERN LE IA " A Minnesota Tine Company That portion of Tract 11 of Interurban Addition to Se,attle,'according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, records of King County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the West line of said Tract 11, distant South 0 °35' West 228 feet from the Northwest corner thereof; thence North 89 °.52' East parallel with the North line of said Tract 11, a distance of 185 feet, more or less, to the West line of the East 450.86 feet of said Tract 11; thence South 0 °08' East along said West line 260 feet, more or less, to the Northerly line of Primary State Highway No. 1, R.R. as conveyed to the State of Washington by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 5473599; thence North 70 °32'27" West along said Northerly line 198.57 feet more or less to the West line of said Tract 11; thence North 0 °35' East 194.22 feet to the point of beginning. SUBJECT TO and easement for ingress, egress and utilities over the West 25 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH that portion of Tract 11 of INTERURBAN ADDITION TO SEATTLE, according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, records of King County, Washington described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Tract 11; thence South 0 °35' West along the West line of said Tract 11, a distance of 228 feet, thence North 89 °52' East parallel with the North line of said Tract 11 a distance of 185 feet, more or less, to the West line of the East 450.86 feet of said Tract 11; thence North 0 °08' West along said West line 228. feet to the North line of said Tract 11; thence South 89 °52' West 181.79 feet to the point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities over that portion of the West 25 feet of said Tract 11, lying South of the above - described property and lying North of Primary State Highway No. 1, R.E. END OF EXHIBIT "A" NT038851/813 Page 7 ORTHWESTERN LE A Minnesota Title Company A. RELEASE OF DAMAGE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Between: Satomi Kato, a /k /a Tony Kato And: The City of Tukwila Dated: December 3, 1972 Recorded: August 15, 1974 Recording No.: 7408150422 Releasing the City of Seattle from all future claims for all damages resulting from the inability of Indemnities to negotiate the Indemnitoe's subject driveway during periods of extreme inclement weather with any of Indemnitee's service, rescue and /or firefighting equipment and personnel. Affects a portion and includes other property. E. EASEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Purpose: Disclosed by: Area Affected: Ingress, egress and utilities Instruments recorded under King County Recording Nos. 8012160684 and 8012160685 As described therein C. EASEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Purpose: Disclosed by: Area Affected: Ingress, egress and utilities Instrument recorded under King County Recording No.: 8412311478 The West 30 feet of the East 480.86 feet and lying South of the North 280.00 feet of Tract 11 D. RESTRICTIONS, CONDITIONS AND COVENANTS CONTAINED IN CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Between: And: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: Affects Parcel E.. The City of Tukwila North Hill Associates, a Joint Venture consisting of Western Pacific Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation and VIP's Restaurants, Inc., an Oregon corporation April 29, 1985 May 1, 1985 8505010766 E. EASEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Purpose: Disclosed by: Area Affected: Water, sewer and recreational trail purposes Instrument recorded under King County Recording No.: 8703190468 Portion of said premises NT038851/813 Page 8 F. EASEMENT, AND THE Purpose: Disclosed by: Area Affected: EASEMENT, AND THE Purpose: Disclosed by: Area Affected: Said instrument 8810170290. H. EASEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ..p RTFi W ES I ERIC ALE A Minneso6 This Compsf y TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: For Parking purposes Instrument recorded under King County Recording No.: 8804110076 The description contained therein is not . sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: For Parking and Recreational Space Rights Instrument recorded under King County Recording No.: 8807210449 The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. was amended under King County Recording No. Purpose: Disclosed by: Area Affected: Vehicular Access Instrument recorded under King County Recording No.: 8807210450 The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described..: I. AGREEMENT FOR CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE AND EQUIPMENT, TOGETHER WITH A RIGHT OF ENTRY AND OTHER PROVISIONS: TCI Cablevision of Washington, Inc. Gencor Inc. September 27, 1988 8809270333 Between: And: Recorded: Recording No.: Affects this and other property. EASEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Grantee: Purpose: Puget Sound Power. & Light Company, a Washington corporation Underground electric transmission and /or distribution system NT038851/813 Page 9 Area Affected: Recorded: Recording No.: .' C7RTHWESTpRN LE aarce A Mine is 7711e CvmpanY A right -of -way 10 feet in width having 5 feet of such width on each side of a centerline described as follows: The centerline of Grantee's facilities as constructed or.to;be constructed, extended, or relocated, lying within the above described as follows: March 13, 1989 8903130883 Affects this and other property. Said instrument is a re- recording of instrument recorded August 22, 1988 under King County Recording No. 8808221072. K. PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM STATE OF WASHINGTON: Recorded: November 17, 1988 Recording No.: 8811170199 As follows: The grantee herein, its successors or assigns, shall have no right of ingress and egress to, from, and between said SR S and the lands herein conveyed; nor shall the grantee herein, its successors or assigns, be entitled to compensation . for any loss of light, view, and air occasioned by the location, construction, maintenance, or operation of said highway. The specific details concerning all of which may be found on sheet 6 of that certain plan entitled SR 5, South 178th St. to South 126th St., now of record and on file in the office of the Secretary of Transportation at Olympia, Washington, bearing rate of approval January 30, 1962. The grantee as part consideration herein does hereby agree to comply with all civil rights and anti - discrimination requirements of RCW Chapter 49.60, as to the lands herein described. L. A RECORD OF SURVEY AND MATTERS RELATING THERETO. Recorded: Book: Page: Auditor's No.: Affects: August 10, 1983 37 30 8308109001 This and other property END OF EXHIBIT "B" NT038851/813 Page 10 NOI1rHWESTERN TITui ° ZV A16erwd Tab awn? 250 Arai:: Building 700 Thirc Avenue Seattle, l'lashing= 98104 -1849 Order Na ? AO Plat. Vol, 10 page 5— w 4 2 PP .a•=fw, ae3..6 Otte • aa.r S. 153RD. ST, 10 •••••• .• •••#. •41Pw• III•.• 1• `y, 4"MNFr+ yat/ae! 1bRs A,, RY • M! . „. 1 3 fk S T4 T n 3 f )imen$iana g subject premises are: _ '‘Z2 . , /gyp/ X -0,, f y l9 '�` , 'his sketch foes not purport to show all highways. roads or easements affecting said property.. No liability is assumed far variations in dimensions and )cation, anc Is not based upon a survey of the property described In this order. It is furnished without charge, solely for the purpose of assisting in )eating the .lescribed premises. The Company assumes no liability far inaccuracies therein. CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENVIRON NTAL REVIEW ROUTrIG FORM EPIC: TO: E Building I 1 Planning Pub Wks PROJECT Fire 1 1 Police 1 1 Parks /Rec NORTH HILLS OFFICE BUILDING IN TUKWILA ADDRESS DATE TRANSMITTED 4 -23- 1990 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR JACK PACE DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED The attached environmental checklist was received regarding this project.. Please review and comment below to advise the responsible official regarding the threshold determination. The environmental review file is available in the Planning Department through the above staff . coordinator. Comments regarding the project you wish carried to the Planning Commission, Board of. Adjustment and City Council should be submitted in the comment section below. ITEM COMMENT 4 l Jrn7��ccir�e Date: 17) Comments prepared by: , 09/14/89 • ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC. March 28, 1990 Mr. Ron Cameron City Engineer City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 LAKE WASHINGTON PARK BUILDING 8 5808 LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVAR�I E-H+R$ (206) t4B-W27 -1300 � �� V I N1-° APR 23 1990 c';1 Y of 6 `.!I:MIA PLANNING DEPT. Re: Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed North Hills Office Building in Tukwila, Washington Entranco Project No. 90809 -06 Dear Ron: This letter outlines the traffic impact analysis performed for the North Hills Office Build- ing in Tukwila, Washington. The proposed site is located on the north side of South - center Boulevard west of the 61st Avenue South Bridge and adjacent to the existing Arco AM /PM Mini Mart site. The proposed development will consist of 9,000 square feet of general office space. Two access driveways are planned to ingress and egress the site. One driveway will access the site from Southcenter Boulevard and the other driveway will access the existing North Hills Driveway. EXISTING CONDITIONS Southcenter Boulevard will provide the primary access route to the proposed site. It is currently a five lane east -west minor arterial with two lanes in each direction and a cen- ter left turn Zane. The speed limit is currently signed for 30 mph. The existing North Hills Driveway serves the 54 unit North Hills Apartments complex just north of the proposed office building site and the Arco AM /PM Mini Mart. The Arco facility operates with two other existing driveways along with the North Hills Driveway. A noon peak (12:00 - 1:00 p.m.) and p.m. peak (4:00 - 5:00 p.m.) hour turn movement count was conducted for the North Hills and Arco driveways on March 19th and 20th, 1990 by Entranco Engineers. The City of Tukwila Engineering staff provided the exist- ing traffic volume data for Southcenter Boulevard. Figure 1 shows the 1990 existing traffic volumes at the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection. Traffic flow operations were also observed during the noon and p.m. peak hours. The observations showed no significant operational problems except for the westbound queue from the Macadam Road /Southcenter Boulevard intersection which occasionally extends from the intersection back beyond the North Hills Driveway. This queue was observed during the noon and p.m. peak period, although the noon peak queue did not occur with the frequency or the length of the p.m. peak. No queues were observed in the center left turn lane during either peak period. EVERETT OFFICE: 516 SEATTLE -FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING (206) 258 -6202 1602 HEWITT AVENUE. EVERETT. WA 98201 Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Two The intersections of Southcenter Boulevard /61st Avenue South and Southcenter Boule- vard /Macadam Road are presently controlled by signalization. With a traffic signal lo- cated on either side of the North Hills Driveway, gaps are created on Southcenter Bou- levard which allow the outbound traffic from Arco or the North Hills Apartment to enter the traffic stream. The gap opportunities on Southcenter Boulevard, however, do not al- ways occur simultaneously for the eastbound and westbound direction, therefore, vehi- cles currently attempting a left turn eastbound from the Arco or North Hills driveways used the center left turn lane as a refuge before merging into the eastbound traffic. This behavior is not uncommon for driveways which access a five lane urban arterial facility. TRAFFIC FORECASTS Table 1 summarizes the total number of trips which the proposed office building will generate during the noon and p.m. peak hour. These p.m. peak hour trip generation values are based on the total gross square feet of floor area and the rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' "Trip Generation Manual", 4th Edition, Sep- tember 1987. The noon peak hour generation values were based on a 12 -hour (6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) driveway volume count at an existing office park. The proportion of noon peak trips to p.m. peak trips of the existing office park was applied to the North Hills Office generation to determine the noon peak project volumes. Figure 2 shows the project - generated traffic volumes for the noon and p.m. peak hours. General Office (ITE Code 710) (9,000 sq. ft.) P.M. Peak Hour Noon Peak Hour Table 1 Trip Generation Summary Daily Enter Exit Total 225 4 23 27 — 9 9 18 The proposed North Hills Office Building will generate a total of 225 average daily vehi- cle trips with 27 trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour and 18 trips during the noon peak hour. Trip distribution of the project generated trips were based on the existing turn move- ment volume counts conducted by Entranco for the Arco and North Hills Apartments driveways, and the reported trip distribution in the North Hills Apartments Traffic Study performed by Entranco in December 1987. The project generated trips were distribut- ed evenly (eastbound and westbound) on Southcenter Boulevard for the noon peak generated trips and approximately 60 percent westbound and 40 percent eastbound for the p.m. peak generated trips. Although the proposed project site has two planned ac- cess driveways, all of the project generated trips for either peak hour were assigned to the shared Arco and apartments driveway as a worst case condition since the planned Southcenter Boulevard driveway was designated for right -in /right -out access only. Fig- ure 3 shows the 1990 total traffic volumes with project generated traffic at the access driveway and study intersection. Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Three TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS A level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted for the intersection of Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway during the noon and p.m. peak hours under existing and future conditions. All LOS calculations followed the methodology outlined in the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual". Table 2 summarizes the results of the LOS analysis. Table 2 Level of Service Summary Peak Period 1990 Existing 1990 With Project Reserve Reserve Capacity Capacity Unsignalized LOS (veh. /hr.) LOS (veh. /hr.) Noon Peak E 71 E 83 P.M. Peak D 102 E 99 Delay Delay Signalized LOS (sec. /veh.) LOS (sec. /veh.) Noon Peak N/A N/A B 5.27 P.M. Peak N/A N/A B 7.02 The results of the LOS analysis shows that the intersection currently operates at LOS E and LOS D for the noon and p.m. peak hours, respectively. With the addition of the North Hills Office Building generated traffic, the LOS analysis indicates that the noon peak hour LOS will remain at LOS E. The analysis for the p.m. peak hour indicates that the LOS will deteriorate from a LOS D to LOS E with the project generated traffic. The LOS analysis for an unsignalized intersection, however, does not take into account the gaps created by the adjacent traffic signals on Southcenter Boulevard at Macadam Road and 61st Avenue South. The LOS was also analyzed assuming the intersection would be signalized. A LOS B was obtained for both the noon and p.m. peak periods. As a result of the LOS E obtained for the p.m. peak hour with project volumes, a signal warrant analysis was conducted for the intersection. Signal warrants I and II of the "Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices" (MUTCD) were analyzed for the intersec- tion. Since 24 -hour counts were not available for all approaches, the signal warrant analysis used the projected average daily volumes as the criteria for the analysis. The volume requirements for average daily traffic volumes were interpolated from the Wash- ington State Design Manual and the values given in the MUTCD. The analysis indicat- ed that the volume requirements for the major road would be met for both warrants, however, the projected volumes on the minor road (North Hills Driveway) with project generated traffic did not meet the volume requirements for either warrant. Therefore, signalization of the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection is not war- ranted nor recommended at this time. • • Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Four A queue analysis was also performed for the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Drive- way intersection under stop sign control and signalization. The analysis was conduct- ed for both the noon and p.m. peak hours using the projected future volumes with the proposed project. The analysis of the intersection under stop sign control assumed a "wait interval" of two minutes for the critical turn movements. The analysis of the inter- section under signalization assumes a cycle length of 60 seconds with green time allo- cated proportionally to the approach volumes. Table 3 summarizes the results of the queue analysis. Table 3 Queue Analysis Summary Queue Length Queue Length Critical Movement Peak Period Unsignalized (ft.) Signalized (ft.) Eastbound Left Turn Noon 44 22 Eastbound Left Turn P.M. 44 22 Southbound Left Turn Noon 66 44 Southbound Left Turn P.M. 66 44 The results of the queue analysis project that the eastbound left turn movement vol- umes from Southcenter Boulevard will create a queue of 44 feet for both the noon and p.m. peak hours under stop sign control. The southbound left turn movement volumes from the North Hills Driveway will create a queue length of 66 feet under stop sign con- trol during both the noon and p.m. peak hours. The queue analysis was also conduct- ed for the intersection assuming signalization. A projected queue of 22 feet will be ex- perienced for the eastbound left turn movement from Southcenter Boulevard during both the noon and p.m. peak hours. The southbound left turn movement from the North Hills Driveway will experience a projected queue of 44 feet for both peak periods. The planned access driveway from the proposed site at the North Hills Driveway is lo- cated 75 feet north of the intersection, therefore, the 66 foot queue created by the southbound left turn volumes will not interfere with the operations at the planned drive- way under stop sign control. The 44 foot queue projected for the eastbound left turn movement from Southcenter Boulevard will occasionally block left turning vehicles from Arco's East Driveway, however, the recent driveway counts conducted by Entranco for the Arco driveways indicate that 60 percent of Arco's customers use the Arco West Driveway, therefore impacts to the Arco East Driveway will be minimal. The Southcenter Boulevard extension to Grady Way will increase traffic on Southcenter Boulevard approximately 4 percent according to the "Southcenter. Boulevard Environ- mental Assessment Study" conducted by Entranco Engineers, February 1983. This growth will occur with or without the proposed North Hills Office Building. Since the trip generation from the project is minimal, the Southcenter Boulevard extension will have negligible influence on the distribution of project - generated traffic. • • Mr. Ron Cameron March 28, 1990 Page Five SUMMARY The proposed North Hills Office Building will generate a total of 225 average daily vehi- cle trips with 18 and 27 trips occurring during the noon and p.m. peak hours, respec- tively. A level of service analysis was conducted for the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection during the noon and p.m. peak hours with the project generated volumes. A LOS E was obtained for both peak periods with the additional volumes. A signal warrant analysis was performed for both peak periods to determine if a traffic signal should be installed to improve the operations of the intersection. Signal warrants I and II were evaluated for the future intersection volumes. The analysis showed that neither warrant would be met. The queue analysis performed for the eastbound left turn movement from Southcenter Boulevard and the southbound left turn movement from the North Hills Driveway showed that these critical movements would experience a queue of 44 feet and 66 feet, respectively. These projected queue lengths will have negligible impacts to the adja- cent driveway operations. Based on the above analysis results, we suggest the following recommendations to en- hance the safety and operational efficiency of the intersection and adjacent driveways: • Paint a crosswalk for the North leg of the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection. • Repaint the existing striping on Southcenter Boulevard to clearly identify the cen- ter left turn lane. • Monitor the Southcenter Boulevard /North Hills Driveway intersection with future development to determine the implementation of a traffic signal. We trust that this traffic analysis for the North Hills Office Building development will as- sist you and Gencor Development, Inc. in gaining approval for their proposed project. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the information in this document, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ENTRANCO ENGINEERS, INC. Sherman D. Goo Project Engineer Attachments: Figure 1 - 1990 Existing Traffic Volumes Figure 2 - Project Generated Volumes Figure 3 - 1990 Total Traffic Volumes with North Hills Office Bldg. m 0 m Ll 1 m Jl V' lV 1 r 3 • CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST APR 231990 Control No. Epic File No. Fee $100.00 Receipt No. A. BACKGROUND (TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT) 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: North Hill Office Building 2. Name of applicant: Edi Linardic 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 1836 Westlake Ave N #204 Seattle WA 98109 283 -4764 4. Date checklist prepared: 3/22/1990 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Start of Construction: May, 1990 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. None 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. North Hill Apts. North of this property. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. BAR Building Permit Electrical Permit Plumbing Permit Occupancy Permit 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat answers on this page. The Project is a one story office building (9,524 sf) and 33 parking stalls. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 5900 Southcenter Blvd. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Map as environmentally sensitive ? No. Site does have steep slopes. 2 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 45 %max. slope c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck,)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. sandy, gravely soil d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. The steep slopes to the north of the proposed building are presently stable and will not be disturbed during construction. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Balanced cut and fill with possible minor export. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally describe. g. No. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt, concrete or building)? 45.0% • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency. Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Install filter fabric, ditches. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if know. Dust and vehicle emissions during construction. Vehicle emission during regular use. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Yes, automobile exhaust from cars driving on South Center Blvd. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: During construction, use of good quiet machinery and spray water over site to keep dust to minimum. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year - round and seasonal streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2 3 4 5 6 ) ) ) ) ) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. Will the proposal require surface withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities of known. Construction of new drainage system that will collect run -off, detaining it, and discharging to local storm drain system. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. Does the proposal involve any discharge of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated of discharge. No. b. Groundwater: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such system, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. 2 New storm detention system that will collect the run -off and discharge it to local storm drain system. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No, possibility exists though if any sewer pipes break. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Storm drainage system including catch basins, underground pipes and grassy swales. 6 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: - 7-- deciduous trees:' alders� maple, aspen, other: ■ - -- evergreen trees :lar! cedar, pine, other: - -- shrubs - -- grass - -- pasture - -- crops or grain - -- wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other: - -- water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other : - -- other types of vegetation • b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Addition of new landscaping, removal of existing ground cover. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Describe proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Proposed landscaping will meet City of Tukwila Zoning Code requirements. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: crows, sparrows, robins mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: none • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Gas /electricity for heating and cooling. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Insulation of roof, walls and slab as required by energy code. • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. 1 2 No. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? 2 3 Traffic along South Center Blvd. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or a long -term basis(for example: traffic, construction, operation,other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., traffic noise and usage of facility at peak hours. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Use of quiet equipment during construction. uNgAlk • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Site is vacant, to the North is apartments, to the East is vacant lot, to the South is South Center Blvd.,to the West is AM PM Mart. b. Has the site been used for agriculture ? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structure on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished, if so, which ones? No. e. What is the current zoning classificationth site? PO f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Commercial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? None. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmental sensitive" area? If so, specify. Part of the site is classified as steep slopes. i. Approximately how may people would reside or work on the completed project? 30 max. 10 • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only j Approximately how may people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Building will be approx. 17' -4" high. It will be constructed of concrete and clear glass with ceramic tile feature strips and entry portico. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structures(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? High: 17' -4" Exterior: concrete, ceramic tile and clear glass 11 • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Use of modulation . of the facade and landscaping. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Possible reflection from glazing at dusk. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. ,What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are on the immediate vicinity? Fort Dent Park. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. 12 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidance of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any; None. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Southcenter Blvd Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? 33 stalls, none. 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. 60 Peak volume would occur from 4 PM to 5 PM g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Traffic routes will not be impacted significantly by this project. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, recreational facilities, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, emergency only. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. 14 • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Hook -up of storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water and telephone. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and completed to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relyin• on hem to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted :3 /29/1990 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANill •Evaluation for Agency Use Only E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal ?Offve. �Idt y,Gl c-oV ,6112 -vc_ c2 r, �r�rrt- '► t h Gc2:lP / i lda t�� Garicaa a►vta s •s p C t. J t . gle,O. L A i- r 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? c twer, p- r17cra I 1601 The letacs-t c4- 1r2-+1:1-hve cav,d 4-pe.--Listvc dems?1 op wt� rr-t- a. Her trace -1- 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: asr 2 ikz' c • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? kJo Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: ti11A -23- KEN LONEY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 6869 VVOODLAWN AVE. N.E. #208 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98115 [206) 526 -1426 • March 12, 1990 Mr. Jack Pace City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Pace: L[[Ii[!W1'[►j [APR 23 1990 CITY OF TIiisciiLA PLANNING DEPT. In response to your letter of February 21, 1990, listing your concerns for the landscaping at North Hills Office Building, the following action has been taken: 1. I have reviewed the Civil drawings and am satisfied that proposed plant material will not be negatively impacted in any way by proposed parking and /or vehicle or pedestrian traffic. 2. All storm water runoff is directed through swale to proposed catch basins. Potential erosion to planting beds other than in the swale areas should therefore be minimal. The erosion control hydroseed mix proposed will adequately protect the swale itself. 3. The existing trees on the upland portion of the site are primarily alder and can be retained insofar as they are not undermined by any new grading. It would not seem necessary to introduce additional planting other than erosion control mix. Within the mix it would not be unreasonable to introduce seeds of other native shrubs such as snowberry, mahonia, etc., but with the understanding that the germination rate in such a proceedure is typically very low. Please contact me if you have any further concerns or would like clarification of any of the above. Sincerely, • / .r , L. Ken Loney fi 0 July 12, 1989 Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Gencor, Inc. 11801 Northeast 160th Street, Suite G Bothell, Washington 98011 Re: Tukwila North Hill Office Building Dear Messrs. Grundstein and Smith: This letter presents newly developed information requested by the City of Tukwila for inclusion with your permit application documents for your proposed office building. Earlier reports and correspondence from my office relevant to the project are dated June 24, 1987, June 16, 1989, and June 21, 1989. These latest requirements specify that a test boring be mad nd that the report be expanded in its explanations of groundwater presence, slope stability, bearing pressure, and backslope incline. These issues were raised in association with the north side of the building. The test boring was drilled at the location shown on attached page five, taken from MGA's Sheet A -1 dated June 9, 1988. This is the approximate most critical temporary cut face location and is upslope from the approximate high point of the wall. It approximately coincides with Section "A" of Sheet A -14. A truck - mounted mobil drill B -60 hollow auger was used. Undisturbed samples were obtained at five foot intervals by means of a 3 in OD Dames & Moore type sampler. In brief, sand was found to a depth of 16 feet and sandstone bedrock was found below that. The boring was terminated at 30 feet deep, approximately at proposed first floor elevation, because the hardness of the sandstone essentially precluded further drilling by this method. There were no noted indications of groundwater presence during or immediately following drilling, but a pizzometer was installed at the depth where groundwater could most likely be expected; particulars of pizzometer installation are described on the boring log attached. The driving resistances shown on the log are standard for Dames & Moore equipment, but are not SPT numbers. Groundwater To date, the sand shroud surrounding the pizzometer top remains dry. A small spring emerges from the cut bank north and west of the test boring; the seepage flows several yards down the existing road before it evaporates. Seepage is also emerging from beneath the spoils pile and JAMES EATON, PE n GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (206) 682 -6942 Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Page 2 July 12, 1989 maintaining wet ground in the unfilled area within the proposed building footprint. This is the same seepage which was noted on page three of the 1987 report, though the presence of the new spoils has caused the surface wetting to spread. One can reasonably postulate that development of the North Hill Apartments above has had some effect on springs and shallow groundwater of the lower slopes.. Most likely the effect has been of diminution during winter months, but because of lawn irrigation, the summer effects are uncertain. There is indication that irrigation water has seeped beneath the board fence behind the apartment complex. Any natural or unnatural water which gravitated to the sand /sandstone contact would become a part of the aquifer system that includes the springs. Groundwater and /or springs would be important if a sloped soil mass were saturated in such a way as to become slide prone under the influence of hydrostatic or pore pressure, if it were present in such quantity as to hinder construction, or if its presence were not anticipated in the design of retaining walls or floor slabs. All evidence developed to date suggests that the only groundwater above approximate elevation 80 is the thin perched type along the permeable /impermeable contact, and that it will amount to nothing worse than a nuisance during construction. Typically permeable /impermeable surfaces are warped configurations and saturation is present or detectable only in the trough areas. The reasons that onsite soils are not being used as wall or drain backfill is that collectively they could obstruct natural subgrade drainage and /or permit dangerously high moisture conditions to develop behind retaining walls. The groundwater 'becomes effectively free from confinement or hydrostatic pressure buildings at the point where it enters pea gravel behind the walls. This is illustrated schematically on page 3. Slope Stability and Backslope Angle The sandstone and its weathered variations are vastly superior in strength to any of the glacial or post - glacial soils, and I suggest that maximum advantage be taken of this during construction. Note that 1987 test pit No. 2 and the recent test boring both fall near Section A of Sheet A -14; the depths to sandstone are 1 ft. and 16 ft., respectively, suggesting that some bedrock will likely be excavated. Where possible, you should cut vertical faces through the sandstone so that slopes through unconsolidated soils can be kept minimal. Implied by this is that the precise temporary cut configuration should be determined as the work is in progress. The recommendations I have provided to your civil and structural engineers, both in writing and verbally, provides for a worst case, no sandstone is excavated. Either natural or long- existing slope faces exist east, north, Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Page 3 July 12, 1989 and northwest of the building area and expose the same sand layers which you will excavate. These support varying densities of vegetation and are stable at 60° to 70° to the horizontal for 20 vertical feet and higher. The type of strength upon which such slopes depend cannot be accurately measured in the laboratory, but where field conditions permit can be calculated from critical height observations. I have recommended a 1:4 temporary cut. The wall will not be poured in place. Note that the 1987 report requires a six -inch granular layer beneath the slab and filter- shrouded granular wall backfill. The cut, drain, and wall are shown schematically below: so ° ,i/1 trarale rA9/eic I have advised your structural engineers not to exceed 30° backslope for at least 0 horizontally behind the wall. Beyond that, steeper permanent slopes would not influence the wall and the excavation could merge with any now - existing slopes for the permanent case. The 30° figure is intended to be a maximum to which the wall will be designed and for which lateral pressures have been provided. To whatever the "close -in" angle can be kept below 30° even in exchange for steeper more - distant inclines, the greater the stability of the wall beyond that which was designed. Bearing Pressure It will not be possible to pour the entire foundation system on soil of a uniform. type. N values for the weathered and slightly weathered sandstone justify bearing pressures in the order of 20 ksf or higher. In recognition that it is desirable to design all footings to the same allowable bearing pressures, I recommended in 1987, that all foundations be designed to 5 ksf to stay within commonly recognized ranges of strength used for the other soil types which are likely to be encountered, i.e., dense sand and hard silt -clay mixture. Mr. Leon Grundstein Mr. Walter Smith Page 4 July 12, 1989 I explained that to minimize differential settlement between sandstone - supported footings and other .footings, the others would have to be excavated deeper than specified by code; the bearing surfaces are to be inspected for compliance before they are poured. Yours very ly, ames Eaton, P.E. 71 -3731 JE:ho'r /12 2 Attachments G. 'i 4 . "•-•\ �� CO‘' "boa i 1 >:■ -\\ r;:. . :It .\ 4 e. 1 1 V %� i .o ti IX in ui eti D IWS SPOILS PILES 1�� I la 5 4 1\ 0) • 0 • GENCOR TEST BORING Brown F -M sand 4' (4) (7) (8) 9' (21) (16) (22) 14' (14) (24) (26) 16' Yellowish brown weathered F -M grained sandstone 19' (15) (26) (45) 24' (50/4 ") 29' (31) (50/4 ") Completed July 7, 1989; no indications of groundwater presence by drill cuttings, drilling progress, during sample intervals, or in the progress of stemming and backfilling. Sealed with Bentonite below 19 ft. Sand plug 14 -19 ft. Pizometer installed at 18 ft. Sealed with Bentonite above 14 ft. • • June 24, 1987 Mr. Leon Grundstein • 11801 Northeast 160th Street, Suite G Bothell, Washington 98011 Re: Tukwila Apartment and Office Project Dear Mr. Grundstein: With your authorization, I have investigated the subsurface conditions as they relate to proposed construction of 57 apartment units and an office building in Tukwila. We met at the site on 14 May, at which time you showed me several preliminary site plans and the approximate ground limits of the property. I sent you a proposal dated 18 May, and on the same day summarized the proposal to you by telephone and informed you that it was my intention that the office site be included in the scope of work covered by the proposal, although the document did not specifically say so. You gave verbal authorization to proceed on 28 May, and I received your written proposal on 30 May. On 1 June I picked up additional site plans at your office; these provided ground control points from which field measurements could be made. Field access preparation and subsurface exploration were accomplished on 1 and 2 June. This report describes the property the project proposed, the investigative procedures and summarizes conclusions and recommendations applicable to site grading, subgrade drainage, foundation and retaining wall design, and mitigation of earth - related hazards, whether those hazards are the result of development or not. Considering the steepness of terrain, generally favorable conditions were found. Exception is in the vicinity of Building "A "; there a combination of steep terrain, shallow groundwater, and erosion - cavitated sand which require that Building "A" be supported on augercast piles. Surface evidence suggests that there has been a continuing problem of poor surface drainage, sloughage and erosion in that vicinity, especially toward the west end of the property. The pile- supported building will be as secure as those on flatter terrain and more favorable subgrade conditions and to some minor degree, will bring about improvement of downslope surface flow and sloughage. JAMES EATON, PE (206) 682-6942 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 • • Mr. Grundstein June 24, 1987 Page Two I am also advising you that have an accurate topographic survey made as a logical next step and that you and your architect consider revisions in the site and grading plan. With this letter are three copies of my report of findings. Yours very truly, EARTH SCIENCE es N. Eaton 7 -0431 JNE /rlb Enclosures INTRODUCTION The property slopes moderately to steeply to the south and southwest; elevation differential is in the order of 100 feet. It lies north and east of the intersection of Macadam Road and Southcenter Boulevard. Your south property line represents the approximate toe -of -slope and common property line with Denny's Restaurant and the ARCO AM -PM Market. It appears that the lower reaches of the slope were artificially steepened beyond their natural grades at some time in the past. This is especially the case behind the AM -PM market and around the north and east peripheries of the trapezoidal parcel proposed for office development. Page nine of this report was prepared from a 22 May 1987 site plan prepared by Azaria Rousso /Architects and from an 18 June 1986 office site plan prepared by Mithun - Bowman- Enrich Group, P.S. Note that page nine consists of two separate plans, each to different scale; one is of the residential portion and one applies to the office portion. An earlier undated site plan study prepared by Milbrandt Architects was used for its location of the existing apartments to the north. Some of the test locations plotted on page nine were measured from a demolished house which, for field purposes only, was scaled from a 1" =100 partial top sheet which you provided. Presently, the only improvements on the property are the basement floor and walls of the aforementioned house, the driveway which served the house, and several rockeries along or near the toe of the slope. A variety of trees exist in clusters at various parts of the property. The areas between clusters support a dense growth of blackberry bushes and other brush. Part of that brush, especially in the vicinity of Building "B" and "C ", was removed in preparing access for test equipment. At the time of field work, a spring emerged from the toe -of -slope area immediately north of your proposed office building. It ponded in a small artificially created depression near the northeast corner of that building area. Water was also noted emerging from the south of Building "A" location and north of Denny's. This water appears to originate as spring water from the general area around and north of Building "A ". It appears that shallow groundwater and associated surface drainage has been a problem for the existing apartments to the north since construction there. Several small ditches undermine the perimeter footings and transect the yard areas all directed to an asphaltic- cement lined swale which parallels your common property line. Some of the small ditches carried water when last observed less than a week ago and it can be presumed that flow varies seasonably, but that it continues to some degree through the summer. As now proposed, the 57 units would be divided among five buildings. The present grading plan shown as before and after contour shows Buildings "A ", "B ", "E ", and part of Building "C" on cut with an apparent net removal of borrow from the site. The apartment buildings will be of wood frame construction with slabs on grade. The office building will consist of three stories of wood frame construction with a first floor slab on grade. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Page nine shows the approximate locations at which 12 test pits were dug using a rubber -tire mounted construction backhoe. Log descriptions of conditions at each location were maintained from direct examination of the freshly exposed strata. With recording of soil descriptions and groundwater conditions, the pits were backfilled in the interest of safety. Summaries of the test pit conditions are presented on pages ten to twelve. The stratigraphically lowest material found and of relevance to development is sandstone bedrock, which was found essentially at the surface of locations one and two, representing the north portion of the office building. The sandstone is fine grained, friable, and varies in color from white to gray or yellow- brown. It grades increasingly hard with depth, and within a yard of its upper surface it could be further penetrated only by repeated raking with the bucket teeth under the full weight of the backhoe. It appears that the uppermost one to two feet within the general area of the office building have been disturbed or artificially modified in association with unknown past utilization. To the depths explored, the entire residential area and part of the office area are underlain by glacially associated soils. These soils are highly variable across the property, but range from clean sand or gravelly sand in the bank behind the AM -PM market and at locations 9, 10 and 12 to silt or clay hardpan at locations 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 12. Most of the test pits exhibited layering of more than one type of glacial soil. Between the extremes of granular and find - grained are loam and mixtures of course and fine - grained soils; some of these mixtures include cobbles and boulders. In general, the glacially associated soils exhibit moderate to high bearing strength and good slope stability. Exception is in the very shallow range of depth -- generally less than on yard - -where weathering and root action have diminished the soil's strength and where the granular or partially granular soils are saturated either by surface or subsurface flow. Also in general, after wasting the topsoil and root - ladened soils, the excavated borrow will be suitable for compaction either on this site or on another. Most of the borrow generated will contain a sufficient fraction of fine - grained soil to place serious seasonal restrictions on compaction and to some degree on fresh cuts. Where there are alternating layers of permeable and highly impermeable soils as on your site, there is potential to accumulate thin layers of saturation either seasonably or at more -or -less random locations. Groundwater was observed at locations 8, 10 and 11. The number 11 location was significant. • • CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conditions are favorable for conventional footing support of Buildings "B ", "C ", "E ", and the office building. A deep foundation is advised for Building "D" because of the proximity to a steep slope and the highly erosive nature of the soil. Unfavorable soil and hydrologic conditions were found in the vicinity of Building "A ", and terrain there appears steeper than shown by the topographic map. Because of the steep slopes and the erosive nature of the soil, unusual measures should be taken with respect to surface drainage and pressurized utilities. In its present condition, these are risks of falling rocks and accumulations of sediment or sloughage on downslope properties; surface evidence suggests that debris removal is routine, especially on the Denny's parking lot. Due to the considerable earthwork involved in this project and the potential risk to neighboring properties, especially those downslope, review of appropriate plans and conscientious inspection during construction are imperative aspects of development. Office Building The foundation along the north side of the building will, necessarily, bear on sandstone. At a depth of about two feet below existing grade in that area, the sandstone is sufficiently hard to support conventional spread footing, yet it can be excavated by means of an ordinary construction backhoe or tracked loader. Moving south across the building area, the sandstone gets deeper and it becomes overlain by over - consolidated glacial silt. Considering the relatively high structural loads and the desirability of having all footings bear on generally similar material, I recommend that all footings be excavated either into hard sandstone or glacial hardpan; this would require excavating to 4.6 feet at location three. Allowable soil bearing pressures of 5 ksf are advised, subject to inspection of the bearing surfaces. The 5 ksf figure could be increased by one third to accommodate seismic and similar loads. Those areas which are to support slabs must also be graded down to firm native soil, subject to good judgment and common sense. Near the toe of the slope behind the office building, granular glacial deposits rest on relatively impervious silt and sandstone. This permeable /impermeable relationship is the cause of spring emergence in that area. The footing drain should be laid with its invert at least one foot below slab grade; the drain and its granular washed backfill should be shrouded in filtering fabric, and along the west and north sides of the building the backfill should rise to finished grade. A similar drain should follow the toe -of- the -slope and should parallel the east edge of the parking lot to insure that the paving does not fail because of softening subgrade. A six -inch thick or greater layer of sand or pea gravel should separate the flow slab from natural soils. You or your architect should provide me with a copy of the foundation, grading and drainage plans for review when they are complete. I may advise removal of some of the existing rockeries, the collapse of which could damage the building. You mentioned the possibility of raising grade on the office building parcel using borrow generated from the residential area. If that is done, I recommend that the building still be supported by footings which bear on hard undisturbed natural earth. Fill which is to support paving or any other improvements should be placed and systematically compacted under inspection to assure quality. Topography and Grading, Residential It appears that the contour maps on which the site plans to date have been imposed was constructed from air photos and, in some cases, the contour lines do not accurately describe actual conditions. I recommend that a ground survey be conducted early on and that revisions be made in the site and grading plans based on the better information. There might be advantages to making major site plan revisions to avoid situating buildings near the sides of steep bluffs and thereby eliminating the need for drilled or unusual foundations. It appears that Building "D" and at least part of Building "C" are now proposed to rest on structural fill. I recommend that either floor grades be adjusted or that building locations be shifted to place all buildings on cuts. In view of the severe topographic as well as subsurface restrictions at Building "A ", I am assuming that no part of the construction area will be filled and that no significant part of the building area will be cut below existing grade. Adjusting of locations may or may not necessitate additional testing or explanation. From the onset of earthwork, you are advised to contain all construction - related runoff within the property until it is control - released into the public stormwater system. Generally similar containment applies to the post- construction period. In accordance with usual good construction practice, the areas which are to support improvements of any type must be stripped of organics., topsoil, fills, or soft materials. It appears that there will be some filling in connection with parking lots. No unretained finished fill surface should slope at steeper than 21:1 and then only if it is compacted to at least 95 percent as defined by ASTM D1557. Compliance with this necessarily requires engineer inspection beginning with the stripped, unfilled surface. Cut slopes through any of the soil types described herein should be secure at 13:1. Existing slopes steeper than that and falling outside the construction area are to be left as they are. The basement walls of the demolished house must be removed and the basement and surrounding area should be reshaped to a saucer - shaped section to facilitate placement of fill in feather -edged lifts; this, of course, applies only if grade is to be raised above the existing basement floor level. Septic tanks, buried fuel tanks and similar voids if they exist are to be similarly removed, shaped, and filled under inspection. Slope Stability The site is believed stable with respect to deep or shear -type sliding. That generality applies to the effectively unweathered and nominally weathered soils below the depths of dense roots. With respect to surface raveling, sloughage under adverse climatic conditions, and erosion, those slopes which are now steeper than about 35° are no more than marginally stable under present conditions. It appears that both sandy sediment and rocks gravitate onto the existing parking lots, particularly the Denny's lot from time to time. The only way in which human activities are seen to contribute is that the toe of the slope appears to have been steepened in association with past commercial development. An asphaltic- cement lined shallow ditch appears to be effective at intercepting surface runoff from neighboring property to the north and to all appearances, the present hydrologic condition is either natural or slightly drier than natural. With implementation of all recommendations herein, the following objectives will be accomplished: o There will be no slope movement beneath foundations, parking lots, or other artificial surfaces; under natural conditions these soils will be retained, confined, or graded to safe inclines. o With respect to unnatural conditions, these are seen as incursions of surface water from offsite or from breached pressurized underground lines either onsite or offsite to the north. Both categories of water will or would be directed to and confined within subtle swales designed into the asphaltic surfacing, where it would be directed to a relatively harmless location along or near Southcenter Boulevard. o The steepest slopes will be unaffected by development, except that they will be slightly desiccated by the upslope artificial surfaces and that hazardous -sized rocks and other materials which might roll or slide toward the south property line would be intercepted by a chain link fence. The slight desiccation would translate to a slight improvement in stability. o During the construction period, runoff from altered surfaces will not be permitted to enter unaltered surfaces. It will either be contained and pumped from temporary basins or sumps within the improved areas or it will be directed to a holding pond on the office building parcel. Underground Utilities Earlier reference was made to unnatural contributions to slope instability, and it was explained that this included accidental breaches of pressurized piping. For practical' purposes this refers to water lines but could include sewers if they are pressurized and effectively have infinite reservoirs. The imaginable ways in which breaching might occur include, but are not necessarily limited to, faulty materials, faulty workmanship, seismic induced strain, impact by drilling or excavating equipment, and water hammer or pressure surges caused by human carelessness or equipment malfunction. • • Several design alternatives have been considered in designing protection against any of the above mishaps. Those include location of the largest pressurized lines at unusual depth of burial or at plan locations where some of the causal factors could be partially mitigated, using particularly flexible or durable materials, and using concrete or other conduits or barriers. No one would provide protection against all causal conditions. I recommend that the water system be so designed that the soil at depth is protected from both saturation and scouring by an impermeable synthetic barrier in the form of a trench lining and that the force of leaking water be directed to the surface where it can be contained in subtle open channels in the parking lot and driveway. I would expect to coordinate details of design with your civil engineer. Necessarily, the largest diameter lines would have to fall outside.or near the edges of paving. Small diameter pipe might be exempt from location restrictions but would confine and channel leakage with the synthetic barrier. Apartment Foundations Building "A" will require an augercast pile foundation. For now I am assuming that this building will be terraced and underlain by crawl space. Terracing the building is not intended to mean terracing the slope. I anticipate that there will be no retaining walls for reasons we discussed. I will coordinate with your structural engineer about lengths, vertical capacities and horizontal design. Depending on the outcome of your topographic survey, other units including "D" will require deep foundations to afford protection against undermining, which might be associated proper with encroachment of the nearby high angle bluff. To foundation type for each building, I recommend that a 20 -foot horizontal distance be maintained between the foundation and daylight, measured through native soil. Judging from existing topographic data, conventional spread footings will be appropriate for most of the buildings. With the diversity of soil type from point to point, I recommend that all footings be sized to building code specifications or to 2 ksf soil bearing pressure. If, after topographic mapping and revision of the site plan, the 20 -foot condition cannot practicably be met using spread footings, I will provide your architect with parameters for pile design. These would derive capacity from both friction and end bearing; it would be assumed that there was no friction through fill or through erosion or slide susceptible soils. The piles would be in the order of 14 to 16 inches in diameter and would penetrate beyond the depths explored for this project. For either type of foundation, inspection during excavation is essential to verify compliance with the intent of these recommendations and to confirm continuity of soil conditions between and outside the test areas. In general footings will be poured on stripped soil in place. Under some circumstances, it would be acceptable to support footings on compacted fill, and the recommended 2 psf allowable pressure is within generally accepted limits for such fill. It appears that, even after anticipated site plan revisions, it will not be necessary for any foundations to bear on fill. Retaining Walls All of the soil types found within the residential area are types which would exert lateral wall pressures of magnitudes within a commonly assumed range for this locality. Silt and silt- containing soils found at various locations across the site would exert pressures well beyond the assumed range if used as backfill. Selectively, the cleanest of onsite spoils generated would be satisfactory as retaining wall backfill. For walls which are free to deflect sufficiently to assume an active condition, for which the backslope angle does not exceed 20 °, and which the full height backfill is free draining, I recommend that P be taken as 35 pcf. P as 300 psf, and that the coefficient of fricti on between soil and concrete be taken as 0.5. For the nonyieldable case, p would increase to 55. Neither the 35 nor the 55 figure includes any surcharge load other than the assumed 0 -20° backslope angle. Your structural engineer should coordinate with me about other parameters and assumptions. I anticipate that daylight basement walls will be of reinforced concrete and that cantilever timber bulkheads would be more practical in exterior areas. Rockeries, where used, will be limited to 4 feet height by City ordinance and they, of necessity, will not and cannot be engineered. Property Line Hazards Several unlikely but potential hazards could transcend property lines where the property bounds are in general proximity to steep slopes. In some cases they represent natural hazards, such as gravity movement of earth materials across natural slopes, and in other cases they could include collapse of already existing rockeries along the south edge of your property or the effects of a breach in a water main such as the one that is understood to run parallel to but outside your north property line. One of the objectives of this report is to provide recommendations for development without creating new hazards. To some degree both natural and unnatural existing hazards will be reduced by development. The amount of water which percollates into the soil across the property will be greatly reduced, having a positive effect on spontaneous sloughage and superficial slope instability. Plumbing mishaps from upslope properties, if not controlled by the existing asphaltic -lined ditch, would become contained by the paving, curbs, and gutters of this project, designed specifically for such purposes. The fence recommended for protection of the Denny's and ARCO properties would be installed prior to any grading above. Hopefully it can be installed along the edge of existing paving irrespective of whether it coincides with the property line. The fence is not intended as a retaining wall but as a catcher. Debris which assimulates behind the fence must be periodically removed to preserve the effectiveness of the fence. • • LIMITATIONS AND USE This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the addressee and his design teams for use on the specific residential and office projects described herein. It is not public information and is not to be used by real estate agents, lenders, future owners, or neighboring owners. In case of significant revisions of the types of construction, finished grades, or building locations, the findings and recommendations of this report may be inappropriate. The undersigned should be consulted about the implications of any revision. Partly in recognition of the potential for creation of hazardous conditions by not strictly following the intent of the recommendations herein, inspection of all earthwork and . related construction is imperative. Another reason for close inspection during construction is that the undersigned assumes no responsibility for work performed at variance with the recommendations of this report or which is of uncertain compliance; with foundations and earthwork it is usually not possible to determine compliance after the fact. The only express or implied warrant carried by this report is that the professional efforts in developing and presenting the information in it were performed conscientiously, in good faith, and to recognized standards of engineering practice as understood by the engineering community in this area and at this time. 24 June 1987 James N. Eaton, PE -8- TUKWILA APARTMENT & OFFICE PROJECT 4IMID MID • 4 NORM SCALE N O b 50 100 11e.1..11, .... w - - - - -- - #1 0' • • TEST PIT LOGS Dark brown topsoil and organic matter (soft) 0.5' - Yellow-brown severely weathered clayey standstone (soft to medium) 1.2' - White to yellow weathered sandstone (hard) 5.3' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered; dug with difficulty beyond 4' 1.4' - 1.8' - Brown silt associated with past excavation and rockery construction (soft) Yellow brown severely weathered clayey sandstone (soft to medium) White to yellow weathered sandstone (hard) 4.3' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered; dug with difficulty beyond 3.5' 0 • 2.1' - Brown silty fine to medium sand (dense) Brown fine to medium sandy silt (stiff to hard) 4.6' - Gray clayey silt with sandstone inclusions (hard) 6.4' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered #4 0' OP 3.3' - Brown loam with fine roots throughout (soft) Brown fine sandy silt with occasional sandstone cobbles and small boulders throughout (medium to stiff) 5.9' - • • Gray to tan clayey silt (hard) 8.8' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered #5 0 0.9' - 5.6' - Brown slightly organic topsoil with roots (soft) Brown fine to coarse sand (medium dense) Brown silty clay (hardpan) 7.4',- Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered #6 0 3.0' - Brown loam with fine and course roots throughout (soft) Brown fine sandy silt with occasional roots in upper 5', sandstone and hardrock cobbles and boulders throughout (medium dense) 8.8' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered. #7 0 Brown loam topsoil with roots (soft) 0.8' - Brown silt (soft to medium stiff) 2.1' - Brown thinly bedded silt (hardpan) 5.6' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered #8 0' • 0.5' - 1.9' - Brown sandy loan topsoil with roots (soft) Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) Brown slightly clayey silt (hardpan) 5.6' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; slight groundwater seepage from 1.9 feet -11- #9 0' Mb • Brown gravelly loam topsoil with fine roots (soft) 0.7' - Brown silty fine to coarse sand with sandstone and hardrock gravel, cobbles and boulders (loose at 0.7' to dense at 4') 5.9' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered #10 0' 0.8' - Brown sandy loam topsoil with roots (soft) Brown fine to coarse sand (medium dense) 4.8' - Brown fine sand with trace of silt (medium dense) 7.6' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; minor groundwater flow from 4/8' #11 0' Brown sandy loam with roots 0.4' - Brown fine sand with thin silty strimers (medium to dense) 6.8' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; moderate to severe groundwater flow from 3.5' to 5.5' depths #12 0' 2.6' - 4.7' - Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) Brown thinly bedded silt (hardpan) Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) 6.3' - encountered ndsurf celwateruacross steep eep slopeo w in near vicinity June 21, 1989 Mr. Leon Grundstein Gencor 11801 Northeast 160th Street, Suite G Bothell, Washington 98011 Re: Tukwila Office Building Dear Mr. Grundstein: One issue which I neglected to mention in my June 16th letter was that of temporary slope stability. Fills placed since 1987, will be removed prior to excavating for retaining walls and foundations and, I understand, are not an issue. Pre -1987 natural soils may be excavated at 1:4 (H to V) temporarily with the toe two feet outside the north building wall. The upper edge of that slope would merge with 1987 grade. Insomuch as there may be safety regulations concerning placement of personnel in the toe area, I recommend that any such regulation be observed. From our meetings with the full design team, compliance can be achieved. I do not believe that the operation of excavating equipment would be hazardous. I understand that there is no temporary cut issue along the east side of the building. er Qurs, SUles Eaton, P.E. 71 -3731 JAMES EATON, PE 1 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (206) 682 -6942 I Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 June .:16, 1989. Mr. Leon Grundstein GENCOR 11801 N: E. 160th 'Street .Suite G: _Bothell, Washington :98011 Re: Tukwila : Office Buildin 'Dear Mr.- Grundstein. Since. my-: June. 24,‘ 1987 geotechni.cal _ :report fore your combined office` and apartment project, you have made revisions. in the design of the and are now in the process of applying for a permit:.:: The test holes -du-4 ,in ;1987. still . bracket the building . area;. and the page 3 and . 4 recommendations from: 1987 are 'still :`. appropriate, so far :. as the foundation:.. is concerned. However, slight shifting of the building location and completion of design of certain exterior improvements requires that retaining g walls . be included which were not anticipated in 1987. I had discussions with Messers. Friedman and Smith of your office and -:. with your architect, your structural engineer and your civil engineer I met .with Messers'. •Friedman and Smith onsite earlier this week At my request," Mr. "Smith drew a series of cross sections to show both existing and future configurations I have examined the ,sections and concur.: with 'the_ use of retaining walls -as they are shown -in permit applications 'as of this date. Those recommendations for retaining walls on page .7 of the 1987 report are valid with the following additions.. or 'comments "applicable to, the currently proposed building.. Onsite soils are unsuitable for use as wall backfill and for. your north.: wall, 'I. am recommending pea gravel, for .the full- height wedge against that wall. Passive-resistance will be greater for the sandstone than was recommended for the "other" walls :. in 1987.. Unless your structural engineer ,'wishes :to pursue the issue further, exploration., and quantification of Pp will not be .done. at this time.,'; The 'high angle bluff near your east property ' appears: stable and has-:evidently been at its „present:, configuration :.for several decades or more. That steep face is outside the :influence,of your GEOTECH■ICAL SERVICES.: -Box 126 -• Hobart, WA 98025 Mr. Leon:Grunds.tein June. 16, 1989 -Page 2 :building or 'the . retaining walls you now propose. .I understand that the bluff ,may be removed by the neighboring owner to the east - -or by. Gencor. `i in cooperation with the . neighbor although for the purposes of this letter. I have assumed that it will remain..: I am continuing to coordinate with your structural engineer, your civil engineer, your architect, and-Your structural engineers-and will provide them with additional design parameters if needed I will 'be out-of town for approximately one week beginning June 21, but will be in.touch':with the answering service, 682-6942, daily should questions arise Very.. truly yours=, EARTH SCIENCES es`` Eaton -JE /dbm /11." :717373.1 WASHINGTON LAND TITL ASSOCIATION PRELIMINARY COMMITMENT FORM NORTHWESTERN The T" 4IA A Minnesota Title Company 250 Arctic Building 700 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104.1849 PRELIMINARY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE To: Gencor, Inc. 11801 N.E. 160th St., "G" Bothell, WA Attn: Leon Your Reference: Kato Our Order No.: NT0270S3 Effective Date: October 3, 1988 at 8:30 a.m. Policy or Policies to be issued: ALTA Owner's Form B -1970 Policy X Standard X Extended r Proposed Insured: Later (208) 8251952 MON JUN 121990 C4TY OF ) UKWILA PLANNING DEPT. Amount: Later Premium: Later Tax: Later Rate: Includes easement charge TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MINNESOTA agrees to issue on request and on recording of any appropriate documents, its policy or policies as applied for, with coverage as indicated, based on this preliminary commitment that title to the property described herein is vested on the date shown above in MICHIO KATO and HISAKO KATO, his wife subject only to the exceptions shown herein and to the terms, conditions and exceptions contained in the policy form. This report and commitment shall have no force or effect except as a basis for the coverage specified herein. Harry Kinnee, Title Officer Phone: 625 -1952 SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" for LEGAL DESCRIPTION. ( CONTINUED ) • NORTHWESTERN TITLE '° A Minnesota Tide Company 1. GENERAL TAXES, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY AFTER DELINQUENCY; 1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1: For Year: Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Parcel No.: Levy Code: 1988 $934.31 $467.16 359700 - 0209 -02 2380 ASSESSED VALUATION PER KING COUNTY OFFICE OF FINANCE: Land: $75,200.00 Improvements: $ 0.00 2. Excise tax, if unpaid. NOTE: For purpose of determination of amount of excise tax due, said property is situate in: City of Tukwila Current rate of real estate excise tax as of the date herein is: .0159 NOTE 1: The language contained in the printed Exclusions from Coverage and Conditions and Stipulations of the policy committed for may be examined by inquiry at the office which issued the Commitment, and a specimen copy of the insurance policy form (or forms) referred to in this commitment will be furnished promptly upon request. NOTE 2: Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance, or construction charges for sewer, water or electricity. NOTE 3: In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for services rendered in accordance with our schedule. NOTE 4: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B" FOR FURTHER EXCEPTIONS FM /lp 552 NT027053/552 Page 2 •NORTHWESTERN LE EXHIBIT "A" '" A A Minnesota Title Company Lot 2, of Tukwila Short Plat No. 81- 30 -SS, as recorded under King County Recording No. 8112100483, being a portion of Tract 11, Interurban Addition to the City. of Seattle, according to the plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities over a 22 foot strip as described in instrument recorded under Auditor's File No. 8708270390. END OF EXHIBIT "A" NT027053/552 Page 3 • EXHIBIT "B" � NOE HWESTERN TM A Minnesota rtle Company A. Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, Dedication, Notes and Recitals, if any, contained on Short Plat recorded under King County Recording No. 8112100483. A copy of which is hereto attached. B. SHARE COST OF CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR OF IMPROVEMENT: Covenant to bear equal share of the cost of the construction, maintenance or repair of the improvement herein described; Recorded: August 27, 1987 Auditor's No.: 8708270390 Improvement: Ingress, egress and utilities easement Location: An easement 22 feet in width located on the premises adjoining to the East C. RESTRICTIONS, CONDITIONS AND COVENANTS CONTAINED IN CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Between: And: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: (Copy Attached) Michio and Hisako Kato City of Tukwila July 7, 1987 August 27, 1987 8708270393 END OF EXHIBIT "B" NT027053/S52 Page 4 8708270393. • • • - • ' A., 1987 • • : , ft 3 BTATE Or WASHINGTON ) )sst coomOr King . ) 1 certify that I know or have satisfactory ;evidence: Nisako Kato signed this instrument and acknowledged it tobe;hec free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned is thie_i 'instrument. DATED this/ day o AR My commission expires /%410,..4 -4- • • EXIIIBIT A That portion of the West 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet or ,the Tract 11. interurban Addition to the City of Seattle- according .:_to the plat recorded In Volume 10 of Plats. page 65. In King County. Waihington described as follows' Beginning at the Southeast corner 01 the West 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet of said Tract 11, thence N01•2140'E along the East Ilne thereof 124.63 feet. thence N65 °62'04'W along a line parallel, to the centerline of Southcenter Boulevard (Renton - Three Tree. • Point Road) 162.68 feet to the Meet line of the East 450.06 feet of - said Tract 11, thence 501.21'40'W 165.17 feet to the Northerly • Navin of PS$ No. 1 as conveyed by deed under Auditors File Noel to t. ,.6473599..thence 569.17'02'W along said highway margin 66.33 Intersect the South Ilne of Bald Tract 11, thence S08•24'47'E along • said south line 07.42 feet to the Point of Beginning. NORTHWESTERN TITLE L� ^� A Minnesota rale Company • 250 Arctic Building 700 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 -1849 • , f',\ 4•.. Order No. Plat. Vol. Page /4. /• O S c 't }1 111 8//2/0 - ::• * 1 Y. 1' • • Iv ft( x:10.14(( f • ltia • Aaar• si/ /4; t:; •J Aw I tcy term, A rts'e.uo ; *er.' 11'711;- Q� J'er I' 04J A rtir Or PIP 4 044 :'eia ‚‚ M © *r's10i ® Mu'N a+l L•At•V t, JA sec ei -4 IQ Dimensions of subject premises are This sketch does not purport to show all highways. roads or easements affecting said property. No liability is assumed for variations in dimensions and location, and is not based upon a survey of the property described in this order. It is furnished without charge. solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the described premises. The Company assumes no liability for inaccuracies therein. T h4 s SOaee r'•serWre fC.! recorder's . t!Si'vg SN C • .64100/ 4 4r • 11.3 flied for record at the request pi: Name Return to: he-viewed and approved tio ths Stic:t Subd4vasson Crrmattre •nC cert414ed lor_1414ng th4: alQ •amia °I --is,22Agoit±: • Chairmen. Department of Assessments btailned and approved thle anY r.v6f4: 19 (5.'S /.4,e d dry 01 A Depu Assessor Planning Division 81'10 NO483. 1).: Office at Community Development - RUG F 6230 Southcenter Boulevard casHst_ .4..46.00 Tukwila. Washington MSS 22 .' GAL DESCRIPTION 4 lotal•Parcelt The West 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet of Tract 11, Interurban Addition to the City o4 Seattle according to the plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in ...... King-County, Washington; Except that portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washington for Primary State Highway No. 1 by deed recorded under Auditors File .; • :,,,''::;::•:::i1.• No. 5735; • tot 1 - ' • . . . . , • :That portion of the Vest I50'feet of the East 450.86 feet of Tract 11, Interurban 7 . - - ::: ' ''''' -..,..., 'Addition to-the-City of Seattle according to the plat recordedin Volume 10 of Plats'', •Page SSo in Ring County, Washington described as follows: Illeglnning at the Southeast corner of the West 150 feet of the_fast 450.86 feet of 's41dTract 11, thence 110121'40"E along the East line thereof 124.0 to the TRUE 100INT OF BEGINNING; thence N65.$2'04"W along • line parallel to the centerline of 'Ioutheenter Boulevard (Renton • Three Tree Point Road) 162.68 feet to the West line ;of the East 450.84 feet of said Tract 11, thence N01•21°40"E 328.74 feel to The North line of said Tract 11, thence S8825'271 along sold North line 150.00 feet 'thence S01•21640"W 991.15 feet to the TRUE POINT OF B(GINNING. 1.o17 4- • • That portion of the West 150 feet of the East 160.86 feet of Tract II, Interurban Addition to the C1tf of Seattle according to the plat recorded In Volume 10 of Plats, page.0, in King County, Washington described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of .the Vest 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet of said Tract 11, thence N01•21'40"E along the East line thereof 124.59 feet, thence 1165°52'04•V along a line parallel to the centerline of Southcenter Boulevard (Renton • Three Tree Point Road) 162.68 feet to the West line of the.fast 450.86 fret of said tract 1l• thence S01•21 '40'V 165.17 feet to the Northerly Margin of PSH No. 1 as conveyed by deed under Auditors rile No. 5473(99, thence S69•1702"W along said highway margin 66.33 feet to intersect the South line of said Tract 1 1 . • 1 I. t" V18.24.47"f along said south line 67.42 fret to the Point of IN-ginning. • —.-------"*"."--"'"'""1""71.1"trfirrigraNINewiwrrryTtrw.:,n7:v.,.--: !-• r.7 • LEGAL tif:SCRIPT10!: cont Inti.•;1 f 1 cm. l'aut- 1 )1 4 lot I Access trisrmen' 'lhat portion of lot 11, interurban Addition to the City of Seattle, according t$ reCordrd in Volume 10 of Plats. twit: records of king tOuritt. kotuington, desc ci ' as f�11• ' : 1 I Itletlinnifla at the northeast corner of said Lot II; thence N88'25'27N-ilong the north • line thereof 5.00 feet to the west margin of 62nd Avenue South as conveyed to the City of Tukwila by deed recorded under king County Recording No. 7909040616; thence 601•21•401i along said west margin 164.95 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence idu on a curve to the right haying • radius of 20.00 feet wt. • central ensile of 9000'00" •n am distance of 31.42 feet; thence 11811•311'20"W 153.1S feet to a point of curve; 4.4 thence on a curve to the right having a radius of 37.50 feet, thru • central angle of of 45600'00" an arc distance of 29.45 feet; thence 1143.38•20.11 53.33 feat to a point of s' curve; thence on a curve to the right having • radius of 37.50 feet, thru a cental e4 central angle of 95420". an arc distance of 47.98 feet; thence N1116'001 angle of 4500'0W' an arc distance of 29.4S feet; thence NO121.40"E 50.15 fe:t229: • point of curve; thence on • curve to the eight having • radius of 277.50 feet, thru • feet to the north line of said Lot It thence N88•25627"li along the north line thereof 53.86 feet to the west line of the east 300.86 feet of said Lot 11; thence S01•21 '140"W along said west line 110.84 feet; thence S8838201 5.50 feet to a point on a curve, the center which bears S813•38•20E 79.50 feet; thence southerly along said curve to the left. them a central angle of 4500'00", an arc distance of 62.44 feet; thence 643.38•2011 53.33 feet to a point of curve; thence on a curve to the left having • radius of 79.50 feet, thru • central angle of 45'00'00" •n arc distance of 62.44 feet; thence S88•38'20•1 153.15 feet to • point of curve; thence on a curve to the right having a radius of 20.00 feet, thru • central angle of 9000'00" an arc distance of 31.42 feet to a point of tangency on the west margin of said 62nd Avenue South thence N01•21•40"1 along said west margin 82.00 feet to the TRUE POINT Or BEGINNING. 444,./f, e crit Short Plat Number Part' of 4 • • ;ECLAkA1lON: • Know all men by tWse presents that we, the under fined, owner(s) in fee simple and contract purchaser(s) of the land herein described do hereby make a short subdivision thereof pursuant to RCW 58.17.060 and acknowledge that said short subdivision shall not be further divided in any manner within a period of five years, from date of record, without the filing of is final, plat.., The undersigned further declare this short plat to be the igraphic representation of said short subdivision and.that same is made ° -' withfthe free consent and in accordance with the desire of.the owner(s). In witness whereof we have set our hands and seals. Mir c . ,•.A :Rs MS OD Name —2).1 `i L i r >h1 - C1� Name Name Name STATE OF WASHINGTON, County of ife IN -•� i On this day personally appeared before s• DAil y to w• known to be individual described in and who executed the with• ,in and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that Air , signed the, sane as 4�.. free and voluntary act and deed, for the sesand pure • poses therein portioned. GIVEN under ow hand and official seal this 7. . d y 01 ArteA0A4 .. 2e f E v U sea STATE OF WASHINGTON, County of )10)4i -N4i - -/" ] .f/ eatery Public in and ifor the State Washington. #' j residing at On this dap personally appeared before se /XIGH,D AeATV 141.1* a 14440 to me known to be.the individuals described in and who executed the with in and lore oint instrument, and acknowledged that 1144 signed the sane as tree and voluntary act and deed, for the um and pure pesos therein sentioned. • GIVEN under ay hand and official seal this A Qay of QG A‘ 21AeL. *` s • ary Pub is in and for the St to of Washington,: residing at seal ti \ • 1 ..f.' Jl�. 4. . iv ••-•• !, ,. .t • .1!•••• .: 1:7T-- ..r. . /w: 1 14; j t ! t ∎°• i s :� . V1..."-k41/4. •2 .. k 1 St .a; - T b • •� f � • • . • I il �` (p • El 1 ,XTJ_ • r . f 37.1• 4•SlA' to v .:�., k P PIM ',tom_ : wI lib •` ` ' t . i , i 1 b L O/ j I'f!• Q Arlie/ wZ 1 �. 4°4 r/p c'ee4risoc . j ONO Wove Ar744 foe lrailr • Land Surveyor's Certificate: ,This short plat correctly represents • survey pad* by poor under my direction In conformance with the requirements of Direction.: state statute and has been properly staked . ccordance with the Tukwila Subdivi o Code. Map on file in Vault 27 81 pat'. A Certificate No. Short Plat No. AVM. Seib tee r • loo' Page _ g of WAC 197 -11 -970 Description of Proposal DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE TO CONSTRUCT A 16,821 SQUARE FOOT, THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON THE SOUTHERN HALF OF A 1.75 ACRE SITE. Proponent GENCOR, INC NORTH HILL OFFICE BUILDING Location of Proposal, including street address, if any IMMEDIATELY EAST OF s�nn SOUTHCENIER BIVD; IN S.E. a OF SEC. 23, TWN 23, RANGE 4; TUKWILA, WA Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -19 -88 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. a There is no comment period for this DNS [[ This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Rick Beeler Position /Title Planning Director Address Date 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, / / /�: Signature Phone 433 -1846 88 You may appeal this determination to the ty Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM • CN EPIC ( 7 8c9 FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: n BLDG j—( PLNG P.W. n FIRE 0 POLICE n P & R PROJECT A(04:77( L( /G C arr=(C 6- EC (b G (C err c 02) LOCATION 6171-5-7" vF S8 00 Sou TNCekrr e .7c4(6 FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED 8//(d (8 8 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY (29///849R STAFF COORDINATOR 470:0,(0,1( C' -fe cJ RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. .COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 • CITY OF TUKWILA CN CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM 17 88 TO: BLDG' n PLNG (L71/P.W. (j'FIRE [l POLICE n P & R PROJECT A(ULfl' // /C. C arr= /C Cr Ic D G (G errco2) LOCATION E"4-Y7 vF S8 °O Sov 77(cov -02 FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED g///e /158 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY___c527/8t88 STAFF COORDINATOR £/ G�x. /L(OA( (41 61-rr.ti RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. .COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT So! TA 6 l c r T o P Qc r </ nr G c}- i2 oC ex.(e-5 7-0 s A T � s Fy- v, C i' PitR Ty c ct2 M U s r 1� en-t oN 7G? DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY v .neon/ 6A,rerrIC. P`�`" r 'P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM • CN EPIC FILE (< -8C9 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: f BLDG PLNG n P.W. FIRE n POLICE n P & R PROJECT /C(OLTff-g // /G L apr=/C Cr EG b G- (C err co,e LOCATION 6 4 5 7 o/ S 8 0 0 Sou 77f( v76,22 .j4'D_ FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED g /(c /158 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY //888 STAFF COORDINATOR !/ 2-Z oA( C4-( e-<sv RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT C, rY C( TiuvG e a 7o 'a- s';- ri -F' el) . -T o ire- v672 hi-/ eb c...7/ A -7),e, [ ve Tf77Zoc/6t/ DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY v -L/leo..e 64,e�7.7-v ,& ? -a it/i cK oo.vAS C.P.S. Form 11 `�� � ���'�^�,r �/m `^' ~~^ '�' ^^�^ To: File From: Vernon Umetsu TELEPHONE MEMO RE: North Hills Office Building (88-8-DR/EPIC-19-88) Person Contacted: Leon Grundstein, Gencor (206-488-1197) Person Calling: Vernon Umetsu, Tukwila Planning Dept. Information Items 1. Mr. Grundstein has amended his application to reflect the following additions to the proposed actions: a. All access easements necessary the proposed western driveway shall be secured prior to construction. b. Lane channelization on Southcenter Blvd. for the eastern driveway shall be provided in accordance with Public Works Dept. approved designs. c. The suitability of existing rockeries to protect the increased life and property exposed to hazard will be demonstrated during the building permit review process. Note: Steve Friedman, Gencor, has agreed that demonstrated suitability shall include certification by a geotechnical engineer that the slopes are stable, the rockeries perform no structural (retaining) function, and the rockeries are permanently stable. (8/3/88) Con No. Epic ile No. 11-25V9 Fee $100.00 Receipt No.4 -21 7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: North Hill Office Bldg 2. Name of applicant: Gencor, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 11801 NE 160th St. Ste. G, Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 488 -1197 Leon Grundstein 4. Date checklist prepared: 7/1/88 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction in January 1989 of 3 story office building (16,851 sq. ft.) 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. North Hill Apts on site above this property. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No • • 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Building permits from City of Tukwila. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed use and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in thi. checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do no . need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. The project site is approximately_ 25,000 square feet. The project is 16,821 gross square feet and is a three story office building. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known: If a proposal would occur over a range of.area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tions related to this checklist. The location of the site is 5900 Southcenter Blvd. The sitejs an open dirt /gr ej. basin surrounded on the north and_eaat by sparcQly vegetated stea hillsides °f ail feet_Ln he ah _Its£ fronts Southr nt t Blvd_ _the South, t the West, t he_ Qperty_ adjoins an araa �jini- Mart,_ enn sta.Ltrant anal rorresp ndi ng. parking 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy-Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? No -3- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICili • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth •Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. General description of the site (circle one): /Flat, / rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. d.. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Weathered glacial till e. Describe the purpose,.type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. None f.• Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 40% • Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Silt fence around downside of the perimeter of the site. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust during site excavation b. Are .there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Spray water over dusty site to keep air clean. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No • •Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. None 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No • b. Ground: • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. N/A 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Surface water runoff will be tied into city storm water system. • •Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: No 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other.. Xx shrubs XX grass pasture — crop or grain _ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other _ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? This will be removed and replanted according to landscape design. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. N/A 40 Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Plant wi t-h grass, Ana native shrubs and trees. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: None mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: None fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None • 6. Energy and Natural Resources What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity for heating, lighting, and air conditioning. .Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Insulation of building. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: None • b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short - term or a long -term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction noise.. This would occur from 7:30 a.m. to 3 p.m.; Monday through Friday for approximately 6; months. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Of f icei_ retai l_f_ and apartments. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. None Evaluation for Agency Use Only • •Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? P.O. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? P.O. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the. completed project? Twenty —Five (251 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace ?__None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:_ i /A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Designed according toPXi 1-inrj zoning. • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? ty -Five feet b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None • • 11. light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? None c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal ?. None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control .. light and . glare impacts, if any: None 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? A t -n„nty hiking trail is to the north b. Would the proposed project displace any existing . recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None Evaluation for Agency Use Only • 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Evaluation for 0 Agency Use Only a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. N/A b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Southcenter Blvd. services the site. An access road to the west also services the site. Access lro Southcenter Blvd. would be through the access road and directly onto Southcenter Blvd. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? A bus stop is within 100 yards of the site on Southcenter Blvd. • c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The project would have 43 .2arkinq stalls plus at least 3 temporary stalls. No parking eliminated. • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). None e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Sixty Peak volume would occur 4 p.m. to 5 p.m. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: None 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. None b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. �JA • 16. Utilities •Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. Circle utilities currently, available e: Eater) efuse service septic sy em, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity, water. rein e service, tele ne, sanitary sewer. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLI•T D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS • Evaluation for Agency Use Only (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? None polluting use Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: N/A 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? N/A Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: N/A • •Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? N/A Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: N/A 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? • N/A Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: N/A 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inclduing whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses .incompatible with existing plans? N/A Evaluation for • • Agency Use Only Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: N/A How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? N/A 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The project would increase ridership on public. transportation. It would be serviced by a nearby busstop. The utility usage will he increased, however, the utility system will have the_aapacity to absorb this demand. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The system is already prepared 1-n handle our project_ 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. None • 40 Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? N� Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: No TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLI•T E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To place an office building on a peice of land appropriately zoned and consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? These are the best means available given the comprehensive plan and the zoning. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: N/A Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? No Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: N/A -23- ---• OP. , EQ _ , • .•••' /7,- 7, 77 • . ' . .1.. et .,..„ .. /1 I/ .f • k :' a tOS■ ' 4 : $` F*4.' 1 !Ai i rinh r i i "CITA 1 i i J I i n n FIFA i4-.'")'.1;;■$ IP; -4 F'0‘D59 Off IC5 t51-1LID N, mem.... ond 06.1.9 fog- ICOIL lam, Lon.. •••••ori•PK. HIM •••■•••••{,,.`,. 6669 woodlown wt. ne cults 110 dex•L_It,„1 /settle. teach/Won 96115 (206) 522-61125 proiect Me.* dote • n.LL5 down checked - Neck print V IN3WH3VULIV ATTACHMENT B 1• I o I • ;. r •—••I 1 F., • • 1 -1 • 177- • .1 -2tri, 11T) f !-orcrfri, 1 1 • L Li :f.tt••.F1 t m.^-4--:' 4 -1-t'' L I t 1 1 1 1 ce."1341e-Aorer• ••••■•••mr• -rfe • .. 71. r.mr:011 Corn. ,4 en. • •■•■t* ete vr; .1 • 1 L -±7 eArr . - 04 PHt' C•SeC/11411,41 1 io LI I L. 1 1 1 • _ (11 4 2 rL-'HV 9t4 nem Maataa,....... 0 ........./Cadow CS. MU.. raw Gay emir Mama Sammiallit.... CM. 0 Ium.• ../...agias a... U. Ile as... aa *SUMO *um Sa...../Sama la.la 1.8.‘a rea../.... a.. 1141a ...../lair• . e, ur ■444 •• tetra,. 4.,•••••••• • 0' • •. 4' ATTACHMENT C fF 'TUC WA, dote ••,t, sr I n - !ri. _ . . • 41_ _ Attachment E ; , Surrounding Land Use -Jr IsOuTtl "I e.AT .______A . •ril ' -L\ '' ' , ':slifi , ri 'ANDO, u-A-- ,2.2.: --- - Et • 44/ ! 1 2 \•',-;_--:fi$ . .,,s1 !Qt ',...,, • •., ' • ,: .. s..c, ,),_ ..._ ,.. (I+ _ _f_,,_• , \:\ .., --s- .'•:....,.. ,'''',... *- ---.----Z:Z•••••- •''-'1:- ' .'•,..,,,,..,.,..„ ''''''-'.. ' -'■ •• ,• .... • 11. a .17.-7,--ap E.,,....**.Z.., • *••••••-.. 1•4# . . I 1.1 477: :...0, ,,,,,,, -\ \-\ .-' /5/$1- TI 24. • C: 152N0 STI I:1 • CONDOWNIUY , % ‘ S'''........,,-,..., -i• ‘-. '■.. ,, V \ ...12A ..... ---.........:- - ---7:--,-• .,- - ■Er '-^;•.-...-. . . '0, \., `,,.‘‘ 1 --A 1 '`;', ______.:.„,......._ .......:Z...%..,-z...:„..z.,..,4 .-,04Y.7:405:_,_,,z---,--L,-...-----,.....,. -,... • 0,_ .\.. • : Q, •:w514-rE -- -----........_....., --... czy-,s, ....., -_,.......... _xi PO a INCE„0," .1 1 ' sot 14 Ay v.COU t, .. : .. .; C..,..\! • • -/,/ /eq.0./ ''.0 `•:',, - '-• f- • • , - — .....,., „..--... A .......1.,-=- ,".9,-,V-r.:•...:.. --=•.-'.•1 ':-..,... • . INTERSTATE-r44wY. lir ACC/ TUKWILA i PARKWAY IX SO UTFICENT'ER: cl .# s '"3 T 1 11' C „E' T 1k -IR 140°‘j I. '''' , .13.2 C4 1.4.° 010°"4"11. v00. ('‘' 0 rt•f 0 N.." '3 T. ';;SOUTHc-NTER fl S U T I-1 C!! E E # T 7 . 1 a ANDO arbhltects Itnardte design group.:-arohileete •.1836 .westlake sve.n. suite" 204 le, we 96109 (208)283-4764 ' consultants : sheet title 17T-E- 71-.64■1 . architects • Ilnardie design group . architects • 1830. westiaks won. suits '204' • ' soothe, wa• 98109 • (208)283 -4764 8.-4. w°•-O. IJ •r. y. . r. 41 • -4• 11 11 I1 11. stwER u g II 's• knoac -ok! ur. _ .11 ; 11- Ii. II:'--: 11 -' II • 11: II 11'. ••..-11....- .11 .. i II II . II . 11.`: I II 11 .11. 11 -: 102 II 1103. 11 OFFICE . OFFICE 11.. 11: . :11 11 . 11 : :.. . ; :: 11' .'11 :11 11 II REGISTERED ARCHITECT L.UROIC' STATE or w*wwcroN consultants .' N.T.O. 12• • 20• -0• project title : 4.4¢ Fta6-r +,I6'. MG1o.':::;;A:#1.. . pnnl>:r 6? -r1 —G PZ.s� t�p 64s...-TIED, L.'GOJ.LCTLQD'.• fAu. t?mp 'co.JT ' .-. • oKa. _..yam - IVI :ai - o• CITY OF T1IK*Vf n PLANNING DEPT G/u /90 ROOF cr o architects, Iinardlc design group :architects 1838 w.sttake a•e.n. suite 204 ualtle,"we ooIog (206)283-4764- 4477 aEGISTERE0 ARCHITECT tWt IINARdC . STAT.OI WASHm6TW consultants project title : IIo2T 4 1- f I LLL OP1= I GE sheet title : C.E�/L�TIoN.� WLSIhLUUIS- •WIN 121990 eV.111: DEPT G/u /90 data n • PRFANM ED MET COPING CONC.(PAINT) • RANT -UP ROC . CLASS '6 • POMO RD (SEE 518 0005)5 R -30 MIT BMA PaonoE -8RNT stops 0.9.000 SF ROOF AREA ' . CERYOCMTIE� R -11. BAIT 8615E -: 214 0 .16 OC. 'S•'8. EAT. ura(PMN1) & +III , iT4T1.l4ALT4f �1TlbTMTQd: � - 1 185P ACCOST' LG . INSTALL. PER UBS 540 '07- 18.F0R ZONE w 16 CONC COL ! W18. %AU )UM GRADE (IMPOSED SLOPE or POL FOOT 8/ .MIRE MESH 10 k IN 8611E CLEAR UA54'.'. N CLEAR 4800 511114 5f NE'iF1 GRADE 08441 STAB 01 GRADE. -. OF.1S RICO INSUL, . SECTION` REPORT ��. SECTION SECTION 1/2-.1.-o• RI �o - SECTION 1• �E SECTION a architects-. 'Inardls design group . architects ' 1826 *8itlak0 8w1.n. . iults. 204 9881118• we 88,08 . (206)282 -4764 un REGI ED AR ATS OP w4LanG1C 1 consultants :. project title NORTH, NULL BLJILCIDINCI 'sln•uacs..rrec2..Rx.. -, sheet title :.y' I;•I d J SEL710fJS JUN 12 797 CITY of Tur.CL71 r ANNINC DC' data data:. II i zo/b1 s est no: .'S te.soiree-n.." .o • 19+ • • Ewer* • • I..lotzr'H - G n-1 a nou �A architects Ilnerdie design group .architects 1838 wwstlake aw. n. - sults 204 -: wattle, wa 98109 : 12081283 -4784 • ua REGISTERED ARCMfTECT • ®I t1NAEDK SYAf or WAUiu,Dlv• consultants.: project title : NORTH H ILI . OFF ic.E iZ7uIL01NC. "PI.IKI..Ut1�.., Kee 4GrIt,lR sheet title : 1 "10701 CITY Or ti, :w:IA t$te ro: dawn chedted: 3702/ Qo.• sheetro: ' 1. Sub grade. including bar.' to within 1 /10th foot provided• by general. .' ns _ - unless otherwise noted'. Subgrades 'will be 'inspected by landscape architect. or owner's - rep. before landscape installation._.. 2. Landscape contractor shall' Scarify"an6''grede... r • - . 3. dw dtp.h.copcoil in all planting' areas Pacific Topsoil 5-way min or'approved • • esuel. .. 4 2w depth. mulch in all planting, a 8. All plant material ahallsbe inspected b7 landscape architect. or owner a rep.• - before Installation. - _ - 8. All eau plantings shell have triangular npecing • 7'. All plant materiel shall conform•to. IRA steodard for nursery etock.`1ateOt edition.. • 8. Plant material of sit. or • kind not' eva11ab1e -msy be substituted with approval. . of landscapt archltebe. 8. All tree. pits shall l ba inspected-for proper drainsge by laodaup. architect 10. Positive drainage shall• be-maintained.' !bend planting arena minions 12 Maximum slope-3:1. unless otherwise noted. - . - 11..Shroks and trees minima 42" froo.curb. for car 0.erhaag.'unleae wheeletope • noted. ' -i . 12..6° wide mulch mowing strip.ohere. lawn 1s ad latent to building. ' - 13 landscape contractor shall maintain site until -fio0l• inspection and acceptance 67 owner. . o architects Ilnardic design group . architects' 1836 weetlake ave.n.. ' suite 204 Seattle, era 98109 . (2081283 -4784 4423 �REGISTERED • n Aa STATE 01naxwn1OTO0I consultants KEN LONEY KFIYCTM E LONEY. - . C OnIO.GTE 10 ]47 - • .61-1,411 TREE) PLANTING .DETAIL project title : ivrarH -rf /LL PLANT LIST _2r7, POTPN /CAL _ COMMON 8 - P ltIAii 5 --. cE/7s!6hFEEU4 ' nrekw X.%7 . ,v6WR:Y2T 2' GAL. 9 r B fi' ..PCC2 (7.4r IA Pe'* / ;,tOiZSV4.y MA/Se : Z' Cst ; A. ! W :.- ezAPNYML.?* Pi4TA CO,4 r,A. /' ` t 2i-i Gr W //12 500N47-41.., .ci v?G '4'14 /Al: I l tN-V 7GE'AI17I3ON ' N//J9 ` FU17MIV t 7 lNoc NDI7O(4 :E�"P 1 2r'' M /Al. sixti Its if%Ui.J6' L..'OTTD GUY52S i' / 0770 - 44,77 -C'.J GAU/&E . 2/', t;-1/A1 r feM fi`UY ffd+Wo -: '/Sg FM5 (VY.'' 41' P774 4' O.v. • • . 0 . 1 z C 7 G ti J ( A F f ' I ' / t * 6/144- (.421/1, , . 4 P O r 4 4 ' - . t' 8O ,LriotMJ - %6:•64N - �eUrvi*Gl A. ,Merrzletxl I 2UGt%� . F/R e'. /: //N 0' 3 .,, p� ...'g�rfpT /N/A.FaASLrSI' /: PNOTMbA.'. sheet title LANDSCAPE PLAN 1a CITY Dr TUK'N4u1 . date PLANTING PLAN' ,•. za! job ro:.. - 20' • e8GS10 SSDEMENTA.Tte RO °T*R*- ALL • LIMIT8.OIY CLEARING AND AREAS � VEGELTATIOe:4R85ERVATtONA.4 DESCRIBED ON'THE-PLAN'.SHALL'J86.;C ,PLAGG£D ON -.?912 e18LDnAND` OBSERVED: 000280 ..0061StRUCTION:' =. • L f.. 2. ALL •REQUIRED S8D1MENTATLON /ERDSION. COt1TjR0_I, PACILITIES'r60ST'BC CONSTRUCTED AND 161 OPERR4?2ON °PRIOR T , AHD'. CLEARING: ANO /OR OTHER CONSTRUCTION!TO IN54RE THAT SEDIMENT+I.ADEB.,WATEN•DOES NOT. ENTER THE HATURAL'.DRAINAI'I6 SYSTEM." • AL.6. EROSION AN05'SEDI0EN'D FACILITIES SHALL BE "' MAYNITA I NED IN; A- SAT I SFACTORYj1ANDITLON< UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT CLEARING AND,(OB.:CONSTRUCTION% ISICOMPLET2D • AND POTENTIAL FOR ONSI ?B•- ER05- ION.', HAS:1 PA382D. THE' IMPLEMENTATION. MAINTENANCE. REPLACEMENT .AND.ADDITION5:•TO• EROSION /SEDI MEET AT ION.- .CONTROL • SYSTEMS SHALL`-=BE;T'HE- RESPONSIBILIDc'OP THE PERMLTTEB. 3. THE 20058061 'AND SEDIMENTATION. CONTROLSY9TEMS. DBPICTBD•ON IBIS: DRAWING'. ARE- INTENDED TO 'BE "'MINIMUM- REQUIREMENTS.' TO Herr' PITH ITS CONDITIONS. •• AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES AND., UNEXPECTED OR, SEASONAL CONDITIONS DICTATE. THE PERMITTEE''SHOULD- r ANTICIPATE THAT .MORE. EROS ION AND 88DIMENTATION••CONTROL FACILITIES WILL. SE NECESSARY TO. INSURE. COMPLETE SILTATION CONTROL ON THE PROPOSED SITE.. -. 008IN0, THE COURSE, OP' CONSTRUCTION. IT SHALL BE THE•- OBLIGATION "AND RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTBE TO ADDRESS ANY NSW CONDITION5• THAT MAY BE CREATED' BY HIS ACTIVITIES AND TO PROVIDE ADDLTIONAL.PACILITIES, OVER L. AND ABOVE MINIMUM - REQUIREMENTS. AS MAY BE NEEDED TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND WATER QUALITY OF THE" RECEIVING .DRAINAGE- SYSTEM. - • ',4. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN IS POR EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL• ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN APPROVAL-0F STORM DRAINAGE' DESIGN, SIZE' NOR LOCATION OF PIPES, RESTRICTORS, CHANNELS O8 RETENTION PACILITIES. - 5.• ANY. DISTURBED AREA .WHICH HAS BEEN STRIPPED OP VEGETATION AND WHERE N0 FURTHER WOREIS ANTICIPATED POR A.PHRIOD OF 30 DAYS OR MORE MUST BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH" MULCHING, GRASS PLANTING OR OTHER APPROVED EROSION CONTROL TREATMENT APPLICABLE' TO TH8•T1M6 OF YEAR IN QUESTION. GRASS SEEDING ALONE WILL BE- ACCEPTABLE ONLY DURING THE MONTHS OF APRIL THROUGH SEPTEMBER INCLUSIVE. SEEDING MAY PROCEED OUTSIDE THE SPECIFIED TIME • PERIOD WHENEVER IT IS IN THE INTEREST OF THE PERMITTE6. BUT- MUST BE AUGMENTED WITH MULCHING. MEETING, OR OTHER TREATMENT.• APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT.' - • - CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE • 1. ATTESD ?RECONSTRUCTION MEETING. 2. INSTALL.CONSTRUCTIO9 ENTRANCE. 7. FLAG CLEARING LIMIT. A. PLACE '8SRAN BALE DAN IN EXISTING DITCH. • :5. INSTALL FILTER PENCE AND DIVERSION DITCHES: • 6..-CONSTRUCT 885?.SIDE EROSION CONTROL DITCH VIM! PERFORATED RISER. 7.'. CLEAR AND G SITE. 8.- REMOVE UNSUOABLB M4TBBIAL. 10t .LINO 10. '. BEGIN �V SOBCBARCB. II. NAINTAIBFEROSI08 /SBDINSBTATI08 Correct. 88850053 mum ALL OWING. 12. 8Y6180SEEQ AND 8ULC8 ALL 8500580 AREAS. NOTE: ALL EXCAVATION. 91 .: AND C011PAC9106 SHALL BE DONE PER CEOTBC8 COHSULTARTS SOIL REPORT N0. 88383, DATED NOVEMBER, 1988. 1111111 ®0 C. 6•.■sr NATO - !6? t.9O9 FI LTEAL FAeRU. a..n rm.n ss F6IJLE. PER etzer_ms* • 111 COMMA dn. NJ Mtn 111C71,FarAv. % p6rA1L T • SAW o.... 2 �VTTeR slam JUN 121990 cm/ 0: TUKWILA PLANNIN 11191T. 4. J ae... SI'iiv • 6LVt 20'IG.2289 litttcw UFl01-7 REMICTi,A.L• OF u p-1pAG"IE:o' FILL -. E.84'47114.(6.4 1.24ub 9 - e.0- GYU.ISU(:VeD. - fIJ14-frW? R= e.%!Cf IN 2 VIED FI4164I G.ePOCb APLUND E5L11LI71A1G. PG¢lME.r 2. 140 • . A• OAJ 1.14 EL. RAA41 L.abooc ... C,O, ..a -oJT: +roJT •.l «.. N -C escrt0C'SBALL SR IN11CC0054NPE:WATE 1(1 VASBD,SPECI318111 DIIR FOt:� NUNICIPA_L- POLLIC`''IMMOORSS CONSTRUCTION^- PEEPARBD•BY WASHINGTON STATR'CMAFRRf AME4i1JN',PWBLIC YORKS ASSOCIATION, CURRENT EDITION (AIWA) AND CIIT ''0P.' • TUIDII114= STANOAR08 AND SPECIFICATIONS: • . . 2. THE - "CONTRACTOR ID 801111.4 RESPONSIBLE' POR THE MMAKS, NET5005 AND SEQUENCES. OP CONSTRUCTION AND FOR THE SAFETY' OF WORKERS AND OTHER ON TH6 I. . IT SHALL 86 THE CoNTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT' IN -PLACE ALL • s ' 0211.11[84' AND /0R STRUCTURES '4562500 SHOWS OR NOT SHORN ON THIS PLAN. DAMAGE DUE TO CONT,RACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED' AT THE • ACTOR'S EXPENSE. '. .. 4. PROVIDE'. AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY FILTER FABRIC S11T PENCE TO 054056 SEDIMENT' LADEN DATER 0065 NOT LEAVE THE PROJECT 31111. THE ?AGITATED . MUST' BE IN OPERATION -PRIOR TO CLBARISG 011 OTHER CONSTRUCTION AND BE • MAINTAINED. UNTIL CONSTRUCTION AND LANDSCAPING' ARE COMPLETED AND POTENTIAL. FOR• ON -SITE EROSION HAS PASSED.. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES AND EXPECTED • (SEASONAL) CONDITIONS DICTATE, NORe.8I1.1ATI011 CONTROL FACILITIES MA! 88 , REQUIRED -10 INSURE: COMPLETE SILTATION CONTROL 05 THE 1150POSED 115011LT. T8ERIFO2E,.DORING ATE . COUBS! OF CONSTRUCTION, IT SHALL BE THE OBLIGATION' AND RESPONSIBILITY OF'. THE DEVELOPER TO 'AMBERS ANY NEW' CONDITIONS THAT NAY' BE CREATED By •0I5 - ACTIVITIES AND TO. PROVIDE' ADDITIONAL FACILITIES, OVER AND ABOVE - X10114@4. REQUISEII0OITS,• AS MAY BE NEEDED TO PROTECT ADJACENT . 5. AU. TYPE I PTV' BASINS SHALL BR PER APIA STANDARD, PLAN N0. 8-1,' HMI' APWA STANDARD PLAN NO. B-2a. 110440• AND GRATE. ALL TrP6, II "CATCH BASINS (OIL /WATER - SEPARATOR). SHALL BE Per APWA S1ANDABD.PLAN N0. 5- 1.-8111(1 APIA STANDARD PLAN N0. B -24 F8A7E AND GRATE... . 6.. THE BACIP1U. SHALL BE PLACED EQUALLY '08 BOTH' SIDES 0P THE PIPE IN LAYERS WITH £ 1.0050 411011801 DEPTH OF SIX' INCHES. MAX0MIDI'DEPTH HIGIR INCHES," • THOR/50110LY • TAMPING EACH LAYER: THESE 'COMPACTED LAYERS 1(U8T EXTEND FOR ONE PIPE DIAMETER ON EACH SIDE 02 THE 11020 011 TO SIDE OF THE. TRENCH. MATEBIALS•TO'CRIPL6TE.TNE FILL OVER PIPE SHALL BE THE SAC: AS EXCAVATED P&ON•THH' TRENCH EXCEPT THAT 05CAIIIC' 4ATE51415, EMUS LUMPS -, OR ROCKS 011 PAV0808T. CHUNKS MORE'. THAN SIX INCHES 111.8AXIMUM DIMENSION, 011 OTHER NafFt4MM alrT coo. JNeal- R�O°F O(2.`I.1's 1,.b 9 OR I . 0E oRAlA1, GOJ.I816.11O.1 v./ILL ALLOIUelp. .. . SITE' LOCATION M AP - SCALE: ra2560. OvRRGID#' ELEV To ' '�' PtpvIOB 11ET1PfI10Nf 0161 A 4L.c, a Emer4E.AIT'. : Aal 9c9AAa DN Pct owls. • Q UIR TO UIE11.E OFF-61T-B C 4GE1.S'r' O,KKae.✓ , REED FlLowl e"°- 11.'" PROPERTY o../LJE¢ (3efoRE coaer'1-Rt..)CTIO,.('` (-col 8EC L►1� >t 1-.0. lob 0 Te . IOG.O - 1O. • 9$.00 (9' ARK of BLDCa.) -- oI p A OFFIc-E 9011.@. '1?- 105$ ��5"O`//IYo6FL'a ro nta .rl08 wJ.LA.R/) �- F F > 8-7 FRo•A PA.G� OFBL.D'6) • 7. ALL' STORK -DRAIN PIPE SHALL -BE- CONCRETE RUBBER GA5101ED ASTM C -14-2 OR 1944'C -76 -21 OS 16 GAUGE CALYANI1Y0 STEEL CORRUGATED a.m.. PIPE. STEEL PIPE -SHALL" IIAV! 18T1RTIGe1 COUPLING HANDS CONFORMING TO THE. 015015B101R5 OP - .41114 SPECIFICATI085 SECTION- 9- 05.1(2)4. 811161 PIP! SNAIL RECEIVE TBP.AS 07! 1 ASPHALT C04TINC INSIDE AND'OU!. - - B BEDDING: FOR RICO) PIPE •(CONCRETE OR 0008)' SHALL BE CLASS "B.• PER AMA • STANDARD' PLAN N0. 8-11. BEDDING FOR FLEXIBLE 2120 ( CORRUGATED METAL OR PLASTIC) SHALL 210 CUSS •r. PER APWA STANDARD PLAN NO.. 8 -18. TRBUCH 510T11' SHALL BE 40 INCHES 144X114101 OR 1 -1/2 TINES PIPE DIAMETER PUTS IS . INCHES,. 4H1C0EV8& I5 GREATER.. BAQFILL SHALL BE NACHO IN 6 INCH LAYERS • • COMPACTED TO 952 NAIIKUM DENSITY. '. .. . ' 9. EXTRUDED' CURB SHALL BE BONDED t0TEE- ASPHALT SURFACE 11TH AN 6200! • , BON018C. AGENT SUITABLE FOR THAT PURPOSE' 'PLACE 15 111114 FA. REBAR AT 8'- 0' 0.C. RA0 CYW77ALYX5 4: .O7 CEttre,e - 0057-87. , 10. BIOP01.RATION SHALES, RHSTRICTOR5 AND STORY('' DRAINS NOT LOCATED ON PUBLIC, RIGHT-09-HAT ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED :.; - IT. IN ALL AREAS. OTHER THAN LOADS. WHERE CONSTRUCTION REWIRES : THE REMOVAL. OF SOO: ETC.: THOSE AREAS SMALL BE HY0110- SE1DE0'80111 RTE GRA55 FOR THE PREVENTION OF ON -SITE EROSION.':. 12. ALL PIPE SHALL BE 1.410 ON A PROPERLY PREPARED 'FOUNDATION ACCORDING TO WASHINGTON STATE SPECIFICATION -7- 02.7(1). THIS SHALL INCLUDE NECESSARY LEVELING OF THE TRENCH BOTTOM OR THE TOP OF THE FOUNDATION MATERIAL AS WELL AS PLACEMENT AND -COMPACTION OF REQUIRED BEDDING MATERIAL' TO UN1201121' GRADE SO THAT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF 100:219! HILL BE 00PPORTH0 ON A. '1I. THE STORM- .DRAINAGE SYSTEM SHALL =CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO THE' APPROVED PLANS ' WHICH ARE OS FILE. IN TIE DEPARTMENT OF. PUBLIC NORFS. . ANY DEVIATION PND4 - THE APPROVED PLANS WILL BEQ0I00 WRITTEN,' APPROVAL PROM THE PROPER AGENCY, 111180 0.11 THE CITY OF NRVILA DBPASTS0NT OF PUBLIC WORKS. 14. A COPY OP TBESX'•APPROVED PLA85'MUST,80 ON THE 1080112! WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION TS IN PROGRESS. 15. ALL ROOT DBAINS'AND-P00TING DRAINS SNAIL: BE TIGHTLINBD TO THE' STORM DRAINAGE 5442101. . STANIMRD GMIMNRRD' STEEL LMO6T /STEPS. 5E1 WO. N. 89 =IS._ PIP!'. SUPPOQT(SP. ®� W S's.090G.G8 • SCS. 11 Woe' MRAR BOLIEF OR IsZEOSED , r - Core. .S OwG. W • 2-114 WALL 4.M •. 55 NCNB 0' .... . LAIN • �'il. - •. .ONt SUPPORT / • Use• aePIAA.I...g Litz?. FRI307 .. Ltar'frYP Toe N. e:. GOt415AL F- ELEGTQI >L V4tJ LT . • 4.PIL..ef y I g �r bi o Co �1L17� I.G. T O \ 1. .711 1[4' .. ^I.0 •9F'10.1 CP� - • �' 7'OR PIG6�0 1.G' �PS•e,o �.. 1.4•• 76.60 I Z T.E. 7$S q. o; 72.3 _ ee L4f.PT OF 2,1 4-61 Sl;o Fe IBM PLwFJ v)eLJ 580GY 711/0 C Hf /21%7 .¢vFi //' C0AB • S 4 4 6 Z 2 0 J RSPHFCT at; ' 45PM.9 7 Co.YCREN7 F 0 e 3 H 0 • T E .7 I �L e. - 6aery 2S etiTOwAD IS,LANO • CITY OF-TI; • PLANNING' • 0 z 0 4 51 J1 4 1 "= 20 8917602 . 6 22 89 SANITARY SIDE SEWER NOTES • t. ' 'ALL ' MATERLALS"415P.0.- P08'13OYSTRUCTIO5 0P'CITT "OF' LUXL4ILA SANITARY' SID `T SEVERS !HALL BE' NEW AND UNDAMAGED. ALL MATERIALS USED 'ON THE PROJECT 'SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THH,CITY PRI011' TO. INSTALLATION .ACCEPTANCE• OF THE MATERIALS 'BY THE CITY:SHALL NOT RELIEVE TO DEYELOPEB /CONTRACTOR' P808 1116 RESPONSIBILITY TO GUARAMCE'CONSTHIIC:0.,11,1 ' 'AND: MATC0.IAL9. ALL MATERIALS '.AM D.' 110TNODS REPCwENCED:IIEREIN ' SHALL CONFORM TO. TNEQ APPLICABLE - STANDARDS .PDX, MATERIALS: AND. CONSTRUCTION, FOUND IN TABS "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR MUNICIPA6' PUBLIC VORKS CONSTRUCTION," LATEST] COITION: +PUBLISHED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE' Cl1APTER.OP THE AMERICAN PUBL14. HOME ASSOCIATION • AND THE HASHING-TON :STATE :DEPARTMENT OF. TRANSPORTATION* HEREINAFTER; REFERRED TO AS THE APVA /83007 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. ; F 3. MATERIALS FOR 510E 5241113 .SHALL 'BE : EITHER ,CONCRETE, PVC OR DUCTLL.E. INN AS 3PECLPLCD 01LOV :• - 3. - CEMENT CONCRETE PIPE'SHALL BE RUBBER'GABKLT BELL AND SPIGOT TYPE::, CONFORMING TO 45111 DESIGNATION -CI• CLASS 2 0011 8ON- REINPORCEO P0PE AND; ASTM C76 FOR REINFORCED- WITH :REQUIRED CLASS TO BE SPECIFIED Gel .211E: 4.' DUCTILE IRON PIPE SHALL CONFORM TO 'ANSI 421.51 011 AIWA. C151 AND 511 BE CEMENT LINED, PUSH -0N ''JOINT UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 10! 11018(58 THICKNESS CLASS SHALL BE CLASS 52 UNLESS, 0TOERVISE SPECIFIED, AS DETAILED IN SECTION - 5.3.4'0? THESE STANDARDS: - P.V.C. PIPE SHALL CONFORM 10 -THE - PROVISIONS. OF ASTM. 53034- 80, :.SDR. 35 UNLLSS.OSH4RV151 SPECIFIED. ALL JOINTS ARE TO'88 PUSH -ON RUB810 GASKET 4. PIPE LAYING' SHALL START PROM. .111E LOWEST POINT ABLEST OTHERWISE APPROVED 'ALL-CON5(R4CTION OP-.WAT40- DISTRIBDTION: SYSTEME B8ALC'CONPOHII TO ?3HL : --- 0031C8 -U 0111(451143 OP-THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OP SOCIAL''' AND H0AL111 SERVICES' AND THE CITY OP TUIOIILA' PUBLIC WO11SS ` WATER. CONSTRUCTION AND DEVCLOPML•R STANDARDS .EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE NOTED HEREIN, ALL WORK' SHALL. BE ACCOMPLISHED' AS 'RECOCDIL8010 -IN '.APPLICABLE AMERICAN. 0ATER10R13 ASSOCIATION '(AWA), AND. AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION(APVA) SPECIFICATIONS - NPPA :24' AND ' ACCORDING 11) THE RECOMMENDATIONS - OP THE MANUFACTURER OF TAR'NATERIAL- OR- EQUIPMENT USED. CONTRACTOR P11RPORHING'. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION SHALL WAVE '.A COPY OF THE SPECIFICATIONS ON .TRH JOB- SITE AT ALL TINES. CONTRACTOR- -- .SHALL P02010114 WATER 101144 -PLUG OF THE APPROPRIATE SIZE' WHICH 5HALL. BE INSTALLED IN THE END OF THE WATER MAIN WHEN HOUK IS DELAYED OR STOPPED AT "TEL. END -0P THE H0115.DAY'. _ RIGHT -0P -WAY, 8111.04' 011115000 1RA0E :: ALL 84100.84285 AND '5011001113. WILL NOT BE MORE 11AN SIX (6) PELT BELOW 811118X10 GRADE. - 001001.! 1400 PIPE $BALL BE CEMENT-LINED STANDARD'T11ICKNC55 CLASS 52- : UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED AND 'SEAL. CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS 0? USA STA1(0480 4 -21.51 (AWA C- 151).` .5., ROBBER GASKET PIM "JOINTS TO 00. POSH-00-JOIIIT (031011) OR REGION/CAL JOI04 _ " (11.3.). IN ACCORDANCE' WITH USA STANDARD' A21 -11 (AWWA C -111), UNLESS- OTHE59011 SPECIP000. -.• - -• WATER MAINS SHALL BE A 00011(24 04440 OP- THIRTY -5I5 (36),- IMC1R3 BELOW-10AD 6. ',FLANGES ' JOIN - SHALL'. CONPORIT:TO USA STANDARD 016.1 'STANDARD TBICLN633: CEMENT -LLNING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WIT0-- USA.STANOA80 6. TRENCHES -SHALL BE PROVIDED PER TUKWILA BTABDARO. PLAN 0 -13 'AND.05BA /*5614. 5. SO PORTION OP ANY SEVER MAIN 05 LATERAL LNS0ALLATIOR• IS TO BR BAOII113.40 • OR COVERED UNTIL APPROVED BY-THE PUBLIC VORR5_IRSPECTOR. 9.- 6. 'ALL'5EW LATERALS OR EXTENSIONS TO 01051180 STUBS SHALL BE TESTED RE EITHER EIPILTRATION 84768•4054 OR LOW PRESSURE AIR TEST FROM THE POINT OP CONNECTION'TO THE EXISTING STUB OB MAIN TO THE CONNECTION VITN THE BUILDING PLUMBING....TESTIIIC OF SIDE' SEWERS SHALL BE. PERFORMED' PRIOR 113-.10. BACP.PILLI81..' . - .: '. - .. :.. j -.. • :7. ALL' REQUE5T5!POR 185040410115 AND FOR WITNESSING TESTS SHALL BE SCHEDULE/34 WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR 24 -HOURS IN ADVANCE.. FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE ADVANCE NOTICE MAY RESULT IN 1711.A1 5-TO THE - CONTRACTOR POET • ' 00001RE12-18004541ON. ... I1. 12. -ALL TEES, -`PLUGS AND HYDRANTS SHALL` BE PROVIDED WITH REACTION BLOCRIIIG.. TIE ROOS" OR JOINTS DESIGNED TO PREVENT XOV018NT HAY ALSO - BE REQUIRED. ON-SITE NIXING-OE CONCRETE IS NOT ALLOYED- BEDI -ELY ONLY. (REP PLAN 0-1':4 4'-2). ALL TIE -RODS SHALL BE PAINTED. WITH A 1I1UMIN005 COATING • A CONTINUOUS AND UNIFORM 911DDING SMALL. BE PROVIDED IN THE TRENCH rot ALL. BURIED PIPE. BACKPILL MATERIAL SHALL BE TAMPED IA LAYERS AROUND THE PIPE AND TO A SUFFICIENT HEIGHT ABOVE THE PIPE TO ADEQUATELY: SUPPORT AND PROTE04'THE PIPE. STONES FOUND.. IN THE TRENCH: SHALL BE 86(40040 FOR A DEPTH' OF AT LEAST. SIX (6) INCHES DELCO THE BOTTOM OF THE PIPE. - • CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON' PIPE : INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AIM STANDARD C- 151' AND THE MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATION. PIRG HYDRANTS' SHALL 06 CONSTRUC•ED PER CITY STANDARDS PLANS W-3, 9- 4,,4' -5 - AND 9-6 AND CITY - ORDINANCE' N0. 729. - TIRO ,NMINT 10 K P•Il1100 v11M. DO mlf b 46945111' Tiff 1CI{g1 GLASS. mower. W K M81I01 4.25011 M meLLp 4111, at WWI.. • - dracers To corm. ra A.4.4.4. ' coo. se OS! 1Ylq 08 .sooLLa 20.7TTCE Mot. 14.042 8I11T• 42KIw Tol SLA Al M COMM LIM CO 5 02. N CONITS TOLL 0•002 19 CITY OOU)9Q 2221.. 01110.10 72(0 • STMT.= *8 • OIITECRD ST. PARR u1M.Y1T ' 1T1LLL nor • SCL1A14K COT Ball, -vlTU PACIMT PM„w R6@AIR; 1100102 •PEW. Ir R ousts MOIL -GAL @3DMLR Nl( INK OCT CBS 11)91 11•3.-.0. ROC SOTS.. M 1100 1202 4.1 3g W 1' n N _7 vo a'ri'L.4, - /Pe.19'. :' I:•• I;r,", p4Me6TiY.- _____�4VK_b METER__ I.- 'IC 1E.LIG4T - g LF li6:6 15 0070 rlereR.: DD - :80RlAD Li•1DU116 4ll6T :' I .TulIN y. a,e �A.slJ�.Ta'F: vim. ---L� , T. eI.1 �.6.D. c6w.9 !i71'G, v. C4�J; T.4 . ... I, G.•506.5U/ ND. COUNSB DRAWL ON CAVLT . .. • A. 1)380 0 :000(011 T NO TALL no :i- 380, No52 RIM NA Dl O N.K.T. AP00 OISOORGC 84X4 NO .J. 1040 t O PCaAGM 110 MIN VALK 270. DT.. a 0T4L nM • P O.J. 5280 sou. .RIM ILO ad 00 vMIK 09 11 DMl1 L 0028 18 MT A AT RIRI 280 0011 ITRK.Ir made ace MCC W PTRT- '..PD 111000E RT • S. W K.0.L APOle 00 NM • r bO 4818 MIT.' - 1 .w C Ir i4' SCRIM WT IRO[ v4.K 0@ VIDE 4.10184 OOBCI01 Ira wan]. 0.l COST- ARMIO- N..- RM.J.sP.L - G. A R - 1 :] :4 : -mc'wR MA M MAa 10 ROD I41NMM 0CARONC 1X1 80.10. N. mourn INRM•ATta6 TO ad MT THIS' STTOLIO PUN MD RCOOIROTMS.■ TIROHU 1U0CIM 00 11.21.TI0 CITT M00YNR'1O78. - ' • Z ' 0 L J ..3 0. V y J IU= 4 _ 3 0 j. )I -z $: OPIW 5P8IRQ0 PIT. - :FIRE ROMANI 835001.8... OFFSITIX WM awrt.i. SEE SHEET40F4 • Ab ?e....' ' aorta. BE A 60U Z. to1JA1 FoR A. VM.j F1et-p .vein 1( WA AIp2 ... GoN LEY PRIOR 0 MIS SU lI [JUN 121990 CITY 0/ TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. SOUTHG BLVD. 4 8 4 4 '8N'N.b'- TOPPUAL.• T•eG MLIFE: I +• $" TOP PI4.144 •4; ATE vAL-JE . FL]•MJ I 4., GeNIC. PSer4 TH.P//f7' 'tour. • 'DSB 1' = 20• 6.22.89 89176 02 CD .TJ - VERor4,ex.cT,nli.; iL�T.E RK -?c. v. T.: RuCT. ok.1; vI W RTERMM�1� .. 8 "P. 8°'ThPPING TEE: (Ms ■FL\. 1 -'. a" TAPPi14G -- GRTB .. VALVE (FL. Ir) oNC BLOCK