Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit D12-360 - CBRE - SLAB SETTLEMENT REPAIR
CBRE SLAB SETITLEMENT REPAIR 12622 INTERURBAN AV S D12-360 City ofI'ukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 -431 -3670 Inspection Request Line: 206 - 431 -2451 Web site: http: / /www.TukwilaWA.gov DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Parcel No.: 0004800003 Address: 12622 INTERURBAN AV S TUKW Suite No: Project Name: CBRE - SLAB SETTLEMENT REPAIR Permit Number: D12 -360 Issue Date: 04/18/2013 Permit Expires On: 10/15/2013 Owner: Name: GATEWAY OLYMPIA INC Address: PO BOX 4900 #207 , SCOTTSDALE AZ 85261 Contact Person: Name: DAVID KEHLE Address: 1916 BONAIR DR SW , SEATTLE WA 98116 Contractor: Name: DAVIS SCHUELLER INC. Address: 20700 44 AV W STE 280 , LYNNWOOD WA 98036 Contractor License No: DAVISSI105PN Lender: Name: SELF FUNDED - CB RICHARD ELLIS Address: Phone: 206 - 433 -8997 Phone: 206 775 -9400 Expiration Date: 07/01/2014 DESCRIPTION OF WORK: REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING SLAB, RAISE EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE, ADD PIN PILES AND FOOTINGS AND PIN PILE NEW SLAB, POUR NEW SLAB Value of Construction: $96,000.00 Fees Collected: $2,365.98 Type of Fire Protection: SPRINKLERS /AFA International Building Code Edition: 2009 Type of Construction: V -B Occupancy per IBC: 0008 Electrical Service Provided by: SEATTLE CITY LIGHT * *continued on next page ** doc: IBC -7/10 D12 -360 Printed: 04 -18 -2013 Public Works Activities: Channelization / Striping: N Curb Cut / Access / Sidewalk / CSS: N Fire Loop Hydrant: Flood Control Zone: Hauling: Land Altering: Landscape Irrigation: Moving Oversize Load: Sanitary Side Sewer: Sewer Main Extension: Storm Drainage: Street Use: Water Main Extension: Water Meter: Permit Center Authorized Signature: I hereby certify that I have read and governing this work will be complie N N N Number: 0 Size (Inches): 0 Start Time: Volumes: Cut 0 c.y. End Time: Fill 0 c.y. Start Time: End Time: Private: Profit: N Private: The granting of this permit does not pre construction or the performance of work. to this permit. Signature: Date: Public: Non - Profit: N Public: ed this permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of law and ordinances whether specified herein or not. e to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local laws regulating I am authorized to sign and obtain this development permit and agree to the conditions attached f&V Date: `7// //3 Print Name: �-�" 5 221 e H-,-t S This permit shall become null and void if the work is not commenced within 180 days from the date of issuance, or if the work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days from the last inspection. PERMIT CONDITIONS: 1: ***BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS * ** 2: No changes shall be made to the approved plans unless approved by the design professional in responsible charge and the Building Official. 3: All mechanical work shall be inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the City of Tukwila Permit Center (206/431- 3670). 4: All permits, inspection records, and approved plans shall be at the job site and available to the inspectors prior to start of any construction. These documents shall be maintained and made available until final inspection approval is granted. 5: The special inspections and verifications for concrete construction shall be required. 6: The special inspection of bolts to be installed in concrete prior to and during placement of concrete. 7: When special inspection is required, either the owner or the registered design professional in responsible charge, shall employ a special inspection agency and notify the Building Official of the appointment prior to the first doc: IBC -7/10 D12 -360 Printed: 04 -18 -2013 building inspection. The special inspector s " '• furnish inspection reports to the Building Of in a timely manner. 8: A final report documenting required speci inspections and correction of any discrepancies noted in the inspections shall be submitted to the Building Official. The final inspection report shall be prepared by the approved special inspection agency and shall be submitted to the Building Official prior to and as a condition of final inspection approval. 9: All construction shall be done in conformance with the approved plans and the requirements of the International Building Code or International Residential Code, International Mechanical Code, Washington State Energy Code. 10: Subgrade preparation including drainage, excavation, compaction, and fill requirements shall conform strictly with the recommendations given in the soils report. Special inspection is required. 11: Notify the City of Tukwila Building Division prior to placing any concrete. This procedure is in addition to any requirements for special inspection. 12: There shall be no occupancy of a building until final inspection has been completed and approved by Tukwila building inspector. No exception. 13: Remove all demolition rubble and loose miscellaneous material from lot or parcel of ground, properly cap the sanitary sewer connections, and properly fill or otherwise protect all basements, cellars, septic tanks, wells, and other excavations. Final inspection approval will be determined by the building inspector based on satisfactory completion of this requirement. 14: All plumbing and gas piping work shall be inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the City of Tukwila Building Department (206- 431- 3670). 15: All electrical work shall be inspected and approved under a separate permit issued by the City of Tukwila Building Department (206- 431 - 3670). 16: VALIDITY OF PERMIT: The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the building code or of any other ordinances of the City of Tukwila. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the code or other ordinances of the City of Tukwila shall not be valid. The issuance of a permit based on construction documents and other data shall not prevent the Building Official from requiring the correction of errors in the construction documents and other data. doc: IBC -7/10 D12 -360 Printed: 04 -18 -2013 CITY OF TUICWIN Community DevelopmWDepartment Public Works Department Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 http: / /www.TukwilaWA.gov Building Pere No. b ( b Project No. Date Application Accepted: b — S - a Date Application Expires: Rte• S" t3 (For office use only) CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION Applications and plans must be complete in order to be accepted for plan review. Applications will not be accepted through the mail or by fax. * *Please Print ** SITE LOCATION Site Address: 1Z(.07/1. �1�rrUC► 1 L\f t'b • Tenant Name: hIt2 5l v�ll King Co Assessor's Tax No.:CCO`ifi L tV Floor: 1 New Tenant: ❑ Yes 4:. No Suite Number: PROPERTY OWNER Name: ati o Ketue Address: 11 Ito emote 41�� Name•L,i /� Cv�jt,a Phonetb..455 ...molt Full/014/0_53(01 Email: Ahthie e ekL ieaU, ` Tukwila Business License No.: OA; �1�1 Address: t i •111 ( L1ve .4 . /� l/ll�l sit, City: /a."'� Email: State: W6 Zip: CONTACT PERSON – person receiving all project communication Name: ati o Ketue Address: 11 Ito emote 41�� City 0_Lr., .. State: Vjb Zip / ; (1 o Phonetb..455 ...molt Full/014/0_53(01 Email: Ahthie e ekL ieaU, ` GENERAL CONT TOR INFORMATION Company Name: V ppi 't7 ciiat, Atw Ct Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Contr Reg Nolnyk,.f., r' PH Exp Date: 111 ' I Tukwila Business License No.: OA; �1�1 H:1ApplicationsWorms- Applications On Line12012 Applications\Fermit Application Revised - 2- 7- 12.docx Revised: February 2012 bh ARCHITECT OF RECORD Company Name: 1/19 4 / iptoti (tart ""� 1 ! `v Architect Name: I00 6 Address: Lg to ftkQ Ui1G (j,), CityRelthnk State: Zip:tblI10 Phone::.43 A 1 Fax .8, go/ Emaiithwik Ci dilelkezycti.czatt ENGINEER OF RECORD Name: % r. 1 ���/``�►� 1 Company Name:' 1 (bad% �1 U t • I Engineer Name 6 Address: Addressn la v1o' PEE City&j� l 194, ¢ State: b . Zip: 61p PhoneeeftLiAq _igen!? Fax: �r�tvU ,5 �,t(� 7� u� Email: LENDER/BOND ISSUED (required for projects $5,000 or greater per RCW 19.27.095) Name: % r. 1 ���/``�►� 1 `'" ` C w� L Address: City: State: Zip: Page 1 of 4 I BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION — 206 -431 -3670 Valuation of Project (contractor's bid pri. $ dl(ei Existing tiding Valuation: $ 1 M 11 o.i Describe the scope of work (please provide detailed information): Vera t1E R) 2-11) or nos tt *6, ex'l$t14(1 Po Fig boo krt1445 fw i i , l 0Liniav Will there be new rack storage? ❑ ....Yes o If yes, a separate permit and plan submittal will be required. Provide All Building Areas in Square Footage Below PLANNING DIVISION: Single family building footprint (area of the foundation of all structures, plus any decks over 18 inches and overhangs greater than 18 inches) For an Accessory dwelling, provide the following: Lot Area (sq ft): Floor area of principal dwelling: Floor area of accessory dwelling: *Provide documentation that shows that the I�priinnciipal owner lives in one of the dwellings as his or her primary residence. Number of Parking Stalls Provided: Standard: (I Compact: Handicap: Will there be a change in use? ❑ Yes No If "yes ", explain: FIRE PROTECTION/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: 14 Sprinklers Automatic Fire Alarm ❑ None ❑ Other (specify) Will there be storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials in the building? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes', attach list of materials and storage locations on a separate 8 -1/2" x 11" paper including quantities and Material Safety Data Sheets. SEPTIC SYSTEM ❑ On -site Septic System — For on -site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health Department. H:1Applications\Forms- Applications On Line12012 Applications\Fermit Application Revised - 2- 7- 12.docx Revised: February 2012 bh Page 2 of 4 Existing Interior Remodel Addition to Existing Structure New Type of Construction per IBC Type of Occupancy per IBC 1" Floor �3 j� 7i.NV �r �' Y . /^ fi'2°d v/ r✓ Floor 3rd Floor Floors thru Basement Accessory Structure* Attached Garage Detached Garage Attached Carport Detached Carport Covered Deck Uncovered Deck ,---e PLANNING DIVISION: Single family building footprint (area of the foundation of all structures, plus any decks over 18 inches and overhangs greater than 18 inches) For an Accessory dwelling, provide the following: Lot Area (sq ft): Floor area of principal dwelling: Floor area of accessory dwelling: *Provide documentation that shows that the I�priinnciipal owner lives in one of the dwellings as his or her primary residence. Number of Parking Stalls Provided: Standard: (I Compact: Handicap: Will there be a change in use? ❑ Yes No If "yes ", explain: FIRE PROTECTION/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: 14 Sprinklers Automatic Fire Alarm ❑ None ❑ Other (specify) Will there be storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials in the building? ❑ Yes ❑ No If "yes', attach list of materials and storage locations on a separate 8 -1/2" x 11" paper including quantities and Material Safety Data Sheets. SEPTIC SYSTEM ❑ On -site Septic System — For on -site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health Department. H:1Applications\Forms- Applications On Line12012 Applications\Fermit Application Revised - 2- 7- 12.docx Revised: February 2012 bh Page 2 of 4 PERMIT APPLICATION NOTES — Value of Construction — In all cases, a value oconstruction amount should be entered by the applicant. This figure will be reviewed and is subject to possible revision by the Permit Center to comply with current fee schedules. Expiration of Plan Review — Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation. The Building Official may grant one or more extensions of time for additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. The extension shall be requested in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated. Section 105.3.2 International Building Code (current edition). I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND I AM AUTHORIZED TO APPLY FOR THIS PERMIT. BUILDING OWN Signature: Print Name: f/cl tX ORIZED AGENT: Mailing Address: lei kCO PeNbW R4 J H:WpplicationsWonns- Applications On L1ne12012 Applications\Permit Application Revised - 2- 7- 12.docx Revised: February 2012 bh Date 1I �1 I IZ_ Day Telephone:G( O4 5 i2A44 U3b. l(a City State Zip Page 4 of 4 1 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 Fax: 206 -431 -3665 Web site: http: / /www.TukwilaWA.gov RECEIPT Parcel No.: 0004800003 Permit Number: D12-360 Address: 12622 INTERURBAN AV S TUKW Status: APPROVED Suite No: Applied Date: 11/15/2012 Applicant: CBRE - SLAB SETTLEMENT REPAIR Issue Date: Receipt No.: R13 -01350 Payment Amount: $1,435.70 Initials: JEM Payment Date: 04/18/2013 08:52 AM User ID: 1165 Balance: $0.00 Payee: TRAVIS RICHARDS, DAVIS SCHUELLER INC TRANSACTION LIST: Type Method Descriptio Amount Payment Credit Crd MC Authorization No. 07014Z ACCOUNT ITEM LIST: Description 1,435.70 Account Code Current Pmts BUILDING - NONRES STATE BUILDING SURCHARGE 000.322.100 640.237.114 Total: $1,435.70 1,431.20 4.50 doc: Receipt -06 Printed: 04 -18 -2013 • • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Web site: http: / /www.TukwilaWA.gov Parcel No.: 0004800003 Address: 12622 INTERURBAN AV S TUKW Suite No: Applicant: CBRE SLAB SETTLEMENT RECEIPT Permit Number: D12-360 Status: PENDING Applied Date: 11/15/2012 Issue Date: Receipt No.: R12 -03124 Payment Amount: $930.28 Initials: WER Payment Date: 11/15/2012 01:58 PM User ID: 1655 Balance: $1,435.70 Payee: DAVID KEULE TRANSACTION LIST: Type Method Descriptio Amount Payment Credit Crd VISA Authorization No. 055672 ACCOUNT ITEM LIST: Description 930.28 Account Code Current Pmts PLAN CHECK - NONRES 000.345.830 930.28 Total: $930.28 (Inn. Rarpint -0R Printarl• 11 -1R -7017 Cit INSPECTION RECORD Retain a copy with permit INSPEC ON NO. b1 .-3C;O PERMIT NO. CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila. WA 98188 frx_ (206) 431 -3670 Permit Inspection Request Line (206) 431 -2451 Project: Type of Inspection: r 1 QA1� A ress 12,. T)Tf ) . E> 'i Date called: A V Special Instructions: Date Wanted: " 13 P.m. Requester: Phone No: C..� �Z� C0-- 510 -c1 C�� 1 Approved per applicable codes. OCorrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: \�r.� , v. °ice •- (oc 1 IN iijC■r( A t ►.1( A /6 /E:d AA e sc• pal A/V L1 Dat Li— 5 -13 SPECTION FEE REQUIR1 D.yPrior to ext inspection. fee must be at 6300 Southcenter Blvd). Suite 100. all to schedule reinspection. • INSPECTION RECO• RD Retain a copy with permit INSPECTION NO. PERMIT NO. CITY OF TUKWILA BUILDING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila. WA 98188 _ (206) 431 -3670 Permit Inspection Request Line (206) 431 -2451 No- n J12.-360 Prro,Iect: C` a rk F _. S LA 13 APPA I C Type of Inspection: F R. A lai C Address: 1J 2-Z T _kr'G tit Mki gate Called: Special Instructions: Date Wanted: .7- 2 1'j m. l()11_..11 Requester: Phone No: a06-5)-0-60'1 Approved per applicable codes. Corrections required prior to approval. COMMENTS: prii te;:sk 0.1e2O inspect . r. Dat R =1 NS • ECTION FEE EQUIR D. Prior to next ' spection, fee mu e pa d 6300 Southcenter Blvd.. Suite 100. Cal o schedule reinspection. • PLAN REVIEW r ILG SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D12 -360 ' DATE:, 11 -15 -12 PROJECT NAME: CBRE - SLAB SETTLEMENT REPAIR SITE ADDRESS: 12622 INTERURBAN AV S X Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # Revision # After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: bUllding Division ubli �1Nofks , FO\A KIP U''t2 Fire Prevention Structural ►�w� i 11.Ut1 Planning Division ❑ Permit Coordinator Ll DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) DUE DATE: 11 -20 -12 Complete n Incomplete Not Applicable Comments: Permit Center. Use:Only. • .. .•• ' INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: TUES/THURS ROUTING: Please Route Structural Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: ❑ No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: DUE DATE: 12 -18 -12 Approved ❑ Approved with Conditions N/ Not Approved (attach comments) n Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: Permit Center Use Only •- - , CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: Documents/routing slip.doc 2 -28-02 Contractors or Tradespeople Piiter Friendly Page 1 General /Specialty Contractor A business registered as a construction contractor with L &I to perform construction work within the scope of its specialty. A General or Specialty construction Contractor must maintain a surety bond or assignment of account and carry general liability insurance. Business and Licensing Information Name DAVIS SCHUELLER INC UBI No. 601273797 Phone 4257759400 Status Active Address 20700 44Th Ave W Ste 280 License No. DAVISSI105PN Suite /Apt. License Type Construction Contractor City Lynnwood Effective Date 10/15/1990 State WA Expiration Date 7/1/2014 Zip 98036 Suspend Date County Snohomish Specialty 1 General Business Type Corporation Specialty 2 Unused Parent Company ociated Licenses License Name Type Specialty 1 Specialty 2 Effective Date Expiration Date Status RSMANI•011BN R S MANUFACTURING INC Construction Contractor Cabinets, Millwork And Finish Carpentry Unused 1/15/1999 3/3/2015 Active DAKOTWC962BH DAKOTA WIRELESS CONST SVCS LLC Construction Contractor General Unused 1/8/2004 1/8/2006 Archived SILVECI988Q0 SILVERCREEK CONSTRUCTION INC Construction Contractor General Unused 11/20/2002 11/20/2004 Archived SEACRMI104DE SEACREST MFG INC Construction Contractor Cabinet And Millwork Carpentry/Framing 3/5/1990 2/26/1999 Archived OLYMPE'121Qp OLYMPIC ENTERPRISES Construction Contractor General Unused 11/1/1988 11/1/1989 Archived DALFOCI1810E DALFORD COMPANY INC, THE Construction Contractor General Unused 2/5/1982 12/26/1991 Archived DALFOC'198LW DALFORD COMPANY, THE Construction Contractor General Unused 6/16/1981 6/1/1982 Archived Business Owner Information Name Role Effective Date Expiration Date DAVIS, BILL E President 01/15/1990 SCHUELLER, DANETTE Secretary 01/15/1990 DAVIS, BARBARA D Treasurer 01/15/1990 SCHUELLER, KENNETH E Vice President 01/15/1990 Bond Information Page 1 of 2 Bond Bond Company Name Bond Account Number Effective Date Expiration Date Cancel Date Impaired Date Bond Amount Received Date 5 CBIC SF2518 10/15/2003 Until Cancelled $12,000.00 10/31/2003 Assignment of Savings Information No records found for the previous 6 year period Insurance Information Insurance Company Name Policy Number Effective Date Expiration Date Cancel Date Impaired Date Amount Received Date 20 AMERICAN FIRE & CASUALTY CO BKA53228151 07/01/2010 07/01/2013 $1,000,000.00 06/15/2012 https://fortress.wa.gov/lni/bbip/Print.aspx 04/18/2013 A„ATesttng . ,xt Field Report Report #: 58084 �a «� Phone' i mtt Z, Fax,00),31� 74,..1C Redmond Client: Davis Schueller Inc. 20700 44th Ave. W. Suite 280 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Contact: Gary Myers Project Number: 13 -369 Permit #: 012.360 Project Name: C.B.R.E./Tukwila Commerce Park Address: 12622 Interurban Ave. S. Inspection Performed: Resteel Date: 7/11/2013 Time: Temperature: On site for the following: 1.) Inspected resteel for slab on grade and pile caps. Resteel and clearances in place per approved plans and details. Cleared for concrete placement. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 3 1 2013 PERMIT CENTER Distribution: 51 Distribute Client ❑ Distribute Contractor ❑ Distribute Engineer ❑ Distribute Owner Distribute Municipality ❑ Distribute Other ❑ Distribute Architect ❑ Distribute Other Inspector: Blisserd, Jonathan (JD) Reviewed by: Mike Blackwell All reports are considered confidential and are the property of the client and A.A.R. Testing Laboratory, Inc. Reproduction except in full without the written consent of A.A.R. Testing is strictly forbidden Field /Material Report Report #: 081811 A R TpestIngr. laboratory,,lnc 26.180th A � E yParrk 180; P7R1hone`425 8 8115812 F.az,?42588.1 Client Name: Contact: Client Address: Date: Davis Schueller Inc. Gary Myers 20700 44th Ave. W. Suite 280 Lynnwood, WA 98037 6/20/2013 Project Number: Permit # Project Name: Address: 13 -369 D12 -360 C.B.R.E./Tukwila Commerce Park 12622 lnterurban Ave. S. Supplier: Material Data: Plant Number Mix Number: Truck Number: Ticket Number. Number of Samples: Yards placed: Design Strength: Stoneway Concrete 011 553174 448 415723 4 3/3 4000 Inspection Performed: Reinforced Concrete Location: Column footings Grid Lines: Alr Temperature: Concrete Temperature: Air Content: Slump: Time Sampled: Added Water. Air Entrainment (oz/yard): 60 F 64 F 41/2 " 12 :45:00 PM 3 Admixtures (oz/yard)) : WRDA ADVA ASTM C 1064 ASTM C 231 ASTM C 143 ByWhom: Contractor 25 17 Remarks: Resteel was inspected prior pour. It was in conformance with approed drawing by grade, size, location and concrete cover. Pin pile caps and 7/8" anchor bolts for base were installed per plans. Concrete was placed via the wheelborrows and mechanically consolidated. Mix was approved by the engineer. Q Conforming to approved plans Inspector: Shprits, Yevgeniy Samples Tested In Accordance with ASTM: C 1231 C 31 C 172 C 39 Sample ID Test Date Age Size Area 1304271 6/27/2013 7 4 X 8 12.63 1304272 7/18/2013 28 4 X 8 12.63 1304273 7/18/2013 28 4 X 8 12.63 1304274 7/18/2013 28 4 X 8 12.63 Distribution: in Client Municipality ❑ Distribute Other 2nd Inspector: 3rd Inspector: Set # Total Load PSI Method Fracture Type ❑ Contractor ❑ Engineer 65350 5170 C 1231 Cone Split 91730 7260 C 1231 Cone Split 91830 7270 C 1231 Cone Split 88280 6990 C 1231 Cone ❑ Owner ❑ Architect Date Mailed: Tested By: Mike Jarbeau Reviewed: Mike Blackwell All tests in accordance with the requirements of ASTM C 31 for casting and curing concrete specimens In the field excluding Section 10.1.2 (required use of a maximum - minimum thermometer). All reports are considered confidential and are the property of the client and A.A.R. Testing Laboratory, Inc. Reproduction except in full, without the written consent of A.A.R. Testing Laboratory is strictly forbidden. FILE CO PI z FS ENSOC GEOTECH \KCAL IN `' EST6G = T@O E L- O ' T TUKWILA C ERCE P 12622 Interurban Avenue South Tukwila, Washington Submitted To: Mr. David Kehle David Kehle Architect 1916 Bonair Drive SW Seattle, Washington 98116 Submitted By: Golder Associates Inc. 18300 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 200 Redmond, WA 98052 USA August 9, 2012 3 Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation K REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 2 8 2012 City of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 1 5 2012 PERMIT CENTER 113- 93582.001 Golder Associates *yr August 2012 113- 93582.001 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Site Description 1 1.2 Project Background 1 1.3 Existing Information 2 1.3.1 Building Plans 2 1.3.2 Geotechnical Reports and Borings 3 1.3.3 Settlement Survey 3 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 4 2.1 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Tests 4 2.2 Drilling 4 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 6 3.1 Geologic Setting 6 3.2 Soils 6 3.3 Groundwater 7 3.4 Slab Thickness 7 3.5 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test Results 7 4.0 ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 8 4.1 General Subsurface Conditions 8 4.2 Altemative Settlement Mitigation Strategies 9 4.2.1 Re -level the Slab 9 4.2.2 Over - Excavate and Replace with Lightweight Fill 9 4.2.3 Underpin the Slab 10 5.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 12 5.1 General 12 5.2 Excavations 12 5.3 Pin Pile Installation 12 5.4 Construction Geotechnical Monitoring 12 6.0 USE OF REPORT 13 7.0 CLOSING 14 8.0 REFERENCES 15 List of Tables (in text) Table 3-1 Slab and Overlay Thickness 080912jh1_flnal_geotech investigation tcp.docc Golder Associates August 2012 ii 113- 93582.001 List of Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Vicinity Map Site Exploration Plan List of Appendices Appendix A Soil Classification Legend Boring Logs Appendix B Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test Results Appendix C Settlement Survey Exhibit 080912jh1_flnal_geotech investigation tcp.docc Golder Associates August 2012 1 113 - 93582.001 1.0 INTRODUCTION Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) is pleased to present this forensic geotechnical investigation report to assess floor slab settlement at a mixed -use office building located at the Tukwila Commerce Park at 12622 Interurban Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington as shown on the Vicinity Map (Figure 1). The scope of services for this geotechnical investigation was performed in accordance with our Proposal No. P13 -93582 dated November 3, 2011. The purpose of this investigation was to characterize the subsurface conditions and address the potential causes of slab settlement. Our scope of work consisted of performing a subsurface exploration program and preparation of this report containing geotechnical recommendations for the remediation of the floor slab and potential settlement of the building foundations. 1.1 Site Description The subject building is located in the northern portion of the Tukwila Commerce Park and consists of a single -story, concrete, tilt -up building with a slab -on -grade floor. The building is approximately 300 feet by 100 feet in plan dimension. A parking lot surrounds the building on the south, west and east sides. On the north side there is parking along the west half of the building and grass along the east half of the building. The Duwamish River is about 75 feet from the north side of the building. 1.2 Project Background We understand from Greg Coleman of CBRE that the building was constructed in the early 1980s. We also understand that Greg first became aware of settlement issues in the slab during a change of tenants about six or seven years ago and that settlement has worsened since that time. The settlement is occurring in the north - central part of the building. Golder visited the site August 4, 2011 and again on November 1, 2011 prior to commencing this geotechnical investigation. At the time of our August site visit the space had recently been vacated and visible signs of settlement were seen including gaps between the baseboard and the carpeting, buckling of tiles in the drop ceiling, apparently as a result of wall movement, as well as a visible gap between the top of one of the front windows and the wall above the window. By the time of our November visit interior walls and carpeting had been tom out and additional signs of settlement were apparent, including cracks and tilting in the floor slab and a clearly visible skim of concrete at least several inches thick in spots, which had been placed to level the floor at some time in the past. The time of the concrete placement is unknown, but is believed to predate the building being acquired by RREEF about 10 to 12 years ago. 0809121h1 finalgeotechinvestigationtcp.dooc Golder Associates P August 2012 2 113 - 93582.001 1.3 Existing Information 1.3.1 Building Plans Greg Coleman of CBRE provided Golder with electronic copies of the building plans. Golder reviewed the following plan sheets: s Foundation plan titled — Tukwila Business Center for Trammell Crow Co, Tukwila, Washington, FLR /FD'n Plan BLDG "B ", by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Consulting Engineers, dated 9/6/1979, Sheet 8 of 22. ■ Foundation details titled - Tukwila Business Center for Trammell Crow Co, Tukwila, Washington, Typical Details, by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Consulting Engineers, dated 8/23/1979, Sheet 6 of 22. m Sanitary sewer plan titled - Tukwila Business Center for Trammell Crow Co, Tukwila, Washington, Sanitary Sewer Plan, by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Consulting Engineers, dated 12/7/1979, Sheet SD3 of 10. ■ Temporary sedimentation pond plan titled - Tukwila Business Center for Trammell Crow Co, Tukwila, Washington, Sedimentation Plan, by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Consulting Engineers, dated 3/5/1979, Sheet SD4 of 10. IN Cross - sections plan titled - Tukwila Business Center for Trammell Crow Co, Tukwila, Washington, River Bank Profiles, by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Consulting Engineers, dated 8/22/1979, Sheet SD5 of 10. ® Utility plan titled - Tukwila Business Center for Trammell Crow Co, Tukwila, Washington, Utility Plan, by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Consulting Engineers, dated 9/20/1979, Sheet SD8 of 10. The foundation plan and details show the exterior building walls founded on spread footings spaced at 25 feet on- center. The exterior wall footings are shown as 6 feet 9 inches (parallel to building wall) by 4 feet 6 inches (perpendicular to the building wall). The interior columns are spaced at approximately 25 feet on center and are supported on 5 feet 3 inch wide square footings. The interior column footings consist of a thickened area within the slab. The storefront windows on the northwest comer of the unit are supported on the slab. The sanitary sewer and utility plans were reviewed for the locations of underground utilities. A leaking underground utility could cause settlement. No underground utilities are shown in the area of the settlement. The cross - section plan sheet shows several profiles through different locations at the project site including Building B. The finished floor elevation is shown as 16.0 feet. The mean high water in the river is shown at 9.3 feet and the 100 -year flood elevation is shown at 13.8 feet. The existing grade is also shown on the cross - section through Building B. The existing grade likely refers to the location of the ground surface prior to construction of Building B, which ranges between 13 and 14 feet in elevation. 080912jh1_flnal_geotech investigation tcp.dooc - _ = Golder Associates August 2012 3 113- 93582.001 1.3.2 Geotechnical Reports and Borings Golder completed a City of Tukwila Request for Public Records for the project site and reviewed available information online at GeoMapNW ( http: / /geomapnw.ess.washington.edu /). Neither geotechnical reports nor geotechnical borings were available for the project site. 1.3.3 Settlement Survey Results of a settlement survey were provided by Dave Kehle Architect. A copy of a figure entitled "Settlement Survey Exhibit" (Exhibit) by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. is included in Appendix C of this report. The figure shows spot elevations across the slab inside Building B. The survey measured a maximum of 0.46 feet of settlement adjacent to an interior column. It should be noted that the location showing 0.46 feet of settlement is outside of the area where overlays were installed to re -level the slab. Settlement measured in the area of slab overlays ranges from 0.24 to 0.39 feet. The thickness of the overlays ranged from approximately 0.25 to 0.4 feet. West of the location showing 0.46 feet of settlement, 0.31 and 0.34 feet of settlement were measured and slab overlay thickness was approximately 0.4 feet. Adding the thickness of the overlays to the spot elevations shown on the Exhibit, the total maximum slab settlement could be as much as 0.7 feet. 080912jh1 finai_geotech investigation tcp.do x Golder 1-11 Assoclates August 2012 4 113- 93582.001 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION Golder's field investigation was completed on January 25 and 26 and February 3, 2012 and consisted of completing four dynamic cone penetrometer tests (DCPT) and advancing four borings (B -1 through B -4) inside Building B. Soil descriptions and sampling of soils were performed in general accordance with Golder Technical Guidelines. The approximate exploration locations are shown in Figure 2. Locations shown on the figure are based on measurements taken in the field relative to the building walls. Three exploration locations were selected to cover the area of slab settlement and one was located outside of the observed area of settlement. A Soil Classification Legend and summary logs are contained in Appendix A. The stratigraphic contacts shown on the boring Togs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be more gradual. The soil and groundwater conditions depicted are only for the specific dates and locations reported and, therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. 2.1 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Tests A DCPT was completed at each of the four exploration locations prior to drilling and sampling the soil. The DCPT is similar in nature to the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) conducted during standard geotechnical soil borings, and is used to gauge the relative density of soils in the shallow subsurface. A 35 -pound slide hammer is used to drive 1 -meter long hollow -steel drill rods into the subsurface; the rods are capped with a disposable steel penetration tips. Relative density profiles are obtained by counting the number of blows necessary to drive the sampling rods a distance of 10 centimeters (cm); the results are then converted to an equivalent N- value. The DCPT test results are presented in Appendix B. 2.2 Drilling All four borings were advanced to the depth of the DCPT test with a hand auger. Boring B -1 was further advanced to a depth of 50 feet below ground surface (bgs) using a mini - track - mounted drill rig. The drill rig was operated by Geologic Drill Exploration, Inc. under the full -time observation of a Golder engineer, Josh Hanson, PE. Drilling and sampling of soils were performed in general accordance with Golder Technical Procedures. Standard Penetration Tests were performed to the depth explored using a standard, 2- inch - diameter split -spoon sampler advanced with a 140 -pound cathead safety hammer falling a distance of 30 inches for each strike, in accordance with ASTM D -1586. The number of hammer blows for each 6 inches of penetration was recorded. The standard penetration resistance (N) of the soil is calculated as the sum of the number of blows required for the final 12 inches of sampler penetration. The N -value is an indication of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. If a total of 50 blows are recorded for a single six -inch interval, the test is terminated and the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the total inches of penetration. Field judgment is required when assigning 080912jh1 final_geotech investigation tcp.dooc Golder Associates August 2012 5 113- 93582.001 density descriptions to soils with a high percentage of gravel or cobbles since the driving resistance is often increased by the presence of such materials. All samples were collected and placed in plastic jars to reduce moisture loss and retumed to our Redmond, Washington laboratory for further classification. The boring was backfilled at the conclusion of drilling in general accordance with the appropriate Washington State regulations. 080912jh1 8nal_geoterh investigation tcp.dooc Golder Associates August 2012 6 113 - 93582.001 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Geologic Setting The recent geologic history of the Puget Sound Lowland region has been dominated by several glacial episodes. The most recent, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation (about 12,000 to 20,000 years ago), is responsible for most of the present day geologic and topographic conditions. As worldwide sea levels lowered and the Puget lobe of the Vashon Stade advanced southward from British Columbia into the Puget Sound Lowland, sediments composed of proglacial lacustrine silt and clay, advance outwash, lodgment till, and recessional outwash were deposited upon either bedrock or older Pre - Vashon sediments. The older Pre - Vashon deposits include predominantly glacial and nonglacial sediments deposited during repeated glacial and interglacial periods during the past 2 million years. As the Puget Lobe of the Vashon Stade glacier retreated northward, it deposited a discontinuous veneer of recessional outwash and local deposits of ablation till upon the glacial landscape. The sculpted landscape revealed by the retracting glacier was characterized by elongated north -south oriented uplands, and intervening valleys. Post glacial deposits include: alluvium deposited within active stream channels; modem lacustrine deposits; organic silt and local peat deposits within kettle depressions, drainages, and outwash channels; and landslide deposits. The Geologic map of the Des Moines 7.5' quadrangle, King County, Washington (Booth 2004) was reviewed for this report. The geologic map indicates that the site is underlain by alluvium, described as well sorted deposits of cobble gravel, pebbly sand, and sandy silt. 3.2 Soils As mapped by Booth (2004), our explorations encountered alluvium consisting of sandy silt and well sorted sand, underlying a layer of fill. A more detailed description of the soil units are presented below. • Fill: The fill unit refers to soils placed by human activity. Fill was encountered in all four exploration locations. A minimum of 24 inches of fill was encounter in boring B-4, outside of the area of settlement. A minimum of 36 inches fill was encountered in boring B -1 and a maximum of approximately 48 inches of fill was encountered in boring B -2, within the area of settlement. The fill materials consisted of light -brown to brown, silty, fine-to- coarse sand with little fine - to-coarse gravel, and trace cobbles. ■ Alluvium: Alluvium is a deposit laid down by water. This material was encountered in all explorations, underlying the fill to the depth explored, 9.5 to 50 feet bgs. The alluvium generally consisted of very loose to compact, sandy silt and sand with a zone of organics (primarily wood) starting at approximately 9.5 to 11.5 feet bgs. 080912jh1 final_geotechinvestigationtop.dooc Golder Associates August 2012 7 113- 93582.001 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered in boring B -1 at approximately 12 feet bgs and in boring B-4 at approximately 11 feet bgs. The Duwamish River is approximately 75 feet from the building. It is probable that the groundwater will fluctuate with water levels in river. Groundwater conditions will fluctuate with the amount of recent rainfall and time of year, and will decrease during dryer times of the year. 3.4 Slab Thickness The thickness of the floor slab and overlay at each exploration location is presented in Table 3 -1. The floor slab and overlay are thicker within the area of settlement than the location outside the area of settlement. Table 3 -1: Slab and Overlay Thickness Exploration Number Original Slab' Concrete Overlay Subfloor Overlay2 Total _ Thickness Void Space4 Comments B -1 5 2.5 1 8.5 < 1 Slab settlement B -2 5.5 2.5 0.5 8.5 1 to 2 Slab settlement B -3 7 1.25 1.25 9.5 < 1 _ Slab settlement B-4 4 0 0 4 0 No slab settlement C -13 5.5 3 1.5 10 < 1 Slab settlement Notes: 1. All dimensions are in inches 2. Not structural concrete — skim coat subfloor or plywood material 3. C -1 consisted of a hole cut in the slab only 4. Void space between the bottom of slab and top of underlying soil 3.5 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test Results The DCPT logs in Appendix B indicate the number of blows of the hammer required to advance the cone 10 cm into the soil. It should be noted that the structural fill under the slab was excavated prior to the start of DCPT testing at each location. The structural fill was dense and contained gravels and cobbles that could have caused refusal of the DCPT. The approximate depth of pre - excavation is noted on the log. In general, each test was advanced until the refusal criterion of 50 blows for 10 cm of penetration was achieved. The hammer blows from the DCPT are converted to "N° values. N -value blow counts in the range of 30 to greater than 50 are considered dense to very dense. N- values from 11 to 30 are considered medium dense, 5 to 10 are loose and 0 to 4 are considered very loose. At each location, a zone of very loose to loose soil was encountered under the slab. At locations B -1 and B -3, refusal was likely caused by woody debris, based on the wood chips recovered in subsequent hand augering operations. 080912jh1_final geotech investigation tcp.docx Golder Associates August 2012 8 113- 93582.001 4.0 ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS The engineering recommendations contained in this report only address the potential causes of and possible solutions to slab and building foundation settlement. The engineering recommendations do not address the potential for liquefaction at this site or any other geotechnical issue outside of our scope of work. This section of the report provides engineering recommendations based on our interpretation of the geotechnical data obtained during the investigation. The recommendations provided are intended for the guidance of the design engineers and are intended for this project only. The data may not be sufficient for construction and where comments are made on construction, they are provided only to highlight aspects of construction which could affect the design of the project. Contractors bidding on or undertaking the works must make their own interpretation of the subsurface information provided as it affects their proposed construction methods, costs, equipment selection, scheduling, and safety. 4.1 General Subsurface Conditions Based on our review of the building plans and subsurface investigation, the following is our understanding of Building B. The building plans show the existing grade prior to construction approximately two to three feet below finished slab elevation. Two to four feet of structural fill was encountered under the slab and loose silts and sands were encountered under the structural fill. In the area of settlement, organic material consisting largely of wood was encountered in two locations at approximately 9.5 to 11.5 feet below the top of slab. Where we were able to advance the boring, the woody zone was on the order of 5 feet thick. Outside of the area of settlement, similar loose soil conditions were encountered; however, organic material was not encountered at this location. Based on this information, the slab settlement is likely caused by the relatively thick layer of organics. The organic material is likely compressing under the weight of the slab and the structural fill. The organic material might also be decaying. We anticipate that the floor slab will continue to settle. This settlement is primarily due to continued consolidation of the organic soils beneath the building, with a small amount of settlement due to the gradual decomposition and breakdown of the organic matter. There are potentially many alternatives to address the slab settlement. Different altematives will provide different results. We primarily focused on and considered three possible alternatives to remediate the settling slab. The following sections discuss the alternatives in more detail. 080g12p 1 final_geotech investigation tcp.docx 0.1 Golder Associates August 2012 9 113- 93582.001 4.2 Alternative Settlement Mitigation Strategies 4.2.1 Re -level the Slab Re- leveling the slab is a relatively short-term (less than five years) solution for addressing the slab settlement. Re- leveling could be achieved with another overlay or with slab jacking. Slab jacking is also known as mud - jacking and usually involves pumping slurry under pressure beneath the slab. The pressurized slurry fills voids and lifts the slab back to level position. The advantage of re- leveling the slab is that is likely the least expensive alternative. Adding another overlay or slab- jacking has two main drawbacks. First, both options add additional weight to the underlying soils that would likely cause additional settlement. Second, neither option addresses the cause of the settlement. Therefore, either option should be considered a short-term fix and further re- leveling of the floor slab planned for in the future. Also, the floor slab should not be subjected to heavy loading. The slab could also be re- leveled by injecting a polymer under the slab instead of slung. Polymer (usually polyurethane) injected under the slab expands and the expansion lifts the slab. Compared to slurry, the polymer has the advantage of being lightweight; however it does not address the cause of the settlement and would remain a short term solution. 4.2.2 Over - Excavate and Replace with Lightweight Fill Over - excavation of underlying fill soils and replacement with lightweight fill is another short term solution for addressing slab settlement. This involves reducing the weight on the underlying compressible soil. This will involve removal of the existing slab, excavation of one or more feet of the existing underlying soil, backfilling with a lightweight fill, and construction of a new floor slab. The weight of the existing slab (and overlays) and structural fill soils has loaded the underlying soil since construction of the building approximately 30 years ago. The load has caused settlement likely due to compression of the organic material. If the weight of the slab and structural fill is reduced, compression settlement of the underlying soil would likely be reduced or stopped. The existing slab ranges from 8 to 10 inches thick. If replaced with a 4- inch -thick slab, the weight of slab would be reduced by approximately 50 %. The underlying structural fill weighs on the order of approximately 125 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). There are lightweight materials that can be used for structural backfill. One type of lightweight fill is known as Geofoam, which consists of rigid cellular polystyrene (similar to Styrofoam). The weight of Geofoam ranges between 1 and 3 pcf. 080912jh1 t nal_geotech invesUgation tcp.docc 9Golder Associates August 2012 10 113- 93582.001 The advantage of over - excavation and replacement with lightweight fill is that it has the potential to reduce or stop compression settlement of the underlying organic material under the slab. Compared to re- leveling the slab (discussed in Section 4.2.1) this solution has the potential to perform for a longer period of time. Over - excavation and replacement with lightweight fill has two main drawbacks. First, the slab is still supported on the organic material and although this option addresses compression settlement, the slab is still susceptible to settlement due to the decay of organic material. Second, working inside the building to remove existing fill and the lightweight fill will likely be expensive. If this alternative is selected, we recommend removing the structural fill (approximately 3 feet of soil) and replacing with Geofoam. This would reduce the load on the underlying fill by approximately 375 pounds per square foot and should be enough to reduce the rate compression settlement. Greater depths of over - excavation and replacement will have higher likelihoods of stopping the settlement entirely. However, there is a practical limit to the depth because of the potential for undermining adjacent footings. 4.2.3 Underpin the Slab A long term (potentially the life of the building) solution to the settlement of the floor slab involves installing pin piles beneath the floor slab. This will involve removal of the existing concrete floor slab, installation of pin piles that penetrate into the compact sands beneath the site, and construction of a structural, pile- supported floor slab. Piles will transfer the load of the slab to soil beneath the organic material. The advantages of underpinning the slab include, stopping slab settlement and lasting for the life of the building. Underpinning piles can also be installed to support spread footings that may have also settled. Underpinning the slab has one main drawback - cost. If this altemative is selected, we recommend using 2 -inch- diameter pin piles and a 90 -pound pneumatic pile- driving hammer. The standard refusal criterion is defined as less than one inch of movement during one minute of continuous driving. This criterion should result in piles with a minimum allowable vertical capacity of 4,000 pounds. We recommend that Schedule 80 steel pipe be used. The pile length will vary, but based on the boring B -1, the piles should be driven to a depth of approximately 30 feet bgs. Based on the thickness and depth of organics found in boring B -1, we recommend the piles be driven a minimum of 20 feet. Due to the relatively loose soils encountered under the slab, the standard refusal criterion might not be achievable. A test pile should be driven and if the refusal criterion is not met by 35 feet of embedment, a pile Toad test should be performed to measure the capacity of the pile and develop a site specific driving 080912jh1 final_geotech investigation tcp.dooc ` Golder Associates August 2012 11 113- 93582.001 criteria. The Quick Test (Method A) in ASTM Standard D 1143 "Standard Test Methods for Deep Foundations Under Static Axial Compressive Load" is generally used for this type of pile. If higher pile capacities are required, 4- inch - diameter pin piles are another commonly used size with typical capacities on the order of 20,000 pounds. Based on the soil conditions encountered, we estimate an allowable axial capacity closer to 10,000 pounds for a 4- inch - diameter pin pile driven a minimum of 35 feet. We recommend developing site specific driving criteria and determining the capacity with pile load tests. Helical anchors are another potential method of supporting a structural slab. Instead of driving with a hammer, helical anchors are screwed into the ground. The helical anchor capacity is generally readily correlated to the torque required to install the anchor. Because of their larger diameter, helical anchors are more likely to encounter challenges being installed through the woody debris encountered in the borings. 080912jh1 final_geotech investigation tcp.dooc 441Golder Associates August 2012 12 113- 93582.001 5.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General Any construction activities associated with remediating the slab will likely require working inside Building B. Work inside the building will require the use of low overhead equipment. At the time of our investigation, the majority of the interior walls and ceiling tiles had been removed. There were a few interior columns and many light fixtures with associated wiring, a sprinkler system, and duct work left in place overhead. 5.2 Excavations Maintaining safe excavations is the responsibility of the contractor. The soil and groundwater conditions in the excavations will vary across the site and groundwater conditions will also vary over time. We expect excavations in the alluvium to cave easily and occasional boulders and cobbles may be encountered. As appropriate, shoring should be employed by the contractor. Care should be taken in excavating adjacent to existing footings. We recommend limiting excavation to the area outside of a 1 horizontal to 1 vertical (1H:1V) line extending from the edge of any footing. 5.3 Pin Pile Installation If underpinning piles are installed, the contractor should be prepared to pre -drill (or pre -dig) through the existing structural fill and be prepared for issues driving the piles through the woody debris encountered in the borings. 5.4 Construction Geotechnical Monitoring Critical aspects of the foundation and earthwork should be observed and tested by Golder. These aspects of the project may include but not be limited to installation of pin piles or helical anchors, subgrade verification, and placement and compaction of structural fills. 08091411 lnal_geotach investigation tcp.docc Golder Associates August 2012 13 113- 93582.001 6.0 USE OF REPORT This report has been prepared exclusively for the use of David Kehle Architect and their consultants for the project site. We encourage review of this report by bidders and /or contractors as it relates to factual data only (test pit logs, boring logs, laboratory test results, conclusions, etc.). The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the explorations and observations completed for this study, conversations regarding the existing site conditions, and our understanding of the planned development. The conclusions are not intended, nor should they be construed to represent, a warranty regarding the development. But they are included to assist in the planning and design process. Judgment has been applied in interpreting and presenting the results. Variations in subsurface conditions outside the exploration locations are common in glacial environments such as those encountered at the site. Actual conditions encountered during construction might be different from those observed in the explorations. When the site project plans are finalized, we recommend that Golder be given the opportunity to review the plans and specifications to verify that they are in accordance with the conditions described in this report. The explorations were advanced and logged in general accordance with locally accepted geotechnical engineering practice, subject to the time limits and financial and physical constraints applicable to the services for this project, to provide information for the areas explored. There are possible variations in the subsurface conditions between the borehole locations and variations over time. The professional services retained for this project include only the geotechnical aspects of the subsurface conditions at the site. The presence or implication(s) of possible surface and /or subsurface contamination resulting from previous site activities and /or resulting from the introduction of materials from off -site sources are outside the scope of services for this report and have not been investigated or addressed. 080912jh1 final geotech investigation tcp.docx Golder Associates August 2012 14 113- 93582.001 7.0 CLOSING We trust that this report meets your needs. If you have questions or comments, please contact us at (425) 883 -0777. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services for this project. GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC. t Joshua L. Hanson, PE Senior Project Engineer JLH /JEH /nb 0809121 Bnal_geotech investigation tcp.tloc t August 2012 15 113- 93582.001 8.0 REFERENCES Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc, 2012. Settlement Survey Exhibit, Tukwila Commercial Park, Job Number 15476, Sheet 1 of 1, dated January 25. Booth, DB and Waldron, HH. 2004. Geologic Map of the Des Moines 7.5' Quadrangle, King County, Washington, Scientific Investigations Map 2855, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geologic Survey, scale 1:24,000. GeoMapNW, University of Washington, ( http : / /geomapnw.ess.washington.edu) (accessed February 2012). 0809121ht_final_geoteth investigation tcp.docx Golder Associates FIGURES 0 2000 SCALE IN FEET Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map; Renton, WA,1983; _ Bellevue South, WA, 1983; Des Moines, WA, 1995; Seattle South, WA, 1983 KEHLE/TUKWILA COMMERCE PARK/WA FIGURE 1 SITE VICINITY MAP 113935820018g01.ai 1 Mod:02/21/12 1 AMP Golder Associates FRONT DOOR *B -3 0 10 20 SCALE N FEET LEGEND 9B -1 *C -1 .:o BORING LOCATION CONCRETE CUT FLOOR SPOT ELEVATION RESTROONS TOP FLANGE 1 TOP FLANGE ' .0.11 0,, BASE: 'SETTLEMENT SURVEY E7041BT BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC, DATED 1/252012 FIGURE 2 SITE EXPLORATION PLAN KEHLE 1 TUKWILA COMMERCE PARK / WA tYAMsctaileMOSSBIgp>1ISptWisq I la I? Awe 2 1 OS OM= M1:11 PIA* IMMIX lO 1 ha Golder Associates APPENDIX A SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND TEST PIT LOGS Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Merle for Assigning Group Symbols and Names Soil Classification Generalized Group Descriptions COARSE - GRAINED SOILS More than 55. retained on No. 200 sieve GRAVELS More than 5096 of coarse fraction retained on No 4 Steve CLEAN GRAVELS Less than 596 fines GW Wei-graded Gravels GP poodp.0rarted gravels GRAVELS WITH FINES More than 12% fines GM Qravel and sit t"ai anea GC Gravel and Clay mama SANDS 5096 or more of coarse fraction Na 4 4 slim CLEAN SANDS Less than 596 fines SW Well-graded Sands SP Nornptassdam L Sands SANDS WITH FINES than 1296 fines SM Sand and Ste maims SC Sand and pay thtskaes FINE-GRAINED SOILS 5096 or more passes the No. 200 sieve SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit less than 50 INORGANIC CL Lowciasadty pays ML Low-Plasedtv Silts non.praaac and Low- Plasticity Organic pays Plastldtv ORGANIC OLd SILTS AND CLAYS Uqukl Omit greater than 50 INORGANIC CH 111th-riasfidtY Oays MH HIgh-plamidly Silts ORGANIC OH HI dty 001111C Clays High-plasticity Organic SATs HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PdinaiftY organic maser. dart in valor. and organic odor PT Peat Coheslonless Soils (a) banally N. blows/fed Density (%) Very loose 0to4 0 -15 Loose 4 to 10 15 - 35 compact 101o30 35 -65 Dense 30 to 50 65 - 85 Very Dense over 50 >85 Cohesive Solls(b) Consistency N, b1owslf r Undralned Shear Strength Clayey Silt CL-ML (low plasticity) (pg() an Very soft 0 to 2 <250 Soft 2 to 250-500 Finn 4 to 8 500 -1000 Stiff 8 to 15 1000 -2000 Very Stiff 15 to 30 2000.4000 Hard over 30 >4000 (a) Sills consisting of gravel. sand. and ROL either separately or 0 oomtinadon. possessing no dhaededsdns d plastldly. and exhibiting drained behavior. (b) Sate possessing the characteristics of gasedty, and wetting urhdrekhed behavior. (c) Refer to test or ASTM 01586.84 for a delWtIon ot it In noway any cahsdldatud cdhasladess sags Release Density terms ere based an N vapors corrected for overburden pressures. (d) UndreLred shear strength a 1/2 uncan5ned compression strength. Silt and Gay Descriptions Description Typical Unified Designation Sill ML (ran - plastic) Clayey Silt CL-ML (low plasticity) Silty Clay CL Clay CH Plastic Sic MH Organic Solis OL, OH, Pt Qualitat)ve Descriptive Terminology for Moisture Content Dry No discernible moisture present Boulders Enough moisture present to darken Damp the appearance but no moisture on materials adheres to the hand Mist Will moisten the hand Wet Visible water present on materials Component Deflnitlons by Gradation Component Size Range Boulders Above 12 in. Cobbles 3 in. to 121n. Gravel 3 In. to No. 4 (4.78m l) Coarse gravel 3 In. to 3/4 In. Fine wavei 3/4 In. to No. 4 (4.78rran) Send No. 4 (4.76mm) to No. 200 (0.074mm) Coarse sand No. 4 (4.76mm) to No. 10 (2.0rrart) Medium sand No. 10 (2.Omm) to No. 40 (0.42mm) Fine sand No. 40 (0.42mm) to No. 200 (0.074mm) sit end any Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm) SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND Sample Types Symbol Oescrlpaon SS SPT Sampler (2.0* OD) HD Heavy Duty Spilt Spoon SH Shelby Tube CA California Sampler B Bulk C Cored G Grab P Pitcher Sampler Laboratory Tests Test Oeslgnatlon Moisture (1) Density D Grain Size G Hydrometer H Atterberg limas (1) Consolidation c Unconfined u UU Tries UU CU Trlaz CU CO Ttiaz CD Permeability P (1) Moisture and Moberg Limits planed on rota. Descriptive Terminology Denoting Component Proportions Descriptive Terms Range of Proportion Treoe 0-596 Utile 5.1296 Some or Adjective (a) 12 -3096 And 30.5096 (a) Use Gravelly. Sandy or Silty as appropriate P:IFORMS gab, geld. pemdt9Soii ClasslacadaMOld Verslons\Soil ClesdaealIonLegend10.23.08.dwg 1 Sot Class. 1 Mod: 10120/1009. 21:29 1 Plotted raz0r1008, 21:34 1 edenniean O 0 9 0 0 tl ui tl z 0 u, 0, 0 cc ¢ cc W 0 w ¢ °m RECORD OF BOREHOLE B -1 PROJECT Kehle/Tukwila Commerce Park DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger / HSA PROJECT NUMBER: 113 -93582 DRILLING DATE: 1/25 and 2/3/ 2 LOCATION: NE comer of settlement DRILL RIG: Mini track -mount DATUM: Local AZIMUTH: N/A COORDINATES: not surveyed SHEET 1 of 3 ELEVATION: 16 INCLINATION: -90 a- w— n 0 —5 — 10 — 15 — 20 BORING METHOD SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES DESCRIPTION 0 0 ELEV. DEPTH (n) cc w a1 zz w 1-- BLOWS per 6 in 140 m hammer SO arch drop N PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS /ft■ 10 20 30 40 WATE w, R CONTENT ow 20 40 (PERCENT) w, 80 80 NOTES WATER LEVELS GRAPHIC 2 0.0 - 0.7 Subfloor and concrete slab 15.3 0.7.3.0 Ught brown to brown, silty fine to coarse SAND, trace to little fine to coarse gravel, trace cobbles ( <5- inch), damp. (SM) SM 0.7 13.0 21/4 -inch inner diameter hollow stem auger with cathead safety hammer 3.0 - 11.0 Brown, silty fine SAND to sandy SILT and SILT, damp to moist. ( SM/ML) -7.5 feet becomes moist. 11.0 - 17.0 very loose to loose, dark gray, sky fine SAND to sandy SILT with organics, wood chips and rootletts, moist to wet. ( SM/ML) (BURRIED TOPSOIL) 17.0.40.0 Loose, dark gray, nonstraflfied fine to medium SAND, trace ant, trove lenses of iro-oxide staining, wet. (SP) Log continued on next page SM/ML 3.0 5.0 AUGER 11.0 SM/ML SP 11.0 1 SS 0 -0-1 1 2 SS 2 J.& 1.5 -1.0 17.0 3 SS 1.2 -2 4 1.5 • • 1 in to 3 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Geologic Drill DRILLER: A. Hansen LOGGED: J. Hanson CHECKED: A. Dennison DATE: 8/9/2012 N r- O co cc (0 Ec- 41 c00 N 0 0 (] cc W J 0 w 0 m RECORD OF BOREHOLE B -1 SHEET 2of 3 PROJECT Kehle/Tukwila Commerce Park DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger / HSA PROJECT NUMBER: 113-93582 DRILLING DATE: 1/25 and 2/3/ 2 LOCATION: NE comer of settlement DRILL RIG: Mini track -mount DATUM: Local AZIMUTH: N/A COORDINATES: not surveyed ELEVATION: 16 INCLINATION: -90 S or 20 — 25 —30 — 35 —40 0 O 2 f Z Fc 2 SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES DESCRIPTION U 0 I0 QO ELEV. DEPTH (5) m f z BLOWS per 6 in 1401b hammer 30 inch trop N U PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS /ft■ 10 20 30 40 WATER CONTENT w, ow 20 40 60 (PERCENT) w, eo NOTES WATER LEVELS GRAPHIC 2 114-inch inner diameter hollow stem auger with cathead safety hammer 17.0.40.0 Loose, dark gray, nonstrat8ied fine to medilum O. trace sill trave lenses of irooxide staining, wet. (SP) (continued) -30 feet becomes compact. Log continued on next page SP 4 SS 2-3-3 6 1.5 5 SS 3-3-4 7 1.5 6 SS 5-5-8 13 .?D 1.5 7 SS 8-10 -9 19 1.5 -24.0 • • • ■ Bacldilled boring with bentonite chips. 1 in to 3 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Geologic Drill DRILLER: A. Hansen LOGGED: J. Hanson CHECKED: A. Dennison DATE: 8/9/2012 RECORD OF BOREHOLE B -1 SHEET 3of 3 PROJECT Kehte/Tukwila Commerce Park DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger / HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 16 PROJECT NUMBER: 113 -93582 DRILLING DATE 1/25 and 2/3/12 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: NE comer of settlement DRILL RIG: Mini track -mount COORDINATES: not surveyed BORING METHOD SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS / ft • to 20 so 4U NOTES WATER LEVELS GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION m co O GRAPHIC LOG ELEV. NUMBER w r- ~ BLOWS per 6 in r40 ® crammer 30 inch drop N REC /ATT WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) w, DEPTH H 1 OW 1 W, 20 40 60 e0 2 t /flinch inner diameter ho0ow stem auger with cathead safety hammer 40.0 - 51.5 Very loose, dark gray, SILT, little Me sand. wet. (ML) ML 40.0 -35.5 8 SS 2 -2.2 4 if • ■ ■ 8 SS 2 -1 -2 3 9 SS 2-1-2 3 Boring completed at 51.0 ft. 51.5 1 in to 3 f LOGGED: J. Hanson =3. DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Geologic Drill CHECKED: A. Dennison -, Golder DRILLER: A. Hansen DATE: 8/9/2012 Associates RECORD OF BOREHOLE B -2 SHEET 1 of 1 PROJECT Kehle/Tukwila Commerce Park DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 16 PROJECT NUMBER: 113 -93582 DRILLING DATE: 1/25/2012 AZIMUTH: N/A INCUNATION: -90 LOCATION: NW comer of settlement DRILL RIG: Hand Auger COORDINATES: not surveyed = t= p BORING METHOD 1 SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS / ft II Io 20 3o to NOTES WATER LEVELS GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION ., =p ¢ O C7 ELEV. NUMBER w ,4 BLOWS per 8 in 140 lb hammer 90 4 drop N a p WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) DEPTH w, 1 Ow 1 W, 20 40 80 80 0 - - 5 - — — — -10 - 15 - 20 k. o v c I 0.0 - 0.8 Subibor and concrete slab 15.3 AUGER R 9 -6 Groundwater was not encountered during dating. Bacidded boring with 111_ �•41,... i-, �. t'�Y� :a a": i 'i'i,-Y':i �• •.•.. n ,� },,t if :0-�• ' ii'' 6�. 17.1 L :war,. w•c� L si } iii }•'f nirY :i��1 • ;•i∎ i' 87Y'i �11�� t 4i - - � - ie — Ili1 ■ 1 "f _ _ 0.8 -4.0 brown to brown, s lty tine to coarse SAND, trace to little fine to coarse gravel. trace cobbles (<5-inch), damp. (SM) (FILL) 4.0.9.6 Brown. sandy SILT to SILT, trace to little fine sand, damp to moist. (ML) Refusal at 9.6 feet SM � ������� ����4•�4. 4i,,".• •i•• •:. v••,., ••♦ S.* 0.8 • :. 12.0 ML 4.0 8.4 Boring completed at 9.8 ft. 9.6 - .-- 1 in to 3 f LOGGED: J. Hanson DRILLING CONTRACTOR: CHECKED: A. Dennison DRILLER: J. Hanson DATE: 8/9/2012 ° �� AssoG� dates N_ CC 3i 0 -J el 0 2 EE O m N m N r7 Q1 60 0 0 8 Q 0 0 w J S w 00 RECORD OF BOREHOLE B -3 SHEET 1 of 1 PROJECT: Kehle/Tukwila Commerce Park DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 16 PROJECT NUMBER: 113 -93582 DRILLING DATE: 1/2612012 AZIMUTH: WA INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: South end of settlement DRILL RIG: Hand Auger COORDINATES: not surveyed BORING METHOD SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS / ft • t0 20 so 40 NOTES WATER LEVELS GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION USCS GRAPHIC ELEV. NUMBER w I- BLOWS per 8 in 140 ID hemmer 30 Duch mop N k a i-.; ¢ WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) � D(H) H OW W, I Il 1 W, 20 40 60 80 1 I I I 1 1 I O IV N O N C 1 m Ws v x 0.0.0.8 Subtloor and concrete slab. 0.8 - 3.0 LAM brown to brown, silty fine to coarse SAND, trace to little fine to coarse gravel, trace cobbles ( <5- inch), damp. (SM) (FILL) 3.0 -9.5 Brown, silty fine SAND transitionmg to sandy SILT and SILT With depth, damp to moist. SM/ML Refusal at 9.5 feet, wood chips in tip of 15.2 AUGEP 9.5 Groundwater not not encountered duringdrfThng. Baelddled boring wfth cuttings ...r. ; j.� :_e e, Li 11 �rli =�, 1�'•)i t }!= 1 1r.1 1:¢li :.-,: 1�,� 1 .t2e1 If 0� rejig', 1.6 .oi•i -. 1,g.r 'Will?), Attll VI 1? 11)4‘ 1�:� _ �,i d — 44 • II •li 41 �] SM ' VV. *VA, 4.iei� 0 :4+ iii D ♦ ♦ 0.8 13.0 SNVML '.:.} 3.0 .. 8.5 —� auger. / 9.5 — Boling completed at 9.5 ft. 1 in to 3 ft LOGGED: A. Rydecki DRILLING CONTRACTOR: CHECKED: A. Dennison l DRILLER: J. Hanson DATE: 8/9/2012 OA 930`�� Ot d�T te. RECORD OF BOREHOLE B -4 , SHEET 1 of 1 PROJECT: Kehle/Tukwila Commerce Park DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 16 PROJECT NUMBER: 113 -93582 DRIWNGDATE: 1/26/2012 AZIMUTH: NIA INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: South side of building DRILL RIG: Hand Auger COORDINATES: not surveyed s BORING METHOD SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS / ft • 10 Z0 30 40 WATER LEEVELS GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOG ELEV. NUMBER TYPE BLOWS per 6 in 140 lb hammer 30 in fop N REC / ATT WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) DEPTH W, 1 Ow 1 W, 20 40 s0 e0 0 ' _ - 15 - 20 g I 0.0 - 0.3 Concrete slab r— 0.3 - 2.0 Brown, silty fine to coarse SAND, little line to coarse gravel, trace cobbles (c5- inch), damp. (SM) (FILL) 15.7 AUGER 12.0 Groundwater not encountered during dnitng. B�, cuttings. 111 •;6 , 7•Ii Ins or"1 1 � . ^•r rs'ir�� 1` a '�}.y •.r. 1i izg '!1} '1• 1 i •• -`a L4.4 ..ib•1. 1e. x14, >,F >il `141_ , P � 1i ir'I •',- 44` -••'i 1?��al r: =�, 'ilk: aii.1=!i • - ,, - =4 =j P p • I - r. SM • +��H1 t4 .4 *.i�I ��•••ir $44QQi .* Niel r•••, • • 0.3 2.0 - 5.5 Brown, sandy SILT to SILT, trace to little fine sand damp. (ML) ML 2.0 10.5 5.5 -6.0 Brown, cfaarey SILT, dames to moist. (CL -ML) CL-ML % %� %% /,/�//, 5.5 10.0 8.0.11.0 Brown, fare SAND, trace to little alt, damp to moist. (SP/SP-SM) 8P /SP -S, 6.0 5.0 11.0 - 12.0 Brown, fine SAND, lttle silt. wet. (SP -SM) SP-SM . •. • 11.0 4.0 Boring completed at 12.0 ft 12.0 - - 1 in to 3 f LOGGED: A. Rydecki •• =_ DRILLING CONTRACTOR: CHECKED: A. Dennison 1d� DRILLER: J. Hanson DATE: 8/9 /2012 • Asso(�� Clate8 APPENDIX B DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TEST RESULTS WILDCAT DYNAMIC CONE LOG Golder Associates 18300 Union Hill Rd. Suite 200 Redmond, WA HOLE #: B-1 CREW: T. Marshall/J. Hanson PROJECT: Tukwila Commerce Park ADDRESS: 12622 Interurban Avenue S LOCATION: Tukwila, Washington PROJECT NUMBER: DATE STARTED: DATE COMPLETED: Page 1 of 1 113 -93582 01 -25 -2012 01 -25 -2012 SURFACE ELEVATION: Pre -dug -3 feet WATER ON COMPLETION: N/A HAMMER WEIGHT: 35 lbs. CONE AREA: 10 sq. cm DEPTH BLOWS PER 10 cm RESISTANCE Kg/cm2 GRAPH OF CONE RESISTANCE) 0 50 100 150 N' TESTED CONSISTENCY SAND & SILT CLAY - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 1 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 2 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 3 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 1 m 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 17 65.6 ••••••N••••••• 18 MEDIUM DENSE - 4 ft 15 57.9 MNNN•NN••• 16 MEDIUM DENSE - 18 69.5 •••••• 19 MEDIUM DENSE - 18 69.5 19 MEDIUM DENSE - 5 ft 14 54.0 ••••••••■•••••• 15 MEDIUM DENSE - 14 54.0 15 MEDIUM DENSE - 12 46.3 ••••••••••••• 13 MEDIUM DENSE - 6 ft 9 34.7 •••••• .... 9 LOOSE - 8 30.9 •••••••• 8 LOOSE - 2 m 6 23.2 •••••• 6 LOOSE E < G - 134- -.«000662ri v, 000 -1 444 - 7 ft 8 27.4 ••••••• 7 LOOSE - 7 23.9 •••••• 6 LOOSE - 6 20.5 5 LOOSE - 8 ft 5 17.1 ••• 4 VERY LOOSE - 5 17.1 ••• 4 VERY LOOSE - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE - 9 ft 5 17.1 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE - 3 m 10 ft 1 3.4 0 VERY LOOSE - I 3.1 0 VERY LOOSE - 14 42.8 12 MEDIUM DENSE - 10 30.6 ••••••• 8 LOOSE - 11 ft 15 45.9 13 MEDIUM DENSE - 50 153.0 •••• - DENSE - 12ft - 4m 13ft WuLICAT LS WILDCAT DYNAMIC CONE LOG Golder Associates 18300 Union Hill Rd. Suite 200 Redmond, WA HOLE #: B -2 CREW: T. Marshall/J. Hanson PROJECT: Tukwila Commerce Park ADDRESS: 12622 interurban Avenue S LOCATION: Tukwila, Washington PROJECT NUMBER: DATE STARTED: DATE COMPLETED: Page 1 of 1 113 -93582 01 -25 -2012 01 -25 -2012 SURFACE ELEVATION: Pre -dug —3 feet WATER ON COMPLETION: N/A HAMMER WEIGHT: 35 lbs. CONE AREA: 10 sq. cm DEPTH BLOWS PER 10 cm RESISTANCE Kg/cm2 GRAPH OF CONE RESISTANCE 0 50 100 150 N' TESTED CONSISTENCY SAND & SILT CLAY - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 1 if 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 2 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 3 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 1 m 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 11 42.5 •••••• ...... 12 MEDIUM DENSE STIFF - 4 ft 10 38.6 11 MEDIUM DENSE STIFF - 17 65.6 18 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 21 81.1 •••• 23 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 5 ft 16 61.8 17 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 16 61.8 •••••• »••• •••••• 17 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 11 42.5 12 MEDIUM DENSE STIFF - 6 if 8 30.9 8 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 7 27.0 7 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 2 m 7 27.0 ••••••• 7 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 7 ft 7 23.9 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 5 17.1 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 8 ft 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 9 ft 3 10.3 •• 2 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 3 10.3 •• 2 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 6 20.5 «••• 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 3 m - 10 ft lift 50 171.0 ••• - DENSE HARD - 12ft - 4m 13ft WILDCATJO.S WILDCAT DYNAMIC CONE LOG Page 1 of 1 Golder Associates 18300 Union Hill Rd. Suite 200 Redmond, WA HOLE #: B -3 CREW: A.Rydecki/J. Hanson PROJECT: Tukwila Commerce Park ADDRESS: 12622 Interurban Avenue S LOCATION: Tukwila, Washington PROJECT NUMBER: DATE STARTED: DATE COMPLETED: 113 -93582 01 -26 -2012 01 -26 -2012 SURFACE ELEVATION: Pre -dug -4 feet WATER ON COMPLETION: N/A HAMMER WEIGHT: 35 lbs. CONE AREA: 10 sq. cm DEPTH BLOWS PER 10 cm RESISTANCE Kg/cm2 GRAPH OF CONE RESISTANCE 0 50 100 150 14' TESTED CONSISTENCY SAND & SILT CLAY - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 1 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 2 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 3 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 1 m 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 4 ft 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 25 96.5 - MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 21 81.1 23 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 5 ft 21 81.1 •••• »• 23 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 15 57.9 16 MEDIUM DENSE VERY STIFF - 10 38.6 11 MEDIUM DENSE STIFF - 6 ft I 3.9 • 1 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 2 7.7 •• 2 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 2 m 1 3.9 • 1 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 7 ft 3 10.3 •• 2 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 2 6.8 • 1 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 8 ft 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 2 6.8 • 1 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 5 17.1 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 9 ft 6 20.5 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 4 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 50 171.0 - DENSE HARD - 3m 10ft - 11 ft - 12ft - 4m 13ft WILOCATXLS WILDCAT DYNAMIC CONE LOG Golder Associates 18300 Union Hill Rd. Suite 200 Redmond, WA HOLE #: B-4 CREW: A.Rydecki/J. Hanson PROJECT: Tukwila Commerce Park ADDRESS: 12622 Interurban Avenue S LOCATION: Tukwila, Washington PROJECT NUMBER: DATE STARTED: DATE COMPLETED: SURFACE ELEVATION: WATER ON COMPLETION: HAMMER WEIGHT: CONE AREA: Page 1 of 2 113 -93582 01 -26 -2012 01 -26 -2012 Pre-dug -3 feet N/A 35 lbs. 10 sq. cm DEPTH BLOWS PER 10 cm RESISTANCE Kg/cm2 GRAPH OF CONE RESISTANCE 0 50 100 150 N' TESTED CONSISTENCY SAND & SILT CLAY - �7 ON -4 -1 O1 -4 -4 00 00 Os v O1 -4 '0 -4 . OT Os OT 01 W W N W fa W W W? A -4 j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 1 ft 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 2 ft 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 0.0 0 VERY LOOSE VERY SOFT - 3 ft 53.3 ••••-• 15 MEDIUM DENSE STIFF - 1 m 31.1 N•N•N• 8 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 15.4 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 ft 15.4 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 11.6 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 11.6 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 5 ft 11.6 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 15.4 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 11.6 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 6 ft 7.7 •• 2 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 11.6 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 2 m 11.6 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 7 ft 20.5 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 20.5 ••••• 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 20.5 ••••• 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 8 ft 20.5 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 13.7 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 23.9 •••••• 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 9 ft 30.8 •••••••• 8 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 23.9 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 20.5 ••••• 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 3 m 10 ft 23.9 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 18.4 ••••• 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 24.5 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 24.5 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 11 ft 21.4 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 21.4 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 18.4 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 12 ft 21.4 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 21.4 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 18.4 5 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 4 m 13 ft 21.4 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF WIWCAT XLS HOLE #: B-4 WILDCAT DYNAMIC CONE LOG PROJECT: Tukwila Commerce Park PROJECT NUMBER: Page 2 of 2 113 -93582 DEPTH BLOWS PER 10 cm RESISTANCE Kg/cm2 GRAPH OF CONE RESISTANCE 0 50 100 150 N' TESTED CONSISTENCY SAND & SILT CLAY - 8 22.2 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 6 16.6 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 14 ft 5 13.9 •••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 11.1 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 4 11.1 ••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 15 ft 6 16.6 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 5 13.9 •••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 6 16.6 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 16 ft 5 13.9 •••• 3 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 5 m 6 16.6 •••• 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT - 9 22.9 •••••• 6 LOOSE MEDIUM STIFF - 17ft - 18ft - 19ft -6m - 20 ft - 21ft - 22 ft - 7m 23ft - 24 ft - 25 ft - 26 ft -8m - 27 ft - 28 ft - 29 ft -9m WILDCAT-XIS APPENDIX C SETTLEMENT SURVEY EXHIBIT \--0.09 0.23 0.02 -0.05 IL -0.16 •` -0.04 T -0.04 70.00 0.03\ - 0.34 -f - 0.31- L -0.06 -0.01 -0.24 -0.46 TOP FLANGE = -0.34 `00 \- -0.10 Ooo -0.01 O • Off. -0.01 O Oh go" p. LEGEND ELEVATION • XX.X = FLOOR SPOT ELEVATION O = FLANGE FOR SUPPORT COLUMN 12 2F7 O� L \--0.20 -0.01 RESTROOMS • 0.03- TOP RANGE x.06' 7 " 00 ` TOP FLANGE ph =0.11 p'l. O O" 0.04 -/ I7 717 0.061 • 0.05 0.03-N 0.02- 0.00 O 0 cD File:P: \15000s \15476 \ survey \15476EXH01.dwg Date/Time:1 /27/2012 7:17 PM BRIAN SCALE HORIZONTAL 1. =10' VERTICAL N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 f` (425)251 -6222 - (425)251 -8782 FAX MIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING. SURVEYING, 1401110, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For TUKWILA COMMERCIAL PARK JOB NUMBER 15476 Title: SETTLEMENT SURVEY EXHIBIT DESIGNED (DRAWN BDG (CHECKED 000 IAPPRoVED BDG I0.411 SHEET 1 0, 1 1/75/2012 At Golder Associates we strive to tae the most: respected global group of companies specie in rn ground engineering and environmental services. Employee owned since our fiarrnstion in 1960,, we have created a unique culture with pride in cawnership, resulting in king -term organizational stability. Cider professionals take the time to build an understanding of client needs and of the specific environments in which they operate. We continue to expand our technical capabilities and have experienced steady growth with employees now operating from offices located throughout Africa, Asia, Austratasie, Europe, North America and South America Golder Associates Golder Associates Inc. 18300 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 200 Redmond, WA 98052 USA Tel: (425) 883 -0777 Fax: (425) 882 -5498 Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation c STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR TUKWILA COMMERCE PARK BUILDING B 12622 INTERURBAN WAY SOUTH TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR: DAVID KEHLE -- ARCHITECT NOVEMBER 9, 2012 CASCADE CREST CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. 21902 96TH AVENUE SE SNOHOMISH, WASHINGTON 98296 (296) 909 -7808 PREPARED BY: KEITH MOORE, S.E. I(�41fz RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 1 5 2012 PERMIT CENTER REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 2 8 2012 City of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION ,Sk„ 18959 4a- 40/ONA L EG\ wd BLS w� `•' , EXPIRES 6 f 1. �3 f e°j E--1- bt- -PT oki : F<ERAc CokIC 'rE S14t..43- o►4- 2 DE- `NI 1-1-14 SLA - 0,-1- Ei RT Dw -To 5D111.E11454-r or E56 Nt"i ^ ; Std$, i � SLR '1-o B� SUPS -E b ot.4 " $ PI L-cS, L0,6.4Z ?c:)e) (0191c-E) PsP Fi1oLJ Moore Engineering Group PROJECT: CCM /4'E Z FzK- ENGR: DATE: 16� SCALE: SHEET Tip /4- / 2— vc S la b 4 _c/a i ile StAiopar S Psi' ? Acid _ad/ (,41. O 50 Ps - S r asps{ load & ,/ P/o re R-0 �. ei (,p e✓ ea, , (A/ rt 4 rav bo ) Se 1 low ,� f3c)e.f .tlr f r r ) ✓1' c l e 5 " Q ) 7 , " v o Gkeckc, f IQo Yt C �' r t r2.='t / 61.4 '77142 t •.0 G_ ! /0 / 4. . `t d= 2,S �J ?h/.ieke. - 3S II b , -7 S Y 4 -( q-; o n 3 5 " ,, Z , c, " — 18. 6 r4 - 6 "4C 3 CASCADE CREST CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. PROJECT: TUKW ILA COMMERCE PARK ENGR: SEE' DATE: /0/3 I /I Z SCALE: SHEET Calculations Page 1 Z a6ed suogelnaleo ADAPT - STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SOFTWARE SYSTEM ADAPT -RC Version "2010" Date: "10 - 31 - 2012" Time: "16:10" File: 8 Inch slab 1 - PROJECT TITLE: 'Tukwila Commerce" 1.1 Design Strip: Structural Slab on Grade 1.2 Load Case: Envelope 2 - MEMBER ELEVATIQ' 1 [ft] y 6.°0 9.00 8.00 3.00 9 3 - TOP REBAR 3.1 ADAPT selected 3.2 ADAPT selected i aasxior Q mixer 5 - BOTTOM REBAR 5.1 ADAPT selected ka'~i 505 e )2.4..c. o 5.2 ADAPT selected Q xr 0 asxicir 6 - REQUIRED & PROVIDED BARS 6.1 Top Bars max 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.30 0 . 8 required — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p r o v i d e d 0. 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.2 Bottom Bars max 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.00 7 PUNCHING SHEAR - ; OK =Acceptable i • RE =Reinforce i NG =Exceeds code : NA =not applicable or not performed i i 7.1 Stress Ratio ! 0.52 ! 0.50 ✓ ! 0.43 0.37 i I I 1 1 7.2 Status 1 OK OK i OK OK 9 - DESIGN PARAMETERS 9.1 Code: American ACI318 (2008) /IBC (2009) Po = 4000 psi fy = 60 kid (longitudinal) fy = 60 kW (shear) 9.2 Rebar Cover. Top = 2.5 in Bottom = 3 In Reber Table: 10 - DESIGNER'S NOTES Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1 - USER SPECIFIED GENERAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value Parameter Value Concrete TF Width Fy (Shear reinforcement) 60.00 ksi Pc for BEAMS/SLABS 4000.00 psi Minimum Cover at TOP 2.50 in Ec for BEAMS/SLABS 3605.00 ksi Minimum Cover at BOTTOM 3.00 in CREEP factor 2.00 Analysis and design options in CONCRETE WEIGHT NORMAL Structural system - Equiv Frame TWO -WAY UNIT WEIGHT 150.00 pcf Moments reduced to face of support YES Reinforcement 0.00 Moment Redistribution NO Fy (Main bars) 60.00 ksi DESIGN CODE SELECTED American- AC1318 (2008)/IBC 2009 2 - INPUT GEOMETRY 2.1 Principal Span Data of Uniform Spans Span Form Length Width Depth TF Width TF Thick. BF/MF Width BF/MF Thick. Rh Right Mutt. Left Mutt. in in ft in in in in in in in 24.00 0.00 1 1 8.00 96.00 6.00 0.00 2 12.00 24.00 6.00 0.50 0.50 2 1 8.00 96.00 6.00 12.00 24.00 12.00 12.00 6.00 0.50 0.50 3 1 8.00 96.00 6.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.50 0.50 C 1 3.00 96.00 6.00 100 (1) LL U 6.00 0.50 0.50 2.5 Drop Cap and Drop Panel Data Joint Cap T Cap B Cap DL Cap DR Drop TL Drop TR Drop B Drop L Drop R % UC in in in in in in in in in 1 12.00 24.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 12.00 24.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 12.00 24.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 12.00 24.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.7 Support Width and Column Data Joint Support Width Length LC B(DIA.) LC D LC % LC CBC LC Length UC B(DIA.) UC D UC % UC CBC UC in ft in in ft if ft in in 1 LL 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 (1) 1 SDL U 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 (1) 2 LL U 0.050 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 (1) 2 SDL U 0.020 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 (1) LL U 0.050 3 - INPUT APPLIED LOADING 3.1 Loading As Appears in User's Input Screen Span Class Type W P1 P2 A B C F M k/ft2 k/ft k/ft ft if ft k k -ft 1 LL U 0.050 1 SDL U 0.020 2 LL U 0.050 2 SDL U 0.020 3 LL U 0.050 3 SDL U 0.020 CANT LL U 0.050 email: Support©Adaptsoft.com website: http: //www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 1 Calculations Page 3 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 CANT 1 SDL 1 U 1 0.020 1 1 1 1 1 1 I NOTE SELFWEIGHT INCLUSION REQUIRED (SW= SELF WEIGHT Computed from geometry input and treated as dead loading. Unit selfweight W = 150.0 pcf 3.2 Compiled loads Span Class Type P1 P2 F M A B C Reduction Factor in 1 1 k/ft k/ft k k -ft ft if ft 0.63E +04 1 LL P 0.400 576.00 0.17E +04 3.00 0.000 8.000 4 0.000 1 SDL P 0.160 5 720.00 0.63E +04 0.000 8.000 2 1 1 SW P 0.750 2 2 720.00 0.000 1.000 4.20 2 1 SW P 0.600 3.00 2 4 1.000 7.000 7.80 4.20 1 SW P 0.750 7.80 4.20 3 7.000 8.000 0.63E +04 7.80 2 LL P 0.400 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 0.000 8.000 576.00 0.000 2 SDL P 0.160 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 0.000 8.000 5 720.00 2 SW P 0.750 1 720.00 0.63E +04 0.000 1.000 CR 2 2 SW P 0.600 1.000 7.000 2 SW P 0.750 7.000 8.000 3 LL P 0.400 0.000 8.000 0.000 3 SDL P 0.160 0.000 8.000 3 SW P 0.750 0.000 1.000 3 SW P 0.600 1.000 7.000 3 SW P 0.750 7.000 8.000 CR LL P 0.400 0.000 3.000 0.000 CR SDL P 0.160 0.000 3.000 CR SW P 0.750 0.000 1.000 CR SW P 0.600 1.000 3.000 4 - CALCULATED SECTION PROPERTIES 4.2 Section Pro perties for Non - Uniform Spans Span Segme nt Area I Yb Yt in2 in4 in in 1 1 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 1 2 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 1 3 576.00 0.17E +04 3.00 3.00 1 4 720.00 0.63E+04 7.80 4.20 1 5 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 2 1 720.00 0.63E+04 7.80 4.20 2 2 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 2 3 576.00 0.17E+04 3.00 3.00 2 4 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 2 5 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 3 1 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 3 2 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 3 3 576.00 0.17E +04 3.00 3.00 3 4 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 3 5 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 CR 1 720.00 0.63E +04 7.80 4.20 CR 2 576.00 0.17E +04 3.00 3.00 5 - MOMENTS, SHEARS AND REACTIONS email: Support@Adaptsoft.com website: httpi/www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 2 Calculations Page 4 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Tkle: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5.1 Span Moments and Shears (Excluding Live Load Span Load Case Moment Left Moment Midspan Moment Right Shear Left Shear Right k k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k k 1 SW 0.00 2.42 -4.91 -1.94 3.16 2 SW -4.91 0.58 -3.67 -2.71 2.39 3 SW -3.67 1.65 -2.78 -2.66 2.44 CANT SW -2.78 0.00 0.00 -1.95 SDL - - - 1 SDL 0.00 0.64 -1.28 -0.48 0.80 2 SDL -1.28 0.16 -0.96 -0.68 0.60 3 SDL -0.96 0.44 -0.72 -0.67 0.61 CANT SDL -0.72 - - -0.48 - 1 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CANT XL 0.00 0.00 - - - 5.2 Reactions and Column Moments (Excluding Live Load Joint Load Case Reaction Moment Lower Column Moment Upper Column Moment Right Max Moment Right Min k k -ft k -ft 1 SW 1.94 0.00 0.00 2 SW 5.87 0.00 0.00 3 SW 5.06 0.00 0.00 4 SW 4.39 0.00 0.00 1 SDL 0.48 0.00 0.00 2 SDL 1.48 0.00 0.00 3 SDL 1.27 0.00 0.00 4 SDL 1.09 0.00 0.00 1 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.3 Span Moments and Shears (Live Load Span Moment Left Max Moment Left Min Moment Midspan Max Moment Midspan Min Moment Right Max Moment Right Min Shear Left Shear Right k k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k k 1 0.00 0.00 1.60 1.60 -3.21 -3.21 -1.20 2.00 2 -3.21 -3.21 0.39 0.39 -2.40 -2.40 -1.70 1.50 3 -2.40 -2.40 1.10 1.10 -1.80 -1.80 -1.68 1.52 CR -1.80 -1.20 - - - - - - 5.4 Reactions and Column Moments (Live Load Joint Reaction Max Reaction Min Moment Lower Column Max Moment Lower Column Min Moment Upper Column Max Moment Upper Column Min k k k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft 1 1.20 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 3.17 3.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 2.72 2.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 - MOMENTS REDUCED TO FACE OF SUPPORT 6.1 Reduced Moments at Face of Support (Excluding Live Load) email: Support@Adaptsoft.com website: httpi/www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 3 Calculations Page 5 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 Span Load Case Moment Left Moment Midspan Moment Right Moment Right Max Moment Right Min k -ft k -ft k -ft 1 SW 0.00 2.42 -4.91 2 SW -4.91 0.58 -3.67 3 SW -3.67 1.65 -2.77 CANT SW -2.77 - - 1 SDL 0.00 0.64 -1.28 2 SDL -1.28 0.16 -0.96 3 SDL -0.96 0.44 -0.72 CANT SDL -0.72 - - 1 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 XL 0.00 0.00 0.00 CANT XL 0.00 - - 6.2 Reduced Moments at Face of Supaort (Live Load Span Moment Left Max Moment Left Min Moment Midspan Max Moment Midspan Min Moment Right Max Moment Right Min k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k-ft k -ft 1 0.00 0.00 1.60 1.60 -3.21 -3.21 2 -3.21 -3.21 0.39 0.39 -2.40 -2.40 3 -2.40 -2.40 1.10 1.10 -1.80 -1.80 CR -1.80 10.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - - - 8 - FACTORED MOMENTS AND REACTIONS ENVELOPE 8.1 Factored Design Moments Not Redistributed Span Left Max Left Min Middle Max Middle Min Right Max Right Min k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft 1 0.00 0.00 6.22 6.22 -12.57 -12.57 2 -12.57 -12.57 1.52 1.52 -9.41 -9.41 3 -9.41 -9.41 4.26 4.26 -7.07 -7.07 CR -7.07 10.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - - - 8.2 Reactions and Column Moments Joint Reaction Max Reaction Min Moment Lower Column Max Moment Lower Column Min Moment Upper Column Max Moment Upper Column Min k k k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft 1 4.82 4.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 14.74 14.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 12.67 12.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 10.93 10.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Note: Moments are reported at face of support . 10 - MILD STEEL - NO REDISTRIBUTION 10.1 Required Rebar 10.1.1 Total Strip Required Rebar Span Location From To As Required Ultimate Minimum ft ft in2 in2 in2 email: Support a(� Adaptsoft.com website: http: //www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 4 Calculation Page 6 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1 TOP 6.00 8.00 1.04 0.91 1.04 2 TOP 0.00 2.80 1.04 0.91 1.04 2 TOP 6.00 8.00 1.04 0.68 1.04 3 TOP 0.00 1.60 1.04 0.68 1.04 3 TOP 6.80 8.00 1.04 0.50 1.04 CR TOP 0.00 3.00 1.30 0.21 1.30 1 BOT 0.00 5.60 1.04 0.60 1.04 2 BOT 3.20 5.60 1.04 0.13 1.04 3 BOT 2.00 6.40 1.04 0.36 1.04 10.1.2 Column Stria Required Rebar Span Location From To As Required Ultimate Minimum Area ft ft in2 in2 in2 1 TOP 6.00 8.00 0.78 0.68 0.78 2 TOP 0.00 2.80 0.78 0.68 0.78 2 TOP 6.00 8.00 0.78 0.51 0.78 3 TOP 0.00 1.60 0.78 0.51 0.78 3 TOP 6.80 8.00 1.04 0.50 1.04 CR TOP 0.00 3.00 1.30 0.21 1.30 1 BOT 0.00 5.60 0.62 0.36 0.62 2 BOT 3.20 5.60 0.62 0.08 0.62 3 BOT 2.00 6.40 0.62 0.22 0.62 10.1.3 Middle Stria Required Rebar Span Location From To As Required Ultimate Minimum Area ft ft in2 in2 in2 1 TOP 6.00 8.00 0.26 0.23 0.26 2 TOP 0.00 2.80 0.26 0.23 0.26 2 TOP 6.00 8.00 0.26 0.17 0.26 3 TOP 0.00 1.60 0.26 0.17 0.26 1 BOT 0.00 5.60 0.42 0.24 0.42 2 BOT 3.20 5.60 0.42 0.05 0.42 3 BOT 2.00 6.40 0.42 0.14 0.42 10.2 Provided Rebar 10.2.1 Total Stria Provided Rebar Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length Area ft ft ft ft in2 1 1 TOP 4.60 4 5 14.50 1.24 3 2 TOP 5.40 5 5 6.00 1.55 1 3 BOT 0.00 4 5 7.00 1.24 2 4 BOT 1.80 4 5 14.00 1.24 10.2.2 Total Stria Steel Disposition Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length ft ft 1 1 TOP 4.60 4 5 3.40 2 1 TOP 0.00 4 5 8.00 3 1 TOP 0.00 4 5 3.10 3 2 TOP 5.40 5 5 2.60 CR 2 TOP 0.00 5 5 3.40 1 3 BOT 0.00 4 5 7.00 2 4 BOT 1.80 4 5 6.20 3 4 BOT 0.00 4 5 7.80 10.2.3 Column Strip Provided Rebar email: Support@Adaptsoft.com website: httpi/www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, California, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 5 Calculations Page 7 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length Area Allowable stress Stress ratio ft ft in ft ft in2 1 1 TOP 4.60 3 5 14.50 0.93 3 2 TOP 5.40 5 5 6.00 1.55 1 3 BOT 0.00 2 5 7.00 0.62 2 4 BOT 1.80 2 5 14.00 0.62 10.2.4 Column Stria Steel Disposition Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length Area Allowable stress Stress ratio ft ft in ft 1 1 TOP 4.60 3 5 3.40 2 1 TOP 0.00 3 5 8.00 3 1 TOP 0.00 3 5 3.10 3 2 TOP 5.40 5 5 2.60 CR 2 TOP 0.00 5 5 3.40 1 3 BOT 0.00 2 5 7.00 2 4 BOT 1.80 2 5 6.20 3 4 BOT 0.00 2 5 7.80 10.2.5 Middle Stria Provided Rebar Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length Area Allowable stress Stress ratio ft ft in ft ft in2 1 1 TOP 4.60 1 5 14.50 0.31 1 3 BOT 0.00 2 5 7.00 0.62 2 4 BOT 1.80 2 5 14.00 0.62 10.2.6 Middle Stri p Steel Disposition Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length Total stress Allowable stress Stress ratio ft in in ft 1 1 TOP 4.60 1 5 3.40 2 1 TOP 0.00 1 5 8.00 3 1 TOP 0.00 1 5 3.10 1 3 BOT 0.00 2 5 7.00 2 4 BOT 1.80 2 5 620 3 4 BOT 0.00 2 5 7.80 13 - PUNCHING SHEAR REINFORCEMENT 13.1 Critical Section Geome Column Layer Cond. a d b1 b2 Total stress Allowable stress Stress ratio in in in in 1 3 2 1.44 2.88 13.44 26.88 2 3 1 1.44 2.88 26.88 26.88 3 3 1 1.44 2.88 26.88 26.88 4 3 1 1.44 2.88 26.88 26.88 13.2 Critical Section Stresses Label Layer Cond. Factored shear Factored moment Stress due to shear Stress due to moment Total stress Allowable stress Stress ratio k k -ft ksi ksi ksi ksi 1 3 2 -4.82 -0.00 0.03 0.018 0.049 0.095 0.516 2 3 1 -14.73 +0.00 0.05 0.000 0.048 0.095 0.502 3 3 1 - 12.67 +0.00 0.04 0.000 0.041 0.095 0.432 4 3 1 -10.93 +0.00 0.04 0.000 0.035 0.095 0.373 13.3 Punching Shear Reinforcement Reinforcement option: Stirrups email: Support@Adaptsoft.com website: httpi /www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 6 Calculations Page 8 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 Bar Size: 4 Col. Dist N Legs Dist N Legs Dist N Legs Dist N Legs Dist N Legs in in in in 0.00 in 0.01(6719) in 0.00("""'') in 2 1 0.00 0.00(47328) 0.00('**'") 0.00(""") 0.00(40376) 3 0.00 0.00 0.01(12246) 0.00(70093) 2 0.01(10425) CR 0.00 0.00 0.00(9428) 0.00(53748) 0.00(""') 0.00(8021) 3.00 3.00 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 3 0.60 0.60 4 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 4 Dist. = Distance measured from the face of support Note: Columns with - have not been checked for punching shear. Note: Columns with "' have exceeded the maximum allowable shear stress. 14 - DEFLECTIONS 14.1 Maximum Span Deflections Span SW SW +SD L SW +SDL +Cr eep LL X Total Moment Right Neg in in in in in in 1 0.00 0.00 0.01(6719) 0.00(38766) 0.00("""'') 0.02(5727) 2 0.00 0.00 0.00(47328) 0.00('**'") 0.00(""") 0.00(40376) 3 0.00 0.00 0.01(12246) 0.00(70093) 0.00(""') 0.01(10425) CR 0.00 0.00 0.00(9428) 0.00(53748) 0.00(""') 0.00(8021) 16 - Unbalanced Moment Reinforcement 16.1 Unbalanced Moment Reinforcement - No Redistribution Joint Gamma Left Gamma Right Width Left Width Right Moment Left Neg Moment Left Pos Moment Right Neg Moment Right Pos As Top As Bot n Bar Top n Bar Bot ft ft k -ft k -ft k -ft k -ft in2 in2 1 0.00 0.60 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1 2 0.60 0.60 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 3 0.60 0.60 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 4 0.60 0.60 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 email: Support@Adaptsoft.com Adaptsoft.com website: httpi/www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA. Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 7 Calculations Page 9 Project Name: Tukwila Commerce Specific Title: Structural Slab on Grade File Name: 6 inch slab Date of Generation: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 email: Support@Adaptsoft.com website: httpi/www.Adaptsoft.com 1733 Woodside Road, Suite 220, Redwood City, Califomia, 94061, USA, Tel: (650) 306 -2400 Fax (650) 364-2401 8 Calculations Page 10 �oo f i1 s- -to cis "' p l -wood 2X @, epx co I � s' oc. - /r" 5I,,L1ciMs 1Mist Iv e Lo acf 7-2 �c, 1 • • LASE 6.S Ps - ( G,7 p5F /, 7 pc( 3 psf �• ps.: Zo.0 PSG n� (Snow) _ 2S p S� 2A' )1 ( 2 , 7 - 1 - _900 �� -- tb L L 5 #-o.5 0 r le /^ �C 49.8 wC [�/ /.'6 ?Yt> ,s4 CASC.e2E CRBsr CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. PROJECT: Tt44.VOLA PM.K ENGR: SF S DATE: IC 3I /lam r SCALE: SHEET Calculations Page 11 ••• •••• • N'4101 .9L4 ..011'4111 '')IV114 LIfS •11•11414 " •••■ .31/10. 01.7 *AV 44011M01, CM 1111 0111/11d '51a, 4o7 •WICUIA11. • *VII 03c00 1V),/• 0■••■• minim 471,4: anr0 • ; I 1 1 11 ICJ ••• • 1 ••14.4 •0•.1 • IN • ...,,OM +A ,•-it4 1 •,....pw. tHeregrv31 ''' iggivrg ....veq......if. e•44•73.1% • ?ram -rep m Xr11.1,40 aDVICtt K CT,' .aTIO;',Wrgat . 1.-- ••• •--• 1441.1%, 1.0,1•,•,• • • . I / •W4 14'. 1 i .0,Wsrl 40 "Igoe WA% 4,Z•44, I jame am. 10) • AI 1•111.1.,Ifto 04 114 ....44g4 1*04 -0.)•••384. 4 ••■ 4e1.1141.40 .01 i ts' ---....4;;;;',74-,*),-" • ,30,a•ip 4142,40 A erns •."4 IttAt••"•_, inirorl 44P4e; • - • -I A7v49.7.sy 407a • • 7,14''• V I .11 /me ltee4o. 1714. • • 4)•••.5 044. ' 44, irze 446.6, kV' r • a.4•41 ••••• g-.1a 401 111•^• -)o•rt., arre.1..0 0,4•• '1' " -• • ••/••••.1•111,•A4 / rtetz.41/ 4r6:441 -44•1: f gay% 41*.er•04• •t!1:111.-1 / 41.• 40 •••••••••4q „ _OA U(401.46'0.4 gm 1= •••1•.1 -•,•••,/11111, le 47 • r 17-11 cm•go 1' 101*4. 413._4(11C:41•171.11 engte 4•4•we VV./V..0.1 cam , ••••••••1•,110. mg ••• • 4-rtik. 104,41114,4 • 4 1/..7 •• • * * 61:rd• t •••;.' ■•.1.‘ • • '11 1011• 441, f, in.21.1AV 0'940 it 144 .1.° • teg••• SW eye olloasawo - k cot7.41,•.‘ -04%1 ••=r7T, 444444 0: /TOO trim I •-•t•el .11 10•o • • • 'II Weir, gf•tr; q • •••• >4.4•.4.6"4,1441;e1 otova..to 000 . two ••,.=.• Woe, 0.0.geol " -0•41.141. • -Wk. delegbeil -'440/7A 44 • It. 1,4 'e14‘•1 0 • ....ree,0;.1. • ::".4:4 0410412 -•erg:I.eele VIS •71•4, r • -JeArritiAef '04•144 1, 4 •••• • fielltlei ••• 1•••••1,, .4.0,1. t.lk,C144:1)••••1;,..;•"4-.4 7%,_4 •10.4.• elfm - • 51.(47,1.■ ;•••!•09 ••••13 '74 :or 944. ••1•04-1•4•10:::: ■•• •IN•••11..e.4 • 0..0) . . it (1E • VolLa • NV-41 litalte,"14111 47 7; 744114. 7.4 0 ever-01W • We 1,:ige'S 0 41 •1404j 114 •7•441,4. 4•1414 r 0 g erio coo •••1•4 • 0g SY 41 "11 de,ei 4 00.1" ••,..p 1.c./ 01.1.41 .1•44 •-•••••-• • I vf. " • 1-r<is •-001•41•.1•4 .• ‚51491 •4 .... '40 no 04.0...040 . ---Va it, RI • it+4, 1 1- Ist) -10 .)40 ..),)* -j-11:01 'W . •,I 0, 1 1.42 'VD Ari • tt 0 1 1 . . f. .16... i I t . ..... i 711A71'..rfel •00A21.1.10.7 *RI 111 0‘412::*, . 11 11"3.71M ..SV7 uv.rnmr, 4,..tea 494 tv....4%. gv-a.41. . c I' 0,,c10,c,, •,..•" ' ptd eti• 141 141 ay 14a va . Li .049 t 411 • NI, • , ,, t4••• 40I *V , 40 elrl • V vv-git tt It • 141 're MK • .1 4 ' L 4 4 4. —,...„.4.11,4%...v. , $14 144•11,)0.1' .01 h1/4.1 491. , 144 441 • ^4:1 1, .wo 1V .44 • ,440 I r -110 ,*191 •,1449 4•17.; 004.4ridr0r7 •e•••Irbailll 1,4 :Ts= srml .100 ••■••rx,,! , -4:44-411-g Pot .0404 iL 0.09 • pike Cap : (5) p i'/e cu p M = PL 4 (a v ,R.,;( Vey n VV-'-1- I i f etOGf' 21 70. `{-Ie- 26ILL c cS S IGb (awls 2 3" b = 42" 6116�"� = 739k As -- 12 44 rc- 4 (f -) :5 t o-r ¢JV% - 0.9 AI _ • ¢(17„ = 0.9 (, A-)(' °) (23 - a, 26 _ 1 S23 I Ds-L" • d �c ✓ 9 Ve, 61,75 (2-) oca -4-2" • 2); = 91- 1` k` 7. /17 . i !s'1 1.4- vs., P ©1GG))Sx6 G1 = Z1`Z1nZ prd✓la{e n-+,n i " (4-) r NP ANr DoT 4Ay. CwscwoE Caesr CoNsuLTIN6 ENGINEERS. INC. PROJECT: TUKW(A_ CCM NE PARK ENGR: SES DATE: /0 /,3 I % 12 SCALE: / SHEET Calculations Page 13 Pr' 2009 Washington State Energy Code Compliance Forms for Nonresidential and Multifamily Envelope Summary: 2009 Washington State Energy Code Compliance Forms for Nonresidential and Multifamily Residential Project Info .r,- toject Address I N1"elu1Q MO be Io Applicant Name: u, (� Ir , A i rten . Applicant Address: VI i ,n ►1 i L 1�U c;i2 em„ aloe ,`fin, ` I I Applicant Phone: ry e (p..4 -33.- 41' • V -1� 11 I I'I I2, Project Description I❑ New Building ❑ Addition $ Alteration [Compliance Option Prescriptive [] Component Performance (See Decision Flowchart (over) for qualifications) Occupancy Group Nonresidential 0 Multifamily Residential Climate Zone i4 Climate Zone 1 0 Climate Zone 2 ( See Fenestration Area Calculation Total Fenestration Electronic version: these values are automatic (rough opening) Gross Exterior (vertical & overhd) divided by Wall Area Roofs - Metal Building Semi- Heated Path ee yes Allowable if project meets all requirements as defined in section 1310.2 calculated separately from other conditioned spaces. Limited to reducer no and qualifying thermostat. Envelope Requirements (enter values as applicable) Roofs - Insulation Above Deck _ .ODE i ' ' sit r� OI PLTANCE Roofs - Metal Building Roofs - Single Rafter Roofs - Attic and All Others Walls - Mass Walls - Metal Building Walls - Steel Framed CI ; of Tukwila Walls - Wood Framed and Other BUILDING DIVISION Floors - Mass Floors - Steel Joist Floors - Wood Framed and Other Maximum F- factors Slabs -on -Grade - Unheated Slabs -on -Grade - Heated Envelope Requirements Vertical Fenestration Non -Metal Frame Metal Frame Entrance Door Skylights - Without Curb Skylights - With Curb Opaque Doors - Swinging Opaque Doors - Non -Swir Vertical Fenestration Non -North North Skylights Notes: I III C 10 � wI �tW WSE( ally t. . Only wall i RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 1 5 2012 PERMIT CENTER 2009 Washington State Energy Code Compliance Form for Nonresidential and Multifamily Residential Interior Lighting Summary 2009 Washington State Energy Code Compliance Forms for Nonresidential and Multifamily Residential Project Address Project Info FILE 0 LTG-INT Revised November 2010 A e: v I O Otte, b-Mtirreor Na v. Z I Ai 1 /nt. lib. `i i icv zi 33 �- Applicant Address: iti III Applicant Phone: Project Description Compliance Option Date For Building Department Use ❑ New Building ❑ Addition 44 Alteration ❑ Plans Included Refer to WSEC Section 1513 for controls and commissioning requirements. () Prescriptive 0 Lighting Power Allowance 0 Systems Analysis (See Qualification Checklist (over). Indicate Prescriptive & LPA spaces clearly on plans.) Alteration Exceptions (check appropriate box - sec. 1132.3) No changes are being made to the lighting and space use not changed ❑ Less than 60% of the fixtures new, installed wattage not increased, & space use not changed. Maximum Allowed Lighting Wattage Location (floor plan /room #) Occupancy Description Allowed Watts per ft2 ** Gross Interior Area in ft2 Allowed x Area Watts/ Fixture Watts Proposed I Va i i4ra rOR CODEriCOMPLIANCE APPROVED " From Table 15 -1 (over) - document all exceptions on form LTG -LPA Total Allowed Watts Proposed Lighting Wattage Location (floor plan /room #) Number of Fixtures Watts/ Fixture Watts Proposed I Va i i4ra rOR CODEriCOMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 28 2012 City of i urcwaa C1J1i.DIWG DIVISION— Total Proposed Watts may not exceed Total Allowed Watts for Interior Total Proposed Watts Notes: 1. For proposed Fixture Description, indicate fixture type, lamp type (e.g. 7 -8), number of lamps in the fixture, and ballast type (if included). For track lighting, list the length of the track (in feet) in addition to the fixture, lamp, and ballast information. 2. For proposed Watts /Fixture, use manufacturer's listed maximum input wattage of the fixture (not simply the lamp wattage) and other criteria as specified in Section 1530. For line voltage track lighting, list the greater of actual luminaire wattage or length of track multiplied by 50, or as applicable. the wattage of current limiting devices or of the transformer. For low voltage track lighting list the transformer rated wattage. 3. List all fixtures. For exempt lighting, note section and exception number. and leave Watts /Fixture blank. bI3&O RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 15 2012 PERMIT CENTER 04 -02 -2013 • City ®f Tukwila 1 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director DAVID KEHLE 1916 BONAIR DR SW SEATTLE WA 98116 RE: Permit Application No. D12 -360 CBRE - SLAB SETTLEMENT REPAIR 12622 INTERURBAN AV S TUKW Dear Permit Applicant: In reviewing our current application files, it appears that your permit applied for on 11/15/2012, has not been issued by the City of Tukwila Permit Center. Per the International Building Code, International Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code and/or National Electrical Code every permit application not issued within 180 days from the date of application shall expire and become null and void. Your permit application will expire on 05/14/2013. If you still plan to pursue your project, a written request for extension of your application must be submitted to the Permit Center at least seven (7) days before it is due to expire. Address your extension request to the Building Official and state your reason(s) for the need to extend your permit application. If it is determined that an extension is granted, your application will be extended for an addtional 90 days from the expiration date and you will be notified by mail. In the event that we do not receive your written request for extension or request was denied, your permit application will expire, become null and void and your project will require a new permit application, plans and specifications, and associated fees. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Bill Rambo Permit Technician File: Permit File No. D12 -360 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax 206 -431 -3665 A TI4UE NORTH SITE PLAN FILE COPY Permit No. . t \? rF r / w approval is subject to errors and omissions. of construction documents does not authcs a ice+ of any adopted code or ordinance. Recd: t a c p oved Field Copy and conditions is owiedg : By. Bate:, VP's/ `$ City Of TtskwiIa BUILDING DIVISION SEPPAR T PERMIT REQUIRED FOR: ® Mechanical Electrical gi Plumbing IR Gas Piping City of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION REVISIONS No changes shall he made to the scope of work without prior approval of Tukwila Building Division. MT:: Fie-visions will require a new plan submittal i may inciude additional plan review fees. viclNltY MAP 2;T SNP APII,e_piNAp4TA WILDING CQpE: 200B IG WITH WASHINGTON STATE AMENDMENTS I._OC4TI•: PARCEL NU ER: AccOUNT *MISER CONSTRICTION TYPE: QccUM4CY GROUP( &): ZONE; LOT TENANT SUITE; LARKING: ACM TUKWILA COMMERCE PARIS, sUILDIN0 B 12622 INTERUTAN AyE 5 TA LA 1UA 000400003 0004000030 V! Sf RINKLERED O R 0 U P ? p i OFFICE AND 51 W A K H O U S E /L =1 445,2S5 so Fr (10b5 ACRES) o im SF, (2,s0 SF OF OFFICE oRGINALVO NO ClilANOE REeVILp Dorm ALAS, PIN PILE SUPPORT STRUCTURE AND SLAB, legritAcE $IpEUJ4LK,1 PLACE EXISTIN4 STOREFRONT AND . fFIT AS REQUIRED AND PER PLANS. RapiAca EXIGTIKIROIRMK NO CNA *E5 arHaiwag REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 28 2012 City o1jukwila BUILDING 12iIVISION L,EWis G C. G M 31 E IEO N 01.44.10 E 199.11 FT FROM I-1US AT END CU E ON CENT LN 9UWAMI$HOREMTON ,JUNCTION RD SD 1405 15gINCa , F'i4'IRo>< 1 o4 ) PT N 4Nt7 440 FT W OIL V4 CQR 5gT SECS 14 4 1 -23 -4 TI.I N 4e-24-�� IJJ 2535 FT TN N 49•A0 -0+ E 5 FT TO TRUE E EG TI-I $ 84.4o-30 E Mut PT TF{ N ` +22*30 E 6,0 .36 FT T14 N 01-51-30 W X43 FT To LEFT BANK OF M441411614 t I VE ? OE INO I'LL'" E$OLINDRY OF LEWIS D Q TN 1 WLY ,ALO SID pANI OP RIVER TO ITT N 00.30-40 W oF TRUE 15EG TI-4 5 I -3S -4p E TO TIRL4E G ALSO POPS P c r W cpP AgooyE DESGRIBED .ANC SLY 160 PT AND A 16 PT 5TPRIP ADJ AND PAM_ TO ELY LN OF RAO P ELEC CO FOR hiOINT RD TGIWJ LOT 41 QF PLAT c ftIvEIRSIIPE INT R IR 3AN TPA A 8UILOINct IS SURRoUNDECt O YARDS, PER SECTION WI, 5013 SOILDI■Cs AREA I6 UNLIMITED IN GROUP B J1 OR 6 OCCUPANCIES 10-1EM SPRINKLED. 08F)41,0Tg_PAR.:PIIT SPRINKLER RECEIVED CITY OF T ik !m NOV 1 5 2012 PERMIT CENTER e!•thrtnainAzsrlifee enei Qe Fline` b; Af11. IearwlP►Awi AAA 6 in t:•. eV?. .1....11. •AnAA e„•■■•.•. f+.•■•,. w -. DESCRIPTION REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 28 2012 City of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION c=:=3V=p EXISTING WALLS, DOORS, CIELING AND LIGHTING HAVE BEEN REMOVED DUE TO SETTLEMENT OF BUILDI 10 PREVIOUS DEMO DUE TO SfT71..FMENT SCALE: 1 /8" NORTH REMOVE EXTERIOR SLAB AND PORTION OF SIDEWALK TO LEVEL WIN SLAB, SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDING AT 1 /4" _ 1' -0" REMOVE EXISTING: CONCRETE SLAB AND TOPPING SLABS TO EXPOSED DIRT. ► PROPOSED NEW DEMO PLAN SCALE: 1 /8" ; 1i -011 NORTH DRIVE IN DOOR DOCK HIGH DOOR RECEIVED CITY OF TLJKv'!i,, NOV 15 2012 3 lp a w } lY cict2 U) Q Q3 Z *' * 03 CO (1f 0) • rc4 014 841 U W I c:4 0 E-4 a Ix WASHING WASHINGTON T — 1 C:1Documents and SettingslAll Users\Documents\CAD1200210225 RREEF \Tukwila Commerce Park\Building 13112822 SETTLEMENT\CD'S112822 Interurban Ave SETTLEMENT.dwo, T. • NEW INSULATED STOREFRONT, THERMAL 5ROKEN ALUMINUM FRAMES, INSULATED GLAZING (U = 0.40,SHGC: C.40). 56I4 ltf" 1 FO IC FOR1ER OFF E NOW OPEN SPACE WAREHOUSE SEMI HEATED SPACES, MAX S BTUH PER SF THERMOSTAT AT EXISTING HEATERS, MAX 44 DEG. NEW SHEET VINYL FLOORING AND COVED SHEET VINYL BASE UP 6" n 0 n c NEW SHEET VINYL FLOORING AND COVED SHEET VINYL B SE UP 6" EXISTING FULL HEIGHT DEMISING WALLS, PATCH AND REPAIR AS REQUI�D 2O' -211 31' -211 NEW FINI54WD FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" : I'_O" NORTH FUTURE INTERIOR FINISHES- -�..,� CAULK STEEL SUPPORT FRAM14 OR EXISTING STUD W/ R -21 INSULATION VAPOR BARKER I/2" PLYWOOD AND CEDAR SIDIirG OVER BUILDING PAPER TO MATCH EXISTNG SOFFITS OF. VERIFY MAW. EXISTING \--1/2" GYP. SHTG, W/ 3/4" RIGID INSULATION FOR DRYVIT FMi5H. N96TALL PER 11G. RECOMMENDATIONS AND N'1CLUDES ALL ACCESSORIES. UII 1"I WINDOW FRAME OUPPORT HEAD e DIRYVJT SCALE: 1 -1/2" • 1' -0" SECTION I" INSUL.ATEp GLAZN4 IN ALUMINUM THIEWIAL WEAK FRAME (LEATHER ! ! f STOP ALUMINUM DOOR I!U INSULA #4PETY GLAZING $TOREFRONT DoQR + ; ( JAS SM) SCALE:( -1/2" 1' -0" SECTION INSULATED WITH SAFETY GLASS, STOREFRONT ALUMINUM THRESHOLD MAX 1/2" W/ NEOPRENE EXPANSION JOINT NEW CONC. SLAB W/ THICKENED EDGE • QFENINGS ($EE STRUCTURAL) NEW 4" CONC. SIDEWALK W/ WIRE MESH IN CENTER AND EXPANSION JOINT ELC) F, RNT DOOR iimifeS4,40 SECTION POUR NEW 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK OYER COMPACTED SOILS, EXPANSION JOINT AT pUILDING EDGE, AND TIE INTO EXISTING SIDEWALKS, SLOPE AWAY FROM THE BUILDING AT 1/4" PER FOOT ... NEW INSULATED STOREFRONT, THERMAL BROKEN ALUMINUM FRAMES, INSULATED GLAZING REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 2 8 2012 City of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION • •• .1, • • • • • • • 1 —:. . 0 0 NEW 6" 4NCRETE SLAB WITH REINFORCING OVER COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL, WITH 4 MIL VAPOR BARRIER 20' -211 31' 11 NORRTH C===vr---1 PROPOSED. NUJ RECON$TRUCTION SCALE: V8" = 11-0" tigni SEE STRUCTURAL. DRAWINGS FOR PIN PILES AT COLUMNS, PERIMETER AND SLAB AREAS DRIVE N DOOR DOCK NIGH DOOR RECEIVED CITY OFTUKk IL NOV 1 5 2012 PERMIT IT CElNTE R N 4 n CO W z 0 9 1 DESCRIPTION WASHINGTON C:\Documents and Settings\A1l Users \Documents \CAD\200210225 RREEF\Tukwiia Commerce ParklBullding B112822 SETTLEMENTICD 'S112622Ilnterurban Ave SETTLEMENT.dwg, General Structural Notes (THE FOLLOWING APPLY UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS.) CRITERIA: 1. ALL MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC), 2009 EDITION. 2. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN EVALUATED AND /OR STRENGTHENED TO CONFORM TO PRESENT EARTHQUAKE CODE REQUIREMENTS AS PART OF THIS PROJECT SCOPE. 3. DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA.. ROOF LIVE LOAD 25 PSF (IS = 1.0) FLOOR LIVE LOAD 50 PSF 4. STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR COMPATIBILITY AND SHALL NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ALL DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING DIMENSIONS, MEMBER SIZES AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK. ALL DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED AS GUIDELINES ONLY AND MUST BE VERIFIED. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE BASED EITHER ON SITE OBSERVATION, ORIGINAL DRAWINGS OR WERE ASSUMED BASED ON EXPECTED CONDITIONS. IF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS DO NOT CLOSELY MATCH THE CONDMONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS, OR IF THE EXISTING MATERIALS ARE OF QUESTIONABLE OR SUBSTANDARD QUALITY, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY BRACING FOR THE STRUCTURE AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS UNTIL ALL FINAL CONNECTIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND THE METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES OR PROCEDURES REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION OF THE WORK. 8. CONTRACTOR- INITIATED CHANGES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO FABRICATION OR CONSTRUCTION. CHANGES SHOWN ON SHOP DRAWINGS ONLY WILL NOT SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT. 9. DRAWINGS INDICATE GENERAL AND TYPICAL DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION. WHERE CONDITIONS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY INDICATED BUT ARE OF SIMILAR CHARACTER TO DETAILS SHOWN, SIMILAR DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE USED, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECT AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. 10. SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF THESE ITEMS. 11. SHOP DRAWING REVIEW: DIMENSIONS AND QUANTITIES ARE NOT REVIEWED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD, AND THEREFORE MUST BE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND STAMP DRAWINGS PRIOR TO REVIEW BY ENGINEER OF RECORD. SUBMITTALS SHALL INCLUDE A REPRODUCIBLE AND ONE COPY. THE REPRODUCIBLE SHALL BE MARKED AND RETURNED. SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS PROCESSED BY THE ENGINEER ARE NOT CHANGE ORDERS. THE PURPOSE OF SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS BY THE CONTRACTOR IS TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE ENGINEER THAT THE CONTRACTOR UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN CONCEPT BY INDICATING WHICH MATERIAL IS INTENDED TO BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED AND BY DETAILING THE INTENDED FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION METHODS. IF DEVIATIONS, DISCREPANCIES, OR CONFLICTS BETWEEN SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS AND THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ARE DISCOVERED EITHER PRIOR TO OR AFTER SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS ARE PROCESSED BY THE ENGINEER, THE DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL CONTROL AND SHALL BE FOLLOWED. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: 12. STATEMENT OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS STRUCTURAL ITEMS (SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY D): DEFINITIONS: THE SEISMIC LATERAL FORCE- RESISTING SYSTEMS FOR THIS STRUCTURE CONSISTS PRIMARILY OF THE EXISTING CONCRETE WALL PANELS AND THE WOOD FRAMED ROOF DIAPHRAGMS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND TESTING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE OWNER APPOINTED INSPECTION AGENCY IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 17 OF THE IBC WITH REPORTS PER IBC SECTION 1704.1.2 SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER, ARCHITECT, STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, CONTRACTOR, AND BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR EACH DAY SPECIAL INSPECTIONS OR TESTING IS PERFORMED. THESE INSPECTIONS ARE IN ADDITION TO THE INSPECTIONS SPECIFIED IN IBC SECTION 110. SEE TABLES BELOW FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. STRUCTURAL ITEMS PIN PILES CONCRETE BATCH PLANT INSPECTION REINFORCING PLACEMENT ANCHOR BOLT PLACEMENT CONCRETE PLACEMENT** CURING & FORMWORK PROCEDURES SPECIAL INSPECTION FREQUENCY IBC REFERENCE CONTINUOUS CONTINUOUS DURING MIXING PERIODIC AND PRIOR TO ALL POURS PERIODIC AND PRIOR TO ALL TABLE 1704.4, ITEM 3 CONCRETE POURS CONTINUOUS PERIODIC AS REQUIRED PER 1704.8 AS REQUIRED PER 1704.4.2 TABLE 1704.4 ITEM 1 TABLE 1704.4 ITEMS 5, 6, & 7 TABLE 1704.4 ITEMS 8. 11 & 12 * EXCEPTIONS 1 THRU 4 PER IBC SECTION 1704.4 SHALL NOT APPLY TO CONCRETE WORK ON THIS PROJECT. ** FREQUENCY OF CONCRETE LABORATORY TESTING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 318 -08 SECTION 5.6.2. STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION PER IBC SECTION 1710 IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THIS STRUCTURE. GEOTECHNICAL 13. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN "FORENSIC GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT - TUKWILA COMMERCE PARK - 12622 INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH - TUKWILA, WASHINGTON ", PREPARED BY GOLDER ASSOCIATES, DATED AUGUST 9, 2012.FOUNDATION NOTES: ALLOWABLE AXIAL CAPACITY - 4" DIAMETER PIN PILE 10,000 POUNDS CONCRETE: 14. CONCRETE SHALL BE MIXED, PROPORTIONED, CONVEYED AND PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH IBC SECTION 1905 AND ACI 301. CONCRETE SHALL ATTAIN A 28 -DAY STRENGTH OF f'c = 4,000 PSI AND MIX SHALL CONTAIN NOT LESS THAN 6 -1/2 SACKS OF CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL PER CUBIC YARD AND SHALL BE PROPORTIONED TO PRODUCE A SLUMP OF 5" OR LESS. MAXIMUM WATER- CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL RATIO FOR INTERIOR SLABS SHALL BE BETWEEN 0.40 AND 0.44. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE EXPOSURE CLASSES FO, SO, P0, CO PER ACI 308 -08 TABLE 4.2.1 EXCEPT AS NOTED BELOW. ALL CONCRETE EXPOSED TO EARTH (FOUNDATIONS, ETC.) FO, SO, P0, C1 AU CONCRETE EXPOSED TO WEATHER F1, SO, P0, C1 15. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615, GRADE 60, fy = 60,000 PSI. WELDED WIRE FABRIC SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A185. 16. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE DETAILED (INCLUDING HOOKS AND BENDS) IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 315 -99 AND 318 -05. LAP ALL CONTINUOUS REINFORCEMENT ( #5 AND SMALLER) 40 BAR DIAMETERS OR 2' -0" MINIMUM. LAPS OF LARGER BARS SHALL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 318 -05, CLASS B. 17. CONCRETE PROTECTION (COVER) FOR REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: FOOTINGS AND OTHER UNFORMED SURFACES CAST AGAINST AND PERMANENTLY EXPOSED TO EARTH ... 3" 18. NON- SHRINK GROUT SHALL BE FURNISHED BY AN APPROVED MANUFACTURER AND SHALL BE MIXED AND PLACED IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. GROUT STRENGTH SHALL BE AT LEAST EQUAL TO THE MATERIAL ON WHICH IT IS PLACED (6,000 PSI MINIMUM). STRUCTURAL STEEL 19. STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: TYPE OF MEMBER A. PIN PILES B. ANCHOR BOLTS OR RODS ASTM SPECIFICATION Fy A53, GRADE B F1554 (GRADE 36) 36 KSI 36 KSI 20. DIMENSIONAL TOLERANCE FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL MEMBERS SHALL BE PER THE AISC CODE OF STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STEEL BUILDINGS AND BRIDGES, SECTION 6.4 AND ASTM SPECIFICATION A6. 3' -0" 8' -0" MAX. MAX. 17/S1.1 1 6/S1.1 V TYP. 0 7/S1.1 r L 1 J r•1 L r L r•1 LJ L J 0 I 00 1 r J LJ 6" CONCRETE SLAB W/ #5 0 12 "oc EA. WAY MID -DEPTH (3" CLR. FROM BOTTOM) 18/S1.1 rot LJ _ r 1 r1 I L.J 13/51.1 LJ TYP. E 1 L r,1 LJ 111 LTJ 20/51.1 LJ L r•1 LJ J r•-I LJ r1 LJ r1 LJ Lt1 r•1 LJ L, 18/S1.1 r Ne- SIM. rot L1 3' -0" I01 LJ r L r L r L 1 J 1 J T J J MAX. J 18.S1.1 SPACES 0 8' -0 "oc MAX W L J 18/S1.1 1 I-- SAWCUT DaSk 6 COLUMN' u Plan PM ls 1 0" G. SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 10 SLAB REINF. PER PLAN 0 CAP I. 1 /2 "x6 "x0'-6" 18 18 (2) #4 x �%- EA. WAY III- L,I�I,�11- SCALE: 1/8 " =1' -0" 2'- 0 "x2' -0" THICKENED SLAB AT EA. PILE Q 1' -0" 1' -0" b,1 1/4 4 "0 STD. PIPE COLUMN Typical Pile -Slab Attachment 13 SLAB PER PLAN 24 #4 x -1 0 24 "oc 11 111=111=1 11 -1 11, -1 I I -I I (1) #4 CONT. TOP & BOT. CURTAIN WALL PER ARCH'L FINISHED GRADE (SIDEWALK WHERE OCCURS) 6" (0 SCALE: 1/8 " =11_0. Exterior Slab Edge Detail 16 SLAB PER PLAN • • • SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0* EXIST. PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANEL Interior Slab Edge Detail 17 #4 x 18 SLAB PER PLAN 0 18 "oc EX. SLAB -ON -GRADE (2) #4 CONT. BOT. SCALE: 1/8"=1' -0" 4" MIN. Interior Slab Edge Detail 18 REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE APPROVED NOV 2 8 2012 City of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION ANCHOR BOLTS TO MATCH EXIST. PLACE SLAB OVER PILE CAP AS SHOWN, THICKEN SLAB OVER PILE CAP AS NEEDED SLAB & REINF. PER PLAN CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY SHORING AS REQ'D TO INSTALL PILE CAP (6) #5 EA. WAY AS SHOWN 5' -6" SQ. PILE CAP 11 11 (4) 4 '0 PIPE PILES 0 4' -6 "oc (5) PILES TOTAL SCALE: 1 /8 " =1' -0" • • 6" EXIST. COLUMN & BASE R 3/4' GROUT d • • (4) #5 x 11 EA. WAY • • T 2' -3" 2' -3" td- 1 " NOTE: VERIFY PILE SPACING W/ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER (1) PILE AT CENTER OF CAP VERIFY TOP OF SLAB ELEVATION IN FIELD RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 1 5 2012 PERMIT CENTER Pile Cap Detail 20 C: \Users\ Laura \Documents \Cad_2012 \CCC_Tukwila Commerce Park -Bldg B \TCP- B- S1.1.dwg, 11/13/2012 8:43:50 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3 CASCADE CREST CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. View Road O) 0 .6 C• .4 C N 70,1 X0• 0 Mme 1 nqN -din CO Ce+' Y E Q a)� c O O W �v'U p O Cr Q W -I--' 0 c-° O cr W � Li ✓ 1- W ti a; o O Q p-) a � _ 0 Q) 0 - N CO ~ N SHEET TITLE : GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES, PLANS & DETAILS PROJECT NO. C12 -026 PERMIT SET SHEET NO. 1 OF : 1 REVISIONS : LMH DATE : 11/9/2o12 COMPUTER FILE : SCALE : NOTED w z<1<<k< SHEET NO. 1 OF : 1 DRAWN BY : LMH DATE : 11/9/2o12 COMPUTER FILE : SCALE : NOTED SHEET NO. 1 OF : 1