DOCSLIB.ORG

Montlake Cut Tunnel Expert Review Panel Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Montlake Cut Tunnel Expert Review Panel Report SR 520 Project Montlake Cut Tunnel Expert Review Panel Report EXPERT REVIEW PANEL MEMBERS: John Reilly, P.E., C.P.Eng. John Reilly Associates International Brenda Böhlke, Ph.D., P.G.. Myers Böhlke Enterprise Vojtech Gall, Ph.D., P.E. Gall Zeidler Consultants Lars Christian Ingerslev, P.E. PB Red Robinson, C.E.G., R.G. Shannon and Wilson Gregg Korbin, Ph.D. Geotechnical Consultant John Townsend, C.Eng. Hatch-Mott MacDonald José Carrasquero-Verde, Principal Scientist Herrera Environmental Consultants Submitted to the Washington State Department of Transportation July 17, 2008 SR520, Montlake Cut, Tunnel Alternatives, Expert Review Panel Report July 17h, 2008 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................5 1.1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................5 1.2. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................5 1.3. TUNNELING METHODS CONSIDERED......................................................................................................5 Figure 1 - Immersed Tunnel Construction (General) ......................................................................................6 Figure 2 - Tunnel Boring Machine (Elbe River, Hamburg) ............................................................................6 Figure 3 – Sequential Excavation Method (Beacon Hill Tunnel, Seattle).......................................................7 1.4. GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS .........................................................................................................7 1.5. ALIGNMENTS CONSIDERED.....................................................................................................................8 Figure 4 - Plan of tunnel alignments A, B, C and D considered .....................................................................8 1.6. METHODS, LENGTHS, GRADES AND MINIMUM SOIL COVER..................................................................9 Table A – Alignments, Lengths, Road Grades and Minimum Cover..............................................................9 Alignment B - Modified........................................................................................................................9 Table A-1 – Alignment B Modified................................................................................................................9 Plan of Alignment B Modified......................................................................................................................10 1.7. ACCEPTABLE RAMP GRADES ................................................................................................................10 Table B – WSDOT Design Manual, Maximum Grades for Ramps ..............................................................10 1.8. FINDINGS REGARDING THE TUNNELING METHODS CONSIDERED..........................................................11 2. REPORT, SR520 EXPERT PANEL, MONTLAKE CUT TUNNELS .............................................12 2.1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND, THE COWI REPORT....................................................................12 Figure 5 – General arrangement of the COWI Immersed Tunnel Proposal ..................................................12 This Document...................................................................................................................................12 Project Context..................................................................................................................................12 Expert Review Panel, convening and objectives ...............................................................................13 Input from the Project and Mediation Panel Members .....................................................................13 Cost of the alternatives not addressed...............................................................................................14 2.2. EXPERT REVIEW PANEL - WORKSHOP ..................................................................................................14 Considerations...................................................................................................................................14 2.3. PROPOSED MONTLAKE CUT TUNNEL – PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................14 Tunnel - configuration, coordination and considerations.................................................................14 SR 520 Project Schedule....................................................................................................................15 2.4. INITIAL DELIBERATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS..................................................................................15 3. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................16 3.1. BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................................................16 3.2. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ...............................................................................................................17 Fisheries and Fish Habitat ................................................................................................................17 Chinook Salmon.............................................................................................................................18 Steelhead ........................................................................................................................................18 Coastal/Puget Sound Bull Trout.....................................................................................................19 Wetlands and Riparian Vegetation....................................................................................................19 Parks and Recreation ........................................................................................................................20 Historic and Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................20 3.3. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS...................................................................................................................21 Table C - Comparative Environmental Effects of Tunnel Construction Methods ........................................21 Table D – Salmonoids Migration Timing for ESA Listed Species in Montlake Cut ....................................24 4. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS NEAR MONTLAKE CUT........................................................24 Background........................................................................................................................................24 Ground conditions .............................................................................................................................24 Subsurface Data - Cautions...............................................................................................................25 Alignment and depth considerations .................................................................................................25 5. ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................25 SR520, Montlake Cut, Tunnel Alternatives, Expert Review Panel Report July 17h, 2008 Page 3 5.1. ALIGNMENTS CONSIDERED ..................................................................................................................26 Figure 6 - Plan of tunnel alignments considered...........................................................................................27 Considerations regarding the Alignments .........................................................................................28 5.2. METHODS, LENGTHS, GRADES AND MINIMUM SOIL COVER................................................................28 Table E – Alignment, Method, Lengths, Road Grades and Minimum Cover ...............................................28 Table E-1 – Alignment B Modified ..............................................................................................................29 5.3. ACCEPTABLE RAMP GRADES ................................................................................................................29 Table F – WSDOT Design Manual, Maximum Grades for Ramps...............................................................29 6. TUNNELING METHODS CONSIDERED.........................................................................................30 Figure 7, Immersed Tunnel Construction (General) .....................................................................................30 Figure 8 - Tunnel Boring Machine (Elbe River, Hamburg) ..........................................................................30 Figure 9 – Sequential Excavation Method (Beacon Hill Tunnel, Seattle).....................................................31 Discussion..........................................................................................................................................31 7. SPECIFICS OF EACH CONSTRUCTION METHOD .....................................................................32 7.1. SEQUENTIAL EXCAVATION METHOD (SEM) TUNNELING....................................................................32 General
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Heavy Equipment
    Heavy Equipment Code: 5913 Version: 01 Copyright © 2007. All Rights Reserved. Heavy Equipment General Assessment Information Blueprint Contents General Assessment Information Sample Written Items Written Assessment Information Performance Assessment Information Specic Competencies Covered in the Test Sample Performance Job Test Type: The Heavy Equipment assessment is included in NOCTI’s Teacher assessment battery. Teacher assessments measure an individual’s technical knowledge and skills in a proctored prociency examination format. These assessments are used in a large number of states as part of the teacher licensing and/or certication process, assessing competency in all aspects of a particular industry. NOCTI Teacher tests typically oer both a written and performance component that must be administered at a NOCTI-approved Area Test Center. Teacher assessments can be delivered in an online or paper/pencil format. Revision Team: The assessment content is based on input from subject matter experts representing the state of Pennsylvania. CIP Code 49.0202- Construction/Heavy Career Cluster 2- 47-2073.00- Operating Engineers Equipment/Earthmoving Architecture and Construction and Other Construction Equipment Operation Equipment Operators NOCTI Teacher Assessment Page 2 of 12 Heavy Equipment Wrien Assessment NOCTI written assessments consist of questions to measure an individual’s factual theoretical knowledge. Administration Time: 3 hours Number of Questions: 232 Number of Sessions: This assessment may be administered in one, two, or three
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 82 Tuesday, No. 33 February 21, 2017 Pages 11131–11298
    Vol. 82 Tuesday, No. 33 February 21, 2017 Pages 11131–11298 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Sep 11 2014 18:37 Feb 17, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\21FEWS.LOC 21FEWS sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with FRONT MATTER WS II Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 21, 2017 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Email [email protected] Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Phone 202–741–6000 issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal
    Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal October 2017 Alternative Formats Available Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Prepared for: King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division Submitted by: Timothy Clark, Wendy Eash-Loucks, and Dean Wilson King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank for following people for their contributions to this report: Staff at the King County Environmental Laboratory for field and analytical support. Dawn Duddleson (King County) for her help in completing the literature review. The King County Water Quality and Quantity Group for their insights, especially Sally Abella for her thorough and thoughtful review. Lauran Warner, Frederick Goetz, and Kent Easthouse of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Judy Pickar (project manager), Dean Wilson (science lead), and King County project team members (Bob Bernhard, Mark Buscher, Timothy Clark, Betsy Cooper, Wendy Eash‐Loucks, Elizabeth Gaskill, Martin Grassley, Erica Jacobs, Susan Kaufman‐Una, Lester, Deborah, Kate Macneale, Chris Magan, Bruce Nairn, Sarah Ogier, Erika Peterson, John Phillips, Cathie Scott, Jim Simmonds, Jeff Stern, Dave White, Mary Wohleb, and Olivia Wright). The project’s Science and Technical Review Team members—Virgil Adderley, Mike Brett, Jay Davis, Ken Schiff, and John Stark—for guidance and review of this report. Citation King County. 2017. Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal.
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Salish Culture – 70 Min
    Lesson 2: The Big Picture: Coast Salish Culture – 70 min. Short Description: By analyzing and comparing maps and photographs from the Renton History Museum’s collection and other sources, students will gain a better understanding of Coast Salish daily life through mini lessons. These activities will include information on both life during the time of first contact with White explorers and settlers and current cultural traditions. Supported Standards: ● 3rd Grade Social Studies ○ 3.1.1 Understands and applies how maps and globes are used to display the regions of North America in the past and present. ○ 3.2.2 Understands the cultural universals of place, time, family life, economics, communication, arts, recreation, food, clothing, shelter, transportation, government, and education. ○ 4.2.2 Understands how contributions made by various cultural groups have shaped the history of the community and the world. Learning Objectives -- Students will be able to: ● Inspect maps to understand where Native Americans lived at the time of contact in Washington State. ● Describe elements of traditional daily life of Coast Salish peoples; including food, shelter, and transportation. ● Categorize similarities and differences between Coast Salish pre-contact culture and modern Coast Salish culture. Time: 70 min. Materials: ● Laminated and bound set of Photo Set 2 Warm-Up 15 min.: Ask students to get out a piece of paper and fold it into thirds. 5 min.: In the top third, ask them to write: What do you already know about Native Americans (from the artifacts you looked at in the last lesson)? Give them 5 min to brainstorm. 5 min.: In the middle, ask them to write: What do you still want to know? Give them 5min to brainstorm answers to this.
    [Show full text]
  • Slope Stability
    Slope stability Causes of instability Mechanics of slopes Analysis of translational slip Analysis of rotational slip Site investigation Remedial measures Soil or rock masses with sloping surfaces, either natural or constructed, are subject to forces associated with gravity and seepage which cause instability. Resistance to failure is derived mainly from a combination of slope geometry and the shear strength of the soil or rock itself. The different types of instability can be characterised by spatial considerations, particle size and speed of movement. One of the simplest methods of classification is that proposed by Varnes in 1978: I. Falls II. Topples III. Slides rotational and translational IV. Lateral spreads V. Flows in Bedrock and in Soils VI. Complex Falls In which the mass in motion travels most of the distance through the air. Falls include: free fall, movement by leaps and bounds, and rolling of fragments of bedrock or soil. Topples Toppling occurs as movement due to forces that cause an over-turning moment about a pivot point below the centre of gravity of the unit. If unchecked it will result in a fall or slide. The potential for toppling can be identified using the graphical construction on a stereonet. The stereonet allows the spatial distribution of discontinuities to be presented alongside the slope surface. On a stereoplot toppling is indicated by a concentration of poles "in front" of the slope's great circle and within ± 30º of the direction of true dip. Lateral Spreads Lateral spreads are disturbed lateral extension movements in a fractured mass. Two subgroups are identified: A.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Impact Study Proposed GA 53 at New Cut Road Mixed-Use Development Town of Braselton, Jackson County, Georgia
    Traffic Impact Study Proposed GA 53 at New Cut Road Mixed-Use Development Town of Braselton, Jackson County, Georgia May 7, 2020 MARC R. ACAMPORA, PE, LLC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Traffic Impact Study Proposed GA 53 at New Cut Road Mixed-Use Development Town of Braselton, Jackson County, Georgia study prepared for: Mahaffey Pickens Tucker, LLP 1550 North Brown Road, Suite 125 Lawrenceville, Georgia 30043 May 7, 2020 MARC R. ACAMPORA, PE, LLC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 858 Myrtle Street, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30308 phone: (678) 637-1763 e-mail: [email protected] Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 2 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ROADWAYS ............................................................................................................................................. 2 PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ............................................................................................................................. 2 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Categorization in Motion: Duwamish Identity, 1792-1934 Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/75s2k9tm Author O'Malley, Corey Susan Publication Date 2017 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Categorization in Motion: Duwamish Identity, 1792-1934 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology by Corey Susan O’Malley 2017 © Copyright by Corey Susan O’Malley 2017 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Categorization in Motion: Duwamish Identity, 1792-1934 by Corey Susan O’Malley Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology University of California, Los Angeles, 2017 Professor Rebecca J. Emigh, Chair This study uses narrative analysis to examine how racial, ethnic, and national schemas were mobilized by social actors to categorize Duwamish identity from the eighteenth century to the early twentieth century. In so doing, it evaluates how the classificatory schemas of non- indigenous actors, particularly the state, resembled or diverged from Duwamish self- understandings and the relationship between these classificatory schemes and the configuration of political power in the Puget Sound region of Washington state. The earliest classificatory schema applied to the Duwamish consisted of a racial category “Indian” attached to an ethno- national category of “tribe,” which was honed during the treaty period. After the “Indian wars” of 1855-56, this ethno-national orientation was supplanted by a highly racialized schema aimed at the political exclusion of “Indians”. By the twentieth century, however, formalized racialized exclusion was replaced by a racialized ethno-national schema by which tribal membership was defined using a racial logic of blood purity.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Earthwork
    Topic #625-000-007 Plans Preparation Manual, Volume 1 January 1, 2016 Chapter 3 Earthwork 3.1 General ...................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Classification of Soils ................................................................. 3-3 3.3 Cross Sections - A Design Tool .................................................. 3-3 3.4 Earthwork Quantities .................................................................. 3-4 3.4.1 Method of Calculating ................................................. 3-4 3.4.2 Earthwork Tabulation ................................................. 3-4 3.4.3 Earthwork Accuracy ................................................... 3-5 3.4.3.1 Projects with Horizontal and Vertical Controlled Cross Sections .......................... 3-5 3.4.3.2 Projects without Horizontal and Vertical Controlled Cross Sections .......................... 3-6 3.4.4 Variation in Quantities ................................................ 3-6 3.5 Earthwork Items of Payment ...................................................... 3-7 3.5.1 Guidelines for Selecting Earthwork Pay Items ............ 3-7 3.5.2 Regular Excavation .................................................... 3-8 3.5.3 Embankment .............................................................. 3-9 3.5.4 Subsoil Excavation ..................................................... 3-9 3.5.5 Lateral Ditch Excavation ............................................. 3-9 3.5.6 Channel Excavation ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamentals of Site Grading Design
    188.pdf A SunCam online continuing education course Fundamentals of Site Grading Design by Joshua A. Tiner, P.E. 188.pdf Fundamentals of Site Grading A SunCam online continuing education course Table of Contents A. Introduction B. Basics • Background: • Existing Conditions: • Contour Lines: • Spot Elevations / Spot Grades: • Other Standard Annotations: • Slope • Plan Setup • Limit of Disturbance / Transition between Existing and New Grades • The Inverse Slope/Contour Calculation Method C. Design Parameters and Other Limitations • Design Parameters • Positive Drainage • Rules of Thumb o Maximum Access Drive Slope: 8% o Maximum Parking Lot Slope: 5% o Maximum Slope in Maintainable Grassed Landscaped Areas 3:1 o Maximum Slope in Stabilized Landscaped Areas 2:1 o Slopes exceeding 2:1 o Minimum Slope of Asphalt: 1.5% o Minimum Slope of Concrete: 0.75% o Minimum Slope of Concrete Curb: 0.75% o Loading Dock grading: 2.0% for 60’ • ADA Requirements • Cut-Fill Analysis • Rock Ledge walls D. Other Grading Features • Berms • Swales • Ridge Lines • Retaining Walls E. Problem Areas and Other Locations of Importance • Landscaped Islands and Peninsulas • ADA Parking Spaces • Longitudinal Islands with Sidewalks • Flush Ramps • Drainage Outfall Location • Setting the Finished Floor • Property Line grading F. Summary and Conclusion www.SunCam.com Copyright 2014 Joshua A. Tiner, P.E. Page 2 of 24 188.pdf Fundamentals of Site Grading A SunCam online continuing education course A. Introduction This course is developed to identify the fundamentals of site grading design to those who are not experienced with site grading design, as well as a refresher to anyone who has worked in Civil Engineering and/or Land Development.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Lake Union & Ship Canal 34-43.P65
    Seattle’s Aquatic Environments: Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal System Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal System The following write-up relies heavily on the Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal Subarea Chapter by Douglas Houck (with substantial contributions by Deb Lester and Scott Brewer) of the Draft Reconnaissance Assessment – Habitat Factors that Contribute to the Decline of Salmonids by the Greater Lake Washington Technical Committee (2001). Overview Lake Union and the Lake Washington Ship Canal Washington to Puget Sound. are located in the city of Seattle and combine to In 1916, the 8.6 mile long Lake Washington Ship serve as the primary outlet of Lake Washington Canal was completed, which included the construc- into Puget Sound. In 1916, drainage from Lake tion of the Montlake Cut, the Fremont Cut, and Washington into the Black River was blocked and the Chittenden Locks. The new Ship Canal the Ship Canal and Hiram M. Chittenden Locks provided navigable passage for commercial vessels, were constructed to allow navigable passage barges, and recreational boaters between Lake between Puget Sound, Lake Union, and Lake Washington and Puget Sound. Washington and provide better flushing in Lake Washington. In a 1943 report published by the Washington State Pollution Commission, 45 industries were listed The Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal adjoining Lake Union (Tomlinson 1977). Along system is comprised of the Montlake Cut, Portage with the marinas, houseboats, and commercial Bay, Lake Union, the Fremont Cut, and the Salmon Bay Waterway. The Montlake Cut is an approximately 100-foot wide channel with con- crete bulkheads extending along the length of the channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Design Commission #2 Brief
    SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C and Bridge Replacement Project SEATTLE DESIGN COMMISSION #2 BRIEF SR 520 Project Background The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is redeveloping the Seattle segment of the State Route (SR) 520 corridor between I-5 and Lake Washington, known as the “Rest of the West”. The redevelopment will include new bridges that meet current seismic standards, updated roadways with HOV capacity and new pedestrian and bicycle facilities. In addition, the project will include a lid between Montlake Blvd E. and 24th Ave E, as well as a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over SR 520 to the east of the Montlake lid. The Montlake lid will include improved transit connections, open spaces, and enhanced non-motorized connections. Although the entire project is fully funded, funding for design and construction is allocated over several biennia. Construction is occurring in phases: • Phase 1- West Approach Bridge North • Phase 2- West Approach Bridge South and the mainline corridor spanning from Lake Washington to Montlake Blvd. This phase will include the design and construction of the Montlake lid, the Pedestrian Land Bridge, Lake Washington Boulevard and restoration of Foster Island. • Phase 3 - I-5 Express lane connection • Phase 4 - Includes replacement of the Portage Bay Bridge, a new Roanoke lid • Phase 5 – Includes a second bascule bridge over the Montlake Cut. In 2016, The Seattle Design Commission (SDC) provided recommendations to WSDOT on final design concepts related to Phase 2 of the corridor, which will be designed and constructed by a design-build contract. These SDC recommendations along with detailed input from city departments and the public assisted WSDOT in developing the 2018 Request for Proposals (RFP) for construction of Phase 2.
    [Show full text]
  • SR 520, I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project
    Historic Property at 2517 Lake Washington Blvd E, aka 2517 26th Ave. E, Seattle, WA 98112 Inventory Report for LOCATION SECTION Field Site No.: SR520W259 OAHP No.: Historic Name: Common Name: 2517 Lake Washington Blvd Property Address: 2517 Lake Washington Blvd E, aka 2517 26th Ave. E, Seattle, WA 98112 Comments: County Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/4 1/4 Sec Quadrangle Coordinate Reference King T25R04na 21 NE SEATTLE NORTH Zone: 10 Spatial Type: Point Acquisition Code: Digitized Source Sequence: 1 Easting: 552660 Northing: 5276769 Sequence: 1 Easting: 552660 Northing: 5276769 Tax No./Parcel No. Plat/Block/Lot Supplemental Map(s) Acreage 0260000045 Arensberg Add/0010/TR9 0.18 IDENTIFICATION SECTION Survey Name: SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project Field Recorder: Lori Durio Date Recorded: 9/14/2009 Owner's Name: Owner Address: City/State/Zip: Childs, Shawn M 2517 Lake Washington Blvd. E Seattle, WA 98112 Classification: Building Resource Status Comments Survey/Inventory Within a District? No Contributing? National Register Nomination: Local District: National Register District/Thematic Nomination Name: DESCRIPTION SECTION Historic Use: Domestic - Single Family House View of front elevation taken 2/29/2004 Current Use: Domestic - Single Family House Photography Neg. No (Roll No./Frame No.): N/A Plan: L-Shape No. of Stories: 1 Comments: Structural System: Platform Frame Changes to plan: Intact Changes to interior: Unknown Style Form/Type Changes to original cladding: Intact Changes to other: Ranch Single Family - Side Gable Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/23/2009 11:18:18 AM Historic Property at 2517 Lake Washington Blvd E, aka 2517 26th Ave.
    [Show full text]