Alaskan Way Viaduct Study

1 2

3 Appendix J 4 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 5 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project 6 Supplemental Draft EIS 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15

October 2010

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

1 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project

2 Supplemental Draft EIS 3 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 4 5 6 7 The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project is a joint effort between the Federal Highway 8 Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and 9 the City of Seattle. To conduct this project, WSDOT contracted with: 10 11 Parsons Brinckerhoff 12 999 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 13 Seattle, WA 98104 14 15 In association with: 16 Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Inc. 17 Entech Northwest, Inc. 18 EnviroIssues, Inc. 19 HDR Engineering, Inc. 20 Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 21 KPFF, Inc. 22 Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Inc. 23 Mimi Sheridan, AICP 24 Parametrix, Inc. 25 Power Engineers, Inc. 26 RoseWater GHD 27 Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 28 So-Deep, Inc. 29 Telvent Farradyne, Inc. 30 William P. Ott Construction Consultants

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials Supplemental Draft EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Introduction ...... 1 3 Explanation of Section 4(f) Terms ...... 4 4 Identification of Section 4(f) Resources ...... 5 5 Part A: Section 4(f) Resources Subject to Use by the Bored Tunnel Alternative ...... 9 6 Alaskan Way Viaduct ...... 11 7 Battery Street Tunnel ...... 12 8 Western Building ...... 13 9 Part B: Section 4(f) Resources Evaluated for Potential Direct or Constructive Use by the Bored 10 Tunnel Alternative ...... 15 11 Dearborn South Tideland Site ...... 19 12 One Yesler Building ...... 22 13 Polson Building ...... 24 14 Federal Office Building ...... 26 15 National Building ...... 28 16 Alexis Hotel/Globe Building ...... 30 17 Arlington South/Beebe Building ...... 32 18 Maritime Building ...... 34 19 Arlington North/Hotel Cecil ...... 36 20 Grand Pacific Hotel ...... 38 21 Colonial Hotel ...... 40 22 Two Bells Tavern ...... 42 23 Fire Station No. 2 ...... 44 24 Seattle Housing Authority ...... 46 25 Part C: Park and Recreation Lands and Historic Properties That Are Not Section 4(f) Resources 26 or Are Not Subject to Use by the Bored Tunnel Alternative ...... 49 27 Historic Properties ...... 49 28 Park and Recreational Lands ...... 69 29 Part D: Section 6(f) Evaluation ...... 79 30

31 LIST OF EXHIBITS 32 Exhibit 1. Section 4(f) Resources in Stadium Area ...... 6 33 Exhibit 2. Section 4(f) Resources in Downtown Area ...... 7 34 Exhibit 3. Section 4(f) Resources in Uptown Area ...... 8 35 Exhibit A-1. Historic Resources Subject to Use Under Section 4(f) ...... 10 36 Exhibit B-1. Historic Resources Evaluated for Potential Use Under Section 4(f) ...... 16 37 Exhibit B-2. Building Damage Classification (Boscardin and Cording) ...... 19 38 Exhibit C-1. Inventory of Buildings and Structures 40 or More Years Old Within the Area of Effects ...... 50 39 Exhibit C-2. Section 4(f) Status for Study Area Parks and Recreational Facilities ...... 70 40 41

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials i Supplemental Draft EIS

1 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 2 CFR Code of Federal Regulations 3 DAHP Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 4 EIS Environmental Impact Statement 5 FHWA Federal Highway Administration 6 NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 7 NRHP National Register of Historic Places 8 Program Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program 9 project Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project 10 PSHD Pioneer Square Historic District 11 SR State Route 12 WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation 13

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials ii Supplemental Draft EIS

1 INTRODUCTION

2 This document evaluates the Bored Tunnel Alternative, the new alternative under 3 consideration for replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct. This document and the 4 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project Supplemental Draft Environmental 5 Impact Statement (EIS) that it supports are intended to provide new information 6 and updated analyses to those presented in the March 2004 Alaskan Way Viaduct 7 and Seawall Replacement Project Draft EIS and the July 2006 Alaskan Way 8 Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Project Supplemental Draft EIS. The discipline 9 reports present the detailed technical analyses of existing conditions and 10 predicted effects of the Bored Tunnel Alternative. The results of these analyses 11 are presented in the main volume of the Supplemental Draft EIS. 12 The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the lead federal agency for this 13 project, primarily responsible for compliance with the National Environmental 14 Policy Act (NEPA) and other federal regulations, as well as distributing federal 15 funding. As part of the NEPA process, FHWA is also responsible for selecting the 16 preferred alternative. FHWA will base its decision on the information evaluated 17 during the environmental review process, including information contained within 18 the Supplemental Draft EIS and the subsequent Final EIS. FHWA will make its 19 decision independently. 20 The 2004 Draft EIS (WSDOT et al. 2004) evaluated five Build Alternatives and a 21 No Build Alternative. In December 2004, the project proponents identified the 22 Cut-and-Cover Tunnel Alternative as the preferred alternative and carried the 23 Rebuild Alternative forward for analysis as well. The 2006 Supplemental Draft 24 EIS (WSDOT et al. 2006) analyzed two alternatives—a refined Cut-and-Cover 25 Tunnel Alternative and a modified rebuild alternative called the Elevated 26 Structure Alternative. After continued public and agency debate, Governor 27 Gregoire called for an advisory vote to be held in the city of Seattle. The March 28 2007 ballot included an elevated alternative and a surface-tunnel hybrid 29 alternative. The citizens voted down both alternatives. 30 Following this election, the lead agencies committed to a collaborative process to 31 find a solution to replace the viaduct along Seattle’s central waterfront. This 32 Partnership Process is described in Appendix S, the Project History Report. In 33 January 2009, Governor Gregoire, King County Executive Sims, and Seattle 34 Mayor Nickels announced that the agencies had reached a consensus and 35 recommended replacing the aging viaduct with a bored tunnel. 36 The environmental review process for the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement 37 Project (the project) builds on the five Build Alternatives evaluated in the 2004 38 Draft EIS and the two Build Alternatives evaluated in the 2006 Supplemental

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 1 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Draft EIS. It also incorporates the work done during the Partnership Process. The 2 bored tunnel was not studied as part of the previous environmental review 3 process, and so it becomes the eighth alternative to be evaluated in detail. 4 The Bored Tunnel Alternative analyzed in this document and in the 5 Supplemental Draft EIS has been evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. 6 The Bored Tunnel Alternative includes replacing State Route (SR) 99 with a bored 7 tunnel and associated improvements, such as relocating utilities located on or 8 under the viaduct, removing the viaduct, decommissioning the Battery Street 9 Tunnel, and making improvements to the surface streets in the tunnel’s south and 10 north portal areas. 11 Improvements at the south portal area include full northbound and southbound 12 access to and from SR 99 between S. Royal Brougham Way and S. King Street. 13 Alaskan Way S. would be reconfigured with three lanes in each direction from the 14 south tunnel portal to S. King Street. Two options are being considered for new 15 cross streets that would intersect with Alaskan Way S.: 16 • New Dearborn Intersection – Alaskan Way S. would have one new 17 intersection and cross street at S. Dearborn Street. 18 • New Dearborn and Charles Intersections – Alaskan Way S. would have 19 two new intersections and cross streets at S. Charles Street and 20 S. Dearborn Street. 21 Improvements at the north portal area would include restoring Aurora Avenue 22 and providing full northbound and southbound access to and from SR 99 near 23 Harrison and Republican Streets. Aurora Avenue would be restored to grade 24 level between Denny Way and John Street, and John, Thomas, and Harrison 25 Streets would be connected as cross streets. This rebuilt section of Aurora 26 Avenue would connect to the new SR 99 alignment via the ramps at Harrison 27 Street. Mercer Street would be widened for two-way operation from Fifth 28 Avenue N. to Dexter Avenue N. Broad Street would be filled and closed between 29 Ninth Avenue N. and Taylor Avenue N. Two options are being considered for 30 Sixth Avenue N. and the southbound on-ramp: 31 • The Curved Sixth Avenue option proposes to build a new roadway that 32 would extend Sixth Avenue N. in a curved formation between Harrison 33 and Mercer Streets. The new roadway would have a signalized 34 intersection at Republican Street. 35 • The Straight Sixth Avenue option proposes to build a new roadway that 36 would extend Sixth Avenue N. from Harrison Street to Mercer Street in a 37 typical grid formation. The new roadway would have signalized 38 intersections at Republican and Mercer Streets.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 2 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 For these project elements, the analyses of effects and benefits have been 2 quantified with supporting studies, and the resulting data are found in the 3 discipline reports (Appendices A through R). These analyses focus on assessing 4 the Bored Tunnel Alternative’s potential effects for both construction and 5 operation, and consider appropriate mitigation measures that could be employed. 6 The Viaduct Closed (No Build Alternative) is also analyzed. 7 The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project is one of several independent 8 projects that improve safety and mobility along SR 99 and the Seattle waterfront 9 from the SODO area south of downtown to Seattle Center. Collectively, these 10 individual projects are often referred to as the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall 11 Replacement Program (the Program). This Supplemental Draft EIS evaluates the 12 cumulative effects of all projects in the Program; however, direct and indirect 13 environmental effects of these independent projects will be considered separately 14 in independent environmental documents. This collection of independent 15 projects is categorized into four groups: roadway elements, non-roadway 16 elements, projects under construction, and completed projects. 17 Roadway Elements 18 • Alaskan Way Surface Street Improvements 19 • Elliott/Western Connector 20 • Mercer West Project (Mercer Street improvements from Fifth Avenue N. to 21 Elliott Avenue) 22 Non-Roadway Elements 23 • First Avenue Streetcar Evaluation 24 • Transit Enhancements 25 • Elliott Bay Seawall Replacement Project 26 • Alaskan Way Promenade/Public Space 27 Projects Under Construction 28 • S. Holgate Street to S. King Street Viaduct Replacement 29 • Transportation Improvements to Minimize Traffic Effects During 30 Construction 31 Completed Projects 32 • SR 99 Yesler Way Vicinity Foundation Stabilization (Column Safety 33 Repairs) 34 • S. Massachusetts Street to Railroad Way S. Electrical Line Relocation 35 Project (Electrical Line Relocation Along the Viaduct’s South End)

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 3 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Explanation of Section 4(f) Terms 2 As discussed in the Supplemental Draft EIS Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation, Section 3 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act declares a national policy to 4 preserve, where possible, “the natural beauty of the countryside and public park 5 and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” The 6 regulations can be found in Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Part 774 7 (23 CFR Part 774). These Section 4(f) regulations were comprehensively updated 8 in March 2008 to reflect amendments to Section 4(f) that were made in August 9 2005 as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 10 Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). 11 Section 4(f) restricts the authority of the U.S. Department of Transportation (in 12 this case, FHWA) to approve transportation projects that “use” land from 13 Section 4(f) resources. As defined in Section 4(f) regulations, a “use” occurs when 14 a project permanently incorporates land from a Section 4(f) property, except in 15 certain circumstances, including “de minimis impacts,” as described below. In 16 addition, a use can result from a temporary occupancy of land within a Section 17 4(f) property, if the temporary occupancy exceeds certain criteria, including the 18 amount of time the use is needed and the amount of the property to be used. A 19 use also can result from proximity effects—such as noise, visual impacts, or 20 vibration—if those effects “substantially” impair the protected features of the 21 property. A use that results from proximity effects is known as a “constructive 22 use.” A constructive use evaluation considers the project’s effects near the 23 protected area to determine if they are so severe that the resources’ activities, 24 features, or attributes are substantially impaired. In this case, a Section 4(f) use 25 could occur even if the project does not actually intrude into the protected site or 26 require any portion of the property. 27 There are two different ways that FHWA can approve the use of a Section 4(f) 28 resource for a transportation project. FHWA can approve the use of a Section 4(f) 29 resource if it finds that the project will cause a “de minimis impact” on that 30 resource. To make this finding, FHWA must determine that the project will not 31 adversely affect the Section 4(f) resource. This finding requires the concurrence of 32 the official with jurisdiction over the resource. The official with jurisdiction over 33 a park, recreation area, or refuge is typically the agency that owns or administers 34 that resource. The official with jurisdiction over a historic site is the State Historic 35 Preservation Officer, and a de minimis determination requires concurrence with a 36 determination of a “not adverse” effect on the resource under Section 106 of the 37 National Historic Preservation Act. 38 FHWA also can approve the use of a Section 4(f) resource by preparing a Section 39 4(f) evaluation. This approach is used in situations where impacts on the Section 40 4(f) resource are not de minimis. Unlike a finding of de minimis impact, a Section

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 4 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 4(f) evaluation requires consideration of alternatives to the use of the Section 4(f) 2 resource.

3 Identification of Section 4(f) Resources 4 The project has conducted a comprehensive review of potentially eligible 5 resources within the project’s area of effect, in close coordination with the 6 environmental analysis for related environmental disciplines, including historic, 7 cultural, and archaeological resources and parks and recreation. The project has 8 also coordinated with local, state, and federal jurisdictions and agencies to help 9 identify potentially affected properties that could qualify as Section 4(f) resources. 10 No wildlife or waterfowl refuges exist within the area of effect of the Bored 11 Tunnel Alternative. Therefore, the Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation in the 12 Supplemental Draft EIS addresses only public park and recreation lands and 13 historic sites. Part A of this appendix provides data sheets for the three Section 14 4(f) resources (the Alaskan Way Viaduct itself, the Battery Street Tunnel, and the 15 Western Building at 619 Western Avenue) that are subject to use by the Bored 16 Tunnel Alternative. Part B provides a summary table and data sheets for the 17 historic properties evaluated for constructive use by the Bored Tunnel 18 Alternative. Part C includes a summary table that provides findings for all 19 recreation lands and historic properties evaluated in the Bored Tunnel Alternative 20 area, including those not protected by Section 4(f) and those that are not subject to 21 a Section 4(f) use. Part D is the Section 6(f) Evaluation. Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 show 22 the locations of the historic properties and recreation lands included in this 23 Section 4(f) evaluation. 24 The data sheets in this appendix do not describe in detail the recreational or 25 historic use that occurs. That information is in the Supplemental Draft EIS Draft 26 Section 4(f) Evaluation and associated discipline reports, such as Appendix I, 27 Section 106 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources Discipline Report. 28 Furthermore, the data sheets describe Section 4(f) resources evaluated only for the 29 Bored Tunnel Alternative. Resources evaluated for other alternatives can be 30 found in the 2004 Draft EIS and 2006 Supplemental Draft EIS. Historic Resource 31 Inventory Forms have been prepared as part of the Section 106 analysis and were 32 distributed separately to the State Historic Preservation Officer. 33

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 5 Supplemental Draft EIS

H123 H125 H124 H121 H120

H119 H122 H118 H113 Cherry St

H110 James St H109 H98 8 H108

H71 S Washington St PIONEER 7 SQUARE S Main St

H48 S Jackson St

S King St

H17 QWEST Field

Alaskan Viaduct Way

H2 H15

45KI924 H13 H11 H12

SAFECO Field Publicly Owned Park and Recreation Facilities Including Shoreline Public Access 7 Occidental Park H5 8 Pioneer Square

554-1585-030/CC(07) 7/28/10 National Register Listed H17 Pioneer Square Historic District Building Number NRHP Eligible Park/Recreation National Historic District Exhibit 1 Archaeological Site Section 4(f) 0 600 Area of Potential Effects (Historic) Note: See Part C for building name and addresses, Resources in for resources not protected by Section 4(f) or not SCALE IN FEET Bored Tunnel subject to use under Section 4(f). Stadium Area 5 Westlake Ave N H254 th Ave H054A H045A H051A H039A H244 4th AveH073A H031A Battery St Tunnel H049A H037A 3rd Ave 034A Bell St Western Ave H227 H070A H069A H068A Blanchard St 2nd H223 Ave H260 H225 Olive Wy Elliott AveH258 1st Ave Lenora St H240 012A H216 H241 H257 H206 Virginia StH210 Stewart St Alaskan Way H072A 5th Ave H238 H209 H071A H207 H202 4th Ave H197 H194 H203 3rd Ave

Alaskan 21 Way 2nd Ave H190 Pine St

H175

Viaduct PIKE PLACE H174 Pike St MARKET H171 1st Ave 22 Union St H160 H148

University St H152 Western Ave H142 H137 Seneca St 18 H140 H001A H145 Spring St Alaskan Way Viaduct H135 H130 H132 H139 H136 H138 H134 Madison St H131 H129 H128 H133 H127 H126 Marion St Elliott H121 H123 S Bay H125 H124 H120 Alaskan Way Columbia H119 H122 H118 H113 Publicly Owned Park and Recreation Facilities Including Shoreline Public Access Colman Cherry St 18 Waterfront Park Dock 21 Victor Steinbrueck Park 22 Pier 62/63 Park Yesler Way

554-1585-030/CC(07) 7/28/10

National Register Listed Bored Tunnel NRHP Eligible Park/Recreation Exhibit 2 National Historic District Section 4(f) 0 600 Note: See Part C for building name and addresses, for resources not protected by Resources in Area of Potential Effects Section 4(f) or not subject to use under SCALE IN FEET (Historic) Section 4(f). Downtown Area Valley St

H312 Roy St 4th Ave N Ave 4th Aurora Ave N Ave Aurora 99 Mercer St

Republican St

45KI958 26 SEATTLE CENTER Harrison St

H284

Thomas St

John St

Broad St H270 25 H269 5th Ave N Ave 5th 9th Ave N Ave 9th 6th Ave N Ave 6th Taylor Ave N Ave Taylor Aurora Ave N Ave Aurora Denny Wy N Ave Dexter Denny Wy Westlake Ave N Ave Westlake 27 H056A H268B

Publicly Owned Park and 8th Ave Recreation Facilities Including Shoreline Clay St H055A Public Access 7th Ave 25 Denny Park Cedar St 26 Seattle Center 27 Tilikum Place Vine St H264 6th Ave

Wall St H261 Western Ave H2545th Ave H045A H054A Battery St H039A Elliott Ave H051A H244 Battery St Tunnel 4th AveH073A H031A Bell St H049A H037A 3rd Ave 034A Alaskan Way H069A H227 H070A H068A Blanchard St 2nd H223 Ave H260 H225 H258 1st Ave Lenora St Elliott H240 012A Bay Virginia St H257 H241 554-1585-030/CC(07) 7/28/10

National Register Listed Bored Tunnel NRHP Eligible Park/Recreation Exhibit 3 National Historic District Archaeological Site Section 4(f) 0 600 Area of Potential Effects Note: See Part C for building name and addresses, Resources in (Historic) for resources not protected by Section 4(f) or not SCALE IN FEET subject to use under Section 4(f). Uptown Area

1 PART A: SECTION 4(F) RESOURCES SUBJECT TO USE BY 2 THE BORED TUNNEL ALTERNATIVE

3 The Bored Tunnel Alternative would require the use of the Alaskan Way Viaduct 4 and the Battery Street Tunnel (Exhibit A-1). In addition, it would require the use 5 of the Western Building due to the Bored Tunnel Alternative’s potential to cause 6 moderate to high levels of settlement that could damage the Western Building. 7 The Western Building would experience an estimated 2.4 to 2.8 inches of 8 settlement, which a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 9 engineering assessment rates as “very severe.” Given the building’s poor existing 10 structural condition, this amount of settlement would likely damage major 11 structural and architectural elements of the building and increase concerns about 12 its instability. The extent of settlement and structural damage would require the 13 acquisition of the property, and if protective and preventive measures are not 14 adequate to ensure its structural stability, the building may require demolition to 15 avoid collapse. 16 This section includes data sheets for each property that describe how the 17 Section 4(f) property would be subject to use by the Bored Tunnel Alternative.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 9 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Exhibit A-1. Historic Resources Subject to Use Under Section 4(f) Map Code Facility Name Location Owner Section 4(f) Status Primary Use Potential Effects of Bored Tunnel Alternative H-2 Alaskan Way Alaskan Way Public Determined Transportation The Bored Tunnel Alternative includes demolition of Viaduct Viaduct (WSDOT) eligible for the existing viaduct. NRHP, protected by Section 4(f) H-2 Battery Street Battery Street Public Determined Transportation The Bored Tunnel Alternative includes Tunnel Tunnel (WSDOT) eligible for decommissioning of the Battery Street Tunnel. NRHP, protected by Section 4(f) H-108 Western 619 Western Private PSHD, protected Retail/Office The Western Building would experience settlement Building Avenue by Section 4(f) that WSDOT’s engineering assessment rates as “very severe,” causing an estimated settlement of 2.4 to 2.8 inches, likely damaging major structural and architectural elements of the building and increasing concerns about the building’s instability, given its poor existing structural condition. The project would likely need to acquire the property, and if settlement and structural damage cannot be reduced through protective and preventive measures, the property may require demolition to avoid collapse. 2 NRHP = National Register of Historic Places 3 PSHD = Pioneer Square Historic District 4 WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation 5

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 10 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Alaskan Way Viaduct 2 Site Identification No.: H-2 3 Type of Facility: Historic

4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property and is subject to use by 5 the Bored Tunnel Alternative. The Alaskan Way Viaduct has been determined 6 eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under 7 Criterion A for its association with bridge and tunnel building in Washington in 8 the 1950s and under Criterion C for its type, period, materials, and methods of 9 construction. It is the only multispan concrete double-level bridge in the state. It 10 is also significant for its role in the development of the regional transportation 11 system and of Seattle’s waterfront. 12 Section 4(f) Use: The Bored Tunnel Alternative includes demolition of the 13 existing viaduct.

Site Plan or Photograph: Alaskan Way Viaduct at Alaskan Way surface street and Union Street. Ownership: Public (WSDOT). Location: No specific address. This double- level elevated highway extends from S. Holgate Street on the south to the Battery Street Tunnel on the north. Available activities or functions: Transportation. Size: About 3,500 linear meters (11,156 linear feet, approximately 2.1 miles), with a width of approximately 15 meters (50 feet). 14

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 11 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Battery Street Tunnel 2 Site Identification No.: H-2 3 Type of Facility: Historic

4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property and is subject to use by 5 the Bored Tunnel Alternative. The Battery Street Tunnel has been determined 6 eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion A for its association with tunnel 7 building in Washington in the 1950s and as the first tunnel designed and built by 8 the City of Seattle Engineering Department. It is also significant under Criterion 9 C for the type, period, materials, and methods of construction. In addition to its 10 engineering importance, it is significant for its contribution to the development of 11 the local transportation system, connecting SR 99, which was built in the 1930s, 12 with the Alaskan Way Viaduct, which was completed in the 1950s. 13 Section 4(f) Use: The Bored Tunnel Alternative includes decommissioning the 14 Battery Street Tunnel, which would include using crushed rubble recycled from 15 the existing viaduct to fill the tunnel approximately two-thirds full and then 16 pumping in a low-strength concrete slurry to solidify the rubble. After being 17 filled, the tunnel would be permanently sealed. Site Plan or Photograph: View from the south. Ownership: (Public (WSDOT). Location: No specific address. This four-lane tunnel is located primarily within the right-of-way of Battery Street and Aurora Avenue from First Avenue on the south to Denny Way on the north.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 12 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Western Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-108 3 Type of Facility: Historic

4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is a contributing 5 building to the Pioneer Square Historic District, which is listed in the NRHP. A 6 six-story warehouse building constructed in 1910, it is significant because it dates 7 from the period of economic and industrial growth, extending from the original 8 heart of Seattle and into the former tidal flats of Elliott Bay. While less ornate 9 than other warehouse buildings in the district, it remains an intact example of 10 utilitarian warehouses constructed in reinforced concrete and featuring large 11 multilight windows. 12 Section 4(f) Use: This property would be subject to direct use under Section 4(f) 13 by the Bored Tunnel Alternative because acquisition of the property would be 14 required. The Western Building would experience settlement that WSDOT’s 15 engineering assessment rates as “very severe,” causing an estimated settlement of 16 2.4 to 2.8 inches, likely damaging major structural and architectural elements of 17 the building and increasing concerns about the building’s instability, given its 18 poor existing structural condition. Prior to construction, the project would 19 require the acquisition of the property, and if settlement and structural damage 20 cannot be reduced through protective and preventive measures, the building may 21 require demolition to avoid collapse. Site Plan or Photograph: View from the south. Ownership: Private. Location: 619 Western Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 13 Supplemental Draft EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank

1 PART B: SECTION 4(F) RESOURCES EVALUATED FOR 2 POTENTIAL DIRECT OR CONSTRUCTIVE USE BY THE 3 BORED TUNNEL ALTERNATIVE

4 This section describes the Section 4(f) resources evaluated for direct or constructive use 5 by the project (Exhibit B-1). If the proximity effects—such as noise, visual impacts, or 6 vibration—“substantially” impair the protected features of the property, these effects 7 constitute a “constructive use.” 8 For properties other than those listed in Part A, the preliminary FHWA and WSDOT 9 determination is that no direct or constructive use would occur for other Section 4(f) 10 resources as a result of the Bored Tunnel Alternative. 11 This section identifies a set of historic properties that would be directly affected by the 12 Bored Tunnel Alternative, but the lead agencies have preliminarily determined that the 13 effects would not constitute a use or a constructive use because property acquisitions 14 are not necessary, and the impacts would not substantially impair the protected 15 activities, features, or attributes of the resource. Moreover, the impact avoidance and 16 minimization measures are incorporated within the Bored Tunnel Alternative. 17 The listing includes 14 historic properties with potential impacts as determined by 18 WSDOT’s engineering assessments of building settlement risk due to the construction 19 of the Bored Tunnel Alternative. WSDOT’s assessments have identified 13 properties 20 as having the potential for “very slight” to “slight” damage due to settlement, using 21 the Boscardin and Cording1 method of classifying building damage, which is 22 described in Exhibit B-2. One additional property (the Polson Building) has been 23 identified as having the potential for “severe to very severe” damage. Severe to very 24 severe settlement damage does not mean that the building would become 25 uninhabitable or be completely altered. As discussed below, with measures for 26 protection, repair, and rehabilitation of the building, the lead agencies expect the 27 property to retain the qualities, features, and attributes that qualify it as a Section 4(f) 28 resource. The building is expected to remain in use during construction, and no 29 temporary or permanent acquisition of the building would occur. Therefore, no direct 30 Section 4(f) use would result. A constructive use would also not occur, since the 31 building would remain a contributing resource within the Pioneer Square Historic 32 District, retaining its association with the surrounding district and maintaining the 33 warehouse building features and characteristics that also are part of its historic 34 significance.

1 Boscardin, M.D. and E.J. Cording. 1989. Building Response to Excavation-Induced Settlement. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 115 (1): 1–21. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 15 Supplemental Draft EIS 1 Exhibit B-1. Historic Resources Evaluated for Potential Use Under Section 4(f) Section 106 Facility Section 4(f) Consulting Map Code Name Location Owner Status Primary Use Parties Potential Effects of Bored Tunnel Alternative 45‐KI‐924 Dearborn West of First Public NRHP- N/A DAHP No use. The historical value at this site is provided by South Avenue between (WSDOT) eligible, data that could be recovered during construction, not by Tideland S. Royal protected what could be preserved in place. Section 4(f) Site Brougham Way by Section regulations provide an exception for the use of these and S. Dearborn 4(f) types of archaeological properties in 23 CFR 774.13(b), Street with concurrence from DAHP. 45-KI-958 SDOT Bounded by Public NRHP Maintenan DAHP No use. The historical value at this site is provided by Maintena Aurora Avenue, (SDOT) eligibility ce yard data that could be recovered during construction, not by nce Yard Broad Street, not what could be preserved in place. Section 4(f) Site Harrison Street, determined regulations provide an exception for the use of these and Republican types of archaeological properties in 23 CFR 774.13(b), Street with concurrence from DAHP. H-87 One 1 Yesler Way Private PSHD, Restaurant/ DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Yesler protected Office HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not Building by Section substantially impair protected features. 4(f) Proposed finding: no use. H-109 Polson 61 Columbia Private PSHD, Retail/ DAHP Effects: risk of settlement damage rated as “severe to Building Street protected Office HPO very severe”; with minimization and mitigation, by Section settlement would not substantially impair protected 4(f) features. Proposed finding: no use. H-122 Maritime 911 Western Private NRHP- Office/ DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Building Avenue eligible, Retail HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not protected substantially impair protected features. by Section Proposed finding: no use. 4(f)

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 16 Supplemental Draft EIS Exhibit B-1. Historic Resources Evaluated for Potential Use Under Section 4(f) (continued)

Section 106 Facility Section 4(f) Consulting Map Code Name Location Owner Status Primary Use Parties Potential Effects of Bored Tunnel Alternative H-123 Federal 901 First Public (U.S. NRHP, Governme DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Office Avenue Government) protected nt minimization and mitigation, settlement would not Building by Section substantially impair protected features. 4(f) Proposed finding: no use. H-125 National 1000–1024 Private NRHP, Retail, DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Building Western protected Office, HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not Avenue by Section Restaurant substantially impair protected features. 4(f) Proposed finding: no use. H-126 Alexis 1001 First Private NRHP, Hotel/Retai DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Hotel Avenue protected l HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not (Globe by Section substantially impair protected features. Building) 4(f) Proposed finding: no use. H-128 Arlington 1013 First Private NRHP, Hotel/Retai DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with South Avenue protected l HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not (Beebe by Section substantially impair protected features. Building) 4(f) Proposed finding: no use. H-130 Arlington 1019–1023 First Private NRHP, Hotel/Retai DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with North Avenue protected l HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not (Hotel by Section substantially impair protected features. Cecil) 4(f) Proposed finding: no use. H-134 Grand 1115–1117 First Private NRHP, Residential DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Pacific Avenue protected / HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not Hotel by Section Retail/Offic substantially impair protected features. 4(f) e/ Proposed finding: no use. Restaurant

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 17 Supplemental Draft EIS Exhibit B-1. Historic Resources Evaluated for Potential Use Under Section 4(f) (continued)

Section 106 Facility Section 4(f) Consulting Map Code Name Location Owner Status Primary Use Parties Potential Effects of Bored Tunnel Alternative H-135 Colonial 1123 First Private NRHP, Residential DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Hotel Avenue protected /Retail/ HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not by Section Office/ substantially impair protected features. 4(f) Restaurant Proposed finding: no use. H-304 Two Bells 2313 Fourth Private NRHP- Restaurant DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Tavern Avenue eligible, HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not protected substantially impair protected features. by Section Proposed finding: no use. 4(f) H-311 Fire 2334 Fourth Public NRHP- Governmen DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Station Avenue (Seattle Fire eligible, t HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not No. 2 Department) protected substantially impair protected features. by Section Proposed finding: no use. 4(f) H-335 Seattle 120 Sixth Public NRHP- Office DAHP Effects: risk of slight settlement damage; with Housing Avenue N. eligible, HPO minimization and mitigation, settlement would not Authority protected substantially impair protected features. by Section Proposed finding: no use. 4(f) 1 DAHP = Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 2 HPO = City of Seattle Historic Preservation Officer 3 N/A = not applicable 4 NRHP = National Register of Historic Places 5 PSHD = contributing resource in NRHP-listed Pioneer Square Historic District

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 18 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Exhibit B-2. Building Damage Classification (Boscardin and Cording) Approximate Class of Damage Description of Damage Width of Cracks Negligible Hairline cracks <0.1 mm Very Slight Fine cracks; perhaps isolated slight fracture in building. <1 mm. Cracks in exterior brickwork visible upon close inspection. Slight Cracks easily filled. Redecoration probably required. Several <5 mm slight fractures inside building. Exterior cracks visible, some repointing may be required for weather tightness. Doors and windows may stick slightly. Moderate Cracks may require cutting out and patching. Tuck-pointing 5 to 15 mm, or and replacement of some exterior brickwork may be required. several cracks >3 Doors and windows stick. Utility service may be interrupted. mm Weather-tightness may be impaired. Severe Extensive repair required, involving removal and replacement 15 to 25 mm; also of sections of walls, especially over doors and windows. depends on Windows and door frames distorted; floor slopes noticeably; number of cracks walls lean; doors bulge noticeably; some loss of bearing in beams. Utility service disrupted. Very Severe Major repair required involving partial or complete Usually >25 mm; reconstruction. Beams lose bearing. Walls lean badly and also depends on require shoring. Windows broken by distortion. Danger of number of cracks instability. 2

3 The project would not require the acquisition of any of these properties to 4 construct or operate the Bored Tunnel Alternative. The project has also identified 5 protective measures and repair commitments designed to further minimize 6 effects on these properties. All restoration and repair work to the buildings 7 identified in this section would be performed in compliance with the Secretary of 8 the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, 9 Section 67.7 (36 CFR 67.7). Through the Section 106 process, the actions to protect 10 and repair these properties will be further developed through consultation and 11 agreements with the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic 12 Preservation (DAHP), and the City of Seattle Historic Preservation Officer. 13 Dearborn South Tideland Site 14 Site Identification No.: 45‐KI‐924 15 Type of Facility: Archaeological 16 Section 4(f) Status: The site has been determined eligible for the NRHP under 17 Criteria A and C and is protected under Section 4(f). The Dearborn South 18 Tideland Site occupies most of the Washington-Oregon Shippers Cooperative 19 Association (WOSCA) lot at the south portal, covering three blocks west of First

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 19 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Avenue S. on filled tidelands between S. Royal Brougham Way and S. Dearborn 2 Street. The site is on a peninsula created with spoils from dredging the adjacent 3 tidelands to deepen the draft on the landforms on the west (Elliott Bay) side. 4 Dredging began in 1895, and the area was above tide level by 1898, when rapid 5 development, including construction of substantial brick buildings, began. The 6 Union Pacific began purchasing property about 1908. By 1910, the area had been 7 cleared, the grade raised, and an extensive railroad freight yard established. The 8 site contains building remains, refuse accumulations, and other cultural features 9 associated with the period from 1898 to 1910, and it represents historic 10 development of the tidal flats south of Denny Island. 11 Section 4(f) Use: No use. The historical value at this site is provided by data that 12 could be recovered during construction, not by what could be preserved in place. 13 Section 4(f) regulations provide an exception for the use of these types of 14 archaeological properties in 23 CFR 774.13(b), with concurrence from DAHP. Site Plan or Photograph: Ownership: Public (WSDOT). Location: West of First Avenue between S. Royal Brougham Way and S. Dearborn Street.

15 16

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 20 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 SDOT Maintenance Yard site 2 Site Identification No.: 45-KI-958 3 Type of Facility: Archaeological 4 Section 4(f) Status: This historic archaeological resource site was discovered 5 during investigations for the Bored Tunnel Alternative and is defined as the 6 original street block generally bounded by Broad Street to the northwest, Aurora 7 Avenue to the east, Harrison Street to the south, and Sixth Avenue N. to the west. 8 The site contains stratified remains of residential and commercial structures 9 dating to the first half of the twentieth century. It has potential to yield 10 information on residential life, commerce, and trade that is not available from 11 written sources. Pending the collection of additional information and further 12 consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, the site is assumed to be 13 NRHP-eligible under Criterion D for its potential to yield information about early 14 development in Seattle, but its value is in the data that may be recovered and 15 does not depend on being preserved in place. 16 Section 4(f) Use: No use. The historical value at this site is provided by data that 17 could be recovered during construction, not by what could be preserved in place. 18 Section 4(f) regulations provide an exception for the use of these types of 19 archaeological properties in 23 CFR 774.13(b), with concurrence from DAHP. Site Plan or Photograph: Ownership: Public (SDOT) Location: Bounded by Aurora Avenue, Broad Street, Harrison Street, and Republican Street.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 21 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 One Yesler Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-87 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is a contributing 5 building to the Pioneer Square Historic District, which is listed in the NRHP. This 6 small, three-story brick-clad building, which first housed the Bedford Hotel from 7 1911 to 1940, was erected in 1911. After World War II, this building continued to 8 serve as a seamen’s and travelers’ hotel. Restored as an office building in 1967, it 9 currently houses a restaurant on the ground floor. It is considered significant for 10 its association with the development of the Pioneer Square area (Criterion A) and 11 for the building type and characteristics (Criterion C). 12 Section 4(f) Use: No use and no constructive use. No acquisition of the property 13 is required. The property was also evaluated for the potential for a constructive 14 use, since the Bored Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize 15 damage, to monitor and protect the building during construction, and to repair 16 any damage or restoration in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s 17 Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR 67.7). 18 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 19 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 20 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 21 that this alternative would not substantially impair the protected features, 22 activities, and attributes of this property, once all protective and mitigating 23 measures have been incorporated into the alternative. The property would retain 24 its association with the development of the Pioneer Square Historic District, and it 25 would retain the building characteristics that also make it a good example of an 26 early twentieth century hotel for travelers. Other vicinity effects during 27 construction would be minor and temporary, and longer term, the removal of the 28 existing viaduct is expected to be beneficial. Therefore, no Section 4(f) 29 constructive use would occur.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 22 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the northeast. Ownership: Private. Location: 1 Yesler Way.

1 2

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 23 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Polson Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-109 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is a contributing 5 building to the Pioneer Square Historic District, which is listed in the NRHP. This 6 six-story warehouse building, constructed in 1910, was designed by Charles 7 Saunders and George Lawton, who designed several of the other warehouses in 8 the district as well as other notable buildings in Seattle. It is significant because it 9 is part of the reconstruction of the Pioneer Square Historic District in the original 10 heart of Seattle and the former tidal flats of Elliott Bay (Criterion A) and for the 11 warehouse building type and characteristics that are representative of the 12 “Chicago Style” (Criterion C). 13 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use and no constructive use. No acquisition of the 14 property is required. The property has also been evaluated for a potential 15 constructive use, since there is the potential for damage due to ground settlement 16 of the Polson Building during tunneling. The potential damage was rated as 17 “severe to very severe,” with an estimated settlement of 2.2 inches. However, 18 because this building is in good structural condition, the project has identified 19 protective measures including compensation grouting and foundation 20 strengthening that can be implemented prior to construction. These measures, 21 along with high levels of monitoring during construction, would prevent major 22 structural damage. The remaining structural and aesthetic damage could be 23 repaired, allowing the building to be preserved. 24 The Bored Tunnel Alternative would include a comprehensive program of 25 protection measures that would begin prior to tunnel construction. These 26 measures would include detailed survey and photographic assessments of the 27 building’s preconstruction conditions. Measures to protect and stabilize the 28 building would include the use of various soil improvement and grouting 29 techniques to improve soil strength or compensate for ground loss due to 30 excavation. Protective measures also may include underpinning or strengthening 31 other elements of the building’s foundation to prevent settlement. Structural 32 retrofits prior to construction could also help reduce damage during settlement. 33 While construction is under way and as construction is completed, the building 34 would be monitored for any signs of damage. 35 If damage does occur, all restoration and repair work would be performed in 36 compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 37 CFR 67.7). This and other potential mitigation actions will be defined through the 38 Section 106 process, in consultation with DAHP, the City of Seattle Historic

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 24 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Preservation Officer, the Pioneer Square Preservation Board, and other interested 2 parties. 3 A direct use of the property is not involved because the lead agencies also 4 anticipate that with protective measures in place during the construction period, 5 the building could remain in use during construction, and temporary or 6 permanent acquisition of the building would not be needed. The property has 7 also been evaluated for a potential constructive use. With the measures for 8 protection, repair, and rehabilitation of the building, the lead agencies expect the 9 property to retain the qualities, features, and attributes that qualify it as a Section 10 4(f) resource. While the lead agencies anticipate that the building damage would 11 be an adverse effect under the Section 106 processes, the effect could be mitigated 12 to avoid a Section 4(f) constructive use. During and after the construction, the 13 property would still retain its association with the Pioneer Square Historic District 14 (Criterion A), and the protection and restoration of the building architecture and 15 materials would also maintain its eligibility for the register under Criterion C. 16 Appendix I, Section 106: Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources 17 Discipline Report, provides additional detail about this building. 18 Long-term effects of the Bored Tunnel Alternative are considered to be beneficial 19 because it would remove the existing viaduct and its visual and operating 20 impacts on the setting and views of the Polson Building and the Pioneer Square 21 Historic District. The potential removal of the Western Building would alter the 22 setting of the Polson Building, but the overall setting of the building within the 23 district would remain. Other proximity effects, including the short-term effects of 24 construction disruption, noise, and traffic affecting areas surrounding the 25 building, are also not expected to result in substantial long-term impairment of 26 the building or removal of the characteristics that qualify it as a Section 4(f) 27 resource, and they would not result in a constructive use.

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Private. Location: 61 Columbia Street.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 25 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Federal Office Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-123 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed in the 5 NRHP. The building was designed between 1930 and 1931 by the office of 6 James A. Wetmore, acting supervising architect of the U.S. Treasury Department. 7 Construction was completed in 1933 by the Murch Construction Company of 8 St. Louis, Missouri. It was the first building in Seattle designed specifically to 9 house offices for the federal government (Criterion A). Among its first tenants 10 were 52 federal agencies, the largest of which was the Department of the 11 Treasury. The Jackson Federal Building, located across the street, was 12 constructed from 1975 to 1976. In 1979, the Federal Office Building was listed in 13 the NRHP. The seven- and eight-story Art Deco brick and terra cotta building is 14 also important under Criterion C for the building style and characteristics, 15 featuring terra cotta cladding on the first story, terra cotta details in stylized 16 geometric motifs covering the entire top of the building, and the use of aluminum 17 spandrels. 18 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 19 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The property was also 20 reviewed for potential constructive use because of ground settlement during the 21 construction of the Bored Tunnel Alternative that may result in non-adverse 22 effects under Section 106. Ground settlement has the potential for causing slight 23 damage to the building, including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require 24 interior painting or repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and 25 windows. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize 26 damage, to monitor and protect the building during construction, and to repair 27 any damage or restoration in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s 28 Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR 67.7). 29 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 30 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 31 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 32 that with the protective and mitigating measures that have been incorporated into 33 the alternative, a constructive use would be avoided. The building would retain 34 its historic association as the first federal building constructed in Seattle, and it 35 would also remain historically important under Criterion C for building type and 36 materials, which would be preserved. Other effects during construction such as 37 traffic, noise, dust, dirt, and other disruptions would be temporary and also 38 would not affect the qualities that make the property historically significant.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 26 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Long term effects from removing the viaduct and replacing it with another facility 2 would be positive. Therefore, no Section 4(f) constructive use would occur. Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Pubic (U.S. Government). Location: 901 First Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 27 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 National Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-125 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed in the 5 NRHP. This six-story brick commercial building was designed in 1904 by 6 Kingsley and Anderson for the Northern Pacific Railroad, making it important 7 under Criterion A for its role in Seattle’s development and under Criterion C for 8 building type and characteristics, including its brick pilasters with terra cotta 9 capitals. It was the headquarters of the National Grocery Company, one of the 10 West Coast’s largest grocery wholesalers. It was renovated for office use in 1983 11 as part of Cornerstone Development’s Waterfront Place project and was listed in 12 the NRHP in 1982. 13 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 14 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The property was reviewed for 15 potential constructive use because of ground settlement during tunnel 16 construction. Ground settlement could potentially cause slight damage to the 17 building, including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting 18 or repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 19 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 20 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 21 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 22 CFR 67.7). 23 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 24 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 25 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 26 that the property would still retain the qualities that allowed it to be listed in the 27 NRHP. The Bored Tunnel Alternative would preserve the building’s historic 28 associations and its type and characteristics, once all protective and mitigating 29 measures have been incorporated into the alternative, avoiding a constructive 30 use. 31 Long-term effects of the Bored Tunnel Alternative are considered to be beneficial 32 because the Bored Tunnel Alternative would remove the existing viaduct and its 33 visual and operating impacts on the setting and views of the building and the 34 surrounding areas. Other proximity effects, including the short-term effects of 35 construction disruption, noise, and traffic, which would affect areas surrounding 36 the building, are also not expected to result in substantial long-term impairment 37 of the building or to remove the characteristics that qualify it as a Section 4(f) 38 resource, and they would not result in a constructive use.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 28 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the southwest. Ownership: Private. Location: 1000–1024 Western Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 29 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Alexis Hotel/Globe Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-126 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed in the 5 NRHP. The Globe Building is important under Section 106 historic significance 6 Criterion A because it was designed by Max Umbrecht in 1901, and, along with 7 the neighboring Beebe Building and Hotel Cecil, it was built during the rapid 8 expansion northward from Pioneer Square following the Klondike Gold Rush. 9 All three buildings provided transient housing for businessmen and workers. 10 The building and the group are also important under Section 106 Criterion C for 11 the building type and materials, because their refined Beaux Arts classical design 12 reflects the changes in taste from the Romanesque buildings constructed in 13 Pioneer Square a decade earlier. The Globe is a brick and terra cotta building that 14 features a terra cotta cornice, arches, bracketed lintels. and quoins. The Globe 15 became a parking garage in the 1940s but was renovated for hotel use in 1983 as 16 part of Cornerstone Development’s Waterfront Place project; it was listed in the 17 NRHP in 1982 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. 18 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 19 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 20 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 21 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in ground 22 settlement, potentially causing slight damage to the building, including utility 23 disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or repointing of brick 24 walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored Tunnel Alternative 25 would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and protect the 26 building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration in 27 compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 28 CFR 67.7). 29 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 30 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 31 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 32 that this alternative, with its protective and mitigating measures, would preserve 33 the important historic associations of this building as part of the First Avenue 34 Building Group and would also preserve the building type and characteristics, 35 avoiding a constructive use. Other effects during construction such as traffic, 36 noise, dust, dirt, and other disruptions would be temporary and also would not 37 affect the qualities that make the property historically significant. Long-term 38 effects from removing the viaduct and replacing it with another facility would be 39 positive.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 30 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Private. Location: 1001 First Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 31 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Arlington South/Beebe Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-128 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed in the NRHP 5 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. The Beebe Building, like the Globe 6 Building, is important under Section 106 historic significance Criterion A because 7 it was designed by Max Umbrecht in 1901 and shares its histor ic relationship 8 with the redevelopment of Seattle following the “Great Fire” As a brick building 9 with terra cotta cornice, pilasters, entablatures, and window casings, the Beebe 10 Building is also recognized under Criterion C for building type and 11 characteristics, which are representative of the period. Along with the 12 neighboring Hotel Cecil, it was renovated for apartment/condominium use in 13 1983 as part of Cornerstone Development’s Waterfront Place project and was 14 listed in the NRHP in 1982 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. 15 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 16 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 17 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 18 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in non-adverse 19 effects, with settlement potentially causing slight damage to the building, 20 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 21 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 22 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 23 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 24 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 25 CFR 67.7). 26 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 27 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 28 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 29 that this alternative, with its protective and mitigating measures, would preserve 30 the important historic associations of this building as part of the First Avenue 31 Building Group and would also preserve the building type and characteristics, 32 avoiding a constructive use. Other effects during construction such as traffic, 33 noise, dust, dirt, and other disruptions would be temporary and also would not 34 affect the qualities that make the property historically significant. Long-term 35 effects from removing the viaduct and replacing it with another facility would be 36 positive.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 32 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Private. Location: 1013 First Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 33 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Maritime Building 2 Site Identification No.: H-123 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: This building, built in 1910, is a very good and largely intact 5 example of an early twentieth century warehouse/wholesale building constructed 6 on a large scale for numerous tenants. It is eligible for listing in the NRHP under 7 Criterion C as an example of warehouse construction and under Criterion A as 8 one of the best extant works of E. W. Houghton, a prominent early Seattle 9 architect, and of engineers Stone and Webster. It is also eligible under Criterion A 10 for its association with Seattle’s maritime and trade development. 11 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 12 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 13 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 14 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in ground 15 settlement during construction, potentially causing slight damage to the building, 16 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 17 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 18 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 19 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 20 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 21 CFR 67.7). 22 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 23 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 24 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 25 that this alternative, with its protective and mitigating measures, would avoid a 26 constructive use because it would preserve the important historic associations of 27 this building as an example of the work of a prominent architect and its 28 relationship with the development of Seattle. The alternative would also preserve 29 the qualities illustrating the building’s type and characteristics. Other effects 30 during construction such as traffic, noise, dust, dirt, and other disruptions would 31 be temporary and also would not affect the qualities that make the property 32 historically significant. Long-term effects from removing the viaduct and 33 replacing it with another facility would be positive.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 34 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the south. Ownership: Private. Location: 911 Western Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 35 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Arlington North/Hotel Cecil 2 Site Identification No.: H-130 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed in the NRHP 5 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. It is important under Section 106 6 historic significance Criterion A because it was designed by Max Umbrecht in 7 1901 and shares its historic relationship with the redevelopment of Seattle 8 following the “Great Fire.” It is also important under Criterion C for building 9 type and characteristics, due to the use of brick, and features including terra cotta 10 moldings, stringcourses, and a cornice with lion heads. Along with the 11 neighboring Beebe Building, it was renovated for apartment/condominium use in 12 1983 as part of Cornerstone Development’s Waterfront Place project and was 13 listed in the NRHP in 1982 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. 14 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 15 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 16 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 17 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in ground 18 settlement during construction, potentially causing slight damage to the building, 19 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 20 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 21 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 22 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 23 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 24 CFR 67.7). 25 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 26 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 27 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 28 that this alternative, with its protective and mitigating measures, would preserve 29 the important historic associations of this building as part of the First Avenue 30 Building Group, and would also preserve or restore the materials and features 31 indicating the building type and characteristics, avoiding a constructive use. 32 Other effects during construction such as traffic, noise, dust, dirt, and other 33 disruptions would be temporary and also would not affect the qualities that make 34 the property historically significant. Long-term effects from removing the viaduct 35 and replacing it with another facility would be positive.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 36 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Private. Location: 1019-1023 First Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 37 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Grand Pacific Hotel 2 Site Identification No.: H-135 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed in the NRHP 5 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. The origins of the Grand Pacific 6 Hotel are less certain than that of its neighbors, as the construction date and 7 architect have not been identified. However, it marks the same period of Seattle’s 8 development following the “Great Fire” and shares the same early use as a 9 transient hotel (Criterion A) and the same Beaux Arts design features (Criterion 10 C) in a brick building with brick and stone arches. In 1983, the Grand Pacific was 11 combined with the adjoining Colonial Hotel and renovated for apartment and 12 condominium use as part of Cornerstone Development’s Waterfront Place project. 13 It was listed in the NRHP in 1982 as part of the First Avenue Building Group. 14 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 15 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 16 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 17 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in non-adverse 18 effects, with ground settlement potentially causing slight damage to the building, 19 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 20 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 21 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 22 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 23 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 24 CFR 67.7). 25 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 26 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 27 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 28 that this alternative, with its protective and mitigating measures, would preserve 29 the important historic associations of this building as part of the First Avenue 30 Building Group and would also preserve or restore the materials and features 31 indicating the building type and characteristics, avoiding a constructive use. 32 Other effects during construction such as traffic, noise, dust, dirt, and other 33 disruptions would be temporary and also would not affect the qualities that make 34 the property historically significant. Long-term effects from removing the viaduct 35 and replacing it with another facility would be positive.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 38 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Private. Location: 1115–1117 First Avenue.

1 2

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 39 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Colonial Hotel 2 Site Identification No.: H-135 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Qualifies as a Section 4(f) property, as it is listed on the 5 NRHP as part of the First Avenue Building Group. The Colonial Hotel is 6 important under Section 106 historic significance Criterion A because it was 7 designed by Max Umbrecht in 1901, was part of the redevelopment of Seattle 8 following the “Great Fire,” and it shares the same early use as a transient hotel as 9 the other properties. This brick building, with its Beaux Arts design featuring 10 terra cotta moldings, stringcourses, and a cornice with lion heads, is also 11 important under Criterion C for building type and characteristics. In 1983 the 12 Colonial was combined with the adjoining Grand Pacific and renovated for 13 apartment and condominium use as part of Cornerstone Development's 14 Waterfront Place project. It was listed in the NRHP in 1982 as part of the First 15 Avenue Building Group. 16 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 17 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 18 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 19 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in non-adverse 20 effects, with settlement potentially causing slight damage to the building, 21 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 22 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 23 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 24 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 25 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 26 CFR 67.7). 27 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 28 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 29 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 30 that this alternative, with its protective and mitigating measures, would avoid a 31 constructive use because it would preserve the important historic associations of 32 this building as the work of a prominent architect and as part of the First Avenue 33 Building Group, and it would also preserve the building type and characteristics. 34 Other effects during construction such as traffic, noise, dust, dirt, and other 35 disruptions would be temporary and also would not affect the qualities that make 36 the property historically significant. Long-term effects from removing the viaduct 37 and replacing it with another facility would be positive.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 40 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the east. Ownership: Private. Location: 1123 First Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 41 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Two Bells Tavern 2 Site Identification No.: H-045A 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: This small café building is a fine example of innovative 1920s 5 ornamentation and one of the most intact small downtown buildings. It was 6 designed in 1923 by noted local architect George W. Stoddard and is a very good 7 example of his early eclectic work. It is eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C 8 as an excellent small-scale example of early commercial architecture and the work 9 of Stoddard. 10 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 11 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 12 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 13 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in non-adverse 14 effects, with settlement potentially causing slight damage to the building, 15 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 16 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 17 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 18 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 19 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 20 CFR 67.7). 21 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 22 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 23 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 24 that this alternative and its protective and mitigating measures would preserve 25 the building’s protected features, activities, and attributes, allowing it to remain 26 an intact example of a work by a noted local architect and as representative of 27 early commercial architecture in Seattle. Therefore, a constructive use under 28 Section 4(f) would not occur. Other indirect effects due to construction are 29 expected to be minor, and the major areas of surface construction are not 30 immediately adjacent.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 42 Supplemental Draft EIS

Site Plan or Photograph: View from the west. Ownership: Private. Location: 2313 Fourth Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 43 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Fire Station No. 2 2 Site Identification No.: H-264 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: Built in 1920, this is the city’s oldest fire station that is still in 5 its original use. It is considerably larger than most, as it has a maintenance shop 6 and an auditorium that is used for department meetings. The building is eligible 7 for the NRHP under Criterion A for its association with the city of Seattle, its 8 development, and its fire department, and under Criterion C as an example of 9 finely detailed industrial architecture and a work by Seattle’s most prominent 10 municipal architect, Daniel Huntington. 11 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 12 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 13 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 14 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in non-adverse 15 effects, with settlement potentially causing slight damage to the building, 16 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 17 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 18 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 19 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 20 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 21 CFR 67.7). 22 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 23 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 24 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 25 that this alternative, with the protective and mitigating measures it incorporates, 26 would allow the building to retain its current and historic use as a Fire Station 27 and also preserve the architectural and building type and features that mark it as 28 an example of finely detailed industrial architecture and the work of a prominent 29 architect. Other indirect effects due to construction are expected to be minor and 30 temporary, and no adverse long-term indirect effects have been identified. 31 Therefore, no Section 4(f) constructive use is anticipated. 32

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 44 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Site Plan or Photograph: View from the west. Ownership: Public (Seattle Fire Department). Location: 2334 Fourth Avenue.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 45 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Seattle Housing Authority 2 Site Identification No.: H-270 3 Type of Facility: Historic 4 Section 4(f) Status: This building was constructed in 1954 for Northwestern 5 Mutual Life, which occupied it along with other firms. The Seattle Housing 6 Authority executive offices moved into the building in the 1970s, and the agency 7 now occupies the entire building. The building features ribbon windows and an 8 enframed concrete wall. It is eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C as an 9 example of midcentury commercial architecture. 10 Section 4(f) Use: No direct use or constructive use would result. No acquisition 11 of the property is required, avoiding a direct use. The evaluation of constructive 12 use has also considered the potential of effects of ground settlement during 13 tunnel construction. The Bored Tunnel Alternative may result in non-adverse 14 effects, with settlement potentially causing slight damage to the building, 15 including utility disruptions, minor cracks that require interior painting or 16 repointing of brick walls, or slightly sticking doors and windows. The Bored 17 Tunnel Alternative would include measures to minimize damage, to monitor and 18 protect the building during construction, and to repair any damage or restoration 19 in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 20 CFR 67.7). 21 The lead agencies have made a preliminary determination that the settlement 22 effects would be “not adverse” under Section 106. Even if the effects are 23 ultimately considered to be adverse under Section 106, the lead agencies expect 24 that this alternative, with the protective and mitigating measures it incorporates, 25 would preserve the architectural and building type and features that mark it as an 26 example of midcentury commercial architecture. Other indirect effects due to 27 construction are expected to be minor and temporary, and no adverse long-term 28 indirect effects have been identified. Therefore, no Section 4(f) constructive use is 29 anticipated. 30

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 46 Supplemental Draft EIS

1 Site Plan or Photograph: View from the northwest. Ownership: Public. Location: 120 Sixth Avenue N.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 47 Supplemental Draft EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank

1 PART C: PARK AND RECREATION LANDS AND HISTORIC 2 PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOT SECTION 4(F) RESOURCES 3 OR ARE NOT SUBJECT TO USE BY THE BORED TUNNEL 4 ALTERNATIVE

5 This section lists each historic property described in Appendix I, Section 106: 6 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources Discipline Report, and each of 7 the park and recreation properties described in Appendix H, Social Discipline 8 Report, that were determined not to be Section 4(f) resources or determined to be 9 Section 4(f) resources that are not subject to use by the Bored Tunnel Alternative. 10 Each of the potential historic resources has been evaluated and a determination 11 was made regarding eligibility for listing in the NRHP and, therefore, protection 12 under Section 4(f). An individual rating sheet was prepared for each property and 13 submitted to WSDOT cultural resources staff and DAHP.

14 Historic Properties 15 To qualify for protection under Section 4(f), historic properties must be listed in or 16 determined eligible for inclusion in the NRHP.

17 Exhibit C-1 shows the properties within the area of effect that were built in 1963 18 or earlier, with their historic designation. Properties are listed generally from 19 south to north, west to east. None of the Section 4(f) resources listed in 20 Exhibit C-1 would be subject to use by the project, other than those discussed in 21 Parts A and B.

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 49 Supplemental Draft EIS 1 Exhibit C-1. Inventory of Buildings and Structures 40 or More Years Old Within the Area of Effects Map Code Address Current Name (Historical Name) Historic Designation Section 4(f) Protection Section 4(f) Use H-1 Alaskan Way Alaskan Way Seawall Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-2 Alaskan Way/Battery Alaskan Way Viaduct & Battery Street Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) Subject to use under Section Street Tunnel 4(f); see Part A H-3 S. Main Street to Bell Burlington Northern Railway Tunnel Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use Street (Great Northern Railway Tunnel) H-4 1526 First Avenue S. Emerald Market Supply Not eligible Not protected N/A (David Dow and Sons) H-5 1518 First Avenue S. McKinnon Furniture Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use (Frederick & Nelson Warehouse) H-6 1251 First Avenue S. Great Floors Not eligible Not protected N/A (International Harvester) H-7 1201 First Avenue S. Pyramid Alehouse Not eligible Not protected N/A H-8 1041 First Avenue S. Gerry Sportswear Not eligible Not protected N/A H-9 1026 First Avenue S. Stadium Silver Cloud Inn Not eligible Not protected N/A H-10 1028 First Avenue S. Hawk’s Nest Not eligible Not protected N/A (Maginnis Bottling Works) H-11 1020-22 First Avenue S. E.O. Graves Building Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-12 1014 First Avenue S. Olympic Reprographics Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use (M.F. Backus Warehouse) H-13 1000 First Avenue S. Palmer Court Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use (A.L. Palmer Building) H-14 902 First Avenue S. Artists’ Gallery of Seattle/ Not eligible Not protected N/A Worldwide Marble & Granite H-15 900 First Avenue S. Roebling Building Eligible for NRHP Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-16 820 First Avenue S. Coastal Environmental Systems Not eligible Not protected N/A H-17 553 First Avenue S. Triangle Hotel NRHP, PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-18 505 First Avenue S. Starbucks PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use

SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project October 2010 Section 4(f) Supplemental Materials 50 Supplemental Draft EIS Exhibit C-1. Inventory of Buildings and Structures 40 or More Years Old Within the Area of Effects (continued) Map Code Address Current Name (Historical Name) Historic Designation Section 4(f) Protection Section 4(f) Use H-19 501 First Avenue S. (Seattle Hardware Annex) PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-20 83 S. King Street 83 King Street & garage PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use (Seattle Hardware Co.) H-21 590 First Avenue S. (Seattle Plumbing Building) PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-22 568 First Avenue S. Provident Building PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-23 562 First Avenue S. The Copy Machine PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use (Bornstein & Sons) H-24 558 First Avenue S. Fobes Supply Co. PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-25 548 First Avenue S. Elysian Fields/Reedo Building PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use (Carsten Brothers/Nordic Cold Storage) H-26 542 First Avenue S. Washington Shoe Building PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-27 538 First Avenue S. Sluggers (Kaufman Warehouse) PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-28 508–534 First Avenue S. Florentine Condominiums PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use (Seattle Security Co. Warehouse) H-29 500 First Avenue S. 101 King Street (Norfin Building) PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-30 410 Alaskan Way S. Merrill Place Garage PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-31 419 First Avenue S. Merrill Place (Hambach Building) PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-32 411 First Avenue S. Merrill Place (Seller Building) PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use H-33 401 First Avenue S. Merrill Place PSHD Protected by Section 4(f) No use (Schwabacher Hardware Co.) H-34 100 S. King Street Westland Building P