Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTIR-4240Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Technical Information Report Crown Castle 83170 A-TEAM Wireless Communication Site 2902 NE 12th Street Prepared: January 3, 2022 Revised: January 19, 2023 Revised: March 10, 2023 DCI Project: 04168.184 Duncanson Company, Inc. 145 SW 155th Street, Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98166 (206) 244-4141 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Table Of Contents 1. Project Overview 3 Figure 1.1 – Technical Information Report Worksheet 5 Figure 1.2 – Vicinity Map 11 Figure 1.3 – Soils Survey Map 12 2. Conditions and Requirements Summary 13 3. Offsite Analysis 16 Figure 3.1 – Offsite Analysis Map 19 4. Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design 20 Figure 4.1 – Predeveloped Basin Map 22 Figure 4.2 – Postdeveloped Basin Map 24 5. Conveyance System Analysis and Design 25 6. Special Reports and Studies 27 7. Other Permits 52 8. CSWPPP Analysis and Design 54 9. Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant 58 10. Operations and Maintenance Manual 75 Appendix A – WWHM Report 78 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 1. Project Overview Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 1. Project Overview This project involves development of a new wireless telecom site. Improvements will include an antenna tower, rock surfaced equipment compound, an access drive and power/telco utility trenching. The equipment compound and an access connection comprise the total new and/or replaced impervious surface, which is 7,060 SF. The clearing limits for utility trenching, grading the equipment compound and construction access are approximately 12,300 SF of disturbed area. The work will occur in the City owned community use parcels located north of the Sunset Neighborhood health center. The access drive will extend south approximately 350 feet from the end of an existing crushed rock alleyway. Existing ground slopes down to the southwest at about 5% or less. Existing ground cover consists of grass, blackberries, a primitive walkway, an intersecting driveway, and several deciduous trees. There are no defined conveyance systems. Runoff appears to sheet flow to the southwest toward Index Avenue NE. The access drive is proposed as a 12-foot wide asphalt. The wireless equipment compound is proposed in a vacant area in the back yard of the Sunset Neighborhood health center. Existing ground slopes down to the south at about 10% or less. The compound is proposed on a mounded area west of an existing concrete walkway. Existing ground cover consists of mostly grass with a deciduous tree canopy. Runoff appears to sheet flow south. The equipment compound surfacing is proposed as clean/washed crushed rock. While a minor amount of runoff from the access drive area may flow southwest toward NE 13th Street, this would recombine with other site runoff in the public storm drain system at the intersection of NE 12th Street and Harrington Ave NE, less than ¼ mile downstream. Therefore, this project is considered to have a single Threshold Discharge Area. NRCS mapped soil conditions are Arents, Alderwood material. A geotechnical investigation found loose, fine to coarse silty Sand with gravel. No groundwater or restrictive layer was noted in the boring log. See Section 6. Included are Figures 1.1 – Technical Information Report Worksheet; 1.2 – Vicinity Map; and 1.3 – Soils Map. See Figures 4.1 and 4.2 for the Predeveloped and Postdeveloped Conditions basin maps. CITY OF RENTON SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 8-A-1 REFERENCE 8-A TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner _____________________________ Phone ___________________________________ Address __________________________________ _________________________________________ Project Engineer ___________________________ Company _________________________________ Phone ___________________________________ Project Name __________________________ CED Permit # ________________________ Location Township ________________ Range __________________ Section _________________ Site Address __________________________ _____________________________________ Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS  Land Use (e.g., Subdivision / Short Subd.)  Building (e.g., M/F / Commercial / SFR)  Grading  Right-of-Way Use  Other _______________________  DFW HPA  COE 404  DOE Dam Safety  FEMA Floodplain  COE Wetlands  Other ________  Shoreline Management  Structural Rockery/Vault/_____  ESA Section 7 Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type of Drainage Review (check one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final:  Full  Targeted  Simplified  Large Project  Directed ____________________________________ __________________ Plan Type (check one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final:  Full  Modified  Simplified ____________________________________ __________________ REFERENCE 8: PLAN REVIEW FORMS AND WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 8-A-2 Part 6 SWDM ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): Standard / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Approved Adjustment No. ______________________ Date of Approval: _______________________ Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes / No Start Date: _______________________ Completion Date: _______________________ Describe: _________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ Re: SWDM Adjustment No. ________________ Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan: ____________________________________________________________________ Special District Overlays: ______________________________________________________________ Drainage Basin: _____________________________________________________________________ Stormwater Requirements: _____________________________________________________________ Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS  River/Stream ________________________  Lake ______________________________  Wetlands ____________________________  Closed Depression ____________________  Floodplain ___________________________  Other _______________________________ _______________________________  Steep Slope __________________________  Erosion Hazard _______________________  Landslide Hazard ______________________  Coal Mine Hazard ______________________  Seismic Hazard _______________________  Habitat Protection ______________________  _____________________________________ REFERENCE 8-A: TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 Ref 8-A-3 Part 10 SOILS Soil Type ______________________ ______________________ ______________________ ______________________ Slopes ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ Erosion Potential _________________________ _________________________ _________________________ _________________________  High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet)  Other ________________________________  Sole Source Aquifer  Seeps/Springs  Additional Sheets Attached Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE  Core 2 – Offsite Analysis_________________  Sensitive/Critical Areas__________________  SEPA________________________________  LID Infeasibility________________________  Other________________________________  _____________________________________ LIMITATION / SITE CONSTRAINT _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________  Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Threshold Discharge Area: (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply): Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharge Locations: Offsite Analysis Level: 1 / 2 / 3 dated:__________________ Flow Control (include facility summary sheet) Standard: _______________________________ or Exemption Number: ____________ On-site BMPs: _______________________________ Conveyance System Spill containment located at: _____________________________ Erosion and Sediment Control / Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention CSWPP/CESCL/ESC Site Supervisor: _____________________ Contact Phone: _________________________ After Hours Phone: _________________________ REFERENCE 8: PLAN REVIEW FORMS AND WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 8-A-4 Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Maintenance and Operation Responsibility (circle one): Private / Public If Private, Maintenance Log Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Liability Provided: Yes / No Water Quality (include facility summary sheet) Type (circle one): Basic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basic / Bog or Exemption No. _______________________ Special Requirements (as applicable): Area Specific Drainage Requirements Type: SDO / MDP / BP / Shared Fac. / None Name: ________________________ Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type (circle one): Major / Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): _______________ Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: Source Control (commercial / industrial land use) Describe land use: Describe any structural controls: Oil Control High-Use Site: Yes / No Treatment BMP: _________________________________ Maintenance Agreement: Yes / No with whom? _____________________________________ Other Drainage Structures Describe: REFERENCE 8-A: TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 Ref 8-A-5 Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION  Clearing Limits  Cover Measures  Perimeter Protection  Traffic Area Stabilization  Sediment Retention  Surface Water Collection  Dewatering Control  Dust Control  Flow Control  Control Pollutants  Protect Existing and Proposed BMPs/Facilities  Maintain Protective BMPs / Manage Project MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION  Stabilize exposed surfaces  Remove and restore Temporary ESC Facilities  Clean and remove all silt and debris, ensure operation of Permanent BMPs/Facilities, restore operation of BMPs/Facilities as necessary  Flag limits of sensitive areas and open space preservation areas  Other _______________________ Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facility Summary and Sketch) Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description  Detention  Infiltration  Regional Facility  Shared Facility  On-site BMPs  Other ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________  Vegetated Flowpath  Wetpool  Filtration  Oil Control  Spill Control  On-site BMPs  Other ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS  Drainage Easement  Covenant  Native Growth Protection Covenant  Tract  Other ____________________________  Cast in Place Vault  Retaining Wall  Rockery > 4′ High  Structural on Steep Slope  Other _______________________________ REFERENCE 8: PLAN REVIEW FORMS AND WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 8-A-6 Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Signed/Date DCI #: 04168.184Drawn: HMD1" = 100' FIGURE 1.2 - VICINITY MAP Civil Engineering · Surveying · Land Planning D U N C A N S O N C O M P A N Y, I N C. 145 SW 155th Street, Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98166 Phone 206.244.4141 Fax 206.244.4455 X SITE DCI #: 04168.184Drawn: HMD1" = 100' FIGURE 1.3 - SOIL MAP Civil Engineering · Surveying · Land Planning D U N C A N S O N C O M P A N Y, I N C. 145 SW 155th Street, Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98166 Phone 206.244.4141 Fax 206.244.4455 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 2. Conditions and Requirements Summary Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 2. Preliminary Conditions and Requirements Summary Following is a discussion of how the Project will conform to the Core and Special Requirements of the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (Manual). Core Requirements: 1. Discharge at the Natural Location Runoff will continue to either infiltrate in place or sheet flow in the same direction as with existing conditions. 2. Offsite Analysis A Level 1 offsite analysis has been performed for this project. See Section 3 for more information. 3. Flow Control The Site is within Renton’s Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area. The increase in 100- year peak flow from Existing to Postdeveloped conditions is less than 0.15 CFS thereby meeting the exception criteria for waiving flow control facilities. See Section 4 for more information. 4. Conveyance System No conveyance systems are proposed. 5. Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention TESC/SWPPP BMPs are discussed in Section 8 and applicable BMPs are shown on the TESC plans. 6. Maintenance and Operations It is anticipated that the City of Renton will assume maintenance of the dispersal area since it is within publicly owned property. The open graded, washed crushed rock surface of the Crown Castle lease area/equipment compound will require insignificant maintenance and in our opinion a BMP covenant is not warranted. 7. Financial Guarantees and Liability The project proponent will provide financial guarantees and liability insurance for construction of the improvements. A bond quantities worksheet is included in Section 9. 8. Water Quality The project is located within the Basic Water Quality treatment area and Zone 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area. The access drive is considered an infrequently used maintenance access road, which historically has not been considered pollution generating. Less than 5,000 SF of new/replaced PGIS is proposed. Therefore, the project is exempt from the water quality facility requirements. 9. On-Site BMPs On-Site BMPs are proposed in the form of Basic Dispersion—Sheet Flow. See Section 4. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Special Requirements: 1. Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements No Area-Specific Requirements have been identified. 2. Flood Hazard Area Delineation This site does not contain and is not adjacent to a flood hazard area; therefore, this requirement does not apply. 3. Flood Protection Facilities This project does not rely on and does not propose to modify or construct a flood protection facility; therefore, this requirement does not apply. 4. Source Control A detailed Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (CSWPPP), including appropriate source controls for site development activity is included in Section 8 of this report. 5. Oil Control This project is not a high use site; therefore, this requirement does not apply. 6. Aquifer Protection Area Per Reference 15-B of the Manual, this project site is within and Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2; however no open ponds or conveyances are proposed that would warrant special treatment. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 3. Offsite Analysis Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 3. Offsite Analysis Task 1 - Study Area Definition & Maps The study area is defined as the upstream contributing area located west of the Site and the downstream area extending 1 mile from the Project Site. Task 2 - Resource Review 1. Adopted Basin Plan, Basin Reconnaissance Summary Reports No special basin plan requirements were identified. 2. FEMA Maps The Site is entirely within Zone X. 3. Offsite Analysis Reports Finalized Drainage Studies No other offsite analyses were reviewed. 4. Critical Areas (formerly Sensitive Area Folio) COR Maps was consulted to investigate the presence of critical areas. The only critical areas shown in the study area were slopes and landslide hazard areas, but these appear to be the cut and fill slopes associated with Edmond Ave NE and NE Sunset Boulevard. 5. Soil Survey The NRCS Web Soil Survey mapping tool was used to determine mapped soil conditions. Arent, Alderwood material was shown as site soil conditions. This matches the Soil Survey in Reference 15-C of the Manual. 6. Wetlands Inventory No wetlands were identified in the study area per COR Maps. 7. Ecology/CWA 303d List Ecology’s Water Quality Atlas was consulted to check for 303d listed waters. None were identified in the study area. 7. City of Renton Erosion and Landslide Maps See 4 above. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Task 3 - Field Reconnaissance A field reconnaissance was conducted on December 9, 2021, (weather conditions were cool, cloudy with occasional showers). No evidence of flooding or erosion problems were observed. The upstream runoff is intercepted by a private drainage system to the north and Sunset Boulevard to the east. The resource review did not identify any conditions that warranted extended field review beyond a ¼ mile downstream. Task 4 - Drainage System Description And Problem Screening See Figure 3.1 – Offsite Analysis Map Upstream Upstream run-on is limited to minor amounts of back yard runoff from residential properties to the east. No concentrated flow path or evidence of any significant run-on was observed. Further east, runoff is intercepted by a thickened edge along Jefferson Ave NE so that it does not contribute to the site or study area. Component 1—Overland Flow (0’ – 350’) Runoff from the project site sheet flow generally south across landscaping. There is a yard drain on the north side of the Sunset Neighborhood building which may collect some runoff. Connectivity of this yard drain could not be verified. It likely is a local infiltration system or is possibly connected to the public storm drain in NE 12th Street. Any runoff not collected by the yard drain would flow around the building, across the parking lot and into the gutter on the north side of NE 12th Street. No evidence of flooding or erosion problems was observed. Component 2—Pipe and Catch Basin System Runoff is then collected by a catch basin in the north gutter line of NE 12th Street. Runoff is piped south, then west under NE 12th Street in a 12-inch concrete pipe. According to as-builts, the 12-inch pipe interconnects with a parallel 36-inch storm drain at Harrington Ave NE. Runoff then continues west in the 12 and 36-inch pipes to the intersection of Edmonds Ave NE where the parallel pipe systems are intercepted by a south flowing 18-inch pipe. This is approximately the 1/4-mile downstream point and the end of our field reconnaissance. No evidence of flooding or erosion problems was observed. Task 5 – Mitigation of Existing or Potential Problems The resource review and field reconnaissance did not reveal any Type 1 – 4 Problems (Conveyance System Nuisance, Severe Erosion, Severe Flooding, or Wetland Impact) that would warrant a higher level of flow control or additional mitigation beyond the On-Site BMPs. It is Duncanson Company’s opinion from the available information that the developed Site will not create or aggravate any downstream problems. DCI #: 04168.184Drawn: HMD1" = 100' FIGURE 3.1 - OFFSITE ANALYSIS MAP Civil Engineering · Surveying · Land Planning D U N C A N S O N C O M P A N Y, I N C. 145 SW 155th Street, Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98166 Phone 206.244.4141 Fax 206.244.4455 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 4. Flow Control Analysis and Design Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 4. Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design Part A – Existing Site Hydrology King County records show that the property was developed as a public library in 1973 apparently with a parking lot to the south of the building and pedestrian and landscape amenities to the north, west and east of the building. The wireless equipment compound is proposed in the landscape area north of the existing building. The access drive is proposed to extend south from an existing crushed rock alley within a public use tract that is predominantly grass and blackberries. WWHM was used to compute runoff rates. Existing conditions within the development area were modeled as 0.162 Acres of A/B, Pasture. See Figure 4.1—Predeveloped Conditions for delineation of these areas. Part B – Developed Site Hydrology Project development will result in the addition of 7,060 SF (0.162 acres) of new impervious surface in the form of access drive and the crushed rock equipment compound. The access drive with Basic Dispersion was modeled as 100% Impervious. The WWHM input parameters are therefore 0.162 acres Roads/Flat. See Figure 4.2—Postdeveloped Conditions for delineation of these areas. Part C – Performance Standards The City of Renton specifies Peak Rate Flow Control and Basic Water Quality treatment as the required performance standards for this Site. The screen shot of the WWHM Flow Frequency below shows that the project will result in 0.13 CFS (less than a 0.15 CFS) increase in 100-year peak flow. Therefore, the project meets the exception criteria for a flow control facility. See Appendix A for WWHM output report. DCI #: 04168.184Drawn: HMD1" = 100' FIGURE 4.1 - PREDEVELOPED CONDITIONS Civil Engineering · Surveying · Land Planning D U N C A N S O N C O M P A N Y, I N C. 145 SW 155th Street, Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98166 Phone 206.244.4141 Fax 206.244.4455 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Part D – Flow Control Systems BMPs The Site/Lot is larger than 22,000 SF; therefore this project is subject to the Large Lot BMP Requirement per Section 1.2.9.2.2 of the Manual. Full Dispersal is not considered feasible due to lack of available flow paths. There are no roof surfaces with this project so Full Infiltration of Roof Runoff does not apply. The new paved road extends off the end of a long crushed rock alley. Due to the potential for sediment tracking and subsequent maintenance concerns, infiltration, bioretention and permeable pavement are not considered feasible for the paved access. Therefore, Basic Dispersal (Sheet Flow) was selected as an appropriate BMP for the access road extension. For the 12-foot wide road, a minimum vegetated flow path of 10 feet is required. The equipment compound/lease area will receive little traffic. Permeable Pavement in the form of open graded (clean) crushed rock over permeable ballast was selected for the equipment compound surface. Flow Control Facility Not applicable—this project meets the exception criteria for waiver of the facility requirement as discussed above. Part E – Water Quality System Not applicable—this project involves less than 5,000 SF of new PGIS and is exempt from the water quality facility requirement. Drawn: HMD1" = 100' FIGURE 4.2 - POSTDEVELOPED CONDITIONS DCI #: 04168.184 Civil Engineering · Surveying · Land Planning D U N C A N S O N C O M P A N Y, I N C. 145 SW 155th Street, Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98166 Phone 206.244.4141 Fax 206.244.4455 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 5. Conveyance System Analysis and Design Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 5. Conveyance System Analysis and Design Not applicable—no conveyance system is proposed. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 6. Special Reports and Studies Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 6. Special Reports and Studies A geotechnical engineering report has been prepared by Tower Engineering Professionals. A copy of that report is included in this Section. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net Date: April 19, 2019 Kasheik McGee Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. Crown Castle 326 Tryon Road 2055 S. Stearman Drive Raleigh, NC 27603 Chandler, AZ 85286 (919) 661-6351 Office: (602) 845-1748 Geotech@tepgroup.net Subject: Subsurface Exploration Report CCI Designation: Site Number: 831070 Site Name: A-Team Engineering Firm Designation: TEP Project Number: 152641.247262 Site Data: 2902 NE 12th St., Renton, WA 98056 (King County) Latitude N47° 30' 13.92'', Longitude W122° 10' 49.94'' 95 Foot – Proposed Monopine Tower Dear Kasheik McGee, Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. (TEP) is pleased to submit this “Subsurface Exploration Report” to evaluate subsurface conditions in the tower area as they pertain to providing support for the tower foundation. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice for specific application to this project. The conclusions in this report are based on the applicable standards of TEP’s practice in this geographic area at the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. The analyses and recommendations submitted herein are based, in part, upon the data obtained from the subsurface exploration. The soil conditions may vary from what is represented in the boring log. While some transitions may be gradual, subsurface conditions in other areas may be quite different. Should actual site conditions vary from those presented in this report, TEP should be provided the opportunity to amend its recommendations as necessary. We at Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. appreciate the opportunity of providing our continuing professional services to you and Crown Castle. If you have any questions or need further assistance on this or any other projects please give us a call. Report Prepared/Reviewed by: Jason E. Lafollette, E.I. / John D. Longest, P.E. Respectfully submitted by: William H. Martin, P.E. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 2 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net TABLE OF CONTENTS 1) PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2) PREVIOUS EXPLORATION 3) SITE EXPLORATION 4) SITE CONDITIONS AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY 5) SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5.1) Soil 5.2) Rock 5.3) Subsurface Water 5.4) Frost 6) TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN 6.1) Shallow Foundation Table 1 - Shallow Foundation Analysis Parameters 6.2) Drilled Shaft Foundation Table 2 - Drilled Shaft Foundation Analysis Parameters 6.3) Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 7) SEISMIC 8) SOIL RESISTIVITY, pH, SULFATE, AND CHLORIDE 9) CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS - SHALLOW FOUNDATION 9.1) Excavation 9.2) Foundation Evaluation/Subgrade Preparation 9.3) Fill Placement and Compaction 9.4) Reuse of Excavated Soil 10) CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS - DRILLED SHAFTS 11) SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 12) SAMPLE PHOTOGRAPHS 13) APPENDIX A Aerial Layout Topographic Layout Boring Layout 14) APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing Summary 15) APPENDIX C Boring Log April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 3 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 1) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on the preliminary drawings, it is understood a monopine communications tower will be constructed at the referenced site. The structure loads will be provided by the tower manufacturer. 2) PREVIOUS EXPLORATION A previous subsurface exploration was not available at the time of this report. 3) SITE EXPLORATION The field exploration included the performance of one soil test boring (B-1) to the planned depth of 50 feet (bgs) at the approximate location of the proposed monopine tower. The boring was performed by a track mounted drill rig using continuous flight hollow stem augers to advance the hole. Split-spoon samples and Standard Penetration Resistance Values (N-values) were obtained in accordance with ASTM D 1586 at a frequency of four samples in the top 10 feet and two samples every 10 feet thereafter. The Split-spoon samples were transported to the TEP laboratory where they were classified by a Geotechnical Engineer in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), using visual-manual identification procedures (ASTM D 2488). Additional laboratory testing included the performance of Soil Water Content (ASTM D 2216), and Sieve Particle-Size Gradation (ASTM D 6913) tests. A Boring Location Plan showing the approximate boring location, a Boring Log presenting the subsurface information obtained and a brief guide to interpreting the boring log are included in the Appendix. 4) SITE CONDITIONS AND REGIONAL GEOLOGY The site is located at 2902 NE 12th St. in Renton, King County, Washington. The proposed tower and compound are located in an urban area. The ground topography is lightly sloping. The project site is located within the Puget Lowland physiographic province in Washington. Near surface materials in this area are generally comprised of glacial-outwash from the Pleistocene Epoch. A study of area soils from the available literature (USDA Web Soil Survey) shows that the near surface material consists of Arents, Alderwood material (AmC). Adjacent soils near surface materials consist of Urban Land (Ur) and Indianola Loamy Sand (InC). April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 4 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 5) SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The following description of subsurface conditions is brief and general. For more detailed information, the individual Boring Log contained in Appendix C - Boring Log may be consulted. 5.1) Soil The USCS classification of the materials encountered in the boring include SP and SM. The Standard Penetration Resistance (“N” Values) recorded in the materials ranged from 4 to 42 blows per foot of penetration. 5.2) Rock Rock was not encountered in the boring. Refusal of auger advancement was not encountered in the boring. 5.3) Subsurface Water Subsurface water was not encountered in the boring at the time of drilling. It should be noted the subsurface water level will fluctuate during the year, due to seasonal variations and construction activity in the area. 5.4) Frost The TIA frost depth for King County Washington is 10 inches. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 5 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 6) TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN Based on the boring data, it is the opinion of TEP that a pier extending to a single large mat foundation or a single drilled shaft can be used to support the new tower. If the drilled shaft foundation option is utilized, design of the foundation should be adjusted to terminate in a known material. The following presents TEP’s conclusions and recommendations regarding the foundation types. 6.1) Shallow Foundation The foundation should bear a minimum of 10 inches below the ground surface to penetrate the frost depth and with sufficient depth to withstand the overturning of the tower. To resist the overturning moment, the weight of the concrete and any soil directly above the foundation can be used. TEP recommends that the foundation designer specify a minimum unit weight for compacted backfill over the new foundation based on what is required to resist overturning of shallow foundations. The values are based on the current ground surface elevation and soils bearing in undisturbed native soils. Based on preliminary site information the site is located on lightly sloping ground, with approximately 2 feet of elevation change across the planned 50 foot fenced compound area. It is recommended that foundation designs account for site grades being raised with excavation spoils or that foundation drawings specify minimum embedment depths based on existing site elevations and factor in ground slopes. Table 1 - Shallow Foundation Analysis Parameters – Boring B-1 Depth Soil Gross Ultimate Bearing1 (psf) Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (degrees) Total Unit Weight2 (pcf) Friction Factor Top Bottom 0 3.5 SM 5850 - 30 105 0.36 3.5 6 SM 11250 - 30 105 0.36 6 8.5 SM 19575 - 32 105 0.39 8.5 13.5 SM 21525 - 31 105 0.38 Notes: 1) The bearing values provided are gross ultimate. 2) Total unit weights provided. Effective unit weights can be achieved by subtracting unit weight of water from the total unit weight below the subsurface water level. 3) The soil values are based on a maximum foundation size of 30 foot squared. If the foundation design size exceeds this dimension TEP should be contacted to re-evaluate soil parameters based on the actual foundation size. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 6 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 6.2) Drilled Shaft Foundation The following values may be used for analysis of a drilled shaft foundation. TEP recommends the side frictional and lateral resistance values developed in the top section of the caisson for a depth equal to the half the diameter of the caisson or the frost depth, whichever is greater, be neglected in the calculations. The values are based on the current ground surface elevation. Table 2 – Drilled Shaft Foundation Analysis Parameters Depth Soil Gross Ultimate Bearing1 (psf) Ultimate Side Frictional Resistance2 (psf) Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (degrees) Total Unit Weight3 (pcf) Top Bottom 0 3.5 SM 1250 70 - 30 105 3.5 6 SM 6150 200 - 30 105 6 8.5 SM 14975 330 - 32 105 8.5 13.5 SM 18175 490 - 31 105 13.5 18.5 SM 42000 800 - 34 112 18.5 23.5 SM 55700 1070 - 34 113 23.5 28.5 SP 87325 1430 - 36 113 28.5 33.5 SP 142500 1890 - 39 114 33.5 38.5 SP 182175 2280 - 40 114 38.5 43.5 SP 207700 2690 - 41 115 43.5 48.5 SP 173075 2680 - 37 113 48.5 50 SP 213075 2970 - 38 114 Notes: 1) The bearing values provided are gross ultimate. If the bearing depth of the foundation is less than 5 diameters below the ground surface the bearing values listed in Table 1 – Shallow Foundation Analysis Parameters should be utilized. 2) The side frictional resistance values provided are ultimate. 3) Total unit weights provided. Effective unit weights can be achieved by subtracting unit weight of water from the total unit weight below the subsurface water level. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 7 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 6.3) Modulus of Subgrade Reaction A vertical modulus of subgrade reaction and a horizontal modulus of subgrade reaction may be derived using the following equations and soil parameters for analysis of foundations. ks-v = 12 (SF) Qa ks-h = ks-v B Qa = Allowable Bearing Capacity (ksf) SF = Factor of Safety B = Base width (ft), use 1 if B<1ft. ks-v = Vertical Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (kcf) ks-h = Horizontal Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (ksf) 7) SEISMIC The Site Class per Section 1613.3.2, of the 2015 International Building Code (2015 IBC) and Chapter 20 of ASCE 7 (2010) based on the site soil conditions is Site Class D. 8) SOIL RESISTIVITY, pH, SULFATE, AND CHLORIDE Soil resistivity was performed at the TEP laboratory in accordance with ASTM G187-05 (Standard Test Method for Measurement of Soil Resistivity Using the Two Electrode Soil Box Method). Test results indicated a result of 25,000 ohms-cm. The pH testing was performed at the TEP laboratory utilizing a Hanna Instruments Direct Soil pH Meter. Test results indicated a pH of 9.28. Sulfate and chloride testing was performed at the TEP laboratory utilizing chemical analysis. Test results indicate a sulfate content of 50 ppm and a chloride content of 25 ppm. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 8 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 9) CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS - SHALLOW FOUNDATION 9.1) Excavation The boring data indicates excavation to the expected subgrade level for the shallow foundation will extend through sand. A large tracked excavator should be able to remove the materials with minimal to moderate difficulty. Excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance with local, state and federal regulations, including OSHA (29 CFR Part 1926) excavation trench safety standards. It is the responsibility of the contractor for site safety. This information is provided as a service and under no circumstance should TEP be assumed responsible for construction site safety. 9.2) Foundation Evaluation/Subgrade Preparation After excavation to the design elevation for the footing, the materials should be evaluated by a Geotechnical Engineer or a representative of the Geotechnical Engineer prior to reinforcement and concrete placement. This evaluation should include probing, shallow hand auger borings and dynamic cone penetrometer testing (ASTM STP-399) to help verify that suitable residual material lies directly under the foundation and to determine the need for any undercut and replacement of unsuitable materials. Loose surficial material should be compacted in the excavation prior to reinforcement and concrete placement to stabilize surface soil that may have become loose during the excavation process. TEP recommends a 6-inch layer of compacted crushed stone be placed just after excavation to aid in surface stability. 9.3) Fill Placement and Compaction Backfill materials placed above the shallow foundation to the design subgrade elevation should not contain more than 5 percent by weight of organic matter, waste, debris or any otherwise deleterious materials. To be considered for use, backfill materials should have a maximum dry density of at least 100 pounds per cubic foot as determined by standard Proctor (ASTM D 698), a Liquid Limit no greater than 40, a Plasticity Index no greater than 20, a maximum particle size of 4 inches, and 20 percent or less of the material having a particle size between 2 and 4 inches. Because small handheld or walk- behind compaction equipment will most likely be used, backfill should be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding 6 inches (loose). Fill placement should be monitored by a qualified Materials Technician working under the direction of a Geotechnical Engineer. In addition to the visual evaluation, a sufficient amount of in-place field density tests should be conducted to confirm the required compaction is being attained. 9.4) Reuse of Excavated Soil The sand that meets the above referenced criteria can be utilized as backfill based on dry soil and site conditions at the time of construction. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 9 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 10) CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS - DRILLED SHAFTS Based on TEP’s experience a conventional drilled shaft rig (Hughes Tool LDH or equivalent) can be used to excavate to the termination depth of TEP’s boring. An earth auger can typically penetrate the materials encountered to the termination depth of the boring with minimal to moderate difficulty. Materials below the auger refusal depth may require a coring bit or roller-bit to remove the material. Special excavation equipment may be necessary for a shaft greater that 60-inches in diameter. If hole collapse is encountered during construction, the design and geotechnical engineers should be contacted immediately to make any necessary adjustments. The following are general procedure recommendations in drilled shaft construction using the “dry” method: 1) Drilling equipment should have cutting teeth to result in a hole with little or no soil smeared or caked on the sides; a spiral like corrugated side should be produced. The shaft diameter should be at least equal to the design diameter for the full depth. 2) The drilled shaft should be drilled to satisfy a plumbness tolerance of 1.5 to 2 percent of the length and an eccentricity tolerance of 2 to 3 inches from plan location. 3) Refer to Section 4.3 for subsurface water information. Water will fluctuate during the year and during rain events. Any subsurface water should be removed by pumping, leaving no more than 3 inches in the bottom of the shaft excavation. 4) A removable steel casing should be installed in the shaft for dry excavations extending beyond 15 feet to prevent caving of the excavation sides due to soil relaxation. Loose soils in the bottom of the shaft should be removed. 5) The drilled shaft should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer or their representative to confirm suitable end bearing conditions and to verify the proper diameter and bottom cleanliness. The shaft should be evaluated immediately prior to and during concrete operations. 6) The drilled shaft should be concreted as soon as practical after excavation to reduce the deterioration of the supporting soils due to caving and subsurface water intrusion. 7) The slump of the concrete is critical for the development of side shear resistance. TEP recommends a concrete mix having a slump of 6 to 8 inches be used with the minimum compressive strength specified by the structural engineer. A mix design incorporating super plasticizer will likely be required to obtain this slump. 8) The concrete may be allowed to fall freely through the open area in the reinforcing steel cage provided it is not allowed to strike the reinforcing steel or the casing prior to reaching the bottom of the shaft excavation. 9) The protective steel casing should be extracted as concrete is placed. A head of concrete should be maintained above the bottom of the casing to prevent soil and water intrusion into the concrete below the casing. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 10 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net Due to the sandy soil, the contractor may elect to utilize the “slurry” method for shaft construction. The following are general procedure recommendations in drilled shaft construction using the “slurry” method: 1) Slurry drilled shafts are constructed by conventional caisson drill rigs excavating beneath a drilling mud slurry. Typically, the slurry is introduced into the excavation after the groundwater table has been penetrated and/or the soils on the sides of the excavation are observed to be caving-in. When the design shaft depth is reached, fluid concrete is placed through a tremie pipe at the bottom of the excavation. 2) The slurry level should be maintained at a minimum of 5 feet or one shaft diameter, whichever is greater, above the subsurface water level. 3) Inspection during excavation should include verification of plumbness, maintenance of sufficient slurry head, monitoring the specific gravity, pH and sand content of the drilling slurry, and monitoring any changes in the depth of the excavation between initial approval and prior to concreting. 4) A removable steel casing may be installed in the shaft to prevent caving of the excavation sides due to soil relaxation. Loose soils in the bottom of the shaft should be removed. 5) The specific gravity or relative density of the drilling mud slurry should be monitored from the initial mixing to the completion of the excavation. An increase in the specific gravity or density of the drilling slurry by as much as 10 percent is indicative of soil particles settling out of the slurry onto the bottom of the excavation. This settling will result in a reduction of the allowable bearing capacity of the bottom of the drilled shaft. 6) After approval, the drilled shaft should be concreted as soon as practical using a tremie pipe. 7) For slurry drilled shafts, the concrete should have a 6 to 8 inch slump prior to discharge into the tremie. The bottom of the tremie should be set at about one tremie pipe diameter above the excavation. A closure flap at the bottom of the tremie should be used, or a sliding plug introduced into the tremie before the concrete, to reduce the potential for the concrete being contaminated by the slurry. The bottom of the tremie must be maintained in concrete during placement, which should be continuous. 8) The protective steel casing should be extracted as concrete is placed. A head of concrete should be maintained above the bottom of the casing to prevent soil and water intrusion into the concrete below the casing. 9) Additional concrete should be placed via the tremie causing the slurry to overflow from the excavation in order to reduce the likelihood of slurry pockets remaining in the drilled shaft. If variability in the subsurface materials is encountered, a representative of the Geotechnical Engineer should verify that the design parameters are valid during construction. Modification to the design values presented above may be required in the field. April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 11 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 11) SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Bentonite Backfill Boring Location April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 12 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net 12) SAMPLE PHOTOGRAPHS Jar Samples Jar Samples Jar Samples April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 13 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net APPENDIX A AERIAL LAYOUT, TOPOGRAPHIC LAYOUT, & BORING LAYOUT C-1 AERIAL LAYOUT 0 152641.247262A-TEAM SITE #: 831070 TOWER ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS (919) 661-6351 RALEIGH, NC 27603 326 TRYON ROAD www.tepgroup.net C-2 TOPOGRAPHIC LAYOUT 0 152641.247262A-TEAM SITE #: 831070 TOWER ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS (919) 661-6351 RALEIGH, NC 27603 326 TRYON ROAD www.tepgroup.net 0 152641.247262A-TEAM SITE #: 831070 TOWER ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS (919) 661-6351 RALEIGH, NC 27603 326 TRYON ROAD www.tepgroup.net C-3 BORING LAYOUT April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 14 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING SUMMARY Project Name:Date: TEP Project No.:Engineer:JDL Boring Sample ID Depth Moisture Content Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Percent Fines [ft][%][%] B-1 S1 1 14.9 - - - - B-1 S2 3.5 14.5 - - - 14.6 B-1 S3 6 15.8 - - - - B-1 S4 8.5 16.4 - - - - B-1 S5 13.5 8.4 - - - - B-1 S6 18.5 17.1 - - - - B-1 S7 23.5 9.3 - - - 2.7 B-1 S8 28.5 10.5 - - - - B-1 S9 33.5 8.1 - - - - B-1 S10 38.5 8.7 - - - - B-1 S11 43.5 9.0 - - - - B-1 S12 48.5 7.7 - - - - - 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 (Ph) 919.661.6351 (Fax) 919.661.6350 Laboratory Results Summary Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. - Silty sand (SM), with sand 831070 - A-Team 152641.247262 April 18, 2019 USCS Soil Classification - - - - - - - Poorly graded sand (SP) - Project Name:Date: TEP Project No.:Engineer:JDL Boring B-1 Sample S-2 Depth 3.5 Sieve Number Percent Passing [%] 3/8"87.2 4 82.5 10 78.9 20 74.6 40 65.1 60 49.7 100 33.7 140 23.0 200 14.6 *Values extrapolated linearly from measured values Boring B-1 Sample S-7 Depth 23.5 Sieve Number Percent Passing [%] 3/8"100.0 4 100.0 10 99.8 20 99.4 40 88.1 60 44.0 100 12.3 140 5.8 200 2.7 Particle Size Analysis Results ASTM D 6913 Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 (Ph) 919.661.6351 (Fax) 919.661.6350 831070 - A-Team April 18, 2019 152641.247262 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.1110100Percent Passing [%]Particle Size [mm] D60 = 0.365 mm D50 = 0.255 mm D30 = 0.134 mm D10 = 0.051 mm* Cu = 7.1 Cc = 1.0 SandGravel Fines 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010.1110100Percent Passing [%]Particle Size [mm] D60 = 0.313 mm D50 = 0.274 mm D30 = 0.206 mm D10 = 0.134 mm Cu = 2.3 Cc = 1.0 SandGravel Fines April 19, 2019 95 Ft Monopine Subsurface Exploration Report A-Team 831070 Project Number 152641.247262 Page 15 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Performed By: Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 O) 919.661.6351 F) 919.661.6350 website: http://www.tepgroup.net APPENDIX C BORING LOG S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 0.0-13.5: Loose, brown, fine to coarse, silty SAND(SM), with gravel, moist 13.5-23.5: to medium dense 23.5-28.5: Medium dense, brown, fine to medium, poorly graded SAND (SP), trace silt, moist 28.5-50.0: to dense 50.0: Boring Terminated Calibrated Auto Hammer ETR: 97% 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 1-2-2(4) 2-2-2(4) 2-3-5 (8) 3-3-5(8) 6-6-8 (14) 8-7-8 (15) 10-12-10 (22) 10-13-18(31) 13-14-22 (36) 15-18-24(42) 10-12-18(30) 14-18-18(36) HOLE SIZE 140lbs / 30in HAMMER WEIGHT/FALL GROUND EL. Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY CHECKED BY Renton, Washington BACKFILL Bentonite LOG OF BORING B-1 PROJECT TEP NO.: DRILLING METHOD JDL Auto HammerDATE COMPLETE DEPTH/EL. GROUNDWATER OF 11 CITY, STATE BORING LOCATION HAMMER TYPE TOTAL DEPTH 831070 50.0 FT JEL UNIT WEIGHTPCF4in POCKET PENTSFSITE ID: REMARKS SAMPLE NUMBERUNCONFINEDSTRENGTH, PSFAt the approximate location of the proposed tower 152641 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DRILL RIG TYPE B-57 DEPTH(FEET)5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50ELEVATION(FEET)USCS GRAPHICSAMPLE GRAPHICSAMPLE LENGTH(INCHES)BLOW COUNTS(N)REC% / RQD%DATE STARTED A-Team 4/15/2019 Not Encountered 4/15/2019 Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon RoadRaleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: 919-661-6351 Email: geotech@tepgroup.com Key to Soil Symbols and Terms TERMS DESCRIBING CONSISTENCY OR CONDITION COARSE-GRAINED SOILS (major portions retained on No. 200 sieve): includes (1) clean gravel and sands and (2) silty or clayey gravels and sands. Condition is rated according to relative density as determined by laboratory tests or standard penetration resistance tests. Descriptive Terms SPT Blow Count Very Loose < 4 Loose 4 to 10 Medium Dense 11 to 30 Dense 31 to 50 Very Dense > 50 FINE-GRAINED SOILS (major portions passing on No. 200 sieve): includes (1) inorganic and organic silts and clays (2) gravelly, sandy, or silty clays, and (3) clayey silts. Consistency is rated according to shearing strength, as indicated by penetrometer readings, SPT blow count, or unconfined compression tests. Descriptive Terms SPT Blow Count Very Soft < 2 Soft 2 to 4 Medium Stiff 5 to 8 Stiff 9 to 15 Very Stiff 16 to 30 Hard > 30 GENERAL NOTES 1. Classifications are bases on the Unified Soil Classification System and include consistency, moisture, and color. Field descriptions have been modified to reflect results of laboratory tests where deemed appropriate. 2. Surface elevations are based on topographic maps and estimated locations and should be considered approximate. 3. Descriptions on these boring logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were made. They are not guaranteed to be representative of subsurface condition at other locations or times. Group Symbols GW GP GC SW SP SC ML CL OL MH PT OH CH Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Poorly-graded gravels, little or no fines/sands Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures Split Spoon Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock floor, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts Peat and other highly organic soils Poorly-graded sands, little or no fines/sands/gravels Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays Inorganic silts, micaceous or distomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts Pushed Shelby Tube Auger Cuttings Grab Sample Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Hand Auger Rock Core Typical Names Sampler Symbols Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: 919-661-6351 Email: Geotech@tepgroup.net GM SM Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Log Abbreviations ATD - At Time of Drilling AD - After Drilling EOD - End of Drilling RMR - Rock Mass Rating WOH - Weight of Hammer WOR - Weight of Rod REC - Rock Core Recovery RQD - Rock Quality Designation Information Information Information Information RRRRegarding egarding egarding egarding TTTThis his his his Subsurface Exploration ReportSubsurface Exploration ReportSubsurface Exploration ReportSubsurface Exploration Report The information contained in this report has been specifically tailored to the needs of the client at the time the report was provided, for the specific purpose of the project named in this report. The attached report may not address the needs of contractors, civil engineers, or structural engineers. Anyone other than the named client should consult with the geotechnical engineer prior to utilizing the information contained in the report. It is always recommended that the full report be read. While certain aspects of the report may seem unnecessary or irrelevant; just as each project and site are unique, so are the subsurface investigation reports and the information contained in them. Several factors can influence the contents of these reports, and the geotechnical engineer has taken into consideration the specific project, the project location, the client’s objectives, potential future improvements, etc. If there is any question about whether the attached report pertains to your specific project or if you would like to verify that certain factors were considered in the preparation of this report, it is recommended that you contact the geotechnical engineer. Geotechnical subsurface investigations often are prepared during the preliminary stages of a project and aspects of the project may change later on. Some changes may require a report revision or additional exploration. Some changes that often need to be brought to the attention of the geotechnical engineer include changes in location, size and/or type of structure, modifications to existing structures, grading around the project site, etc. Some naturally occurring changes can also develop that impact the information contained in this geotechnical report such as earthquakes, landslides, floods, subsurface water levels changing, etc. It is always recommended that the geotechnical be informed of known changes at the project site. Subsurface exploration reports are generated based on the analysis and professional opinions of a geotechnical engineer based on the results of field and laboratory data. Often subsurface conditions can vary – sometimes significantly – across a site and over short distances. It often is helpful to retain the geotechnical engineer’s services during the construction process. Otherwise, the geotechnical cannot assume responsibility or liability for report recommendations which may have needed to change based on changing site conditions or misinterpretation of recommendations. Geotechnical engineers assemble testing and/or boring logs based on their interpretation of field and laboratory data. Testing and/or boring logs should always be coupled with the subsurface exploration report. The geotechnical engineer and Tower Engineering Professionals cannot be held reliable for interpretations, analyses, or recommendations based solely on the testing and/or boring log if it is independent of the prepared report. The scope of the subsurface exploration report does not include an assessment or analysis of environmental conditions, determination of the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic materials on or below the ground surface. Any notes regarding odors, fill, debris, or anything of that nature are offered as general information for the client, often to help identify or delineate natural soil boundaries. For additional information, please contact the geotechnical engineer named in the attached report. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 7. Other Permits Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 7. Other Permits No outside agency permits are anticipated. Less than 1 ac will be disturbed for the total project development; therefore, NPDES coverage is not required. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 8. CSWPPP Analysis and Design Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 8. CSWPPP Analysis and Design Part A – ESC Plan Analysis and Design Core Requirement #5 stipulates 13 elements be incorporated into project construction to minimize erosion and limit sediment transport to drainage facilities, water resources and adjacent properties. The following brief narrative discusses compliance with each of the 13 elements: 1. Clearing Limits Clearing limits have been delineated on the TESC plans. 2. Cover Measures Cover measures are anticipated to include temporary plastic covering on stock piles, if any and permanent seeded of disturbed areas outside of the proposed pavement areas. Applicable notes and cover practices are shown on the TESC plans. 3. Perimeter Protection Perimeter protection will be used as Primary Treatment and will consist of silt fence (in accordance with Appendix D, Section D.2.1.3 of the Manual). Fence location and installation has been specified on the TESC plans. 4. Traffic Area Stabilization A stabilized construction entrance will be used to limit sediment transport. The entrance location and details are shown on the TESC Plans. 5. Sediment Retention Given the relatively small disturbed area, Silt Fence is proposed for the primary sediment retention BMP. 6. Surface Water Collection There are no existing or proposed concentrated collection or discharge points. This element is not applicable. 7. Dewatering Control When to Install: Dewatering control measures shall be used whenever there is a potential for runoff from dewatering of utilities, excavations, foundations, etc. Measures to install: 1. Foundation, vault, excavation, and trench dewatering water that has similar characteristics to stormwater runoff at the site shall be discharged into a controlled conveyance system prior to discharge to a sediment trap or sediment pond. Foundation and trench dewatering water that has similar characteristics to stormwater runoff at the site must be disposed of through one of the following options depending on site constraints: a) Infiltration, b) Transport offsite in a vehicle, such as a vacuum flush truck, for legal disposal in a manner that does not pollute surface waters, Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 c) Discharge to the sanitary sewer discharge with approval from King County and the City of Renton if there is no other option, or d) Use of a sedimentation bag with outfall to a ditch or swale for small volumes of localized dewatering. 2. Clean, non-turbid dewatering water, such as well-point ground water, may be discharged via stable conveyance to systems tributary to surface waters, provided the dewatering flow does not cause erosion or flooding of receiving waters. 3. Highly turbid or contaminated dewatering water (high pH or other) shall be handled separately from stormwater. See Section D.2.2 , SWPPS Measures. 8. Dust Control Sprinkling of exposed surfaces as well as cover practices (plastic covering, hydroseeding, etc.) are recommended for dust control. 9. Flow Control The project is below the threshold for requiring flow control. This element is not applicable. 10. Control Pollutants See the SWPPS discussion in Part B below. 11. Protect Existing and Proposed Stormwater Facilities and BMPs There are no existing stormwater facilities or BMPs. The dispersal area is shown to be outside the clearing limits on the TESC plans. 12. Maintain Protective BMPs The contractor shall maintain the BMPs in accordance with the TESC notes. 13. Manage the Project As required by the City of Renton, the contractor shall designate an erosion control lead/supervisor. Part B – SWPPS Plan Design The following brief narrative discusses compliance with the minimum pollution-generating activities typically associated with construction as required for the SWPPS plan: Storage and Handling of Liquids Paints, solvents, pesticides, form oils and concrete admixtures are anticipated but shall be kept inside garage or under cover and out of elements. Application to comply with all local, state and federal requirements and manufacturer recommendations. Storage and Stockpiling of Construction Materials and Wastes Storage and stockpiling of materials will occur on site. A stockpile location is located on the TESC plans. A plastic covering detail and note is included in the plans(in accordance with KCSWDM Appendix D, Section D.3.2.D) for covering soil stockpiles. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Fueling Fueling is expected to be provided by service trucks. On-site storage of fuel is not anticipated. A note is include on the plans specifying lighting if fueling will occur at night. Maintenance, Repairs and Storage of Vehicles and Equipment A note is included on the plans that specify the use of drip pans or plastic when maintenance is performed. Concrete Saw Cutting, Slurry and Washwater Disposal A sump is shown on the plans for slurry and washwater disposal. Handling of pH Elevated Water Concrete flatwork including building and sidewalks will be less than 10,000 SF and runoff will sheetflow to surrounding areas. Most concrete will be covered with roof within several months. The size of exposed concrete surfaces and the duration of exposure are not anticipated to be substantial enough to cause any significant pH change. Application of Chemicals including Pesticides and Fertilizers No pesticides are anticipated. Disturbed slopes are anticipated to be stabilized by hydroseeding. No other fertilizer application is anticipated. Source Controls This project includes construction of a street, utilities, and street and asphalt shoulder widening. Various types of source controls were considered; the following source controls shall be implemented (refer to the King County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual): - A-8: Storage of Solid Waste and Food Waste - A-13: Vehicle Washing and Steam Cleaning - A-17: Fueling Operations - A-18: Vehicle & Equipment Repair and Maintenance - A-26: Landscaping Activities - A-27: Clearing and Grading of Land for Small Construction Projects - A-31: Vehicle and Equipment Parking and Storage A note is included on the plans that specifies that the contractor shall develop a spill prevention plan and maintain appropriate spill response supplies for any toxic or hazardous liquids stored or used on site. Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 9. Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 9. Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant Bond quantity worksheets are included on the following pages. There are no facilities. A Declaration of Covenant is not expected to be required. 1055 South Grady Way – 6th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430‐7200••Section I: Project Information•••Section II: Bond Quantities Worksheets•• Section II.a  EROSION CONTROL (Stabilization/Erosion Sediment Control (ESC))• Section II.b TRANSPORTATION (Street and Site Improvements)• Section II.c  DRAINAGE (Drainage and Stormwater Facilities): • Section II.d WATER ‐ONLY APPLICABLE IF WATER SERVICE IS PROVIDED BY CITY OF RENTON• Section II.e SANITARY SEWER  ‐ ONLY APPLICABLE IF SEWER SERVICE IS PROVIDED BY CITY OF RENTON••••••Section III. Bond Worksheet•BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET INSTRUCTIONSThis worksheet is intended to be a "working" copy of the bond quantity worksheet, which will be used throughout all phases of the project, from initial submittal to project close‐out approval. Submit this workbook, in its entirety, as follows:The following forms are to be completed by the engineer/developer/applicant as applicable to the project: The Bond Worksheet form will auto‐calculate and auto‐populate from the information provided in Section I and Section II.This section includes all pertinent information for the projectSection II contains a separate spreadsheet TAB for each of the following specialties: (1) electronic copy (.xlsx format) and (1) hard copy of the entire workbook for civil construction permit submittal. Hard copies are to be included as part of the Technical Information Report (TIR).(1) electronic copy (.xlsx format) and (1) hard copy of the entire workbook for final close‐out submittal.This section must be completed in its entiretyInformation from this section auto‐populates to all other relevant areas of the workbookThis section calculates the required Permit Bond for construction permit issuance as well as the required Maintenance Bond for project close‐out submittals to release the permit bond on a project. All unit prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead, profit, and taxes. Complete the 'Quantity' columns for each of the appropriate section(s). Include existing Right‐of‐Way (ROW), Future Public Improvements and Private Improvements.The 'Quantity Remaining' column is only to be used when a project is under construction.  The City allows one (1) bond reduction during the life of the project with the exception of the maintenance period reduction.Excel will auto‐calculate and auto‐populate the relevant fields and subtotals throughout the document.  Only the 'Quantity' columns should need completing.Additional items not included in the lists can be added under the "write‐in" sections. Provide a complete description, cost estimate and unit of measure for each write‐in item. Note: Private improvements, with the exception of stormwater facilities, are not included in the bond amount calculation, but must be entered on the form. Stormwater facilities (public and private) are required to be included in the bond amount.Page 1 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetINSTRUCTIONSUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 1055 South Grady Way – 6th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430‐7200Date Prepared: Name:PE Registration No:Firm Name:Firm Address:Phone No.Email Address:Project Name:  Project Owner:CED Plan # (LUA): Phone:CED Permit # (C):Address: Site Address:Street Intersection: Addt'l Project Owner:Parcel #(s): Phone:Address: Clearing and grading greater than or equal to 5,000 board feet of timber? Yes/No:NOWater Service Provided by:If Yes, Provide Forest Practice Permit #:Sewer Service Provided by: Abbreviated Legal Description:Lot 1 City of Renton Land Use Action LUA16‐000960, King County Recording Number 201705199000042902 NE 12th Street17311 135th Ave NE, Suite A‐100ATTN: Jennifer TaylorStreet IntersectionTBDTBD 206‐228‐21273/10/2023Prepared by:FOR APPROVALProject Phase 1haroldd@duncansonco.comHarold Duncanson29647Duncanson Co145 SW 155th Street, #102, Seattle, 98166206‐244‐4141SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETPROJECT INFORMATIONCITY OF RENTONCITY OF RENTONEngineer Stamp Required (all cost estimates must have original wet stamp and signature)Clearing and Grading Utility ProvidersN/AProject Location and Description Project Owner InformationCrown Castle A‐TeamWoodinville, WA 980727227802040Crown Castle USA, Inc c/o Lynx ConsultingPage 2 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION I PROJECT INFORMATIONUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 10.1%2 All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead, profit, and taxes. City of Renton Sales Tax is:1 Select the current project status/phase from the following options: For Approval - Preliminary Data Enclosed, pending approval from the City; For Construction - Estimated Data Enclosed, Plans have been approved for contruction by the City; Project Closeout - Final Costs and Quantities Enclosed for Project Close-out Submittal-$ Total Estimated Construction CostsEA + B + C + D57,790.11$ Estimated Civil Construction Permit - Construction Costs2Stormwater (Drainage)C-$ As outlined in City Ordinance No. 4345, 50% of the plan review and inspection fees are to be paid at Permit Submittal. The balance is due at Permit Issuance. Significant changes or additional review cycles (beyond 3 cycles) during the review process may result in adjustments to the final review fees.Roadway (Erosion Control + Transportation)D57,790.11$ WaterA-$ Wastewater (Sanitary Sewer)BPage 2 of 2Ref 8-H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION I PROJECT INFORMATIONUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDUnitReference # Price Unit Quantity  CostBackfill & compaction‐embankmentESC‐17.50$                                             CYCheck dams, 4" minus rockESC‐2SWDM 5.4.6.390.00$                                           EachCatch Basin ProtectionESC‐3145.00$                                        EachCrushed surfacing 1 1/4" minusESC‐4WSDOT 9‐03.9(3)110.00$                                        CYDitchingESC‐510.50$                                           CYExcavation‐bulkESC‐62.30$                                             CYFence, siltESC‐7SWDM 5.4.3.15.00$                                             LF 3001,500.00Fence, Temporary (NGPE)ESC‐81.75$                                             LFGeotextile FabricESC‐93.00$                                             SYHay Bale Silt TrapESC‐100.60$                                             EachHydroseedingESC‐11SWDM 5.4.2.40.90$                                             SY 450405.00Interceptor Swale / DikeESC‐121.15$                                             LFJute MeshESC‐13SWDM 5.4.2.24.00$                                             SYLevel SpreaderESC‐142.00$                                             LFMulch, by hand, straw, 3" deepESC‐15SWDM 5.4.2.12.90$                                             SYMulch, by machine, straw, 2" deepESC‐16SWDM 5.4.2.12.30$                                             SYPiping, temporary, CPP, 6"ESC‐1713.75$                                           LFPiping, temporary, CPP, 8"ESC‐1816.00$                                           LFPiping, temporary, CPP, 12"ESC‐1920.50$                                           LFPlastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbaggedESC‐20SWDM 5.4.2.34.60$                                             SYRip Rap, machine placed; slopesESC‐21WSDOT 9‐13.1(2)51.00$                                           CYRock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1'ESC‐22SWDM 5.4.4.12,050.00$                                     EachRock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1'ESC‐23SWDM 5.4.4.13,675.00$                                     Each 13,675.00Sediment pond riser assemblyESC‐24SWDM 5.4.5.22,525.00$                                     EachSediment trap, 5'  high berm ESC‐25SWDM 5.4.5.122.00$                                           LFSed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section ESC‐26SWDM 5.4.5.180.00$                                           LFSeeding, by handESC‐27SWDM 5.4.2.41.15$                                             SYSodding, 1" deep, level groundESC‐28SWDM 5.4.2.59.20$                                             SYSodding, 1" deep, sloped groundESC‐29SWDM 5.4.2.511.50$                                           SYTESC SupervisorESC‐30125.00$                                        HR 121,500.00Water truck, dust controlESC‐31SWDM 5.4.7160.00$                                        HR 2320.00UnitReference # Price Unit Quantity  Cost750.00$                                        LS 1750.00EROSION/SEDIMENT SUBTOTAL: 8,150.00SALES TAX @ 10.1% 823.15EROSION/SEDIMENT TOTAL: 8,973.15(A)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROLDescription No.(A)Misc clean up, sweepingWRITE‐IN‐ITEMS Page 4 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.a EROSION_CONTROLUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExistingFuture PublicPrivateRight-of-WayImprovementsImprovements(D) (E)DescriptionNo. Unit PriceUnitQuant.CostQuant.CostQuant.CostQuant.CostGENERAL ITEMS Backfill & Compaction- embankmentGI-17.00$ CY2301,610.00Backfill & Compaction- trenchGI-210.25$ CYClear/Remove Brush, by hand (SY)GI-31.15$ SYBollards - fixedGI-4275.00$ EachBollards - removableGI-5520.00$ EachClearing/Grubbing/Tree RemovalGI-611,475.00$ Acre0.252,868.75Excavation - bulkGI-72.30$ CYExcavation - TrenchGI-85.75$ CYFencing, cedar, 6' highGI-923.00$ LFFencing, chain link, 4'GI-1044.00$ LFFencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' highGI-1123.00$ LF20460.00Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 20' GI-121,600.00$ Each23,200.00Fill & compact - common barrowGI-1328.75$ CYFill & compact - gravel baseGI-1431.00$ CYFill & compact - screened topsoilGI-1544.75$ CYGabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh GI-1674.50$ SYGabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh GI-17103.25$ SYGabion, 36" deep, stone filled meshGI-18172.00$ SYGrading, fine, by handGI-192.90$ SYGrading, fine, with graderGI-202.30$ SY10002,300.00Monuments, 3' LongGI-211,025.00$ EachSensitive Areas SignGI-228.00$ EachSodding, 1" deep, sloped groundGI-239.25$ SYSurveying, line & gradeGI-24975.00$ Day0.5487.50Surveying, lot location/linesGI-252,050.00$ AcreTopsoil Type A (imported)GI-2632.75$ CYTraffic control crew ( 2 flaggers )GI-27137.75$ HRTrail, 4" chipped woodGI-289.15$ SYTrail, 4" crushed cinderGI-2910.25$ SYTrail, 4" top courseGI-3013.75$ SYConduit, 2"GI-315.75$ LFWall, retaining, concreteGI-3263.00$ SFWall, rockeryGI-3317.25$ SFSUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:10,926.25(B)(C)(D)(E)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTSQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C)Page 1 of 3Ref 8-H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.b TRANSPORTATIONUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExistingFuture PublicPrivateRight-of-WayImprovementsImprovements(D) (E)DescriptionNo. Unit PriceUnitQuant.CostQuant.CostQuant.CostQuant.CostSITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTSQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C)ROAD IMPROVEMENT/PAVEMENT/SURFACINGAC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000syRI-134.50$ SYAC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000syRI-218.25$ SYAC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000syRI-311.50$ SYAC Removal/DisposalRI-440.00$ SYBarricade, Type III ( Permanent )RI-564.25$ LFGuard RailRI-634.50$ LFCurb & Gutter, rolledRI-719.50$ LFCurb & Gutter, verticalRI-814.25$ LFCurb and Gutter, demolition and disposalRI-920.50$ LFCurb, extruded asphaltRI-106.25$ LFCurb, extruded concreteRI-118.00$ LFSawcut, asphalt, 3" depthRI-123.00$ LF40120.00Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depthRI-135.00$ LFSealant, asphaltRI-142.25$ LFShoulder, gravel, 4" thickRI-1517.25$ SYSidewalk, 4" thickRI-1643.50$ SYSidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and disposalRI-1737.00$ SYSidewalk, 5" thickRI-1847.00$ SYSidewalk, 5" thick, demolition and disposalRI-1946.00$ SYSign, Handicap RI-2097.00$ EachStriping, per stallRI-218.00$ EachStriping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk )RI-223.50$ SFStriping, 4" reflectorized lineRI-230.55$ LFAdditional 2.5" Crushed SurfacingRI-244.15$ SYHMA 1/2" Overlay 1.5" RI-2516.00$ SYHMA 1/2" Overlay 2"RI-2620.75$ SYHMA Road, 2", 4" rock, First 2500 SYRI-2732.25$ SYHMA Road, 2", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500SYRI-2824.00$ SYHMA Road, 4", 6" rock, First 2500 SYRI-2951.75$ SY55028,462.50HMA Road, 4", 6" rock, Qty. over 2500 SYRI-3042.50$ SYHMA Road, 4", 4.5" ATBRI-3143.50$ SYGravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SYRI-3217.25$ SY2804,830.00Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SYRI-3311.50$ SYThickened EdgeRI-3410.00$ LFSUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:33,412.50(B)(C)(D)(E)Page 2 of 3Ref 8-H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.b TRANSPORTATIONUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExistingFuture PublicPrivateRight-of-WayImprovementsImprovements(D) (E)DescriptionNo. Unit PriceUnitQuant.CostQuant.CostQuant.CostQuant.CostSITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTSQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C)PARKING LOT SURFACINGNo.2" AC, 2" top course rock & 4" borrowPL-124.00$ SY2" AC, 1.5" top course & 2.5" base coursePL-232.00$ SY4" select borrowPL-35.75$ SY1.5" top course rock & 2.5" base coursePL-416.00$ SYSUBTOTAL PARKING LOT SURFACING:(B)(C)(D)(E)LANDSCAPING & VEGETATIONNo.Street TreesLA-1Median LandscapingLA-2Right-of-Way LandscapingLA-3Wetland LandscapingLA-4SUBTOTAL LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION:(B)(C)(D)(E)TRAFFIC & LIGHTINGNo.SignsTR-1Street Light System ( # of Poles)TR-2Traffic SignalTR-3Traffic Signal ModificationTR-4SUBTOTAL TRAFFIC & LIGHTING:(B)(C)(D)(E)WRITE-IN-ITEMSSUBTOTAL WRITE-IN ITEMS:STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL:44,338.75SALES TAX @ 10.1%4,478.21STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL:48,816.96(B)(C)(D)(E)Page 3 of 3Ref 8-H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.b TRANSPORTATIONUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostDRAINAGE (CPE = Corrugated Polyethylene Pipe, N12 or Equivalent) For Culvert prices, Average of 4' cover was assumed. Assume perforated PVC is same price as solid pipe.) Access Road, R/D D‐1 30.00$             SY* (CBs include frame and lid)Beehive D‐2 103.00$           EachThrough‐curb Inlet Framework D‐3 460.00$           EachCB Type I D‐4 1,725.00$       EachCB Type IL D‐5 2,000.00$       EachCB Type II, 48" diameter D‐6 3,500.00$       Each     for additional depth over 4'     D‐7 550.00$           FTCB Type II, 54" diameter D‐8 4,075.00$       Each     for additional depth over 4' D‐9 570.00$           FTCB Type II, 60" diameter D‐10 4,225.00$       Each     for additional depth over 4' D‐11 690.00$           FTCB Type II, 72" diameter D‐12 6,900.00$       Each     for additional depth over 4' D‐13 975.00$           FTCB Type II, 96" diameter D‐14 16,000.00$     Each     for additional depth over 4' D‐15 1,050.00$       FTTrash Rack, 12" D‐16 400.00$           EachTrash Rack, 15" D‐17 470.00$           EachTrash Rack, 18" D‐18 550.00$           EachTrash Rack, 21" D‐19 630.00$           EachCleanout, PVC, 4" D‐20 170.00$           EachCleanout, PVC, 6" D‐21 195.00$           EachCleanout, PVC, 8" D‐22 230.00$           EachCulvert, PVC, 4"  D‐23 11.50$             LFCulvert, PVC, 6"  D‐24 15.00$             LFCulvert, PVC,  8"  D‐25 17.00$             LFCulvert, PVC, 12"  D‐26 26.00$             LFCulvert, PVC, 15"  D‐27 40.00$             LFCulvert, PVC, 18"  D‐28 47.00$             LFCulvert, PVC, 24" D‐29 65.00$             LFCulvert, PVC, 30"  D‐30 90.00$             LFCulvert, PVC, 36"  D‐31 150.00$           LFCulvert, CMP, 8" D‐32 22.00$             LFCulvert, CMP, 12" D‐33 33.00$             LFSUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:(B) (C) (D) (E)Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIESPage 8 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.c DRAINAGEUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIESDRAINAGE (Continued)Culvert, CMP, 15" D‐34 40.00$             LFCulvert, CMP, 18" D‐35 47.00$             LFCulvert, CMP, 24" D‐36 64.00$             LFCulvert, CMP, 30" D‐37 90.00$             LFCulvert, CMP, 36" D‐38 150.00$           LFCulvert, CMP, 48" D‐39 218.00$           LFCulvert, CMP, 60" D‐40 310.00$           LFCulvert, CMP, 72" D‐41 400.00$           LFCulvert, Concrete, 8" D‐42 48.00$             LFCulvert, Concrete, 12" D‐43 55.00$             LFCulvert, Concrete, 15" D‐44 89.00$             LFCulvert, Concrete, 18" D‐45 100.00$           LFCulvert, Concrete, 24" D‐46 120.00$           LFCulvert, Concrete, 30" D‐47 145.00$           LFCulvert, Concrete, 36" D‐48 175.00$           LFCulvert, Concrete, 42" D‐49 200.00$           LFCulvert, Concrete, 48" D‐50 235.00$           LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 6"  D‐51 16.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 8"  D‐52 18.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 12"  D‐53 27.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 15"  D‐54 40.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 18"  D‐55 47.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 24"  D‐56 64.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 30"  D‐57 90.00$             LFCulvert, CPE Triple Wall, 36"  D‐58 149.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 6" D‐59 69.00$             LFCulvert, LCPE, 8" D‐60 83.00$             LFCulvert, LCPE, 12" D‐61 96.00$             LFCulvert, LCPE, 15" D‐62 110.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 18" D‐63 124.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 24" D‐64 138.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 30" D‐65 151.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 36" D‐66 165.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 48" D‐67 179.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 54" D‐68 193.00$           LFSUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:(B) (C) (D) (E)Page 9 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.c DRAINAGEUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIESDRAINAGE (Continued)Culvert, LCPE, 60" D‐69 206.00$           LFCulvert, LCPE, 72" D‐70 220.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 6" D‐71 48.00$             LFCulvert, HDPE, 8" D‐72 60.00$             LFCulvert, HDPE, 12" D‐73 85.00$             LFCulvert, HDPE, 15" D‐74 122.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 18" D‐75 158.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 24" D‐76 254.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 30" D‐77 317.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 36" D‐78 380.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 48" D‐79 443.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 54" D‐80 506.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 60" D‐81 570.00$           LFCulvert, HDPE, 72" D‐82 632.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 6" D‐83 96.00$             LFPipe, Polypropylene, 8" D‐84 100.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 12" D‐85 100.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 15" D‐86 103.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 18" D‐87 106.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 24" D‐88 119.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 30" D‐89 136.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 36" D‐90 185.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 48" D‐91 260.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 54" D‐92 381.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 60" D‐93 504.00$           LFPipe, Polypropylene, 72" D‐94 625.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 6" D‐95 70.00$             LFCulvert, DI, 8" D‐96 101.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 12" D‐97 121.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 15" D‐98 148.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 18" D‐99 175.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 24" D‐100 200.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 30" D‐101 227.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 36" D‐102 252.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 48" D‐103 279.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 54" D‐104 305.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 60" D‐105 331.00$           LFCulvert, DI, 72" D‐106 357.00$           LFSUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:(B) (C) (D) (E)Page 10 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.c DRAINAGEUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIESSpecialty Drainage ItemsDitching  SD‐1 10.90$             CYFlow Dispersal Trench    (1,436 base+) SD‐3 32.00$             LF French Drain  (3' depth) SD‐4 30.00$             LFGeotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene SD‐5 3.40$               SYMid‐tank Access Riser, 48" dia,  6' deep SD‐6 2,300.00$       EachPond Overflow Spillway SD‐7 18.25$             SYRestrictor/Oil Separator, 12" SD‐8 1,320.00$       EachRestrictor/Oil Separator, 15" SD‐9 1,550.00$       EachRestrictor/Oil Separator, 18" SD‐10 1,950.00$       EachRiprap, placed SD‐11 48.20$             CYTank End Reducer (36" diameter) SD‐12 1,375.00$       EachInfiltration pond testing SD‐13 143.00$           HRPermeable Pavement SD‐14Permeable Concrete Sidewalk SD‐15Culvert, Box      __ ft  x  __ ft SD‐16SUBTOTAL SPECIALTY DRAINAGE ITEMS:(B) (C) (D) (E)STORMWATER FACILITIES (Include Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch)Detention Pond SF‐1 Each Detention Tank SF‐2 Each Detention Vault SF‐3 Each Infiltration Pond SF‐4 Each Infiltration Tank SF‐5 Each Infiltration Vault SF‐6 Each Infiltration Trenches SF‐7 Each Basic Biofiltration Swale SF‐8 Each Wet Biofiltration Swale SF‐9 Each Wetpond SF‐10 Each Wetvault SF‐11 Each Sand Filter SF‐12 Each Sand Filter Vault SF‐13 Each Linear Sand Filter SF‐14 Each Proprietary Facility SF‐15 Each Bioretention Facility SF‐16 Each SUBTOTAL STORMWATER FACILITIES:(B) (C) (D) (E)Page 11 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.c DRAINAGEUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIESWRITE‐IN‐ITEMS (INCLUDE ON‐SITE BMPs)WI‐1WI‐2WI‐3WI‐4WI‐5WI‐6WI‐7WI‐8WI‐9WI‐10WI‐11WI‐12WI‐13WI‐14WI‐15SUBTOTAL WRITE‐IN ITEMS:DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES SUBTOTAL:SALES TAX @ 10.1%DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES TOTAL:(B) (C) (D) (E)Page 12 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.c DRAINAGEUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostConnection to Existing Watermain W‐1 3,400.00$      EachDuctile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 4 Inch Diameter W‐2 58.00$            LFDuctile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 6 Inch Diameter W‐3 65.00$            LFDuctile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 8 Inch Diameter W‐4 75.00$            LFDuctile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 10 Inch Diameter W‐5 80.00$            LFDuctile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 12 Inch Diameter W‐6 145.00$          LFGate Valve, 4 inch Diameter W‐7 1,225.00$      EachGate Valve, 6 inch Diameter W‐8 1,350.00$      EachGate Valve, 8 Inch Diameter W‐9 1,550.00$      EachGate Valve, 10 Inch Diameter W‐10 2,100.00$      EachGate Valve, 12 Inch Diameter W‐11 2,500.00$      EachFire Hydrant Assembly W‐12 5,000.00$      EachPermanent Blow‐Off Assembly W‐13 1,950.00$      EachAir‐Vac Assembly,  2‐Inch Diameter W‐14 3,050.00$      EachAir‐Vac Assembly,  1‐Inch Diameter W‐15 1,725.00$      EachCompound Meter Assembly 3‐inch Diameter W‐16 9,200.00$      EachCompound Meter Assembly 4‐inch Diameter W‐17 10,500.00$    EachCompound Meter Assembly 6‐inch Diameter W‐18 11,500.00$    EachPressure Reducing Valve Station 8‐inch to 10‐inch W‐19 23,000.00$    EachWATER SUBTOTAL:SALES TAX @ 10.1%WATER TOTAL:(B) (C) (D) (E)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR WATERQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)Page 13 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.d WATERUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 CED Permit #:TBDExisting Future Public PrivateRight‐of‐Way Improvements Improvements(D) (E)Description No.  Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. CostClean Outs SS‐1 1,150.00$      EachGrease Interceptor, 500 gallon SS‐2 9,200.00$      EachGrease Interceptor, 1000 gallon SS‐3 11,500.00$    EachGrease Interceptor, 1500 gallon SS‐4 17,200.00$    EachSide Sewer Pipe, PVC. 4 Inch Diameter SS‐5 92.00$            LFSide Sewer Pipe, PVC. 6 Inch Diameter SS‐6 110.00$          LFSewer Pipe, PVC, 8 inch Diameter SS‐7 120.00$          LFSewer Pipe, PVC, 12 Inch Diameter SS‐8 144.00$          LFSewer Pipe, DI, 8 inch Diameter SS‐9 130.00$          LFSewer Pipe, DI, 12 Inch Diameter SS‐10 150.00$          LFManhole, 48 Inch Diameter SS‐11 6,900.00$      EachManhole, 54 Inch Diameter SS‐13 6,800.00$      EachManhole, 60 Inch Diameter SS‐15 7,600.00$      EachManhole, 72 Inch Diameter SS‐17 10,600.00$    EachManhole, 96 Inch Diameter SS‐19 16,000.00$    EachPipe, C‐900, 12 Inch Diameter SS‐21 205.00$          LFOutside Drop SS‐24 1,700.00$      LSInside Drop SS‐25 1,150.00$      LSSewer Pipe, PVC, ____ Inch Diameter SS‐26Lift Station (Entire System) SS‐27 LSSANITARY SEWER SUBTOTAL:SALES TAX @ 10.1%SANITARY SEWER TOTAL:(B) (C) (D) (E)SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEETFOR SANITARY SEWERQuantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B) (C)Page 14 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION II.e SANITARY SEWERUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 1055 South Grady Way – 6th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430‐7200Date:Name:Project Name: PE Registration No:CED Plan # (LUA):Firm Name:CED Permit # (C):Firm Address:Site Address:Phone No.Parcel #(s):Email Address:Project Phase: Site Restoration/Erosion Sediment Control Subtotal (a)Existing Right‐of‐Way Improvements Subtotal (b) (b)‐$                                                               Future Public Improvements Subtotal(c)‐$                                                               Stormwater & Drainage Facilities (Public & Private) Subtotal(d) (d)‐$                                                               (e)(f)Site RestorationExisting Right‐of‐Way and Storm Drainage ImprovementsMaintenance Bond‐$                                                               Bond Reduction2Construction Permit Bond Amount 3Minimum Bond Amount is $10,000.001 Estimate Only  ‐ May involve multiple and variable components, which will be established on an individual basis by Development Engineering.2 The City of Renton allows one request only for bond reduction prior to the maintenance period. Reduction of not more than 70% of the original bond amount, provided that the remaining 30% willcover all remaining items to be constructed. 3 Required Bond Amounts are subject to review and modification by Development Engineering.* Note: The word BOND as used in this document means any financial guarantee acceptable to the City of Renton.** Note: All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead, profit, and taxes. EST1((b) + (c) + (d)) x 20%‐$                                                           MAINTENANCE BOND */**(after final acceptance of construction)8,973.15$                                                 ‐$                                                           ‐$                                                           8,973.15$                                                 ‐$                                                           ‐$                                                           ‐$                                                           10,000.00$                                               P (a) x 100%SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET BOND CALCULATIONS3/10/2023Harold Duncanson29647Duncanson CoR((b x 150%) + (d x 100%))S(e) x 150% + (f) x 100%Bond Reduction: Existing Right‐of‐Way Improvements (Quantity Remaining)2Bond Reduction: Stormwater & Drainage Facilities (Quantity Remaining)2T(P +R ‐ S)Prepared by:Project InformationCONSTRUCTION BOND AMOUNT */**(prior to permit issuance)206‐244‐4141haroldd@duncansonco.comCrown Castle A‐TeamTBD2902 NE 12th Street7227802040FOR APPROVALTBD145 SW 155th Street, #102, Seattle, 98166Page 15 of 15Ref 8‐H Bond Quantity WorksheetSECTION III. BOND WORKSHEETUnit Prices Updated: 01/07/2022Version: 01/07/2022Printed 3/10/2023 Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 10. Operations and Maintenance Manual Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 10. Operations and Maintenance Manual Operation and maintenance information for basic dispersal is included on the following page. MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR BASIC DISPERSION Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) called "basic dispersion," which was installed to mitigate the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of some or all of the impervious surfaces or non-native pervious surfaces on your property. Basic dispersion is a strategy for utilizing any available capacity of onsite vegetated areas to retain, absorb, and filter the runoff from developed surfaces. This flow control BMP has two primary components that must be maintained: (1) the devices that disperse runoff from the developed surfaces and (2) the vegetated area over which runoff is dispersed. Dispersion Devices The dispersion devices used on your property include the following as indicated on the flow control BMP site plan (CHECK THE BOX(ES) THAT APPLY): splash blocks, rock pads, gravel filled trenches, sheet flow. MAINTENANCE RESTRICTIONS The size, placement, composition, and downstream flowpaths of these devices as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County. INSPECTION FREQUENCY AND MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES This flow control BMP has two primary components that must be maintained: (1) the devices that disperse runoff from the developed surfaces and (2) the vegetated flowpath area over which runoff is dispersed. Maintenance of Dispersion Devices • Dispersion devices must be inspected annually and after major storm events to identify and repair any physical defects. • When native soil is exposed or erosion channels are present, the sources of the erosion or concentrated flow need to be identified and mitigated. • Concentrated flow can be mitigated by leveling the edge of the pervious area and/or realigning or replenishing the rocks in the dispersion device, such as in rock pads and gravel filled trenches. Maintenance of Vegetated Flowpaths • The vegetated area over which runoff is dispersed must be maintained in good condition free of bare spots and obstructions that would concentrate flows. RECORDING REQUIREMENT These basic dispersion flow control BMP maintenance and operation instructions must be recorded as an attachment to the required declaration of covenant and grant of easement per Requirement 3 of Section C.1.3.4 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual. The intent of these instructions is to explain to future property owners, the purpose of the BMP and how it must be maintained and operated. These instructions are intended to be a minimum; the King County Department of Permitting and Environmental Services (DPER) may require additional instructions based on site-specific conditions. See King County’s Surface Water Design Manual website for additional information and updates. x Crown Castle A-Team DCI 04168.184 Appendix A – WWHM Report WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT A-Team 2/27/2023 12:11:11 PM Page 2 General Model Information Project Name:A-Team Site Name:A-Team Site Address: City: Report Date:2/27/2023 Gage:Seatac Data Start:1948/10/01 Data End:2009/09/30 Timestep:15 Minute Precip Scale:1.000 Version Date:2019/09/13 Version:4.2.17 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Year A-Team 2/27/2023 12:11:11 PM Page 3 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre A B, Pasture, Flat 0.162 Pervious Total 0.162 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 0.162 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater A-Team 2/27/2023 12:11:11 PM Page 4 Mitigated Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use acre ROADS FLAT 0.162 Impervious Total 0.162 Basin Total 0.162 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater A-Team 2/27/2023 12:11:11 PM Page 7 Analysis Results POC 1 + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.162 Total Impervious Area:0 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0 Total Impervious Area:0.162 Flow Frequency Method:Log Pearson Type III 17B Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.000172 5 year 0.000391 10 year 0.000646 25 year 0.001168 50 year 0.001767 100 year 0.002622 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.061765 5 year 0.078016 10 year 0.089058 25 year 0.103381 50 year 0.114343 100 year 0.125571 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.000 0.080 1950 0.003 0.086 1951 0.001 0.050 1952 0.000 0.044 1953 0.000 0.048 1954 0.000 0.050 1955 0.000 0.057 1956 0.001 0.056 1957 0.000 0.064 1958 0.000 0.051 A-Team 2/27/2023 12:12:26 PM Page 16 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic A-Team 2/27/2023 12:12:27 PM Page 17 Mitigated Schematic