No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC23000412_Approved StormwaterReport STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN Chick-fil-A Project Site No. 04249 - Expansion 375 Rainier Avenue South Renton, Washington Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 Revised April 20, 2023 March 30, 2023 January 16, 2023 Our Job No. 18963 ALEX D O N ALD B E L L PRO F ESSIONA L E N G INEERREGIST E R E DSTATE O F W ASHIN G TON21036182 04/20/2023 SURFACE WATER UTILITY JFarah 11/21/2023 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING yqi 12/05/2023 Stormwater Control Plan Chick-fil-A, Project Site No. 04249 - Expansion Renton, Washington Our Job No. 18963 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1.1 Technical Information Report Worksheet Figure 1.2 Vicinity Map Figure 1.3 Topographic Map Figure 1.4 Soil Survey Map Figure 1.5 FEMA Map Figure 1.6 Assessor's Map Figure 1.7 Sensitive Areas Map Figure 1.8 Flow Chart for Determining Type of Drainage Review Required Figure 1.9 Existing Conditions Map Figure 1.10 Proposed Conditions Map 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY Figure 2.1 Groundwater Protection Areas Map 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS Figure 3.1 Downstream Analysis Map Figure 3.2 Flow Control Application Map 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Existing Site Area Summary and Site Hydrology 4.2 Proposed Site Area Summary and Site Hydrology 4.3 Performance Standards 4.4 Flow Control System Figure 4.1 Flow Control Calculations 4.5 Water Quality System Figure 4.2 Existing Site Hydrology Map Figure 4.3 Proposed Site Hydrology Map Figure 4.4 Existing Condition Threshold Discharge Area Map Figure 4.5 Proposed Condition Threshold Discharge Area Map 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Figure 5.1 Conveyance Calculations 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Figure 6.1 Geotechnical Report Figure 6.2 Infiltration Memo Figure 6.3 Geotechnical Report – Addendum Figure 6.4 Original Approved Civil Plans 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (CSWPPP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Figure 9.1 Water Quality Facility Summary Sketch 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Tab 1.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The existing site consists of two properties. The southern property (south parcel) is Parcel No. 000720-0209. This is a recently developed 0.93-acre lot located in the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Renton, King County, Washington. Specifically, the site is located at 375 Rainier Avenue South. This consists of a Chick-fil-A that had a Stormwater Control Plan under permit TED-40-4063 approved by Development Engineering on January 9, 2020. The second parcel (north parcel) is an existing, fully developed Firestone Tire Center that is located directly to the north of the Chick-fil-A. This property is more specifically located at 351 Rainier Avenue South and is parcel number 000720-0126. The lot is listed as 0.36-acres in size. See the Vicinity Map attached for a graphical depiction of the exact site location. The south parcel was recently constructed under permit TED-40-4063 and other associated permits. This site consists of a Chick-fil-A restaurant with associated utilities and maneuvering and parking. The stormwater system collects and conveys into the storm sewer located in the right-of-way in Rainier Avenue. The north parcel consists of an existing building, paved surfaces, and minimal landscaping. There are no trees on this parcel. See the Existing Conditions Map included in this report. The building will remain as recently constructed and as much of the south parcel will remain. Some parking, the trash enclosure and the drive-thru will be reconfigured to allow the sites to function together. The north parcel proposes to demolish the existing building and it will be replaced with parking and maneuvering as well as new landscaping for the Chick-fil-A building. See the Proposed Conditions Map attached to this report. Permits associated with this project include: • Grading Permit • Building Permit • Health Department Permit • Utility Permits for Water, Sewer, and Storm • Fire Permit • Mechanical and Plumbing Permits The proposed improvements will require the site to implement formal flow control and water quality treatment per the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM). A Full Drainage Review is required. See the attached Flow Chart for Determining Type of Drainage Review Required. This is discussed further in Section 4.0 of this report. A Geotechnical Memo has been coordinated for the north parcel in addition to the geotechnical report and infiltration memo that were previously prepared for the southern parcel and are provided in Section 6.0 of this report. The memo for the north parcel has been provided in this submittal. Due to the north parcel's proximity and recentness of the report and infiltration memo, we expect the north parcel will be subject to similar conditions as the south parcel. Full infiltration is not recommended on site due to high groundwater elevation during the winter months. This is discussed further in Section 4.0 of this report. Figure 1.1 TIR Worksheet Chick-fil-A 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, GA 30349 Chris Jensen, P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers (425) 251-6222 Renton Chick-fil-A 23N 5E 18 361 Rainier Ave S. X Administrative Site Plan Review X X 7/19/19, 8/16/19 11/12/187/19/19, 8/16/19 11/12/18 C23000412 City Center N/A Black River Peak Rate Flow Control Standard - Existing Site Condition 9  1-2 Fill: Silty Gravel w/ Sand 0.5%None 10-12 Alluvial Deposits: Silt, Silt w/ Sand, Sand w/ Silt, Sand 12-19.5: Sand, Sand w/ Silt, Silty Sand Undetermined: Sand, Gravel On-Site Drainage Area None 8/16/2018 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD N/A Commercial Oil/Water Separator Modular Wetland Proprietary Treatment Device On-Site Conveyance X X Oil/Water Separator X Soil Ammendment Pervious concrete sidewalk, catch basins, underground pipes, concrete swales November 12, 2019 Figure 1.2 Vicinity Map auhgs ernabC.OCNNIS ,U SL RTIENEGN IEGN Horizontal: Scale: Vertical: For: Title: VICINITY MAP Job Number 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES N.T.S.N/A 18963 DATE: 08/15/18 Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington P:\18000s\18963\exhibit\graphics\18963 vmap.cdr REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2018) SITE Figure 1.3 Topographic Map auhgs ernabC.OCNNIS ,U SL RTIENEGN IEGN Horizontal: Scale: Vertical: For: Title: SOIL SURVEY MAP Job Number 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1 : 24000 N/A 18963 DATE: 08/15/18 Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington P:\18000s\18963\exhibit\graphics\18963 topo.cdr REFERENCE: usgs.gov SITE Figure 1.4 Soil Survey Map auhgs ernabC.OCNNIS ,U SL RTIENEGN IEGN Horizontal: Scale: Vertical: For: Title: SOIL SURVEY MAP Job Number 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES N.T.S.N/A 18963 DATE: 08/15/18 Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington P:\18000s\18963\exhibit\graphics\18963 soil.cdr REFERENCE: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service LEGEND: Ur = Urban land SITE Figure 1.5 FEMA Map auhgs ernabC.OCNNIS ,U SL RTIENEGN IEGN Horizontal: Scale: Vertical: For: Title: FEMA MAP Job Number 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES N.T.S.N/A 18963 DATE: 08/15/18 Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington P:\18000s\18963\exhibit\graphics\18963 fema.cdr REFERENCE: Federal Emergency Management Agency (Portion of Map 53033C0977 F, May 1995) SITE Areas determined to be outside 500-year floodplain. ZONE X OTHER AREAS LEGEND ZONE X Figure 1.6 Assessor's Map auhgs ernabC.OCNNIS ,U SL RTIENEGN IEGN Horizontal: Scale: Vertical: For: Title: ASSESSOR MAP Job Number 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES N.T.S.N/A 18963 DATE: 08/15/18 Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington P:\18000s\18963\exhibit\graphics\18963 amap.cdr SITE REFERENCE: King County Department of Assessments (Nov. 2017) Figure 1.7 Sensitive Areas Map auhgs ernabC.OCNNIS ,U SL RTIENEGN IEGN Horizontal: Scale: Vertical: For: Title: SENSITIVE AREAS MAP Job Number 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES N.T.S.N/A 18963 DATE: 08/15/18 Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington P:\18000s\18963\exhibit\graphics\18963 sens.cdr SITE REFERENCE: King County iMAP (2018) Figure 1.8 Flow Chart for Determining Type of Drainage Review Required SECTION 1.1 DRAINAGE REVIEW 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 1-14 FIGURE 1.1.2.A FLOW CHART FOR DETERMINING TYPE OF DRAINAGE REVIEW REQUIRED FIGURE 1.5 Figure 1.9 Existing Conditions Map RAINIER AVE S Figure 1.10 Proposed Conditions Map Tab 2.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY Core Requirement No. 1: Discharge at the Natural Location: Response: The southern parcel was recently constructed and consists of conveyance for the entire site, water quality treatment through a Modular Wetland and oil treatment through an oil/water separator and connects to the existing system in Rainier Avenue. The northern parcel appears to drain centrally and is conveyed to the system in Rainier Avenue. The proposed condition will convey stormwater to Rainier Avenue as well. Core Requirement No. 2: Offsite Analysis: Response: A Level 1 Off-Site Analysis is provided in Section 3.0 of this report that assesses potential off-site drainage and water quality impacts associated with the development of the project site. Core Requirement No. 3: Flow Control Facilities: Response: The subject site lies within a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area. This means that the site stormwater discharge will match the existing discharge. The proposed redeveloped site will have approximately a 3 percent decrease in impervious area and as such, will reduce the flow. See Core Requirement No. 9 for feasible on-site flow control BMPs. The proposed site conditions will be modeled against the existing condition in WWHM to demonstrate that flows will pass the required parameters of Section 1.2.3.1.A of the 2017 Renton SWDM. An increase of up to 0.15 cfs in flow for the 100-year peak flow from the site will be allowed; however, this project will see a reduction in this flow rate. Core Requirement No. 4: Conveyance System: Response: A pipe conveyance network has been proposed for on-site stormwater collection and has been designed to convey a minimum 25-year peak flow. Core Requirement No. 5: Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (SWPPP): Response: A Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan can be found in Section 8.0 of this report. Core Requirement No. 6: Maintenance and Operations: Response: An Operations and Maintenance Manual will be provided to the owner of the property and can be found in Section 10.0 of this report. Core Requirement No. 7: Financial Guarantees and Liability: Response: The Construction Bond will be calculated and provided by the contractor once selected to perform the proposed site improvements. Core Requirement No. 8: Water Quality Facilities: Response: The proposed project will be a high-use site and will meet the requirements of the high-use water quality menu. Water quality will be provided, including oil control and Enhanced Basic Water Quality using a coalescing plate oil/water separator in series with a Modular Wetland proprietary facility. 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL Core Requirement No. 9: On-Site BMPs: Response: This project is subject to the large lot BMP requirements per the Renton SWDM because the site is greater than 22,000 square feet. This project will implement on-site BMPs to the maximum extent feasible to address stormwater drainage. The urbanized nature of the site and its surroundings limit the available area to perform any dispersion. The developed site will require large amounts of impervious area for parking and maneuvering to function. This leads the site to be over the 35 percent impervious and non-native pervious area threshold specified in the Renton SWDM. The site also will not have the geometry to allow for a 100-foot native vegetated flow. Full dispersion is infeasible on this site due to these factors. Most infiltration BMPs are infeasible per the Geotechnical Report memo included in this document, which states seasonal high groundwater is expected to be encountered at levels that would not allow 3 feet of separation from any infiltration facility. The Geotechnical Engineer has stated that infiltration must be at least 5 feet away from the building due to concerns with building settlement that may occur overtime. Bioinfiltration and pervious pavement do not require 5 feet of separation from the groundwater elevation level. Bioinfiltration is not feasible in the parking lot landscape islands. The perimeter landscape areas do not allow for bioinfiltration because they would violate the 5-foot setback to the property lines. The interior landscape islands are not feasible for bioinfiltration because they will not allow for a minimum 18-inch flat bottom when graded to the requirements set in the Renton SWDM. Additionally, the site is considered a high-use site which triggers the requirement for oil control. Per the manual, oil control is required for pollution generating surfaces runoff prior to water quality treatment (6.6.2.2). These factors render the parking lot landscape areas infeasible for bioinfiltration. Any on-site bioinfiltration will require an overflow structure because of the groundwater proximity. A bioinfiltration facility located in the landscape area south of the building will require 2.8-feet of fall from the overflow structure to the stormwater connection point to the City system on Rainier Avenue. Bioinfiltration in this location is infeasible because the overflow structure invert and connection point elevations are roughly the same providing no slope between the two points. Since sidewalks are considered non-pollution generating surfaces, oil control is not required for runoff; therefore, porous concrete sidewalks are located on-site where they do not fall within 5 feet of the building. Additionally, porous concrete sidewalks are located off-site in the Rainier Avenue S frontage to the maximum extent feasible for the expansion. This is used in the non- driveway portion of the work as the paved area enters a high-use site. The roof runoff from site is collected and conveyed through a series of pipes prior to connection to the stormwater system. The Geotechnical Engineer stated that infiltration will not be allowed within 5 feet of the building. Per the manual, a 5-foot setback is required from the property line. Two easements are located east of the building. These factors, in addition to the required utilities to the east side of the building, do not allow the perforated pipe requirements to be on this side. The Geotechnical Report states that all paved areas are to be over-excavated 2 feet to install filter fabric and structural fill. Any perforated pipe will need to be at least 2.5-feet below ground surface to the pipe crown. A perforated pipe is not feasible because it will connect 0.44-feet below the existing storm connection. The existing site consists of large amounts of impervious areas. The proposed site design also requires large amounts of impervious surface for parking and maneuvering. During site design, impervious site areas were minimized to the maximum extent feasible that allowed the site to be functional. This resulted in a 1.5 percent decrease in impervious site surface in the developed condition. 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL The existing site impervious area also means natural growth and trees are minimal. Five trees exist onsite, and one is to remain during the development. The four trees removed would affect the developed site's functionality. The existing on-site growth is poorly maintained and located so it will inhibit the developed site's functionality. Soil amendment will be implemented for all on-site landscaped areas. Special Requirement No. 1: Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements: Response: There are no additional Area-Specific Requirements. Special Requirement No. 2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation: Response: The site lies outside of the 500-year floodplain per FEMA FIRM Map Panel 977 of 1725, Map No. 53033C0977F, revised May 16, 1995. Special Requirement No. 3: Flood Protection Facilities: Response: The subject site does not rely on any Flood Protection Facilities. Special Requirement No. 4: Source Control: Response: The proposed developed site will implement roof covering over the trash enclosure. Special Requirement No. 5: Oil Control: Response: The proposed developed site will be of the high-use designation. Oil control will be required. The existing oil/water separator on-site will provide oil removal. Special Requirement No. 6: Aquifer Protection Area: Response: The site is located within Zone 2 of the aquifer protection per the City of Renton's definition. A Zone 2 designation requires open flow control, water quality and conveyance system elements to be lined as stated in Section 1.3.6 of the Renton SWDM. Since the project does not propose any open facilities, this special requirement does not require any additional measures to be taken to satisfy its requirements. Figure 2.1 Groundwater Protection Areas Map SITE LOCATION Tab 3.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS Due to the built-up urban environment around the site, the adjacent lots around the subject site are all established with building, paving, and landscaping. They have stormwater infrastructure in place. There is no off-site stormwater expected to enter the proposed site. A Level 1 Downstream Analysis has been performed for the subject site and is described in the following tasks. A site visit was conducted by a Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. engineer on August 13, 2018. No drainage issues were observed during construction for the southern parcel during Fall 2020 and early 2021, which is wet season in Washington. An additional visit occurred April 17, 2021, and no drainage concerns were observed. Task 1: The study area consists of the subject site, surrounding sites of a Fred Meyer Fuel Station, a strip mall to the west, and a Firestone automotive shop to the north. It also includes the site frontages along Rainier Avenue South to the east and Renton Center Way to the south. For a majority of the site (89 percent), storm infrastructure carries captured stormwater north in the Rainier Avenue right-of-way. This portion of the site has been designated Threshold Discharge Area 1. The remaining portion at the southwest corner flows to storm drain infrastructure on the adjacent shared access. This portion of the site has been designated Threshold Discharge Area 2. Threshold discharge areas are shown on the TDA Basin Maps attached to this report. Task 2: Upon review of the site surveys performed by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated February 7, 2018, and April 7, 2021, and available on City of Renton GIS information and as-built drawings, a complete study of the current on-site and surrounding area was completed. See the Downstream Analysis Maps that show the downstream infrastructure a quarter of a mile downstream of the site. The final outfall of the site is the Black River Drainage Basin approximately two miles downstream. Task 3: A site visit was conducted by a Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. engineer on August 13, 2018, April 17, 2021, and December 7, 2022. During the August 13, 2018, visit the weather was clear and sunny, the temperature was 88 degrees. A thorough investigation of the downstream infrastructure was conducted due to some incorrect information regarding downstream flow direction on the GIS information. The flow direction of adjacent infrastructure in the right-of-way was verified. The weather was partly cloudy and 70 degrees on the April 17, 2021. During December 7, 2022, visit the weather was cloudy and 40 degrees. A brief investigation of the current state of the northern Firestone parcel was conducted. It was observed that the building, its appurtenances, and parking lot have been demolished. Task 4: Upon review of all off-site stormwater conveyance, there are no anticipated concerns regarding the proposed site stormwater runoff contributing to the existing stormwater conveyance. The site lies within a built-up urban environment with well-established stormwater infrastructure. The site lies within the Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions) area as depicted in Reference 15-A of the City of Renton SWDM and is included in this report. Task 5: Based on the above information, no problems are apparent to mitigate. Figure 3.1 Downstream Analysis Map Figure 3.2 Flow Control Application Map 9,028 752 City of Renton Print map Template This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. None 1/13/2023 Legend 5120256 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Feet Notes 512 WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Information Technology - GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa.gov City and County Labels Parcels City and County Boundary <all other values> Renton Water Gravity Pipe Water Main Water Main - Other System Pump Station Discharge Point Surface Water Main Culvert Open Drains Facility Outline Flow Control Application Peak Rate (Existing) Flow Control Duration (Existing) Flow Control Duration (Forested) Flood Problem Flow Facility Transfer Lift Station Wastewater Pressurized Main Renton Private Wastewater Gravity Main Renton SITE Tab 4.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The existing site consists of two parcels and associated parking and maneuvering surfaces and paved pedestrian access. The southern parcel consists of landscape from the recently developed Chick-fil-A project. The northern parcel consists of a building, paved surfaces and two small planters. The sites are modeled based on the existing condition in the WWHM model. The soil profile on site is as follows: (See Geotechnical Report in Section 6.0). Stratum Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum (ft) Material Description Consistency/ Density Surface 0.5 to 1 Asphalt Concrete Pavement N/A Surface 1 to 2 Fill: Silty Gravel with Sand N/A 1 10 to 12 Alluvial Deposits: Silt, Silt with Sand, Sand with Silt and Sand Very Loose/ Soft 2 12 to 19.5 Alluvial Deposits: Sand, Sand with Silt and Silty Sand Loose 3 Undetermined Alluvial Deposits: Sandy Gravel Medium Dense to Dense On-site soil explorations show that groundwater was encountered at 8 feet and 12 feet below existing ground surface. Geotechnical exploration results are dated June 21, 2018, making groundwater level findings lower than may be found during winter months. This was determined during the previous project and per conditions of approval, is still the relevant geotechnical report. 4.1 Existing Site Area Summary and Site Hydrology The existing on-site stormwater infrastructure collects stormwater from the impervious surfaces and conveys it primarily to the public stormwater conveyance along Rainier Avenue South. The existing site has no treatment measures in place. See attached figures for the Existing Site Hydrology Map and Existing TDA Basin Map. 4.2 Proposed Site Area Summary and Site Hydrology The proposed site will utilize a series of catch basins and pipes to convey stormwater to an oil/water separator and Modular Wetland treatment device before release into the public storm sewer. A portion of the site, including the proposed building and frontage plaza impervious surfaces, will be conveyed to a bio-retention basin. 4.3 Performance Standards • Area-Specific Flow Control Facility Requirements: The site lies within a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area (see attached Existing TDA Basin Map). The site stormwater discharge will match the existing discharge. • Per the Exceptions in Section 1.2.3.1.A of the 2022 Renton SWDM, an increase of up to 0.15 cubic feet per second in flow for the 2, 10, and 100-year peak flow from the site will be allowed. 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL • BMP implementation, per Core Requirement No. 9 will include collection and treatment of the proposed building and walkways surrounding the plaza along the Renton Center Way S.W. frontage. The total site plus off-site improvements is 1.32 acres. The remaining areas, including the building roof and frontage plaza will be collected and conveyed to the discharge point to the City's infrastructure. Refer to the attached Proposed Site Hydrology Map. • Per Section 12.9.2.2, Large Lot BMP Requirements, Minimum BMP implementation threshold for a site having greater than 65 percent impervious coverage, requires on- site BMPs to be applied to the lesser of 20 percent of the target impervious surfaces or to an impervious area equal to at least 10 percent of the site. Due to the infiltration restrictions on site and the lack of fall across the site due to the shallow connection point to the City's infrastructure, this is not feasible. Porous concrete sidewalks are incorporated into the design to the extent feasible. These are located at least five feet away from the building per the Geotechnical Report memo included in this report. The porous concrete sidewalks are exclusively designed as non-pollution generating surfaces due to the enhanced treatment menu's oil treatment requirements. • Stormwater conveyance will have capacity to convey the 25-year peak flow without overtopping catch basins. A 100-year flow path has been provided to prevent flooding of the site or adjacent sites. Refer to the attached Proposed Site Hydrology Map. • The site lies within an area of the City of Renton that requires Basic Water Quality Treatment for most land uses. The site contributes greater than 50 percent of its impervious site coverage to the proposed water quality facility; therefore, Enhanced Basic Water Quality will be required. • Per Special Requirement No. 4, Source Controls, a roof will be required to cover the trash enclosure. • Per Special Requirement No. 5, Oil Control, due to the high-use site designation, oil control will be implemented on the subject site. 4.4 Flow Control System The subject site lies within a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area. This means that the site stormwater discharge will match the existing discharge. The proposed redeveloped site will have approximately a 3 percent decrease in impervious area. There are no feasible flow control BMPs to be implemented on site as discussed in Core Requirement No. 9. The proposed site conditions will be modeled against the existing condition in WWHM to demonstrate that flows will pass the required parameters of Section 1.2.3.1.A of the 2022 Renton SWDM. An increase of up to 0.15 cfs in flow for the 100-year peak flow from the site will be allowed. The 2, 10 and 100-year peak flow will decrease in the developed condition. 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 4.5 Water Quality System The proposed project will be a high-use site and will meet the requirements of the high-use water quality menu. Water quality will be provided, including oil control and Enhanced Basic Water Quality using a coalescing plate oil/water separator in series with a Modular Wetland proprietary facility. See Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design Calculations in this section and Proposed Site Hydrology Map for the location and configuration of the water quality infrastructure. The internal operating head of the proposed Modular Wetland facility is 2.5 feet, despite the small drop across the system. The treatment flowline backs up in the system, creating a larger drop than the difference in the inlet and outlet pipe inverts. The bypass area along the Rainier Avenue S frontage will bypass the water quality treatment facility as it qualifies for a surface area exemption. The frontage bypass area totals less than 5,000 square feet of new and replaced pollution generating impervious surface and adds less than ¾ acre pollution generating pervious surface. Stormwater will be collected from the private drive south of the site and routed to bypass the water quality treatment facilities on site. The project is subject to two separate threshold discharge areas (TDA). Refer to the attached Figure 4.5, site TDA Basin Maps included in this report. TDA 2 is 3,358 square feet total with 2,674 square feet of pollutant generating impervious surface. TDA 2 is exempt from water quality treatment since there is less than 5,000 square feet of new plus replaced pollutant generating impervious surface and less the 0.75 acres of pollution generating pervious surface. TDA 2 and the runoff area contributing to the existing catch basin south of the patio with the original Chick-fil-A scope in the Fred Meyer access drive are roughly equivalent. Since construction will impact the existing conveyance system, the exemption to TDA 2 will allow the collected runoff to bypass water quality treatment. The above-mentioned runoff from the access drive to Fred Meyer in the southwest corner of the site and roof runoff are not considered target surfaces for water quality purposes. Refer to the attached TDA Basin Map Exhibits for further details. All target surfaces from TDA 1 are routed through the proprietary modular wetland unit for water quality. See the attached calculations for further details. Figure 4.1 Calculations PLAN VIEW ELEVATION VIEW RIGHT END VIEW LEFT END VIEW SITE SPECIFIC DATA GENERAL NOTES INSTALLATION NOTES STANDARD DETAIL STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM MWS-L-4-8-V-UG FOR PATENT INFORMATION, GO TO www.ContechES.com/IP 736661 Chik-Fil-A Renton (BCE #18963) Renton, WA MWS #1 0.084 0.710587 12" N/A 12" PVC N/A PVC 25.46 N/A 25.21 30.76' DIRECT TRAFFIC 2.5 1.5 1.0 0.084 25.46 25.21 30.76 * PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT RAINIER AVE S FRONTAGE BYPASS AREA NOT INCLUDED IN TDA 1 CALCULATIONS MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:19 Page 2 General Model Information Project Name:MWS Sizing Site Name:Renton CFA Site Address:361 Rainier Ave S City:Renton Report Date:12/28/2022 Gage:Seatac Data Start:1948/10/01 Data End:2009/09/30 Timestep:15 Minute Precip Scale:1.000 Version Date:2021/08/18 Version:4.2.18 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Year MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:19 Page 3 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use TDA 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat 0.17 Pervious Total 0.17 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.1 PARKING FLAT 0.92 Impervious Total 1.02 Basin Total 1.19 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Does not include 0.05 acres of non-target impervious surfaces bypassing water quality unit Total Basin Area 1 with bypass is 1.24 acres MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:19 Page 4 Mitigated Land Use TDA 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat 0.26 Pervious Total 0.26 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.1 PARKING FLAT 0.83 Impervious Total 0.93 Basin Total 1.19 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Does not include 0.05 acres of non-target impervious surfaces bypassing water quality unit Total Basin Area 1 with bypass is 1.24 acres MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:19 Page 5 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:19 Page 6 Mitigated Routing MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:19 Page 7 Analysis Results POC 1 + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.17 Total Impervious Area:1.02 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.26 Total Impervious Area:0.93 Flow Frequency Method:Log Pearson Type III 17B Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.399779 5 year 0.508752 10 year 0.583217 25 year 0.680247 50 year 0.754806 100 year 0.831413 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.371177 5 year 0.474843 10 year 0.54597 25 year 0.638945 50 year 0.710587 100 year 0.784358 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.528 0.497 1950 0.548 0.502 1951 0.330 0.310 1952 0.282 0.258 1953 0.304 0.279 1954 0.325 0.302 1955 0.366 0.339 1956 0.361 0.334 1957 0.416 0.390 1958 0.329 0.304 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 8 1959 0.330 0.301 1960 0.340 0.320 1961 0.354 0.330 1962 0.302 0.277 1963 0.343 0.319 1964 0.326 0.301 1965 0.431 0.404 1966 0.282 0.261 1967 0.488 0.452 1968 0.555 0.515 1969 0.392 0.368 1970 0.373 0.346 1971 0.445 0.414 1972 0.473 0.448 1973 0.270 0.246 1974 0.409 0.383 1975 0.454 0.414 1976 0.317 0.296 1977 0.331 0.302 1978 0.406 0.371 1979 0.557 0.510 1980 0.531 0.505 1981 0.416 0.386 1982 0.594 0.555 1983 0.473 0.435 1984 0.302 0.280 1985 0.416 0.386 1986 0.356 0.327 1987 0.548 0.503 1988 0.329 0.300 1989 0.411 0.375 1990 0.757 0.730 1991 0.594 0.566 1992 0.299 0.278 1993 0.256 0.236 1994 0.275 0.250 1995 0.368 0.340 1996 0.404 0.381 1997 0.389 0.365 1998 0.383 0.353 1999 0.806 0.756 2000 0.397 0.369 2001 0.426 0.390 2002 0.518 0.488 2003 0.403 0.380 2004 0.752 0.703 2005 0.344 0.322 2006 0.306 0.288 2007 0.705 0.661 2008 0.583 0.556 2009 0.503 0.459 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.8061 0.7558 2 0.7569 0.7296 3 0.7516 0.7033 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 9 4 0.7051 0.6613 5 0.5943 0.5658 6 0.5935 0.5556 7 0.5830 0.5549 8 0.5569 0.5150 9 0.5549 0.5097 10 0.5482 0.5050 11 0.5477 0.5027 12 0.5308 0.5023 13 0.5283 0.4970 14 0.5183 0.4883 15 0.5031 0.4590 16 0.4876 0.4523 17 0.4733 0.4483 18 0.4725 0.4346 19 0.4543 0.4143 20 0.4449 0.4135 21 0.4308 0.4042 22 0.4256 0.3901 23 0.4165 0.3898 24 0.4162 0.3859 25 0.4161 0.3855 26 0.4114 0.3826 27 0.4093 0.3810 28 0.4060 0.3795 29 0.4040 0.3752 30 0.4027 0.3711 31 0.3968 0.3695 32 0.3919 0.3675 33 0.3889 0.3648 34 0.3830 0.3526 35 0.3729 0.3465 36 0.3680 0.3403 37 0.3664 0.3388 38 0.3612 0.3345 39 0.3560 0.3299 40 0.3538 0.3274 41 0.3441 0.3224 42 0.3425 0.3200 43 0.3398 0.3194 44 0.3310 0.3096 45 0.3295 0.3037 46 0.3295 0.3023 47 0.3290 0.3020 48 0.3290 0.3006 49 0.3263 0.3005 50 0.3254 0.3000 51 0.3169 0.2960 52 0.3063 0.2883 53 0.3044 0.2805 54 0.3022 0.2788 55 0.3015 0.2778 56 0.2993 0.2772 57 0.2818 0.2606 58 0.2817 0.2581 59 0.2746 0.2503 60 0.2702 0.2464 61 0.2560 0.2357 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 10 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 11 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs)Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.1999 1773 1329 74 Pass 0.2055 1607 1182 73 Pass 0.2111 1449 1058 73 Pass 0.2167 1310 974 74 Pass 0.2223 1179 885 75 Pass 0.2279 1077 815 75 Pass 0.2335 980 736 75 Pass 0.2391 899 670 74 Pass 0.2447 830 621 74 Pass 0.2503 756 569 75 Pass 0.2559 698 531 76 Pass 0.2615 645 488 75 Pass 0.2672 591 437 73 Pass 0.2728 554 411 74 Pass 0.2784 513 376 73 Pass 0.2840 471 358 76 Pass 0.2896 436 332 76 Pass 0.2952 400 308 77 Pass 0.3008 378 284 75 Pass 0.3064 351 260 74 Pass 0.3120 331 244 73 Pass 0.3176 306 226 73 Pass 0.3232 284 208 73 Pass 0.3288 266 197 74 Pass 0.3344 247 185 74 Pass 0.3400 227 169 74 Pass 0.3456 215 157 73 Pass 0.3512 202 146 72 Pass 0.3568 189 139 73 Pass 0.3624 175 129 73 Pass 0.3680 163 118 72 Pass 0.3737 153 112 73 Pass 0.3793 145 107 73 Pass 0.3849 137 99 72 Pass 0.3905 126 92 73 Pass 0.3961 118 82 69 Pass 0.4017 113 82 72 Pass 0.4073 106 79 74 Pass 0.4129 100 78 78 Pass 0.4185 93 73 78 Pass 0.4241 85 68 80 Pass 0.4297 82 66 80 Pass 0.4353 79 61 77 Pass 0.4409 78 58 74 Pass 0.4465 72 55 76 Pass 0.4521 69 51 73 Pass 0.4577 63 48 76 Pass 0.4633 61 47 77 Pass 0.4689 61 43 70 Pass 0.4745 54 40 74 Pass 0.4802 52 40 76 Pass 0.4858 51 38 74 Pass 0.4914 49 31 63 Pass MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 12 0.4970 46 31 67 Pass 0.5026 44 29 65 Pass 0.5082 39 24 61 Pass 0.5138 38 22 57 Pass 0.5194 35 21 60 Pass 0.5250 32 18 56 Pass 0.5306 29 16 55 Pass 0.5362 26 16 61 Pass 0.5418 25 15 60 Pass 0.5474 25 13 52 Pass 0.5530 20 12 60 Pass 0.5586 16 10 62 Pass 0.5642 16 9 56 Pass 0.5698 15 8 53 Pass 0.5754 14 8 57 Pass 0.5810 12 8 66 Pass 0.5866 11 8 72 Pass 0.5923 10 8 80 Pass 0.5979 8 8 100 Pass 0.6035 8 8 100 Pass 0.6091 8 8 100 Pass 0.6147 8 8 100 Pass 0.6203 8 8 100 Pass 0.6259 8 7 87 Pass 0.6315 8 7 87 Pass 0.6371 8 7 87 Pass 0.6427 8 7 87 Pass 0.6483 8 7 87 Pass 0.6539 8 6 75 Pass 0.6595 8 6 75 Pass 0.6651 8 5 62 Pass 0.6707 7 5 71 Pass 0.6763 6 4 66 Pass 0.6819 6 4 66 Pass 0.6875 6 4 66 Pass 0.6931 6 3 50 Pass 0.6988 6 3 50 Pass 0.7044 6 2 33 Pass 0.7100 5 2 40 Pass 0.7156 5 2 40 Pass 0.7212 4 2 50 Pass 0.7268 4 2 50 Pass 0.7324 4 1 25 Pass 0.7380 3 1 33 Pass 0.7436 3 1 33 Pass 0.7492 3 1 33 Pass 0.7548 2 1 50 Pass MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 13 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #1 On-line facility volume:0.1221 acre-feet On-line facility target flow:0.1493 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min:0.1493 cfs. Off-line facility target flow:0.084 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min:0.084 cfs. Water Quality Flow Rate MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:43 Page 14 LID Report MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:50 Page 15 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:50 Page 16 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 17 Mitigated Schematic MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 18 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 MWS Sizing.wdm MESSU 25 PreMWS Sizing.MES 27 PreMWS Sizing.L61 28 PreMWS Sizing.L62 30 POCMWS Sizing1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 16 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 11 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 TDA 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 16 C, Lawn, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 19 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 16 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 16 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 16 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 16 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 11 PARKING/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 11 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 4 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 11 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 20 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 4 0 0 11 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 4 0 0 11 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** TDA 1*** PERLND 16 0.17 COPY 501 12 PERLND 16 0.17 COPY 501 13 IMPLND 4 0.1 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 11 0.92 COPY 501 15 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 21 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 END MASS-LINK END RUN MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 22 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 MWS Sizing.wdm MESSU 25 MitMWS Sizing.MES 27 MitMWS Sizing.L61 28 MitMWS Sizing.L62 30 POCMWS Sizing1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 16 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 11 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 TDA 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 16 C, Lawn, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 23 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 16 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 16 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 16 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 16 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 11 PARKING/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 11 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 4 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 11 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 24 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 4 0 0 11 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 4 0 0 11 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** TDA 1*** PERLND 16 0.26 COPY 501 12 PERLND 16 0.26 COPY 501 13 IMPLND 4 0.1 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 11 0.83 COPY 501 15 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 25 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 END MASS-LINK END RUN MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 26 Predeveloped HSPF Message File MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 27 Mitigated HSPF Message File MWS Sizing 12/28/2022 14:59:51 Page 28 Disclaimer Legal Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2022; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F Olympia, WA. 98501 Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com 11S area 2 12S area 3 13S area 4 14S Building Roof and frontage 15S area 1 16S area 5 17S area 6 19S Order Point Canopy 10R Rainier Ave storm 1PCB Ex Catch Basin #1 2PCB Ex Catch Basin #2 3PCB Ex Catch Basin #3 4P CB Ex Catch Basin #4 5PCB Ex Catch Basin #5 6P CB Ex Catch Basin #6 7PCB Ex SDMH #1 8P CB Ex Catch Basin #7 9PCB Ex SDCO 10PCB Catch Basin #118PCB Catch Basin #2 20PCB Order Point Roof Drains Routing Diagram for 18963 - Expansion Prepared by {enter your company name here}, Printed 4/20/2023 HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link CONVEYANCE CALCULATIONS 18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (all nodes) Area (sq-ft) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 50,639 98 Impervious (11S, 12S, 13S, 14S, 15S, 16S, 17S, 19S) 1,597 74 Pervious Concrete (50% Modeled as Grass) (14S) 52,236 97 TOTAL AREA 18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (all nodes) Area (sq-ft) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0 HSG A 0 HSG B 0 HSG C 0 HSG D 52,236 Other 11S, 12S, 13S, 14S, 15S, 16S, 17S, 19S 52,236 TOTAL AREA 18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (all nodes) HSG-A (sq-ft) HSG-B (sq-ft) HSG-C (sq-ft) HSG-D (sq-ft) Other (sq-ft) Total (sq-ft) Ground Cover 0 0 0 0 50,639 50,639 Impervious 0 0 0 0 1,597 1,597 Pervious Concrete (50% Modeled as Grass) 0 0 0 0 52,236 52,236 TOTAL AREA Area without bypass 18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pipe Listing (all nodes) Line# Node Number In-Invert (feet) Out-Invert (feet) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) n Diam/Width (inches) Height (inches) Inside-Fill (inches) 1 10R 24.86 23.79 190.7 0.0056 0.010 12.0 0.0 0.0 2 1P 26.31 25.57 84.0 0.0088 0.012 12.0 0.0 0.0 3 2P 25.97 25.57 72.0 0.0056 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 4 3P 26.29 25.97 63.0 0.0051 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 5 4P 26.13 25.57 27.0 0.0207 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 6 5P 25.44 25.28 26.0 0.0062 0.012 12.0 0.0 0.0 7 6P 25.28 25.12 10.0 0.0160 0.012 12.0 0.0 0.0 8 7P 25.57 25.12 12.0 0.0375 0.012 12.0 0.0 0.0 9 7P 25.57 25.47 13.0 0.0077 0.012 12.0 0.0 0.0 10 8P 25.12 24.86 52.0 0.0050 0.012 12.0 0.0 0.0 11 9P 25.75 25.33 38.0 0.0111 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 12 10P 26.62 26.31 61.0 0.0051 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 13 18P 26.69 26.31 76.0 0.0050 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 14 20P 25.45 25.12 66.0 0.0050 0.012 8.0 0.0 0.0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=9,583 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 11S: area 2 Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=1.02 cfs 2,527 cf Runoff Area=3,049 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 12S: area 3 Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=0.32 cfs 804 cf Runoff Area=7,405 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 13S: area 4 Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=0.79 cfs 1,953 cf Runoff Area=10,532 sf 84.84% Impervious Runoff Depth>2.74"Subcatchment 14S: Building Roof and Tc=6.3 min CN=94 Runoff=1.04 cfs 2,401 cf Runoff Area=7,405 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 15S: area 1 Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=0.79 cfs 1,953 cf Runoff Area=9,583 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 16S: area 5 Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=1.02 cfs 2,527 cf Runoff Area=3,485 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 17S: area 6 Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=0.37 cfs 919 cf Runoff Area=1,194 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth>3.16"Subcatchment 19S: Order Point Canopy Tc=6.3 min CN=98 Runoff=0.13 cfs 315 cf Avg. Flow Depth=1.00' Max Vel=5.02 fps Inflow=6.26 cfs 81,795 cfReach 10R: Rainier Ave storm 12.0" Round Pipe n=0.010 L=190.7' S=0.0056 '/' Capacity=3.47 cfs Outflow=3.47 cfs 81,649 cf Peak Elev=27.34' Inflow=2.17 cfs 5,398 cfPond 1P: Ex Catch Basin #1 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=84.0' S=0.0088 '/' Outflow=2.17 cfs 5,398 cf Peak Elev=27.43' Inflow=1.34 cfs 3,331 cfPond 2P: Ex Catch Basin #2 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=72.0' S=0.0056 '/' Outflow=1.34 cfs 3,331 cf Peak Elev=26.67' Inflow=0.32 cfs 804 cfPond 3P: Ex Catch Basin #3 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=63.0' S=0.0051 '/' Outflow=0.32 cfs 804 cf Peak Elev=26.81' Inflow=0.79 cfs 1,953 cfPond 4P: Ex Catch Basin #4 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=27.0' S=0.0207 '/' Outflow=0.79 cfs 1,953 cf Peak Elev=27.92' Inflow=4.21 cfs 6,238 cfPond 5P: Ex Catch Basin #5 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=26.0' S=0.0062 '/' Outflow=4.21 cfs 6,238 cf Peak Elev=28.86' Inflow=5.25 cfs 8,639 cfPond 6P: Ex Catch Basin #6 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=10.0' S=0.0160 '/' Outflow=5.25 cfs 8,639 cf Peak Elev=28.26' Inflow=4.30 cfs 10,681 cfPond 7P: Ex SDMH #1 Primary=0.10 cfs 4,444 cf Secondary=4.21 cfs 6,238 cf Outflow=4.30 cfs 10,681 cf Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Peak Elev=28.97' Inflow=5.47 cfs 13,397 cfPond 8P: Ex Catch Basin #7 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=52.0' S=0.0050 '/' Outflow=5.47 cfs 13,397 cf Peak Elev=26.70' Inflow=1.04 cfs 2,401 cfPond 9P: Ex SDCO 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=38.0' S=0.0111 '/' Outflow=1.04 cfs 2,401 cf Peak Elev=27.59' Inflow=1.02 cfs 2,527 cfPond 10P: Catch Basin #1 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=61.0' S=0.0051 '/' Outflow=1.02 cfs 2,527 cf Peak Elev=27.10' Inflow=0.37 cfs 919 cfPond 18P: Catch Basin #2 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=76.0' S=0.0050 '/' Outflow=0.37 cfs 919 cf Peak Elev=25.68' Inflow=0.13 cfs 315 cfPond 20P: Order Point Roof Drains 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=66.0' S=0.0050 '/' Outflow=0.13 cfs 315 cf Total Runoff Area = 52,236 sf Runoff Volume = 13,397 cf Average Runoff Depth = 3.08" 3.06% Pervious = 1,597 sf 96.94% Impervious = 50,639 sf Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 11S: area 2 Runoff = 1.02 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,527 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 9,583 98 Impervious 9,583 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 11S: area 2 Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=9,583 sf Runoff Volume=2,527 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 1.02 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 12S: area 3 Runoff = 0.32 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 804 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 3,049 98 Impervious 3,049 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 12S: area 3 Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=3,049 sf Runoff Volume=804 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 0.32 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 13S: area 4 Runoff = 0.79 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 1,953 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 7,405 98 Impervious 7,405 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 13S: area 4 Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=7,405 sf Runoff Volume=1,953 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 0.79 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 14S: Building Roof and frontage Runoff = 1.04 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,401 cf, Depth> 2.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 8,935 98 Impervious * 1,597 74 Pervious Concrete (50% Modeled as Grass) 10,532 94 Weighted Average 1,597 15.16% Pervious Area 8,935 84.84% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 14S: Building Roof and frontage Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=10,532 sf Runoff Volume=2,401 cf Runoff Depth>2.74" Tc=6.3 min CN=94 1.04 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 15S: area 1 Runoff = 0.79 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 1,953 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 7,405 98 Impervious 7,405 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 15S: area 1 Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=7,405 sf Runoff Volume=1,953 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 0.79 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 16S: area 5 Runoff = 1.02 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,527 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 9,583 98 Impervious 9,583 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 16S: area 5 Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=9,583 sf Runoff Volume=2,527 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 1.02 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 14HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 17S: area 6 Runoff = 0.37 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 919 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 3,485 98 Impervious 3,485 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 17S: area 6 Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=3,485 sf Runoff Volume=919 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 0.37 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 15HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 19S: Order Point Canopy Runoff = 0.13 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 315 cf, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Area (sf) CN Description * 1,194 98 Impervious 1,194 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.3 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 19S: Order Point Canopy Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40" Runoff Area=1,194 sf Runoff Volume=315 cf Runoff Depth>3.16" Tc=6.3 min CN=98 0.13 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 16HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Reach 10R: Rainier Ave storm [52] Hint: Inlet/Outlet conditions not evaluated [55] Hint: Peak inflow is 181% of Manning's capacity [76] Warning: Detained 1,393 cf (Pond w/culvert advised) [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 8P by 0.24' @ 12.25 hrs Inflow Area = 52,236 sf, 96.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 18.79" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 6.26 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 81,795 cf, Incl. 0.79 cfs Base Flow Outflow = 3.47 cfs @ 11.90 hrs, Volume= 81,649 cf, Atten= 45%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Max. Velocity= 5.02 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.6 min Avg. Velocity = 3.71 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.9 min Peak Storage= 150 cf @ 11.85 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 1.00' Bank-Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 0.8 sf, Capacity= 3.47 cfs 12.0" Round Pipe n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior Length= 190.7' Slope= 0.0056 '/' Inlet Invert= 24.86', Outlet Invert= 23.79' Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 17HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Reach 10R: Rainier Ave storm Inflow Outflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=52,236 sf Avg. Flow Depth=1.00' Max Vel=5.02 fps 12.0" Round Pipe n=0.010 L=190.7' S=0.0056 '/' Capacity=3.47 cfs 6.26 cfs 3.47 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 18HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 1P: Ex Catch Basin #1 [79] Warning: Submerged Pond 10P Primary device # 1 INLET by 0.71' [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 18P by 0.23' @ 11.95 hrs Inflow Area = 20,473 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 2.17 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 5,398 cf Outflow = 2.17 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 5,398 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.17 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 5,398 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 27.34' @ 11.96 hrs Flood Elev= 29.26' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 26.31'12.0" Round Culvert L= 84.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 26.31' / 25.57' S= 0.0088 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Primary OutFlow Max=2.11 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=27.31' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 2.11 cfs @ 2.69 fps) Pond 1P: Ex Catch Basin #1 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Inflow Area=20,473 sf Peak Elev=27.34' 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=84.0' S=0.0088 '/' 2.17 cfs 2.17 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 19HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 2P: Ex Catch Basin #2 [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 3P by 0.73' @ 11.95 hrs Inflow Area = 12,632 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 1.34 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 3,331 cf Outflow = 1.34 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 3,331 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.34 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 3,331 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 27.43' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 29.37' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.97'8.0" Round Culvert L= 72.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.97' / 25.57' S= 0.0056 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=1.31 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=27.37' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.31 cfs @ 3.74 fps) Pond 2P: Ex Catch Basin #2 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=12,632 sf Peak Elev=27.43' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=72.0' S=0.0056 '/' 1.34 cfs 1.34 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 20HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 3P: Ex Catch Basin #3 Inflow Area = 3,049 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 0.32 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 804 cf Outflow = 0.32 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 804 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.32 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 804 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 26.67' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 29.29' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 26.29'8.0" Round Culvert L= 63.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 26.29' / 25.97' S= 0.0051 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.32 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=26.67' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.32 cfs @ 2.25 fps) Pond 3P: Ex Catch Basin #3 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Inflow Area=3,049 sf Peak Elev=26.67' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=63.0' S=0.0051 '/' 0.32 cfs 0.32 cfs Peak elevation does not exceed rim (typ) Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 21HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 4P: Ex Catch Basin #4 Inflow Area = 7,405 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 0.79 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 1,953 cf Outflow = 0.79 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 1,953 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.79 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 1,953 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 26.81' @ 11.96 hrs Flood Elev= 29.33' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 26.13'8.0" Round Culvert L= 27.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 26.13' / 25.57' S= 0.0207 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.77 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=26.80' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.77 cfs @ 2.19 fps) Pond 4P: Ex Catch Basin #4 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=7,405 sf Peak Elev=26.81' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=27.0' S=0.0207 '/' 0.79 cfs 0.79 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 22HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 5P: Ex Catch Basin #5 [79] Warning: Submerged Pond 7P Secondary device # 2 INLET by 2.30' Inflow = 4.21 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 6,238 cf Outflow = 4.21 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 6,238 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 4.21 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 6,238 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 27.92' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 31.03' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.44'12.0" Round Culvert L= 26.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.44' / 25.28' S= 0.0062 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Primary OutFlow Max=4.09 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=27.82' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 4.09 cfs @ 5.21 fps) Pond 5P: Ex Catch Basin #5 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Peak Elev=27.92' 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=26.0' S=0.0062 '/' 4.21 cfs 4.21 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 23HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 6P: Ex Catch Basin #6 [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 5P by 0.91' @ 11.95 hrs [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 9P by 2.11' @ 11.95 hrs Inflow Area = 10,532 sf, 84.84% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 9.84" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 5.25 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 8,639 cf Outflow = 5.25 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 8,639 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 5.25 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 8,639 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 28.86' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 30.58' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.28'12.0" Round Culvert L= 10.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.28' / 25.12' S= 0.0160 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Primary OutFlow Max=5.11 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=28.71' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 5.11 cfs @ 6.50 fps) Pond 6P: Ex Catch Basin #6 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=10,532 sf Peak Elev=28.86' 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=10.0' S=0.0160 '/' 5.25 cfs 5.25 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 24HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 7P: Ex SDMH #1 [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 1P by 0.96' @ 11.90 hrs [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 2P by 1.33' @ 11.80 hrs [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 4P by 1.45' @ 12.00 hrs Inflow Area = 40,510 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 4.30 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 10,681 cf Outflow = 4.30 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 10,681 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.10 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 4,444 cf Secondary = 4.21 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 6,238 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 28.26' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 30.61' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.57'12.0" Round Culvert L= 12.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.57' / 25.12' S= 0.0375 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Secondary 25.57'12.0" Round Culvert L= 13.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.57' / 25.47' S= 0.0077 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #3 Device 1 25.57'1.5" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Device 2 27.32'1.6' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Primary OutFlow Max=0.10 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=28.24' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Passes 0.10 cfs of 4.40 cfs potential flow) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.10 cfs @ 7.87 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=4.09 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=28.24' (Free Discharge) 2=Culvert (Passes 4.09 cfs of 4.40 cfs potential flow) 4=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 4.09 cfs @ 3.14 fps) Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 25HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 7P: Ex SDMH #1 Inflow Outflow Primary Secondary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=40,510 sf Peak Elev=28.26' 4.30 cfs 4.30 cfs 0.10 cfs 4.21 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 26HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: Ex Catch Basin #7 [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 6P by 0.10' @ 11.95 hrs [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 7P by 0.64' @ 11.95 hrs [81] Warning: Exceeded Pond 20P by 3.22' @ 11.95 hrs Inflow Area = 52,236 sf, 96.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.08" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 5.47 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 13,397 cf Outflow = 5.47 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 13,397 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 5.47 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 13,397 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 28.97' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 30.61' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.12'12.0" Round Culvert L= 52.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.12' / 24.86' S= 0.0050 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Primary OutFlow Max=5.33 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=28.80' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 5.33 cfs @ 6.78 fps) Pond 8P: Ex Catch Basin #7 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=52,236 sf Peak Elev=28.97' 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=52.0' S=0.0050 '/' 5.47 cfs 5.47 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 27HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 9P: Ex SDCO Inflow Area = 10,532 sf, 84.84% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.74" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 1.04 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,401 cf Outflow = 1.04 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,401 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.04 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,401 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 26.70' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 29.83' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.75'8.0" Round Culvert L= 38.0' CMP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.75' / 25.33' S= 0.0111 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=1.01 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=26.67' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 1.01 cfs @ 2.90 fps) Pond 9P: Ex SDCO Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=10,532 sf Peak Elev=26.70' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=38.0' S=0.0111 '/' 1.04 cfs 1.04 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 28HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 10P: Catch Basin #1 Inflow Area = 9,583 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 1.02 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,527 cf Outflow = 1.02 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,527 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.02 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,527 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 27.59' @ 11.96 hrs Flood Elev= 29.32' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 26.62'8.0" Round Culvert L= 61.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 26.62' / 26.31' S= 0.0051 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.98 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=27.55' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.98 cfs @ 2.80 fps) Pond 10P: Catch Basin #1 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=9,583 sf Peak Elev=27.59' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=61.0' S=0.0051 '/' 1.02 cfs 1.02 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 29HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 18P: Catch Basin #2 Inflow Area = 3,485 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 0.37 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 919 cf Outflow = 0.37 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 919 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.37 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 919 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 27.10' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 29.32' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 26.69'8.0" Round Culvert L= 76.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 26.69' / 26.31' S= 0.0050 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.36 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=27.09' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.36 cfs @ 2.33 fps) Pond 18P: Catch Basin #2 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Inflow Area=3,485 sf Peak Elev=27.10' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=76.0' S=0.0050 '/' 0.37 cfs 0.37 cfs Type II 24-hr 25yr 24hr Rainfall=3.40"18963 - Expansion Printed 4/20/2023Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 30HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 10544 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 20P: Order Point Roof Drains Inflow Area = 1,194 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.16" for 25yr 24hr event Inflow = 0.13 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 315 cf Outflow = 0.13 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 315 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.13 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 315 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 25.68' @ 11.97 hrs Flood Elev= 29.87' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 25.45'8.0" Round Culvert L= 66.0' CPP, projecting, no headwall, Ke= 0.900 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 25.45' / 25.12' S= 0.0050 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.12 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=25.68' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.12 cfs @ 1.77 fps) Pond 20P: Order Point Roof Drains Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Inflow Area=1,194 sf Peak Elev=25.68' 8.0" Round Culvert n=0.012 L=66.0' S=0.0050 '/' 0.13 cfs 0.13 cfs ON-SITE FLOW-SPLITTER ORIFICE SIZING CALCULATIONS Project Name:Date:04/20/23 Street Location:Our Job No.:18963 Municipality: Engineer: Q=CdCvA√2gΔH Q (cfs) =0.084 (Water Quality Flow Rate per WWHM Calculations) ΔH (feet)=2.3 (Head on Orifice)Calculate Cd=0.62 (Sharp-Edged) Cv=0.98 (Sharp-Edged) Q CdCv√2gΔH 0.084 (0.62)(0.98)√(2)(32.2)(1.0) πD2 4 D=(4(A) / π)1/2 1.44 " Ø in21.636 Rainier Ave Expansion CFA 375 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA Alex Bell, P.E. A= Circular Orifice 0.0114A= A= Page 1 of 2 18963 Flow Splitting Orifice Figure 4.2 Existing Site Hydrology Map Figure 4.3 Proposed Site Hydrology Map Figure 4.4 Existing Condition Threshold Discharge Area Map RAINIER AVE S Figure 4.5 Proposed Condition Threshold Discharge Area Map RAINIER AVE S Tab 5.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Conveyance calculations are included in this report as Figure 5.1 – Conveyance Calculations showing the 25-year conveyance. The conveyance calculations have been performed per 2022 SWDM Table 3.2.1.B and Figure 3.2.1.C. Figure 5.1 Conveyance Calculations Tab 6.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES The following reports and studies are included in this section: 6.1 Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon dated June 21, 2018 6.2 Stormwater Infiltration Memo by Terracon dated August 24, 2018 6.3 Geotechnical Engineering Report - Addendum by Terracon dated October 29, 2021 6.4 Original Approved Civil Plans by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated December 18, 2020 Figure 6.1 Geotechnical Report REPORT COVER PAGE RED Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 Terracon Project No. 81185084 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Irvine, California Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Mountlake Terrace, WA Terracon Consultants, Inc.21905 64th Avenue West Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P (425) 771 3304 F (425) 771 3549 terracon.com REPORT COVER LETTER TO SIGN June 21, 2018 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway Suite 350 Irvine, California 30349 Attn: Mr. Don Ikeler P:[404] 765 8000 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 361 Rainier Avenue South Renton, King County, Washington Terracon Project No. 81185084 Dear Mr. Ikeler: We have completed the Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project. This study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Master Services Task Order dated April 24, 2018. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Lauren Phillips, EIT David A. Baska, Ph.D., P.E. Geotechnical Field Engineer Senior Engineering Consultant National Account Manager: Romeo deLeon, Senior Principal Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable REPORT TOPICS REPORT TOPICS REPORT SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION ...................................................................... 3 GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................................... 4 EARTHWORK................................................................................................................. 5 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ........................................................................................... 9 GROUND IMPROVEMENT ........................................................................................... 11 SPECIALTY FOUNDATIONS ....................................................................................... 12 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................................... 13 LIQUEFACTION ........................................................................................................... 14 FLOOR SLABS............................................................................................................. 15 PAVEMENTS ................................................................................................................ 16 GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 20 Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format.Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referenced section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at client.terracon.com. ATTACHMENTS EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS EXPLORATION RESULTS (Boring Logs and Laboratory Data) SUPPORTING INFORMATION (General Notes and Unified Soil Classification System) Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable i REPORT SUMMARY Topic 1 Overview Statement 2 Project Description Approximately 4,696 square foot structure Max. Column loads: 50 kips, Max. Wall loads: 2 kips per lineal foot Finished floor elevation: assumed to be at or near existing site grades Excavations to include demolition of old building and parking area, and new foundation construction Expected traffic for pavement areas: ■300 autos/light trucks per day ■Up to 5 medium-duty delivery/trash trucks and 1 Tractor-trailer per week Geotechnical Characterization Areas of existing fill extending to up to 3 feet below ground surface, underlain by alluvial deposits composed primarily of silt, sand, and gravel that are very loose in the top 10 feet and become denser with depth. Groundwater encountered at a depth ranging from 8 to 12 feet in borings B-1 and B-3. Earthwork Options for floor slab subgrade preparation & risk of post-construction movement: ■Low risk: structural floor slab supported on small diameter piles. ■Medium risk (Terracon recommendation): slab on grade with ground improvement through the use of aggregate piers. Minimal settlement may occur. Any material proposed to be used for engineered fill should be tested & approved Fines are sensitive to moisture variation and movement. Shallow Foundations Shallow foundations will be sufficient if combined with ground improvement. Small diameter piles may also be used as an alternative to shallow foundations and ground improvement. Preliminary allowable bearing pressure = 4,000 lbs/sq ft Expected settlements: < 1 inch total, < 2/3 inch differential Detect and remove zones of unsuitable soils as noted in Earthwork Lateral Earth Pressure Recommendations No retaining walls exist on or are proposed for this site. Pavements For subgrade prepared as noted in Earthwork with 2 feet of over-excavation,we have provided CFA’s standard pavement sections. General Comments This section contains important information about the limitations of this geotechnical engineering report. 1.If the reader is reviewing this report as a pdf, the topics above can be used to access the appropriate section of the report by simply clicking on the topic itself. 2.This summary is for convenience only. It should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 1 INTRODUCTION Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 361 Rainier Avenue South Renton, King County, Washington Terracon Project No. 81185084 June 21, 2018 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant #04249 to be located at 361 Rainier Avenue South in Renton, King County, Washington. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: ■Subsurface soil conditions ■Foundation design and construction ■Groundwater conditions ■Floor slab design and construction ■Site preparation and earthwork ■Seismic site classification per IBC ■Demolition considerations ■Pavement design and construction ■Excavation considerations The geotechnical engineering scope of services for this project included the advancement of 8 test borings to depths ranging from approximately 6 ½ to 51 ½ feet below existing site grades. Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration Plan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs and as separate graphs in the Exploration Results section of this report. SITE CONDITIONS The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps. Item Description Parcel Information The project is located at 361 Rainier Avenue South in Renton, King County, Washington. Latitude: 47° 3' 40.82" N, Longitude: 122° 45' 51.228" W. (See Site Location) Existing Improvements Existing asphalt parking lot and grass area, existing building formerly occupied by Diamond Lil’s Card Casino. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 2 Item Description Current Ground Cover Asphalt paved parking lot and unpaved grass area. Existing Topography Based on review of USGS quadrangle maps and information from Google Earth Pro, grade change of about 29 feet (NE corner of site) to 26 feet (SW corner of site). Within the proposed building area, grade change of about 28 feet (South end of building) to 27 feet (North end of building) is expected. Site History From review of historical aerial photos and city tax records, it appears the existing casino has been on-site since 1964. Another building was located on what is currently the unpaved grassy area and was demolished in the late 2000’s. Additional site history can be found in the Phase 1 assessment Terracon completed for this site, Terracon Report No. 81187027. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Our final understanding of the project conditions is as follows: Item Description Information Provided Preliminary Site Plan with seal dated April 16, 2018 Project Description The project includes a single-story Chick-fil-A restaurant building in the southeast corner of the approximate 1-acre site with associated parking and drive through improvements. Proposed Structure A single-story building with a footprint of about 4,696 square feet. The building will be slab-on-grade (non-basement). Building Construction Details not provided but understood to be concrete masonry units (CMU) with steel and/or wood framing with concrete foundations. Finished Floor Elevation Assumed to be at or near existing site grades. Maximum Loads ■Column Loads: 50 kips ■Walls Loads: 2 kips per lineal foot ■Floor slab Load: 125 psf Grading/Slopes Grading plan not provided at the time of this proposal. Free-Standing Retaining Walls Retaining walls are not expected to be constructed as part of site development to achieve final grades. Pavements Paved drive and parking to accommodate up to 36 vehicles is planned. No specific traffic information has been provided to us. Without this information, we plan to use the following traffic volumes for design of the pavement: Autos/Light Trucks: 300 vehicles per day Light Delivery and Trash Collection Vehicles: 5 vehicles per week Tractor-trailer trucks: Less than 1 vehicle per week. The pavement design period is 20 years. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 3 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION Subsurface Profile We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions based upon our review of the data and our understanding of the geologic setting and planned construction. The following table provides our geotechnical characterization. The geotechnical characterization forms the basis of our geotechnical calculations and evaluation of site preparation, foundation options and pavement options. As noted in General Comments, the characterization is based upon widely spaced exploration points across the site, and variations are likely. Stratum Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum (feet)Material Description Consistency/Density Surface ½ to 1 Asphalt / Concrete Pavement N/A Surface 1 to 2 Fill: Silty Gravel with Sand N/A 1 10 to 12 Alluvial Deposits: Silt, Silt with sand, Sand with silt, and Sand Very loose/soft 2 12 to 19 ½Alluvial Deposits: Sand, Sand with silt, and Silty Sand Loose 3 Undetermined1 Alluvial Deposits: Sandy Gravel Medium dense to dense 1.Borings terminated within this stratum at the planned depth of approximately 51 ½ feet. Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs shown in the Exploration Results section and are attached to this report. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in native soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Groundwater Conditions The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of groundwater. The water levels observed in the boreholes can be found on the boring logs in Exploration Results, and are summarized below. Boring Number Approximate Depth to Groundwater while Drilling (feet)1 B-1 8 B-3 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 4 Groundwater was not observed in the remaining borings while drilling, or for the short duration the borings could remain open. However, this does not necessarily mean the borings terminated above groundwater, or the water levels summarized above are stable groundwater levels. Furthermore, the mud-rotary method used on boring B-4 does not allow for an accurate water level measurement to be taken. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW Much of the site is covered by asphalt overlying approximately 1 to 2 feet of fill. On the south end of the site there is an additional layer of asphalt underlying the surface layer. Below the surface soils, an approximate 10 to 12-foot layer of very loose silt and sand combined with the high water table increase the susceptibility to static settlements and liquefaction in the event of an earthquake. These conditions would not provide adequate support for building loads and settlements due to liquefaction would likely be several inches. To address these concerns we recommend that the building be supported on small diameter (pin) piles or that ground improvement such as aggregate piers be utilized to improve foundation soils. The soils which form the bearing stratum for ground improvement or specialty foundations are dense to medium dense sandy gravels located approximately 20 feet below the ground surface. The Ground Improvement and Specialty Foundations section of this report provide design parameters for the two foundation support options. The near-surface silty gravel with sand and silt with sand could become unstable with typical earthwork and construction traffic, especially after precipitation events. Effective drainage should be established early in the construction sequence and maintained after construction to avoid potential issues. If possible, the grading should be performed during the warmer and drier time of the year. If grading is performed during the winter months, the risk for possible overexcavation and replacement of unstable subgrade will increase. Additional site preparation recommendations including subgrade improvement and fill placement are provided in the Earthwork section. The Floor Slabs section addresses structural slab and slab-on-grade support of the building. Options for floor slab subgrade preparation and risk of post-construction movement include: ■Low risk: Install small diameter piles and support structural slab on piles. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 5 ■Medium risk (Terracon recommendation): Utilize ground improvement, such as aggregate piers, and install a slab-on-grade. This will help provide a uniform layer below the slab but has a slight risk of settlement. A combined rigid/flexible pavement system is recommended for this site. The Pavements section addresses the design of pavement systems and subgrade preparation options and recommendations. The General Comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations. EARTHWORK Earthwork will include demolition of existing structures, excavations and fill placement. The following sections provide recommendations for use in the preparation of specifications for the work. Recommendations include critical quality criteria as necessary to render the site in the state considered in our geotechnical engineering evaluation for foundations, floor slabs, and pavements. Site Preparation Prior to placing fill, existing vegetation, root mat, and existing pavements should be removed. Complete stripping of the topsoil should be performed in the proposed building and parking/driveway areas. Given the wet and soft subgrade anticipated following removal of existing pavements and fills, haul roads and other traffic areas may require stabilization with quarry spalls and possibly a geotextile separation layer. Following removal of unsuitable soils and selected overexcavation, the subgrade should be proof- rolled with an adequately loaded vehicle such as a fully loaded tandem axle dump truck. The proof-rolling should be performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Areas excessively deflecting under the proof-roll should be delineated and subsequently addressed by the Geotechnical Engineer. Such areas should either be removed or replaced by tested and approved structural fill. Excessively wet or dry material should either be removed or moisture conditioned and recompacted. In pavement areas, the following procedure should be followed. Over-excavation should extend to 2 feet below the bottom of the pavement section (i.e., asphalt surface course and aggregate base). Geotextile, such as Mirafi 500x, should be placed directly on the subgrade to provide separation between the soft subgrade and the structural fill. Above the geotextile, place and compact 2 feet of structural fill in two lifts. The first lift should be 18 inches thick followed by a 6 inch thick lift. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 6 Given the wet, very soft and loose consistency of the material underlying the structural fill, dynamic compaction may lead to excessive movements or “pumping” of the subgrade. A Geotechnical Engineer should be present to observe compaction and if movement in the native soils below the structural fill is observed, static compaction techniques should be employed. Fill Material Types Some onsite soils may be suitable for reuse however the soils would need to be assessed by a Geotechnical Engineer at the time of construction. The gradation and moisture content will dictate the acceptability of the onsite soils for reuse and the contractor may find it more expedient and economical to only use imported fill. Fill required to achieve design grade should meet the following material property requirements: Soil Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Parameters (for Structural Fill) On-site soil 2 GM, SP, SP-SM, ML Near surface soil generally appear to consist of silty gravel with sand. Soils with a greater fraction of fines content will be more sensitive to changes in moisture and may not be practical for re-use as structural fill if the moisture content deviates more than 2 percent from optimum.3 A Terracon representative should be present to assess suitability of on-site soils for re-use as fill. Select Granular Fill 4 SP, SW, GW Recommended for use in wet weather conditions. Select fill can generally be placed and compacted in a wider variety of weather conditions than Common import fill. Common Fill5 -- Generally consists of lesser quality, more moisture-sensitive soils that can be compacted to a firm and non-yielding condition if near the optimum moisture content. 1. Structural fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organics or debris. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on frozen subgrade. Maximum particle diameter should be 3 inches. Each proposed fill material should be sampled and evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to its delivery and/or use. 2. Sorting of topsoil and on-site soils containing debris, organics, etc., will be necessary. Delineation of unsuitable on-site soils should be performed in the field by a Terracon representative. Moisture conditioning (i.e., drying) of the on-site soils will be necessary to facilitate compaction. 3. After excavation, we recommend that any stockpiled soil intended to be reused as structural fill be covered with plastic sheeting to prevent deviations from the natural in-situ moisture content of the soil. 4. Select fill should meet the general requirements of Section 9-03.14(1), Gravel Borrow, as presented in the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications for Road, Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 7 Soil Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Parameters (for Structural Fill) Bridge, and Municipal Construction. The percent passing the US No. 200 mesh sieve should, however, be modified from the WSDOT specification to a maximum of 5 percent by weight passing the US No. 200 mesh sieve 5. Common engineered fill should meet the requirements of Section 9-03.14(3), Common Borrow, as presented in the WSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction Fill Compaction Requirements Structural and general fill should meet the following compaction requirements. Item Description Fill Lift Thickness 1 10 inches or less in loose thickness. See specific recommendations for Pavement sections in Site Preparation Compaction Requirements 2, 3 All locations 95% of the material’s modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). Moisture Content Within the range of +/- 2 percent of the optimum moisture content. 1. Thinner lifts may be required in confined areas or within excavations, or when hand-operated compaction equipment is used. 2. We recommend structural fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Bottoms of all excavations should be compacted with lightweight, remote equipment such as a small rolling drum compactor, to minimize disturbance of the wetter soils. Should the results of the in- place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trenching should conform to all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, such as OSHA and WISHA, for open excavations. All trenches should be wide enough to allow for compaction around the haunches of the pipe, or material such as pea gravel (provided this is allowed by the pipe manufacturer) should be used below the spring line of the pipes to eliminate the need for mechanical compaction in this portion of the trenches. We recommend that utility trench excavations be completed using a smooth excavation bucket (without teeth) to reduce the potential for subgrade disturbance. If water is encountered in the excavations, it should be removed prior to fill placement. Materials, placement and compaction of utility trench backfill should be in accordance with the recommendations presented in Fill Material Types and Fill Compaction Requirements Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 8 sections of this report. In our opinion, the initial lift thickness should not exceed one foot unless recommended by the manufacturer to protect utilities from damage by compacting equipment. Light, hand-operated compaction equipment in conjunction with thinner fill lift thicknesses may be utilized on backfill placed above utilities if damage resulting from heavier compaction equipment is of concern. Grading and Drainage All grades must provide effective drainage away from the building during and after construction and should be maintained throughout the life of the structure. Water retained next to the building can result in soil movements greater than those discussed in this report. Greater movements can result in unacceptable differential floor slab and/or foundation movements, cracked slabs and walls, and roof leaks. The roof should have gutters/drains with downspouts that discharge onto splash blocks at a distance of at least 10 feet from the building. Exposed ground should be sloped and maintained at a minimum 5 percent away from the building for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the building. Locally, flatter grades may be necessary to transition ADA access requirements for flatwork. After building construction and landscaping, final grades should be verified to document effective drainage has been achieved. Grades around the structure should also be periodically inspected and adjusted as necessary as part of the structure’s maintenance program. Where paving or flatwork abuts the structure a maintenance program should be established to effectively seal and maintain joints and prevent surface water infiltration. Earthwork Construction Considerations Shallow excavations, for the proposed structure, are anticipated to be accomplished with conventional construction equipment. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade water content prior to construction of floor slabs. Construction traffic over the completed subgrades should be avoided. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. Water collecting over, or adjacent to, construction areas should be removed. If the subgrade freezes, desiccates, saturates, or is disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or the materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted, prior to floor slab construction. We recommend that the earthwork portion of this project be completed during extended periods of dry weather, if possible. If earthwork is completed during the wet season, it may be necessary to take extra precautionary measures to protect subgrade soils. Wet season earthwork may require additional mitigating measures beyond that which would be expected during the drier months. Once subgrades are established, it may be necessary to protect the exposed subgrade soils from construction traffic. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 9 As a minimum, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations” and its appendices, and in accordance with any applicable local, and/or state regulations. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided herein be interpreted to mean Terracon is assuming responsibility for construction site safety, or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied nor inferred. Construction Observation and Testing The earthwork efforts should be monitored under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Monitoring should include documentation of adequate removal of any vegetation, existing fill and top soil, proofrolling and mitigation of areas delineated by the proofroll to require mitigation. Each lift of compacted fill should be tested, evaluated, and reworked as necessary until approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of additional lifts. In areas of foundation excavations, the bearing subgrade should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer. In the event that unanticipated conditions are encountered, the Geotechnical Engineer should recommend mitigation options. In addition to the documentation of the essential parameters necessary for construction, the continuation of the Geotechnical Engineer into the construction phase of the project provides the continuity to maintain the Geotechnical Engineer’s evaluation of subsurface conditions, including assessing variations and associated design changes. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS If the site has been prepared in accordance with the requirements noted in Earthwork, the following design parameters are applicable for shallow foundations. Design Parameters – Compressive Loads Description Column Wall Net allowable soil bearing pressure 1 4,000 psf2 4,000 psf2 Minimum dimensions 24 inches 18 inches Minimum embedment 3 18 inches 18 inches Estimated total settlement 4 < 1 inch < 1 inch Estimated differential settlement 4 2/3-inch between columns 2/3-inch over 40 feet Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 10 Description Column Wall Ultimate Equivalent fluid pressure 5 400 pcf Ultimate coefficient of sliding friction 5 0.45 1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils, if encountered, will be undercut and replaced with engineered fill. Disturbance of the wetter soils may require the need for a granular stabilization layer for an appropriate working surface. Terracon should be consulted if this issue becomes apparent. 2. Final soil bearing pressures should be developed by the specialty contractor that designs the ground improvement. 3. For perimeter footings and footings in unheated areas. For frost protection and to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. If construction extends into freezing weather, we recommend that either all footings extend to frost depth (as measured from adjacent grade at the time of construction) or that the foundations be protected from the elements by straw, frost blankets, or similar means. 4. The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footings, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. 5. Passive resistance in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile should be neglected. Design Parameters - Uplift Loads Uplift resistance of spread footings can be developed from the effective weight of the footing and the overlying soils. As illustrated on the subsequent figure, the effective weight of the soil prism defined by diagonal planes extending up from the top of the perimeter of the foundation to the ground surface at an angle, q, of 20 degrees from the vertical can be included in uplift resistance. The maximum allowable uplift capacity should be taken as a sum of the effective weight of soil plus the dead weight of the foundation, divided by an appropriate factor of safety. A maximum total unit weight of 120 pcf should be used for the backfill. This unit weight should be reduced to 60 pcf for portions of the backfill or natural soils below the groundwater elevation. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 11 Foundation Construction Considerations As noted in Earthwork, the footing excavations should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer. The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil, prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Care should be taken to prevent wetting or drying of the bearing materials during construction. Excessively wet or dry material or any loose/disturbed material in the bottom of the footing excavations should be removed/reconditioned before foundation concrete is placed. Foundations should rest directly on aggregate piers which are outlined in the following section. GROUND IMPROVEMENT Mitigation of excessive settlement from static loading and/or seismic-induced ground motions (e.g., seismic-induced settlement) is generally accomplished through one of three methods: ■Removal of soils susceptible to excessive settlement and replacement with structural fill ■Densification of native soils through ground improvement ■Transfer foundation loads through weaker soils to competent soils using deep foundations Ground improvement options such as jet-grouting and deep soil-cement mixing densify the ground by mixing soil and cement to produce concrete-like columns. Deep foundations such as driven piles, augercast piles, and drilled shafts effectively mitigate excessive settlements. For cases where the design is controlled by horizontal loading, lateral resistance is accomplished through flexural bending which can result in relatively large pile diameters. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 12 The mitigation options of ground improvement and deep foundations mentioned above are generally expensive and may not be the most cost-effective solution. Assuming the structures can be designed to tolerate some lateral displacements while satisfying the seismic performance objective of life safety, ground improvement with aggregate piers is a viable, cost-effective solution. Aggregate piers are typically the preferred option when the following conditions exist: ■The site is relatively level and the risk of lateral spreading is low ■Unit of weaker soils and/or soils susceptible to liquefaction is relatively thin ■A bearing stratum is present at depths shallower than 60 feet, which is about the maximum depth aggregate piers can be installed using conventional methods Ground improvement techniques typically stiffen the ground enough such that spread footings connected with seismic ties are a feasible foundation option. However, ground improvement via aggregate piers does not mitigate lateral spreading. When a lateral spreading hazard exists, ground improvement to produce concrete-like columns may be needed. Deep foundations may also be an option, and a mat foundation could be adequate for some scenarios. For this site, we estimate that the thickness of liquefiable soil is about 10 to 12 feet and results in a post-liquefaction settlement ranging from 4 to 17 inches. While the final ground improvement design will be provided by the specialty contractor, we predict that piers will need to extend to approximately 15 to 20 feet below ground surface.The aggregate pier field should extend outside the building footprint by 5 feet or at least 10 percent of the building footprint, whichever is greater. It is recommended that a ground improvement contractor be consulted for design of the ground improvement system and the structural engineer consulted to provide the tolerable post- liquefaction displacements. Recommendations for foundations resting on aggregate piers are provided in the Shallow Foundations section. SPECIALTY FOUNDATIONS Small-Diameter Piles Small-diameter piles, or pin piles, are comprised of relatively small diameter steel pipe that is driven into the ground with a pneumatic or hydraulic jackhammer, or percussion driver, to a designated “refusal” criteria. Pipe lengths of 5 to 10 feet are commonly used. Successive pipe lengths are either compression coupled or welded together. Once the piles are installed, they are cut off to a pre-determined elevation, and the tops of the piles are then incorporated into new foundations or slabs as determined by the structural engineer. We recommend that the piles be driven to “refusal”. Definition of refusal criteria will depend on pipe diameter and construction installation methods. Pipes should penetrate several feet into the Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 13 bearing layer which is believed to be at a depth of 15 to 20 feet, therefore piles will likely reach 25 to 30 feet below ground surface. Determination of the depth to suitable bearing and the resultant pile capacities and depths will require field engineering decisions. We recommend that a representative from Terracon Consultants, Inc. observe the pile installation and refusal criteria achievement. Allowable axial capacity of pin piles is dependent on pipe diameter and schedule of steel and is outlined in the following table. Small Diameter Driven Pile Design Summary 1 Pile Diameter (inches) Schedule Steel Pipe Allowable Axial Capacity (kips) 2 80 4 3 40 12 4 40 20 1.Design capacities are dependent upon the method of installation, and quality control parameters. The values provided are estimates and should be verified when installation protocol have been finalized. We recommend at least one (and as many as five) load test be performed on an installed pile to confirm piles are providing the required axial support. We do not recommend that the pin piles be designed for lateral loading. A structural slab with a thickened edge utilizing passive earth pressure should be considered for resistance to lateral loading. Battering (i.e., inclining) the piles is another option to provide lateral resistance. Pin piles installed in this manner will not eliminate liquefaction settlements for the surrounding ground-supported elements including driveways, paved surfaces, awnings or other ancillary structures. However, provided that the recommendations of this report are followed, we anticipate the total and differential settlement of the building to be 3/4 inch and 1/2 inch for post-liquefaction loading conditions, respectively, assuming the piles are embedded in the dense bearing stratum. Because the ground surface may settle more than the building, we recommend that utilities be constructed with flexible connections to accommodate the differential settlement. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS The seismic design requirements for buildings and other structures are based on Seismic Design Category. Site Classification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure. The Site Classification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted average value of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear strength in accordance with Section 20.4 of ASCE 7-10. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 14 Description Value 2015 International Building Code Site Classification 1 F1,2 Site Latitude 47.47861°N Site Longitude 122.21709°W SDS Spectral Acceleration for a Short Period 3 0.962g SD1 Spectral Acceleration for a 1-Second Period 3 0.540g 1.Seismic site classification in general accordance with the 2015 International Building Code, which refers to ASCE 7-10. Assuming the fundamental period of vibration for the building is less than 0.5 seconds, Site Class D may be used to determine values for the Site Parameters SS and S1. 2.The 2015 International Building Code (IBC) uses a site profile extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. Borings at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 51 1/2 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth. 3.These values for Site Class D were obtained using online seismic design maps and tools provided by the USGS (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/). LIQUEFACTION Liquefaction is the phenomenon where saturated soils develop high pore water pressures during seismic shaking and lose their strength characteristics. This phenomenon generally occurs in areas of high seismicity, where groundwater is shallow and loose granular soils or relatively non- plastic fine-grained soils are present. Based on the site geology and subsurface groundwater conditions, the risk of liquefaction of the site soils is high during a design level earthquake and is most likely to trigger between 8 and 20 feet below the ground surface. Because the site is relatively level, the risk of lateral spreading is low and should be mitigated with seismic ties between spread footings or grade beams between pile caps. Liquefaction was evaluated using WSLiq software developed by Prof. Steven L. Kramer at the University of Washington (http://faculty.washington.edu/kramer/WSliq/WSliq.htm). We estimate between 4 and 16 inches of liquefaction-induced settlement of the ground surface based on our understanding of the regional geology and the alluvial deposits of the site. Vertical settlements deemed excessive by the structural engineer can be reduced using ground improvement or small diameter piles. However, the ground located outside the aggregate piers or piles will be subject to liquefaction-induced settlement. Therefore, we recommend any utilities connected to the proposed structures be designed with flexible connections to reduce damage during a seismic event. Foundation recommendations are provided in the Shallow Foundations section and discussion of aggregate piers is provided in the Ground Improvement section. Recommendations related to small diameter piles can be found in the Specialty Foundations section. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 15 FLOOR SLABS Floor slab design depends on the foundation approach. If ground improvement through aggregate piers is utilized under the entire footprint, a slab-on-grade is acceptable. In the case of small diameter piles, a structural slab supported on the piles will be necessary. Design parameters for floor slabs assume the requirements for Earthwork have been followed. Specific attention should be given to positive drainage away from the structure and. positive drainage of the aggregate base beneath the floor slab. Floor Slab Design Parameters Item Description Floor slab support 1 In the case of ground improvement, floor slab can rest directly on aggregate piers. If small diameter piles are used, a structural floor slab will be necessary. See Ground Improvement and Specialty Foundations sections for more detail. Aggregate base course/capillary break 2 6 inches of compacted free draining granular subbase material 1.Floor slabs should be structurally independent of building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation. 2.The floor slab design should include a capillary break, comprised of compacted, granular material, as described in subsection Fill Material Types. The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade covered with wood, tile, carpet, or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder. Saw-cut control joints should be placed in the slab to help control the location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations refer to the ACI Design Manual. Joints or cracks should be sealed with a water-proof, non-extruding compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet environments. Where floor slabs are tied to perimeter walls or turn-down slabs to meet structural or other construction objectives, our experience indicates differential movement between the walls and slabs will likely be observed in adjacent slab expansion joints or floor slab cracks beyond the length of the structural dowels. The Structural Engineer should account for potential differential settlement through use of sufficient control joints, appropriate reinforcing or other means. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 16 Floor Slab Construction Considerations Finished subgrade within and for at least 10 feet beyond the floor slab should be protected from traffic, rutting, or other disturbance and maintained in a relatively moist condition until floor slabs are constructed. If the subgrade should become damaged or desiccated prior to construction of floor slabs, the affected material should be removed and structural fill should be added to replace the resulting excavation. Final conditioning of the finished subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the floor slab support course. The Geotechnical Engineer should approve the condition of the floor slab subgrades immediately prior to placement of the floor slab support course, reinforcing steel and concrete. Attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier, and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. PAVEMENTS Pavement designs are provided for the traffic conditions and pavement life conditions as noted in Project Description and in the following sections of this report. A critical aspect of pavement performance is site preparation. Pavement designs, noted in this section, must be applied to the site, which has been prepared as recommended in the Earthwork section. Subgrade Preparation See the subsection Local Terracon General Pavement Design Recommendations for local practices and subgrade preparation options. The following are general subgrade preparation considerations standard to CFA, which apply for pavement subgrades prepared as recommended in the Earthwork section. On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Fills are placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However, as construction proceeds, excavations are made into these areas, rainfall and surface water saturates some areas, heavy traffic from concrete trucks and other delivery vehicles disturbs the subgrade and many surface irregularities are filled in with loose soils to improve traffic conditions temporarily. As a result, the pavement subgrades, initially prepared early in the project, should be carefully evaluated as the time for pavement construction approaches. We recommend the moisture content and density of the top 12 inches of the subgrade be evaluated and the pavement subgrades be proofrolled within two days or after a rainfall prior to commencement of actual paving operations. Areas not in compliance with the required ranges of moisture or density should be moisture conditioned and recompacted. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 17 removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills. If a significant precipitation event occurs after the evaluation or if the surface becomes disturbed, the subgrade should be reviewed by qualified personnel immediately prior to paving. The subgrade should be in its finished form at the time of the final review. Design Considerations Actual traffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available at the time that this report was prepared. However, we anticipate that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and occasional delivery and trash removal trucks. The thickness of pavements subjected to heavy truck traffic should be determined using expected traffic volumes, vehicle types, and vehicle loads and should be in accordance with local, city or county ordinances. Pavement thickness can be determined using AASHTO, Asphalt Institute and/or other methods if specific wheel loads, axle configurations, frequencies, and desired pavement life are provided. Terracon can provide thickness recommendations for pavements subjected to loads other than personal vehicle and occasional delivery and trash removal truck traffic if this information is provided. Standard CFA Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness The following section provides the standard CFA recommended pavement sections according to provided information. As a minimum, we recommend the following typical pavement section be considered for car only areas. Material Thickness (inches)Preparation Subgrade 24 inches of structural fill placed and compacted in two lifts of 18 and 6 inches.1 95% of Modified Proctor -2% to +2% optimum moisture content Aggregate Base 2 6 Minimum CFA recommended base course thickness Asphalt Surface Course 4 Minimum CFA recommended binder course (2.5 inches) and surface course (1.5 inches) Total Pavement Section 10 1. Increased thickness from CFA standard. 2. A material similar to WSDOT: 9-03.9(3) Base Course, or approved alternate. We can review proposed materials during construction. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 18 As a minimum, we suggest the following typical pavement section be considered for combined car and delivery truck traffic. Material Thickness (inches)Preparation Subgrade 24 inches of structural fill placed and compacted in two lifts of 18 and 6 inches.1 95% of Modified Proctor -2% to +2% optimum moisture content Aggregate Base 2 7 Increased recommended base course thickness Asphalt Surface Course 4 Minimum CFA recommended binder course (2.5 inches) and surface course (1.5 inches) Total Pavement Section 11 1. Increased thickness from CFA standard. 2. A material similar to WSDOT: 9-03.9(3) Base Course, or approved alternate. We can review proposed materials during construction. The graded aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material’s modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557, Method C) maximum dry density. The listed pavement component thicknesses should be used as a guide for pavement systems at the site for the traffic classifications stated herein. These recommendations assume a 20-year pavement design life. If pavement frequencies or loads will be different than that specified Terracon should be contacted and allowed to review these pavement sections. We recommend a Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement be utilized in entrance and exit sections, dumpster pads, loading dock areas, or other areas where extensive wheel maneuvering are expected. The dumpster pad should be large enough to support the wheels of the truck which will bear the load of the dumpster. We recommend a minimum of 6 inches of PCC underlain by 4 inches of granular aggregate base. Although not required for structural support, the base course layer is utilized to help reduce potentials for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, and subgrade “pumping” through joints. Proper joint spacing will also be required to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Portland cement concrete should be designed with proper air-entrainment and have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi after 28 days of laboratory curing. Adequate reinforcement and number of longitudinal and transverse control joints should be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI requirements. The joints should be sealed as soon as possible (in accordance with sealant manufacturer’s instructions) to minimize infiltration of water into the soil. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 19 Local Terracon General Pavement Design Recommendations Subgrade The Standard CFA minimums for pavement subgrade and design standards will be sufficient in the Puget Sound region. As recommended in the Earthwork section, over-excavation in the pavement areas should extend to 2 feet below the bottom of the pavement section, including the aggregate base. A geotextile, such as Mirafi 500x should be installed at the base of the excavation to provide separation between the soft subgrade and the structural fill. Above the geotextile, structural fill should be placed in two lifts of 18 inches and 6 inches. Each lift can be compacted with a vibratory roller under the observation of a geotechnical engineer. If movement of the subgrade is observed during dynamic compaction, static compaction methods should be employed and we may recommend that the 24 inches of structural fill be placed in a single lift. Pavement Design We recommend the standard CFA pavement sections as described above for this site. A formal pavement design has not been completed for this project. The above recommended pavement sections are typical minimum values and thicker pavement sections could be used to reduce maintenance and extend the expected service life of the pavements. Periodic maintenance will also extend the service life of the pavements and should include patching and repair of deteriorated areas, crack sealing, and surface sealing. We recommend that a formal pavement design be completed if unusually high vehicle loads or frequencies are anticipated. Construction Considerations Construction scheduling often involves grading and paving by separate contractors and can involve a time lapse between the end of grading operations and the commencement of paving. Disturbance, desiccation or wetting of the subgrade soils between grading and paving can result in deterioration of the previously completed subgrade. A non-uniform subgrade can result in poor pavement performance and local failures relatively soon after pavements are constructed. We recommend the moisture content and density of the subgrade be evaluated within two days prior to commencing paving operations. A proof roll using heavy equipment similar to that required for pavement construction is also recommended to verify subgrade stability for pavement construction. Scarification and recompaction may also be required. Construction traffic on the pavements was not considered in developing the recommended minimum pavement thicknesses. Construction traffic can cause significant damage to pavements, especially to partially-completed pavement sections (e.g., base course lifts). If the pavements will be subject to traffic by construction equipment/vehicles, the pavement thicknesses should be revised to consider the effects of the additional loading. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 20 Areas not in compliance with the required ranges of moisture or density should be moisture conditioned and recompacted. If significant precipitation occurs after the evaluation or if the surface becomes disturbed, the subgrade condition should be reviewed by Terracon personnel immediately prior to paving. Pavement Drainage Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive drainage within the granular base section. We recommend drainage be included at the bottom of the aggregate layer at the storm structures to aid in removing water that may enter this layer. Drainage could consist of small diameter weep holes excavated around the perimeter of the storm structures. The weep holes should be excavated at the elevation of the aggregate and soil interface. The excavation should be covered with No. 57 stone which is encompassed in Mirafi 140 NL or approve equivalent which will aid in reducing fines from entering the storm system. Pavement Maintenance The pavement sections provided in this report represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore, preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required. GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth-related construction phases of the project. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 21 The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. ATTACH MENTS ATTACHMENTS Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES Field Exploration As requested, our field exploration work included the drilling and sampling of exploratory soil borings consistent with the following schedule. Number of Borings Boring Depth (ft)1 Planned Location 2 4 16 ½ - 51 ½Building Pad 3 6 ½Pavement Areas 1 6 ½Dumpster Pad 1. Below existing ground surface 2. See Exploration Plan Boring Layout and Elevations: A Terracon representative used field measurements from existing site features to mark the boring locations prior to drilling operations. Approximate elevations were obtained from Google Earth Pro and are reported to the nearest foot. Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced soil borings with a truck-mounted drill rig using continuous hollow-stem flight augers, a combination of hollow-stem auger and mud rotary was used for the deepest boring, B-4. Samples were obtained at a 2 ½ foot interval in the upper 16 ½ feet of each boring and at intervals of 5 feet thereafter. Soil sampling was performed using split-barrel sampling procedures. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a standard 2-inch outer diameter split-barrel sampling spoon is driven into the ground by a 140-pound automatic hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of a normal 18-inch penetration is recorded as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value. The SPT resistance values, also referred to as N-values, are indicated on the boring logs at the test depths. A 3-inch O.D. split-barrel sampling spoon with 2.5-inch I.D. ring lined sampler was used for sampling in below 25 feet on B-4. Ring-lined, split-barrel sampling procedures are similar to standard split spoon sampling procedure; however blow counts must be adjusted to account for the larger diameter sampler. The samples were sealed and taken to our soil laboratory for testing, and classified by a geotechnical engineer. In addition, we observed and recorded groundwater levels during drilling. Our exploration team prepared field boring logs as part of standard drilling operations including sampling depths, penetration distances, and other relevant sampling information. Field logs include visual classifications of materials encountered during drilling, and our interpretation of subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs, prepared from field logs, represent the geotechnical engineer's interpretation, and include modifications based on observations and laboratory tests. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable Property Disturbance: We backfilled borings with bentonite chips after completion. Pavements were patched with quick-dry concrete. Our services did not include repair of the site beyond backfilling our boreholes, and patching existing pavements. Because backfill material often settles below the surface after a period, we recommend boreholes be checked periodically and backfilled, if necessary. We can provide this service, or grout the boreholes for additional fees, at your request. Laboratory Testing The project engineer reviewed field data and assigned various laboratory tests to better understand the engineering properties of various soil strata. Testing included visual classification, moisture content, and percent finer than no. 200 sieve as appropriate. In addition to our standard testing, Atterberg Limits tests were performed on two selected samples. Procedural standards noted below are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, local practices and professional judgement require method variations. Standards noted below include reference to other related standards. Such references are not necessarily applicable to describe the specific test performed. ■ASTM D2488 Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) ■ASTM D2216 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass ■ASTM D4318 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils ■ASTM D1140 Standard Test Methods for Amount of Material in Soils Finer than No. 200 Sieve Our laboratory testing program often includes examination of soil samples by an engineer. Based on the material’s texture and plasticity, we describe and classify soil samples in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). SITE LOCA TION AND EXPLORATION PLANS SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS EXPLORATION PLAN Chick-fil-A #04249- Renton ■ Renton, King County WA June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDEDBY MICROSOFT BING MAPS EXPLORATION PLAN Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, WA June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES THIS BASEMAP PDF WAS PROVIDED BY CHICK-FIL-A AND MODIFIED BY TERRACON EXPLORATION PLAN Chick-fil-A #04249- Renton ■ Renton, WA June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDEDBY MICROSOFT BING MAPS EXPLORATION RESULTS EXPLORATION RESULTS 42 282727 17 14 11.5 1-1-1N=2 0-0-0N=0 0-0-0N=0 1-1-4N=5 1-2-4N=6 4-17-20 N=37 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4AS-4B S-5 S-6 0.20.91.1 11.0 14.0 16.5 ASPHALT FILL - SANDY GRAVEL (GM), brown, moist, FILL ASPHALT SILT (ML), with interbedded fine sands, light reddish brown with iron stain, wet, very soft, alluvial becomes gray, wood debri POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), with trace silt, brown togray, wet, loose, alluvial SANDY GRAVEL (GW), light brown, wet, dense, alluvial Boring Terminated at 16.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4784° Longitude: -122.2167° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or BentoniteSurface capped with concrete 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-31-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-1 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-31-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 26.52626 23 16.5 10 6.5 1-2-2N=4 1-0-1N=1 0-0-0N=0 0-1-3N=4 2-5-8N=13 2-4-7 N=11 2-9-7 N=16 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4AS-4B S-5 S-6 S-7 0.30.81.0 4.0 10.5 17.0 20.5 ASPHALT SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM), light brown, moist,FILL ASPHALT SAND (SP), with trace silt, brown and reddish brown, wet,loose, interbedded layers of silt with trace sandalluvial SILT (ML), light brown to gray, wet, very soft, ironstaining, alluvial POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), with trace silt, lightbrown, very loose to loose, alluvial becomes medium dense, light reddish brown interbedded fine sand with silt brown grading to gray wood debri SANDY GRAVEL (GP), brown, wet, medium dense,alluvial Boring Terminated at 20.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 27 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4783° Longitude: -122.2169° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or BentoniteSurface capped with concrete 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-31-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-2 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-31-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 21 16 11 1.5 1-2-3N=5 1-0-1N=1 1-0-0N=0 0-0-0N=0 0-1-2N=3 1-2-6 N=8 10-11-16 N=27 14-21-22N=43 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 7.0 12.0 17.0 26.5 SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, brown andreddish brown, moist, loose increased silt content, becomes very soft and wet SILT (ML), brown to gray, wet, very soft, localizedorganics SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), gray, wet, very loose toloose, with interbedded layers of very silty fine sand SANDY GRAVEL (GP), trace silt, light brown, wet,medium dense to dense Boring Terminated at 26.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 25 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4785° Longitude: -122.2168° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or Bentonite 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-30-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-3 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-30-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 82 19 9 46 44 33-28-5 34-28-6 16 13 8.5 1-0-2N=2 0-0-0N=0 0-0-0N=0 0-0-0N=0 1-1-2N=3 1-2-4 N=6 7-10-14 N=24 5-17-41N=58 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 12.0 15.0 19.5 SILT WITH SAND (ML), brown with iron stain, moist towet, very soft interbedded silty sand weight of hammer advanced sampler 1.5' wet, color becomes gray weight of hammer advanced sampler 1.5' SILTY SAND (SM), light brown to reddish brown, wet,very loose, with interbedded silt SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), light brown to reddish brown, wet, loose, with iron stain SANDY GRAVEL (GP), reddish brown, wet, mediumdense becomes dense @ 25 ft. switched to 3" outer diameter sampler for theremainder of the boringGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 25 30 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4784° Longitude: -122.217° Page 1 of 2 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger and Mud Rotary Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or Bentonite 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-30-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-4 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-30-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS -23.5 14-20-20N=40 9-16-17N=33 17-50/5"N=50/5" 21-28-33 N=61 10-32-27 N=59 S-9 S-10 S-11AS-11B S-12 S-1351.5 SANDY GRAVEL (GP), reddish brown, wet, mediumdense (continued) decreased sand content Approximate 6" sand seam @ 40' becomes very dense Boring Terminated at 51.5 Feet @ 25 ft. switched to 3" outer diameter sampler for theremainder of the boringGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)35 40 45 50 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4784° Longitude: -122.217° Page 2 of 2 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger and Mud Rotary Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or Bentonite 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-30-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-4 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-30-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 42 27.527.5 26 25 23 21.5 2-1-2N=3 1-2-2N=4 S-1 S-2 0.30.6 2.0 3.0 5.0 6.5 ASPHALT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GW-GM), brown, (FILL) SILT WITH SAND (ML), brown, (FILL) SILT (ML), brown and reddish brown, wet, soft, (alluvial) SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), reddish brown, moist to wet,very loose, interbedded silt with fine sand(alluvial) Boring Terminated at 6.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4788° Longitude: -122.2175° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or BentoniteSurface capped with concrete 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-31-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-5 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-31-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 35 27.527.5 26 21.5 2-1-1N=2 0-0-1N=1 S-1 S-2 0.40.5 2.0 6.5 ASPHALT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND,brown, moist, (FILL) SILT (ML), gray, wet, very soft to soft, (alluvial) with thin interbedded fine sand with silt and fine sandy silt Boring Terminated at 6.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4787° Longitude: -122.2169° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or BentoniteSurface capped with concrete 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-31-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-6 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-31-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 34 26.5 21.5 1-1-1N=2 1-0-1N=1 S-1 S-2 1.7 6.5 SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM), light brown, moist,(FILL) SILT (ML), with thin interbedded fine sandy silt and siltyfine sand, reddish brown, wet, very soft to soft Boring Terminated at 6.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 28 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4786° Longitude: -122.2171° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or Bentonite 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 05-31-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-7 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 05-31-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 36 2625.5 24 19.5 1-1-2N=3 2-1-1N=2 S-1 S-2 0.20.3 2.0 6.5 ASPHALT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM), light brown to graybrown, damp to moist, (FILL) SILT WITH SAND (ML), light brown to reddish brown,moist to wet, very soft to soft, with iron staining, (alluvial) Boring Terminated at 6.5 FeetGRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Automatic, ETR = 87%Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/21/18PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)LL-PL-PI ATTERBERGLIMITS ELEVATION (Ft.) Surface Elev.: 26 (Ft.)WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 SAMPLE TYPEFIELD TESTRESULTSSAMPLE NUMBERDEPTH LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4782° Longitude: -122.2172° Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or BentoniteSurface capped with concrete 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: CME-85 Boring Started: 06-01-2018 BORING LOG NO. B-8 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: Gregory Boring Completed: 06-01-2018 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA SITE: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 0.0010.010.1110100 1 140 U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 44 1006321014501620 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 3 60 HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ASTM D422 / ASTM C136 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHTPERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 3/4 1/23/8 30 406 2001.5 8 finemediumCOBBLESGRAVELSAND SILT OR CLAYcoarse % COBBLESDEPTH D10 GRAIN SIZE SOIL DESCRIPTION USCS REMARKS COEFFICIENTS Silt with Sand (ML) Silty Sand (SM) Sand with Silt (SP-SM) 7.5 - 9 12.5 - 14 15 - 16.5 81.6 18.9 9.0 B-4 B-4 B-4 % Finer fine coarse % SAND% GRAVEL % SILT Sieve D30 D60 BORING ID #200 81.61 #200 18.86 8.99#200 Sieve % Finer Sieve % Finer % FINES % CLAY CC CU PROJECT NUMBER: 81185084 SITE: Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Irvine, CA 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GRAIN SIZE: AASHTO DESC-1 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/19/18 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 100CH or OHCL or OLML or OL MH or OH"U" Line"A" Line ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS ASTM D4318 P LAS TIC IT Y I NDE X LIQUID LIMIT PROJECT NUMBER: 81185084 SITE: Rainer Ave & 3rd Renton, WA PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Irvine, CA 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. ATTERBERG LIMITS 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 6/19/185 - 6.5 10 - 11.5 33 34 28 28 5 6 Silt with Sand (ML) Silt with Sand (ML) DescriptionUSCSFinesPIPLLLBoring ID Depth B-4 B-4 CL-ML SUPPORTING INFORMA TION SUPPORTING INFORMATION GENERAL NOTES & UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMDRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS:Split Spoon – 1-3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger ST:Thin-Walled Tube - 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger RS:Ring Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger DB:Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B RB: Rock Bit BS:Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the “Standard Penetration” or “N-value”. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL:Water Level WS:While Sampling N/E: Not Encountered WCI:Wet Cave in WD:While Drilling DCI:Dry Cave in BCR:Before Casing Removal AB:After Boring ACR:After Casing Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION:Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS Unconfined Compressive Strength, Qu, psf Standard Penetration or N-value (SS) Blows/Ft. Consistency Standard Penetration or N-value (SS) Blows/Ft. Ring Sampler (RS) Blows/Ft.Relative Density < 500 0-1 Very Soft 0 – 3 0-6 Very Loose 500 – 1,000 2-3 Soft 4 – 9 7-18 Loose 1,001 – 2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff 10 – 29 19-58 Medium Dense 2,001 – 4,000 7-12 Stiff 30 – 49 59-98 Dense 4,001 – 8,000 13-26 Very Stiff 50+99+Very Dense 8,000+26+Hard RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s) of other Constituents Percent of Dry Weight Major Component of Sample Particle Size Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15 – 30 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand Silt or Clay #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm) Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Term(s) of other Constituents Percent of Dry Weight Term Plasticity Index Trace < 5 Non-plastic 0 With 5 – 12 Low 1-10 Modifier > 12 Medium 11-30 High 30+ GENERAL NOTES & UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 ■ Renton, King County, Washington June 21, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group Symbol Group Name B Coarse-Grained Soils: More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels: More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Less than 5% finesC Cu ‡ 4 and 1 £ Cc £ 3 E GW Well-graded gravel F Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines: More than 12% fines C Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF, G, H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% finesD Cu ‡ 6 and 1 £ Cc £ 3E SW Well-graded sandI Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E SP Poorly graded sandI Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines D Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandG, H, I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I Fine-Grained Soils: 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays: Liquid limit less than 50 Inorganic:PI > 7 and plots on or above “A” line J CL Lean clayK, L, M PI < 4 or plots below “A” lineJ ML Silt K, L, M Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OL Organic clayK, L, M, N Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, O Silts and Clays: Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic:PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clayK, L, M PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic SiltK, L, M Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OH Organic clayK, L, M, P Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, Q Highly organic soils:Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders, or both” to group name. C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay E Cu = D60/D10 Cc = 6010 2 30 DxD )(D F If soil contains ‡ 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM. HIf fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name. I If soil contains ‡ 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name. J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. KIf soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,” whichever is predominant. L If soil contains ‡ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. MIf soil contains ‡ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. NPI ‡ 4 and plots on or above “A” line. OPI < 4 or plots below “A” line. P PI plots on or above “A” line. QPI plots below “A” line. Figure 6.2 Infiltration Memo August 24, 2018 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, California 92618 Attn: Mr. Don Ikeler Re: Stormwater Infiltration Proposed Chick-fil-A #04249 361 Rainier Avenue South Renton, Washington Terracon Project No. 81185084 Dear Mr. Ikeler: We understand that a stormwater infiltration facility is being considered for the proposed Renton, Washington location (Chick-fil-A #04249). Given that we encountered relatively shallow groundwater during the exploration program, we recommend not pursuing an infiltration facility at this site. The Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual does not allow infiltration of stormwater when the distance between the bottom of the infiltration facility and seasonal high groundwater level is less than 5 feet. We appreciate the opportunity to provide this letter addressing stormwater infiltration. Please contact us if you have questions regarding this letter or other aspects of the project. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Lauren Phillips, EIT David A. Baska, PhD, PE Geotechnical Field Engineer Senior Consultant cc: Zereck Jones, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Figure 6.3 Geotechnical Report Addendum REPORT COVER PAGE RED Geotechnical Engineering Report - Addendum __________________________________________________________________________ Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 Terracon Project No. 81185084 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Irvine, California Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Mountlake Terrace, Washington Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 64t h Ave. W, Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 P (425) 771 3304 F (425) 771 3549 terracon.com REPORT COVER LETTER TO SIGN October 29, 2021 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway Suite 350 Irvine, California 92618 Attn: Ms. Beth Witt P: (714) 595-6463 E: beth.witt@cfacorp.com Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Addendum Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion 351 Rainier Avenue South Renton, King County, Washington Terracon Project No. 81185084 Dear Ms. Beth Witt: We have completed the Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project. This study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Master Services Agreement dated March 31, 2005. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and pavement for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Eric D. Kunz, P.E. David A. Baska, Ph.D., P.E. Senior Principal Senior Engineering Consultant National Account Manager: Josh Schilling Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 REPORT TOPICS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION ...................................................................... 2 GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................................... 3 EARTHWORK ................................................................................................................ 4 PAVEMENTS .................................................................................................................. 7 GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 10 Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format. Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referenced section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the GeoReport logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at client.terracon.com. ATTACHMENTS EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES PHOTOGRAPHY LOG SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS EXPLORATION RESULTS SUPPORTING INFORMATION Note: Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents. Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Topic 1 Overview Statement 2 Project Description Expanded asphalt paved parking lot and concrete entry drives to be located immediately north of the existing Chick-fil-A restaurant located at 361 Rainier Avenue South, Renton, WA Expected traffic for pavement areas: ■ 300 autos/light trucks per day ■ Up to 5 medium-duty delivery/trash trucks and 1 tractor-trailer per week Geotechnical Characterization Areas of existing fill extending to up to 3 feet below ground surface, underlain by alluvial deposits composed primarily of silt, sand, and gravel that are loose and soft to medium stiff in the top 7 ½ feet. Groundwater was not encountered. Earthwork ■ Demolition of the existing development should include the complete removal of existing buried utilities within the building area, the existing pavement section should be removed and catch basins or buried utilities that will not be reused as a part of the proposed site development should be removed or grouted in-place. ■ Any material proposed to be used for engineered fill should be tested & approved ■ Fines are sensitive to moisture variation and movement. Pavements For subgrade prepared as noted in Earthwork with 2 feet of over-excavation, we have provided CFA’s standard pavement sections. General Comments This section contains important information about the limitations of this geotechnical engineering report. 1. If the reader is reviewing this report as a pdf, the topics above can be used to access the appropriate section of the report by simply clicking on the topic itself. 2. This summary is for convenience only. It should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 INTRODUCTION Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion 351 Rainier Avenue South Renton, King County, Washington Terracon Project No. 81185084 October 29, 2021 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant #04249 parking lot expansion to be located at Renton, King County, Washington. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: ■ Subsurface soil conditions ■ Demolition considerations ■ Groundwater conditions ■ Pavement design and construction ■ Site preparation and earthwork The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of three test borings to depths of approximately 7 ½ feet below existing site grades. Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration Plan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs in the Exploration Results section. SITE CONDITIONS The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps. Item Description Parcel Information The project is located at 351 Rainier Avenue South Renton, King County, Washington Latitude: 47° 28.74' N, Longitude: 122° 13.03' W See Site Location Existing Improvements Existing asphalt parking lot and concrete aprons, existing building formerly occupied by Firestone. Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2 Item Description Current Ground Cover Asphalt paved parking lot with concrete aprons Existing Topography The site is relatively flat based on review of USGS quadrangle maps and information from Google Earth Pro. Geology According to the published geologic maps reviewed, the site is underlain by alluvial deposits composed primarily of silt, sand, and gravel PROJECT DESCRIPTION Our understanding of the project conditions is as follows: Item Description Project Description Expanded asphalt paved parking lot and concrete entry drives to be located immediately north of the existing Chick-fil-A restaurant located at 361 Rainier Avenue South, Renton, WA Grading/Slopes Grading plan not provided at the time of this report Below-Grade Structures None anticipated Free-Standing Retaining Walls None anticipated Pavements No specific traffic information has been provided to us. Without this information, we plan to use the following traffic volumes for design of the pavement: ■ Autos/Light Trucks: 300 vehicles per day ■ Medium duty trucks and Trash Collection Vehicles: 5 vehicles per week ■ Tractor-trailer trucks: 1 vehicle per week The pavement design period is 20 years. GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION Subsurface Profile We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions based upon our review of the data and our understanding of the geologic setting and planned construction. The following table provides our geotechnical characterization. The geotechnical characterization forms the basis of our geotechnical calculations and evaluation of site preparation, foundation options and pavement options. As noted in General Comments, Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3 the characterization is based upon widely spaced exploration points across the site, and variations are likely. Stratum Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum (feet) Material Description Consistency/Density Surface 0.3 Asphalt Pavement N/A Surface 0.3 to ½ Aggregate base course N/A 1 1 to 3 Fill: Silty Sand trace gravel N/A 2 3 to 7½ Alluvial Deposits: Silt, Silt with sand Soft to medium stiff Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs shown in the Exploration Results section and are attached to this report. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in native soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Groundwater Conditions The borings were observed during drilling for the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was not observed in the borings while drilling. However, this does not necessarily mean the borings terminated above groundwater. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW About half of the site is cover with asphalt pavements and concrete aprons overlying about 2 to 3 feet of sandy silty fill /possible fill. The fill soils are underlain by high moisture content, loose to medium stiff silt and silt with sand. The near-surface silty sand could become unstable with typical earthwork and construction traffic, especially after precipitation events. Effective drainage should be established early in the construction sequence and maintained after construction to avoid potential issues. If possible, the grading should be performed during the warmer and drier time of the year. If grading is performed during the winter months, the risk for possible overexcavation and replacement of unstable subgrade will increase. Additional site preparation recommendations including subgrade improvement and fill placement are provided in the Earthwork section. Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4 A flexible pavement system and a rigid pavement system are recommended for this site. The Pavements section addresses the design of pavement systems. The General Comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations. EARTHWORK Earthwork will include demolition of existing structures, excavations and fill placement. The following sections provide recommendations for use in the preparation of specifications for the work. Recommendations include critical quality criteria as necessary to render the site in the state considered in our geotechnical engineering evaluation for pavements. Site Preparation All large-area subgrades should be proof-rolled with an adequately loaded vehicle such as a fully- loaded tandem-axle dump truck. The proof-rolling should be performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Areas excessively deflecting under the proof-roll should be delineated and subsequently addressed by recommendations from the Geotechnical Engineer. Following removal of unsuitable soils and selected overexcavation, the subgrade should be proof- rolled with an adequately loaded vehicle such as a fully loaded tandem axle dump truck. The proof-rolling should be performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Areas excessively deflecting under the proof-roll should be delineated and subsequently addressed by the Geotechnical Engineer. Such areas should either be removed or replaced by tested and approved structural fill. Excessively wet or dry material should either be removed or moisture conditioned and recompacted. In pavement areas, the following procedure should be followed. Over-excavation should extend to 2 feet below the bottom of the pavement section (i.e., asphalt surface course and aggregate base). Geotextile, such as Mirafi 500x, should be placed directly on the subgrade to provide separation between the soft subgrade and the structural fill. Above the geotextile, place and compact 2 feet of structural fill in two lifts. The first lift should be 18 inches thick followed by a 6 inch thick lift. Given the wet, very soft and loose consistency of the material underlying the structural fill, dynamic compaction may lead to excessive movements or “pumping” of the subgrade. A Geotechnical Engineer should be present to observe compaction and if movement in the native soils below the structural fill is observed, static compaction techniques should be employed. Fill Material Types Fill required to achieve design grade should be classified as structural fill and general fill. Structural fill is material used below, or within 5 feet of structures, pavements or constructed Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5 slopes. General fill is material used to achieve grade outside of these areas. Earthen materials used for structural and general fill should meet the following material property requirements: Soil Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement General Fill WSDOT 9-03.14(2) for Select Borrow2 All locations across the site. Appropriate for utility trench backfill, outside of pipe bedding zone. Dry Weather only. Structural Fill WSDOT 9-03.14(1) for Gravel Borrow with exception of no more than 5% passing the No. 200 sieve by weight if placed during wet weather2 All locations across the site. Wet Weather and Dry Weather acceptable. Crushed Aggregate Base Course (CAB) WSDOT 9-03.9(3) for Crushed Surfacing (Base Course and Top Course sizes) All locations across the site. Recommended for finished base course materials for pavements. Wet Weather and Dry Weather acceptable. 1. Controlled, compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. A sample of each material should be submitted to the geotechnical engineer evaluation. 2. With Geotechnical Engineer’s approval, the fines content (percent passing the #200 sieve) may be increased to allow use of on-site soils that otherwise meet Select Borrow criteria, provided these soils can be compacted to a dense and unyielding condition and provided that completed fill areas are protected from additions of moisture and other causes of subgrade degradation. Fill Compaction Requirements Structural and general fill should meet the following compaction requirements. Item Structural Fill General Fill Maximum Lift Thickness 8 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self-propelled compaction equipment is used; 4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-guided equipment (i.e. jumping jack or plate compactor) is used. See specific recommendations for Pavement sections in Site Preparation Same as Structural Fill Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6 Item Structural Fill General Fill Minimum Compaction Requirements 1 95% of maximum dry density within the 2 feet of finished pavement subgrade; 92% of maximum dry density more than 2 feet below finished pavement subgrade Same as Structural Fill Water Content Range 1 -2% to +2% of optimum As required to achieve min. compaction requirements 1. Maximum density and optimum water content as determined by the modified Proctor test (ASTM D 1557). Utility Trench Backfill Utility trenching should conform to all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, such as OSHA and WISHA, for open excavations. All trenches should be wide enough to allow for compaction around the haunches of the pipe, or material such as pea gravel (provided this is allowed by the pipe manufacturer) should be used below the spring line of the pipes to eliminate the need for mechanical compaction in this portion of the trenches. We recommend that utility trench excavations be completed using a smooth excavation bucket (without teeth) to reduce the potential for subgrade disturbance. If water is encountered in the excavations, it should be removed prior to fill placement. Materials, placement and compaction of utility trench backfill should be in accordance with the recommendations presented in Fill Material Types and Fill Compaction Requirements sections of this report. In our opinion, the initial lift thickness should not exceed one foot unless recommended by the manufacturer to protect utilities from damage by compacting equipment. Light, hand-operated compaction equipment in conjunction with thinner fill lift thicknesses may be utilized on backfill placed above utilities if damage resulting from heavier compaction equipment is of concern. Earthwork Construction Considerations After initial proofrolling and compaction, unstable subgrade conditions could develop during general construction operations, particularly if the soils are wetted and/or subjected to repetitive construction traffic. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade moisture content prior to construction of pavements. Construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be avoided to the extent practical. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become desiccated, saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and re-compacted prior to pavement construction. Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7 As a minimum, all temporary excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations” and its appendices, and in accordance with any applicable local, and/or state regulations. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided herein be interpreted to mean Terracon is assuming responsibility for construction site safety, or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied nor inferred. Construction Observation and Testing The earthwork efforts should be monitored under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Monitoring should include documentation of adequate removal of any vegetation, existing fill and top soil, proofrolling and mitigation of areas delineated by the proofroll to require mitigation. Each lift of compacted fill should be tested, evaluated, and reworked as necessary until approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of additional lifts. In addition to the documentation of the essential parameters necessary for construction, the continuation of the Geotechnical Engineer into the construction phase of the project provides the continuity to maintain the Geotechnical Engineer’s evaluation of subsurface conditions, including assessing variations and associated design changes. PAVEMENTS General Pavement Comments Pavement designs are provided for the traffic conditions and pavement life conditions as noted in Project Description and in the following sections of this report. A critical aspect of pavement performance is site preparation. Pavement designs noted in this section must be applied to the site which has been prepared as recommended in the Earthwork section. Design Considerations The standard equivalent single-axle load (ESAL) was estimated using 1993 Guideline for Design of Pavement Structures by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO-1993). The assumed traffic loading for flexible and rigid pavement areas on a per day basis are: ■ 300 passenger cars/pick-up trucks and vans/recreational vehicles per day ■ 5 delivery trucks and garbage/dumpster trucks per week ■ 1 tractor-trailer truck per week Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8 A 20-year design life is assumed. If traffic volumes will exceed the assumed values, Terracon should be notified in order to provide pavement sections designed for higher levels of traffic. Pavement Design Parameters Design of Asphaltic Concrete (AC) pavements are based on the 1993 AASHTO guidelines. Minimum recommended pavement section thicknesses are presented below: Minimum AC Pavement Section (inches) Layer Thickness (inches) Compaction/Material Specification Compacted Subgrade 1 24 inches of structural fill placed and compacted in two lifts of 18 and 6 inches 95% of Modified Proctor Maximum Dry Density; -2 to +2% Optimum Moisture Content Crushed Aggregate Base 6 WSDOT: 9-03.9(3) Base Course Asphalt Thickness 4 WSDOT: 9-03.8(2) ½-inch HMA PG64-22 asphalt binder 1. May vary based on observations following proof-rolling. We recommend that Portland cement concrete (PCC, rigid) pavement be used for entrance and exit sections, or other areas where extensive wheel maneuvering or repeated loading are expected. The minimum thickness of PCC pavement should be 6 inches and underlain by a minimum of 6 inches of crushed aggregate base course (use WSDOT 9.03.9(3)). The 28-day unconfined compressive strength should be at least 4,000 psi. Adequate reinforcement and number of longitudinal and transverse control joints should be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI requirements. Although not required for structural support, the base course layer is recommended to help reduce potentials for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, subgrade “pumping” through joints, and provide a workable surface. Proper joint spacing will also be required to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. The minimum pavement sections outlined above were determined based on the laboratory test results and post-construction traffic loading conditions. These pavement sections do not account for heavy construction traffic during development. A partially constructed structural section that is subjected to heavy construction traffic can result in pavement deterioration and premature distress or failure. Our experience indicates that this pavement construction practice can result in pavements that will not perform as intended. Considering this information, several alternatives Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9 are available to mitigate the impact of heavy construction traffic prior to pavement construction. These include using thicker sections to account for the construction traffic after paving; using some method of soil stabilization to improve the support characteristics of the pavement subgrade; routing heavy construction traffic around paved areas; or delaying paving operations until as near the end of construction as is feasible. Additional Pavement Design Considerations Subgrade As recommended in the Earthwork section, over-excavation in the pavement areas should extend to 2 feet below the bottom of the pavement section, including the aggregate base. A geotextile, such as Mirafi 500x should be installed at the base of the excavation to provide separation between the soft subgrade and the structural fill. Above the geotextile, structural fill should be placed in two lifts of 18 inches and 6 inches. Each lift can be compacted with a vibratory roller under the observation of a geotechnical engineer. If movement of the subgrade is observed during dynamic compaction, static compaction methods should be employed and we may recommend that the 24 inches of structural fill be placed in a single lift. Landscape Islands Openings in the pavement surface, such as landscape islands, are sources for water infiltration into the surrounding pavement section and subgrade. Water can collect in the islands and migrate into the underlying subgrade soils, thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable for islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated vegetation, and near surface soils with low permeability. The following should be considered as minimum recommendations in the design and construction of pavements: 1. Provide a minimum 2% grade in the ground surface away from the edge of pavements. 2. Provide a minimum 2% cross slope for the subgrade and pavement surface to promote proper surface drainage. 3. Install pavement drainage at the perimeter of areas where frequent wetting, such as from irrigation or other sources of water, is anticipated. 4. Seal cracks promptly. 5. Seal landscaped areas near pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils. 6. Place compacted low-permeability backfill against the exterior side of the curb and gutter. Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10 Pavement Drainage Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive drainage within the granular base section. We recommend drainage be included at the bottom of the aggregate layer at the storm structures to aid in removing water that may enter this layer. Drainage could consist of small diameter weep holes excavated around the perimeter of the storm structures. The weep holes should be excavated at the elevation of the aggregate and soil interface. The excavation should be covered with No. 57 stone which is encompassed in Mirafi 140 NL or approve equivalent which will aid in reducing fines from entering the storm system. Preventive Maintenance Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided as a part of an asphalt pavement management program. These maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventative maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing for asphalt pavements). This type of maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and require repair. Pavement Construction Considerations Where subgrades for replacement pavement sections have been prepared, we recommend subgrades be thoroughly proof-rolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck to verify a firm and stable surface prior to final grading and placement of aggregate base. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are encountered should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted Structural Fill. All pavement subgrade areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted in accordance with the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placement of the pavement section materials. In areas of prepared subgrade, the contractor should limit traffic to equipment necessary to construct the pavement section. Heavily loaded vehicles operating on these surfaces may cause significant damage, resulting in deterioration and reduction in pavement life. GENERAL COMMENTS Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical conditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration. Natural variations will occur Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11 between exploration point locations or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. Terracon should be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer, where noted in this report, to provide observation and testing services during pertinent construction phases. If variations appear, we can provide further evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in the absence of our observation and testing services on-site, we should be immediately notified so that we can provide evaluation and supplemental recommendations. Our Scope of Services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Our services and any correspondence or collaboration through this system are intended for the sole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices with no third-party beneficiaries intended. Any third-party access to services or correspondence is solely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client. Reliance upon the services and any work product is limited to our client, and is not intended for third parties. Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at their own risk. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Any use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site characterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing. Site safety, and cost estimating including, excavation support, and dewatering requirements/design are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or location of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable ATTACHMENTS Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 1 of 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES Field Exploration Exploration ID Type of Exploration Boring Depth (feet) Planned Location B-9 Boring 7 ½ Proposed parking lot B-10 Boring 7 ½ Proposed parking lot B-11 Boring 7 ½ Proposed parking lot Boring Layout and Elevations: We used handheld GPS equipment to locate borings with an estimated horizontal accuracy of +/-20 feet. A Terracon representative also used field measurements from existing site features to mark the boring locations prior to drilling operations. Approximate elevations were obtained by interpolation from the Google Earth terrain model. Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced the borings with a truck-mounted drill rig using continuous-flight augers. Samples were obtained at depth intervals of 2.5 ft in all borings. The number of blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of a normal 18-inch penetration is recorded as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value. The SPT resistance values, also referred to as N-values, are indicated on the boring logs at the test depths. Borings were backfilled with bentonite in accordance with Washington Department of Ecology requirements after their completion. Pavements were patched with cold-mix asphalt and/or pre- mixed concrete, as appropriate. The sampling depths, penetration distances, and other sampling information was recorded on the field boring logs. The samples were placed in appropriate containers and taken to our soil laboratory for testing and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer. Our exploration team prepared field boring logs as part of the drilling operations. These field logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs were prepared from the field logs. The final boring logs represent the Geotechnical Engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on observations and tests of the samples in our laboratory. Laboratory Testing The project engineer reviewed the field data and assigned various laboratory tests to better understand the engineering properties of the various soil strata. Procedural standards noted below are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods are applied because of local practice or professional judgment. Standards noted below include reference to other, related standards. Such references are not necessarily applicable to describe the specific test performed. Geotechnical Engineering Report Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 2 of 2 ■ ASTM D2488 Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) ■ ASTM D2216 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS Contents: Site Location Plan Exploration Plan SITE LOCATION Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image. When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table. The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page. SITE LOCATION DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS EXPLORATION PLAN Chick-fil-A Restaurant #04249 – Parking Lot Expansion ■ Renton, King County, Washington October 29, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 81185084 Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image. When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table. The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page. EXPLORATION PLAN DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS EXPLORATION RESULTS Contents: Boring Logs (B-9 through B-11) 3-1-1 N=2 3-1-2N=3 ASPHALT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE FILL - SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM), gray, moist, loose SILT WITH SAND (ML), brown and reddish brown, wet, soft Boring Terminated at 7.5 Feet 0.3 0.6 3.0 7.5 22.5+/- 22.5+/- 20+/- 15.5+/- 4 10 S-1 S-2 13 38 Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424_BS_10282021.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 10/29/21DEPTH (Ft.)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSFIELD TESTRESULTSLOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4790° Longitude: -122.2175°GRAPHIC LOGDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) Approximate Surface Elev.: 23 (Ft.) +/- Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with bentoniteSurface capped with Cold-Mix Asphalt Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: Truck-mounted BORING LOG NO. B-9 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: EDI Boring Completed: 10-18-2021 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton Elevations were interpolated from google Earth. See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. 351 Rainier Ave S. Renton, WA SITE: Boring Started: 10-18-2021 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered RECOVERY (In.)SAMPLE IDWATERCONTENT (%)PERCENT FINESSAMPLE TYPE 2-2-2 N=4 3-4-2N=6 ASPHALT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE FILL - SILTY SAND (SM), trace gravel, gray brown, wet, loose SILT WITH SAND (ML), brown and reddish brown, moist, mediumstiff SILT (ML), brown and gray, wet, medium stiff Boring Terminated at 7.5 Feet 0.3 0.6 3.0 6.0 7.5 22.5+/- 22.5+/- 20+/- 17+/- 15.5+/- 6 14 S-1 S-2 23 38 Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424_BS_10282021.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 10/29/21DEPTH (Ft.)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSFIELD TESTRESULTSLOCATION See Exploration Plan Drill Rig: Truck-mounted BORING LOG NO. B-10 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: EDI Boring Completed: 10-18-2021 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton Elevations were interpolated from google Earth. See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. 351 Rainier Ave S. Renton, WA SITE: Boring Started: 10-18-2021 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered RECOVERY (In.)Latitude: 47.4791° Longitude: -122.2174°GRAPHIC LOGDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) Approximate Surface Elev.: 23 (Ft.) +/- Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with bentoniteSurface capped with Cold-Mix Asphalt Notes: Project No.: 81185084 SAMPLE IDWATERCONTENT (%)PERCENT FINESSAMPLE TYPE 15-3-3 N=6 1-3-4N=7 ASPHALT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE FILL - SILTY SAND (SM), trace gravel, gray brown, wet SILT WITH SAND (ML), brown and gray, wet, medium stiff Boring Terminated at 7.5 Feet 0.3 0.6 2.5 7.5 22.5+/- 22.5+/- 20.5+/- 15.5+/- 18 12 S-1 S-2 31 30 Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 81185084 CHICK-FIL-A #0424_BS_10282021.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 10/29/21DEPTH (Ft.)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSFIELD TESTRESULTSLOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 47.4791° Longitude: -122.2171°GRAPHIC LOGDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) Approximate Surface Elev.: 23 (Ft.) +/- Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with bentoniteSurface capped with Cold-Mix Asphalt Notes: Project No.: 81185084 Drill Rig: Truck-mounted BORING LOG NO. B-11 Chick-fil-A, Inc.CLIENT:Irvine, CA Driller: EDI Boring Completed: 10-18-2021 PROJECT: Chick-fil-A #04249 Renton Elevations were interpolated from google Earth. See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any). See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations. 351 Rainier Ave S. Renton, WA SITE: Boring Started: 10-18-2021 21905 64th Ave W, Ste 100Mountlake Terrace, WA WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered RECOVERY (In.)SAMPLE IDWATERCONTENT (%)PERCENT FINESSAMPLE TYPE SUPPORTING INFORMATION Contents: General Notes Unified Soil Classification System UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group Symbol Group Name B Coarse-Grained Soils: More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels: More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Less than 5% fines C Cu  4 and 1  Cc  3 E GW Well-graded gravel F Cu  4 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E GP Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines: More than 12% fines C Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F, G, H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% fines D Cu  6 and 1  Cc  3 E SW Well-graded sand I Cu  6 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E SP Poorly graded sand I Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines D Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G, H, I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I Fine-Grained Soils: 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays: Liquid limit less than 50 Inorganic: PI  7 and plots on or above “A” line J CL Lean clay K, L, M PI  4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K, L, M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried  0.75 OL Organic clay K, L, M, N Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, O Silts and Clays: Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic: PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay K, L, M PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K, L, M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried  0.75 OH Organic clay K, L, M, P Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, Q Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve. B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders, or both” to group name. C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay. E Cu = D60/D10 Cc = 6010 2 30 DxD )(D F If soil contains  15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM. H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name. I If soil contains  15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name. J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,” whichever is predominant. L If soil contains  30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. M If soil contains  30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. N PI  4 and plots on or above “A” line. O PI  4 or plots below “A” line. P PI plots on or above “A” line. Q PI plots below “A” line. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Figure 6.4 Original Project Scope Approved Plans IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's APPROVED 12/18/2020 msippo DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION SURFACE WATER UTILITY jfarah 12/18/2020 REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY cthomas 12/21/2020 APPROVED IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063***TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 SURFACE WATER UTILITY jfarah 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 SURFACE WATER UTILITY jfarah 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 SURFACE WATER UTILITY jfarah 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 SURFACE WATER UTILITY jfarah 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063WWP-27-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063WWP-27-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 W IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063WTR-27-4063WATER UTILITY agafour 12/18/2020 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063A A SECTION AAWTR-27-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063WTR-27-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063WTR-27-4063WWP-27-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 BUILDING BUILDING FOOTING 14 1 14 1 VA R I E S SE E S I T E P L A N 6" 6" RAMP RAMP 4" 6"6"4"A A STOP VAN ACCESSIBLE RESERVEDPARKING 7' M I N . W I D T H 5' LAN DI N G MI N. 1:20 M A X. LIGHT BROOM FINISH IF CHANGE IN DIRECTION OR IF RAMP EXCEEDS 30 FEET 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION 1:20 MAX. MONOLITHIC CONCRETE ACCESSIBLE RAMP (3000 PSI) NOTE: INSTALL 1" TOOLED RADIUS ON ALL EXPOSED EDGES SIMILAR AS SHOWN ON CURB DETAIL RETAINING CURB SUBGRADE COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED IN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT CURB (BEYOND) CONCRETE FLUSH WITH PAVEMENT 1.5% CROSS SLOPE MAX. SECTION A-A 1'-8"3'-0"1'-4"3'-0"8"4" 1'-8" 4" 4"8"NOTE: SIGNS SHALL BE FABRICATED USING S/F 0.08 NON-ILLUMINATED ALUMINUM WITH VINYL COPY APPLIED TO THE FIRST SURFACE. RED 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR WHITE 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR3"x3" SQUARE ALUMINUM TUBING, DARK BRONZE COLOR OR AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL JURISDICTION OR LANDLORD REQUIREMENTS. 30"30"7'-0"2'-0" (MIN.)1"8"Ø CONCRETE BASE GREEN 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR BLUE 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR WHITE 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR BLUE 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR WITH WHITE 'REFLECTIVE TEXT' 2"x2" SQ. TUBING 1"R 12"18"6"LETTERING STYLE TO BE HELVETICA MEDIUM NOTE: VERIFY COLORS WITH LOCAL MUNICIPALITY. D RIGHT TURN ONLY SIGN (REFER TO SIGN PACKAGE) C CIRCLE BUILDING FOR DRIVE-THRU SIGN (REFER TO SIGN PACKAGE) E ONE WAY SIGN (REFER TO SIGN PACKAGE)24"18"24"18" B ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN (MUTCD R 7-8 AND R 7-8P5) (CIVIL TO VERIFY SIGN PANELS AND COLORS WITH STATE/LOCAL REQUIREMENTS)NOTE: "SIGNS PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY CFA SIGNAGE CONTRACTOR" A STOP SIGN & STANDARD MOUNTING POST (MUTCD R 1-1) SIDEWALK ELEVATIONS VARY - HOLD FLUSH WITH FINISHED FLOOR AT ENTRANCE WAYS. PLANTING AREAS MAY EXIST BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE BACK-OF-SIDEWALK (SEE SITE PLAN). EXPANSION JOINTS DO NOT APPLY TO SIDEWALK SECTION ADJACENT TO PLANTING AREAS. NOTICE: ALWAYS ALIGN CURB AND SIDEWALK JOINTS. COMPACTED SUBGRADE AS SPECIFIED 7.0' MIN. (SEE SITE PLAN) 24" CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER PAVEMENT, AS SPECIFIED IN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT STABILIZED AGGREGATE BASE COARSE, AS SPECIFIED FOR PAVEMENT RAMP (BEYOND) SLOPE 1.5% MAX. CONCRETE X X X XX X XXXXXX 12" EXPANSION JOINT (SEE NOTE #1) SMOOTH TOOLED FINISH AROUND ALL EDGES AND JOINTS (TYP) LIGHT BROOM FINISH (PERPENDICULAR TO TRAVEL PATH) 6"x6"x6 GAUGE WELDED WIRE FABRIC SEATED AND SECURED ON STANDS 5'-0" (TYP)2"2"4"12" CONTRACTION JOINT (SEE NOTE #1) CONTRACTION JOINT 3000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE MIX PER SPECIFICATION.2"4"EXPANSION JOINT 12" CONTRACTION JOINT (SEE NOTE #1)SEE PLANWHITE 'REFLECTIVE' LETTERS FACE: 3M REFLECTIVE COPY (#3272 RED)COLOR G PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK (REFER TO SIGN PACKAGE) F LEFT TURN ONLY SIGN (REFER TO SIGN PACKAGE)24"18"18.5"12" 60° PARKING 90° PARKING 11.0' V A N 8.0' C A R ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN IN BOLLARD 24" CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER :4.5'30° 9'20.1' **TYPICAL9.0' TYPIC A L 10.39' 60° 5.0' 4" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE 4" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (MIN) 4" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (MIN.) 4" PAINTED LINE (TYP.) 8" DIAM.1'-4"10"1'-10"8"1'-2" 14"R GUTTER SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 5% AT LANDING AREA. 4" NOTES: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CHICK-FIL-A PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE DETAIL 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT ON ASPHALT & YELLOW REFLECTIVE PAINT ON CONCRETE. PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS: STANDARDS: 1.ALWAYS FOLLOW ALL APPLICABLE GOVERNING AUTHORITY'S STANDARDS. 2.SURFACES SHOULD BE CLEAN, DRY, AND FREE FROM LOOSE OR PEELING PAINT. REMOVE ALL OIL, DUST, GREASE, DIRT, AND OTHER FOREIGN MATERIAL TO ENSURE ADEQUATE ADHESION. DO NOT APPLY WHEN AIR OR SURFACE TEMPERATURES ARE BELOW 40°F. 3.APPLY SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SETFAST PREMIUM ALKYD ZONE MARKING PAINT A300 WHITE OR A303 YELLOW USING EITHER AIRLESS OR CONVENTIONAL LINE STRIPING EQUIPMENT. USE THE FOLLOWING SETTINGS AS A GUIDE-ACTUAL SETTINGS DEPEND ON ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION: AIRLESS ·PRESSURE 1800-2700 PSI ·HOSE 14"-38" ID ·TIP 0.015"-0.017" ·FILTER 60 MESH ·REDUCTION ONLY IF NECESSARY, UP TO 1PT/GAL VM&P NAPTHA R1K3 CONVENTIONAL ·GUN BLINKS 21 (BLEEDER) OR EQUIVALENT ·FLUID NOZZLE #68 ·AIR NOZZLE INTERNAL MIX, #709 ·ATOMIZATION PRESSURE 45-80 PSI ·FLUID PRESSURE 40-70 PSI ·REDUCTION ONLY IF NECESSARY, UP TO 1PT/GAL VM&P NAPTHA R1K3 ·SHERWIN WILLIAMS, H&C SHARK GRIP SLIP RESISTANT ADDITIVE TO BE MEASURED AND ADDED TO ALL PAINT PER MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS. MIX THOROUGHLY PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS SO THAT NO CLUMPING IS APPARENT AND UNTIL EVEN DISTRIBUTION IS ACHIEVED. MAINTAIN EVEN DISTRIBUTION OF ADDITIVE IN PAINT THROUGHOUT THE APPLICATION PROCESS. · MIX PAINT THOROUGHLY BY BOXING, STIRRING, OR POWER AGITATION BEFORE USE. APPLY AT 15 MILS WET TO ACHIEVE A SPREAD RATE OF 400-500 LINEAL FEET OF STANDARD 4" STRIPE PER GALLON. APPLIED AT THIS RATE AT 70 DEGREES F AND 50% RELATIVE HUMIDITY, PAINT WILL DRY WITH NO TRAFFIC PICKUP AFTER 20 MINUTES. · GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO RE-STRIPE THE LOT 45 DAYS AFTER OPENING. 3'R PAINT SOLID PAINT SOLID 1'-2"1'-8"1'-8"1'-2"3'-0" 1'-0"1'-2"1'-0"1'-2"3'-0"3'-0"NOTES: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CHICK-FIL-A PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE DETAIL 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT ON ASPHALT & YELLOW REFLECTIVE PAINT ON CONCRETE. NOTES: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CHICK-FIL-A PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE DETAIL 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT ON ASPHALT & YELLOW REFLECTIVE PAINT ON CONCRETE. 3.IF STOP SIGN IS PROPOSED, STOP LINE GRAPHIC IS NOT REQUIRED. NOTES: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CHICK-FIL-A PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE DETAIL 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT ON ASPHALT & YELLOW REFLECTIVE PAINT ON CONCRETE, UNLESS UPON VERIFICATION BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IT IS DETERMINED THAT LOCAL, STATE, OR ADA CODES DIFFER, IN WHICH CASE THESE CODES SHALL GOVERN. VARIE S, S E E S I T E P L A N 5' MIN. 4.0' PAINTED ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOL EXPANSION JOINT EXPANSION JOINT 24" CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LIGHT BROOM FINISH SIDEWALK ACCESSIBLE RAMP STOP BAR 2'-0"LENGTH VARIES PAINT FULL LANE WIDTH CENTER "STOP" IN DRIVE LANE 4" TYP.3'-0"2'-0"12" DECK-O-FOAM EXPANSION JOINT FILLER W/ PRE-SCORED STRIP, "ZIP STRIP" OR OTHER CFA APPROVED MATERIAL URETHANE JOINT SEALING COMPOUND 14TBOTH RAMP CURBS TO BE PAINTED YELLOW, SEE PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATION BLACK 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR WHITE 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR7.5' MIN.BOLLARD PENALTY SIGN WITH WORDING AS REQUIRED BY STATE OR LOCAL LAW 6" DIA. SCH. 80 STEEL PIPE BOLLARD FILLED WITH CONCRETE. PAINT DARK BRONZE (TOP 12" PAINTED YELLOW) 4000 PSI CONCRETE 2'-6"6"2'-0"7'-0" TO BOTTOM OF LOWEST REQUIRED SIGN2"X2" SQUARE TUBING PAINT CONCRETE BLACK AFTER CURING AT ASPHALT LOCATIONS 3'-0"7'SIDEWALK WITH CURB & GUTTER SECTION NOT TO SCALE SIDEWALK ACCESSIBLE RAMP NOT TO SCALE DRIVE-THRU GRAPHICS NOT TO SCALE PAINTED ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOL NOT TO SCALE STOP LINE GRAPHIC NOT TO SCALE DIRECTIONAL ARROW NOT TO SCALE DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE NOT TO SCALE 6 C11.0 1 C11.0 2 C11.0 3 C11.0 4 C11.0 7 C11.0 12 C11.0 TYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK NOT TO SCALE 11 C11.0 11 C11.0 STANDARD PARKING STALL NOT TO SCALE 5 C11.0 NOTES: 1.JOINTS AT 5'-0" O.C. TOOLED 12" WIDE, 1" DEEP OR MAX. D4 DEEP WHICHEVER IS GREATER. EXPANSION JOINTS AT 20' MAX. & ALL P.C.s, UNLESS APPROVED OR INDICATED OTHERWISE ON PLAN VIEW JOINT PATTERN. 5 C11.0 5 C11.0 5 C11.0 5 C11.0 17 C11.1 11 C11.0 11 C11.0 17 C11.0 5 C11.0 6 C11.0 17 C11.1 4 C11.0 20 C11.1 7 C11.0 30"30"ENTER DO NOT H DO NOT ENTER (REFER TO SIGN PACKAGE) 6'-0"6'-0"MINIMUM 1% SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDING. MAXIMUM 1.5% SLOPE IN ALL DIRECTIONS AT LANDING.12"6" 12"18.5"WHITE 'REFLECTIVE' COLOR NOTES 1. ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND ACCESSIBLE AISLES SHALL NOT EXCEED 1.5% IN SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION. IF ONLY ONE ACCESS AISLE IS INSTALLED, IT IS TO BE A VAN SIZE. 2. PARKING STALL DIMENSIONING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE GOVERNING AUTHORITY'S AND ADA STANDARDS AND IF DIFFERENT THAN THIS DETAIL SHALL BE THE DIMENSIONING SHOWN ON THE SITE LAYOUT PLAN. 3. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CHICK-FIL-A PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE 4" WIDE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT FOR STRIPING ON ASPHALT PARKING LOTS. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE 4" WIDE YELLOW REFLECTIVE PAINT FOR STRIPING ON CONCRETE PARKING LOTS. 6. NO WHEEL STOPS TO BE INSTALLED WHEN PARKING IS ADJACENT TO SIDEWALK. 7. ADA SIGNS IN BOLLARDS AND BOLLARDS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN PARKING IS ADJACENT TO FLUSH CURB OR A RAMP. 5.0' pedestriancrosswalk Circle ONE WAY Right Turn Only Left Turn Only WHITE 'REFLECTIVE' LETTERS FACE: 3M REFLECTIVE COPY (#3272 RED)COLOR AWNING AT EN T R Y D O O R S 1.5% M A X . Building For Drive -Thru Service 24" 7.0' M I N 7.0' M I N **CIVIL TO MODIFY PER GEOTECH REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS** WHERE LANDING IS ADJACENT TO ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS, GUTTER SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 1.5% **CIVIL TO MODIFY CONCRETE & AGGREGATE BASES PER GEOTECH REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS** **CIVIL TO MODIFY PER GEOTECH REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS** 12" **STANDARD PARKING STALL DEPTH FOR 90° PARKING SHALL BE 18' MINIMUM WHEN NOT IN THE SAME ROW AS 60° PARKING. 60° PARKING STALL CAN BE REDUCED TO 18' MINIMUM IF SITE CONDITIONS REQUIRE IT. 9 C11.0 8 C11.0 NOT USED NOT TO SCALE 10 C11.0 8A C11.0 NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063TRO-41-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 NOT USED NOT TO SCALERAMP U P SEE P L A N F O R G R A D E S 12' 10' 10' 6" PA V E M E N T CO N C R E T E CONC R E T E LAND I N G LAND S C A P E A R E A OF DRI V E T H R U CENT E R L I N E 12' 1'-0" CJ CJ CJ CJ HEAD E R C U R B, VARI A B L E H EI G H T 12'- 6 " M I N . T O F A C E O F C U R B O R T O BUILDI N G FACE AS P H A L T PA V E M E N T 1'-2 " CONC R E T E LANDI N G 24" CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LAND S C A P E A R E A 3" 15 C11.1 6"° STEEL PIPE (SCHEDULE 80) FILLED WITH CONCRETE PAINT BOLLARD WITH DARK BRONZE TONE EXTERIOR ENAMEL PAINT AND PAINT TOP 12" YELLOW AT ALL LOCATIONS. ANCHOR STEEL PIPE IN CONCRETE FOOTING, 2'-0" DIAMETER x 2'-6" DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT APPLICATIONS CONCRETE PAVEMENT/ SLAB APPLICATIONS 2'-6"6"2'-0" TROWELED, ROUNDED CONCRETE 2" DRIVE - T H R U WI N D O W AGGREGATE BASE COURSE SEE NOTE #1. VARIA B L E H EI G H T HEAD E R C U R B , NOTE: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. 6" HE A D E R CURB 17 C-4.1 11 C-4.0 EXPANSION JOINT BOLL A R D 3'-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISEDRIVE-THRU ISOMETRIC NOT TO SCALE 14 C11.1 20 C11.1 CATCHING CURB AND GUTTER 112"R 1"6" 2'-0" PAVEMENT DIMENSION REFER TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE 12"R 6"13"6"SPILLING CURB AND GUTTER 112"R 1"6" 2'-0" PAVEMENT DIMENSION REFER TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE 12"R 6"12"7"1-1/8"BA LIGHT BROOM FINISH 1-1/8"24" CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER NOT TO SCALE 17 C11.1 NOTE: WHEEL STOPS ONLY TO BE USED WHEN NO OTHER PRACTICAL OPTION EXISTS 1. CONCRETE FOR CURBING SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3000 P.S.I. AT 28 DAYS. 2. CONSTRUCTION STAKING FOR CURBING INSTALLATION SHALL BE REFERENCED (CUT OR FILL) TO THE TOP OF CURB 4. CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 10'-0" O.C. TOOLED 1/4" (±1/16",-0) WIDE, 1" OR MAX. D/4 DEEP WHICHEVER IS GREATER. EXPANSION JOINTS AT 40' MAX. AND ALL P.C.'s, UNLESS APPROVED OR INDICATED OTHERWISE ON PLAN VIEW JOINT PATTERN. 3. AT CONTRACTOR'S OPTION THE GUTTER THICKNESS MAY BE INCREASED AT THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO MAKE BOTTOM OF GUTTER PARALLEL WITH PAVING OF BASE COURSE. DEPRESSED SPILLING CURB AND GUTTER 112"R 7" PAVEMENT DIMENSION REFER TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE 12"R C 6" DEPRESSED CATCHING CURB AND GUTTER 112"R 7" 2'-0" PAVEMENT DIMENSION REFER TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE 12"R 7 1/2"D LIGHT BROOM FINISH 6"3/4"2'-0"6"LIGHT BROOM FINISH 5.0% MAX.3/4"5.0% MAX. 34" PER FT. 34" PER FT. TH E E D G E O F P A V E M E N T W I T H N O C U R B (SE E C I V I L P L A N F O R D I M E N S I O N S )(TO FA C E O F BOLL A R D) LIGHT BROOM FINISH 1:20 MAX. SLOPE 1:14 MAX. SLOPE ROADWAY GUTTER PAN DEPRESSED CURB CURB RAMP CATCHING GUTTER SECTION AT ACCESSIBLE RAMPE 1:20 MAX. SLOPE 1:14 MAX. SLOPE ROADWAY GUTTER PAN CURB RAMP SPILLING GUTTER SECTION AT ACCESSIBLE RAMPE BACK O F C U R B I S 2 " IN FR O N T O F F A C E O F DRIV E- T H R U WI N D O W NOTES: 19B C11.1 19A C11.1 20 C11.1 18 C11.1 16 C11.1 13 C11.1 19 C11.1 NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE CONCRETE BOLLARD NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063TRO-41-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 SEE PLAN FOR SLAB THICKNESS 4000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE 14" WIDE SAWED OR PREMOLDED JOINT, 12' MAX. SPACING, SEAL JOINTS WITH POLYURETHANE SEALANT TO WITHIN 14" FROM TOP. PROPOSED PAVING EXISTING PAVING 34" GRADE A36 STEEL DOWEL 14" LENGTH, 12" O.C. SPACING, GREASE OR SLEEVE ONE END SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 DOWELED CONSTRUCTION JOINTSEE PLAN FOR SLAB THICKNESS 4000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 6"x6"x6 GAUGE WELDED WIRE FABRIC SEATED AND SECURED ON STANDS 4000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE MIX PER SPECIFICATION.6"2"XXXX EXTEND BASE 6" BEYOND FOR APPLICATIONS WITHOUT CURB & GUTTER, SIDEWALKS, BUILDINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURES. 2.5" THICK ASPHALTIC CONCRETE BINDER COURSE 1.5" THICK ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE 7" THICK AGGREGATE BASE COURSE IF PRESENT ON-SITE, UNSUITABLE SUBGRADE MATERIAL SHALL BE REPLACED WITH SUITABLE MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. VERTICAL SAW CUT 38" (MIN.) URETHANE JOINT SEALING COMPOUND DOWEL SPACED ON TWO (2) FOOT CENTER TO CENTER, 6 INCHES OFF TIE BARS. EXISTING PAVING PAVING PROPOSED VERTICAL SAW CUT 38" WIDE (MIN.) 114" MIN. CLEARANCE DOWEL SLEEVE (CLOSED END) TO FIT DOWEL AND BE SECURED. TO BE INSTALLED 1'-0" C.C.DDD424" LUBRICATED NO. 8 SMOOTH DOWEL 2" (MIN.) URETHANE JOINT SEALING COMPOUND (TOP 14" NO SEALING COMPOUND)5" TYPICAL (SEE GEOTECHREPORT FORRECOMMENDATIONS12 DEPTHT4#3 BARS ON 18" CTRS. BOTH WAYS 24" LUBRICATED SMOOTH NO. 8 DOWEL BAR 1'-3" MIN.14TTOP 14" NO SEALING COMPOUND SAWCUT FULL DEPTH & CURB & GUTTER 9"-15" EXPANSION JOINT NOT TO SCALE 31 C11.25" TYPICAL (SEE GEOTECHREPORT FORRECOMMENDATIONS12 DEPTH5" TYPICAL (SEE GEOTECHREPORT FORRECOMMENDATIONS12 DEPTH4" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE SEE NOTE #2. NOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE SITE SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT, AGGREGATE, AND SUBGRADE SECTION REQUIREMENTS. 2.MINIMUM PAVEMENT THICKNESS SHOULD BE 7" GRADED AGGREGATE BASE, 2.5"ASPHALT PAVEMENT BINDER & 1.5" ASPHALT PAVEMENT SURFACE COURSE TACK COAT. NOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. 2.MINIMUM PAVEMENT THICKNESS SHALL BE 6" CONCRETE, 4" AGGREGATE BASE NOTES: 1.NO. 5 SMOOTH DOWEL BAR MAY BE USED IN 5 INCH AND 6 INCH PAVEMENT THICKNESS. 2.LONGITUDINAL BUTT CONSTRUCTION MAY BE UTILIZED IN PLACE OF LONGITUDINAL HINGED (KEYWAY) JOINT AT CONTRACTORS OPTION. 3.DOWEL BARS SHALL BE DRILLED & EPOXIED INTO PAVEMENT HORIZONTALLY BY USE OF MECHANICAL EQUIP. 4.PUSHING DOWEL BARS INTO WET CONCRETE NOT ACCEPTABLE. NOTES: 1.NO. 5 SMOOTH DOWEL BAR MAY BE USED IN 5 INCH AND 6 INCH PAVEMENT THICKNESS. 2.LONGITUDINAL BUTT CONSTRUCTION MAY BE UTILIZED IN PLACE OF LONGITUDINAL HINGED (KEYWAY) JOINT AT CONTRACTORS OPTION. 3.DOWEL BARS SHALL BE DRILLED INTO PAVEMENT HORIZONTALLY BY USE OF A MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. 4.DRILLING BY HAND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, PUSHING DOWEL BARS INTO WET CONCRETE NOT ACCEPTABLE. 5. JOINT SPACING TO BE 24'X24' (EVERY OTHER JOINT) #3 BARS ON 16" ON CENTER EACH WAY NOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. NOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. #3 BARS ON 16" ON CENTER EACH WAY LUBRICATE THIS END LUBRICATE EPOXY XXX XXX SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 12" DECK-O-FOAM EXPANSION JOINT FILLER W/ PRE-SCORED STRIP OR OTHER CFA APPROVED MATERIAL URETHANE JOINT SEALING COMPOUND 14TNOTE: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 TYPICAL ASPHALT SECTION NOT TO SCALE TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL CONTRACTION JOINT NOT TO SCALE TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL DOWELED CONSTRUCTION JOINT NOT TO SCALE CONCRETE PAVING DRIVE-THRU LANE NOT TO SCALE LONGITUDINAL BUTT JOINT NOT TO SCALE CONTRACTION JOINT NOT TO SCALE 21 C11.2 22 C11.2 23 C11.2 25 C11.2 28 C11.2 30 C11.2 TACK COAT (APPLICATION RATE PER LOCAL D.O.T. SPECIFICATIONS) NOTES: 1.JOINT SPACING TO BE 12' x 12' WITH EVERY OTHER JOINT BEING AN EXPANSION JOINT. 2.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS NOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. ASPHALT PAVEMENT AND BASE COURSE #4 REBAR FOR CONTINUOUS REINFORCEMENT OF THICKENED EDGE 6" SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 #3 @ 12" ON CENTER EACH WAY 4000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE 12"6"MIN.6" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE SEE NOTE #1. __"PAVEMENT THICKNESS CONCRETE APRON @ TRASH ENCLOSURE NOT TO SCALE 24 C11.2 10" MINASPHALT PAVEMENT AND BASE COURSE __"PAVEMENT THICKNESS SEE NOTE #1 12"10" MINNOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. PAVEMENT EDGE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 21A C11.2 REQUIRED AT ALL JUNCTIONS WITH CONCRETE 9" BUTT JOINT NOT TO SCALE 23A C11.2 SAWCUT EXISTING ASPHALT FULL DEPTH FOR CLEAN CONSTRUCTION JOINT PROPOSED ASPHALT PAVEMENT EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT JOINT SEALANT (AC-20, OR EQUIVALENT)2"URETHANE JOINT SEALING COMPOUND SUBBASE SEE NOTE #1 4000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE MIX PER SPECIFICATION.6"4" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE SEE NOTE #2. CONCRETE PAVING PARKING LOT NOT TO SCALE 26 C11.2 2"#3 @ 12" ON CENTER EACH WAY NOTE: 1.SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. 2.MINIMUM PAVEMENT THICKNESS SHALL BE 6" CONCRETE, 4" AGGREGATE BASE ORDER POINT STRIPING NOT TO SCALE 27 C11.2 29 C11.2 NOT USED NOT TO SCALE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT JOB NUMBER: 81185084 DATE: 06/21/2018 GEOTEXTILE FABIRC GEOTEXTILE FABIRC GEOTEXTILE FABIRC GEOTEXTILE FABIRC GEOTEXTILE FABIRC GEOTEXTILE FABIRC IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063TRO-41-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 PAINT SOLID MULTI-LANE SPLIT MULTI-LANE MERGE 6" PIPE BOLLARD FILLED w. CONCRETE PAINTED DARK BRONZE WITH TOP 12" PAINTED YELLOW 6" 6" PAINT 2" TOP OF CURB YELLOW PAINT FACE OF CURB YELLOW16"CANOPY ABOVE MENU BOARD ISLAND CURB ELEVATION3'-0"8'-0" ISLAND CURB PLAN5'1.5'2.5'5'1.5'2.5'PAINT SOLID MULTI-LANE DIRECTIONAL GRAPHICS NOT TO SCALE 32 C11.3 NOTES: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CHICK-FIL-A PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE DETAIL 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT ON ASPHALT & YELLOW REFLECTIVE PAINT ON CONCRETE. 5 C11.0 20 C11.1 DRIVE THRU ORDER POINT ISLAND CURB NOT TO SCALE 34 C11.3 CROSSWALK DETAIL NOT TO SCALE60°5'3' 8" WHITE 4" WHITE 1. REFER TO PARKING LOT STRIPING SPECIFICATION NOTES: 33 C11.3 1% MINIMUM SLOPE STORM SEWER PIPE (SIZE VARIES) SEE GRADING PLAN FOR LOCATION SEE NOTE #2 SEE NOTE #1 45° BEND (SCH 40 PVC) 2" MAXIMUM DOWNSPOUT 1. FOR ALL DEPTHS OF COVER LESS THAN TWO (2) FEET, PIPE MUST BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC. FOR DEPTHS OF COVER GREATER THAN TWO (2) FEET, FLEXIBLE PIPE MAY BE USED. REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALLOWABLE PIPE TYPES. 2. A WATERTIGHT CONNECTION SHALL BE MAINTAINED WITH ANY TRANSITION FROM SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE TO ANY OTHER PIPE TYPE. 3. THE DOWNSPOUT COLLECTOR DRAIN SHALL BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE DOWNSPOUTS ARE INSTALLED ON THE BUILDING. SITEWORK CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL WORK INCLUDING THE RODENT SCREEN. BUILDING CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONNECTION AT THE POINT OF THE RODENT SCREEN. PIPING IS FREE OF C.O. COVER SUCH THAT LOADING IS NOT TRANSMITTED TO PIPING. COMBINATION, TYP. SANITARY 12" THICK CONCRETE PAD CLEAN OUT AND COVER, P-15, PRIME AND PAINT FLAT BLACK. cl SAN. C.O. OUTSIDE BUILDING37 C11.3 NOTES: TYPICAL SECTION AT MANHOLE AROUND TRANSITION TYP. ALL 3'-0" TRANSITION TYP. ALL AROUND 3'-0" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE ASPHALT PAVEMENT AGGREGATE BASE COURSE FLUSH ASPHALT PAVEMENT FLUSH WASHED STONE ALL AROUND NON-WOVEN FILTER FABRIC 1" DIA. WEEPHOLE (4 REQ'D.) 5 C11.0 BUILDING DOWNSPOUT CONNECTION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 38 C11.3 NOTES: TYPICAL SECTION AT INLET/CATCH BASIN DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 39 C11.3 TYPICAL SECTION AT INLET/CATCH BASIN CJ CJC J C J EJ EJEJ EJ6'12' CONCRETE SLAB POURED WITH ISLAND RESUME TYP. CJ PATTERN RESUME TYP. CJ PATTERN EXTEND CJ THROUGH CURB (TYP.) ASPHALT PAVING SECTION. SEE 21 C11.2 CJ = CONTRACTION JOINT EJ = EXPANSION JOINT 8"8" 2. CROSSWALK ALONG AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE SHALL MAINTAIN A CROSS SLOPE OF 1.5% MAX AND A RUNNING SLOPE OF 5% MAX. 6" SCHEDULE 40 PVC WITH PVC BOOT ADAPTER DOWNSPOUT COVER PAINTED TO MATCH 4. IF NECESSARY, ADJUST FOOTING TO ALLOW DOWNSPOUT TO BE INSTALLED TIGHT AGAINST BUILDING VEHICULAR FLOW DIRECTION OF 1. SEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR GREASE TRAP DETAIL 2. CLEAN OUT COVERS SHALL BE PROVIDEDED ON ALL CLEANOUTS REGARDLESS OF LOCATION. 3. CONCRETE COLLAR ALSO REQUIRED FOR SINGLE CLEANOUTS IN PAVEMENT20"4"4"4'-0"4'-0" REAR 18"35 C11.3 36 C11.3 40 C11.3NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE NOT USED NOT TO SCALE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063TED-40-4063TRO-41-4063DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-40636"12" 2.5" 12" EXPANSION JOINT PER DETAIL THIS SHEET #3 REBAR @ 18" O.C. (VERT) & #3 REBAR @ 18" O.C. (HORIZ) C0NTINUOUS LOCATE ALL BARS MIN. OF 2-1/2" CLEAR FROM FACE OF CONCRETE NOTE: 1.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR PAVEMENT SECTION REQUIREMENTS. 2.MINIMUM PAVEMENT THICKNESS SHALL BE 6" CONCRETE, 4" AGGREGATE BASE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-40631. a. b. c. d. e. f. 2. 3. 4. 5. DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING msippo 12/18/2020 Figure 6.4 Original Approved Civil Plans Tab 7.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 7.0 OTHER PERMITS • Grading Permit • Building Permit • Health Department Permit • Utility Permits for Water, Sewer, and Storm • Fire Permit • Mechanical and Plumbing Permits Tab 8.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (CSWPPP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Analysis and Design Documents is included under a separate cover. Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSWGP) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for Renton Chick-fil-A Expansion Prepared for: Department of Ecology [Insert Ecology Regional Office Name] Permittee / Owner Developer Operator / Contractor Chik-Fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 Chik-Fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 TBD 361 Rainier Avenue South, Renton, WA Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) Name Organization Contact Phone Number TBD TBD TBD SWPPP Prepared By Name Organization Contact Phone Number Alex Bell, P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 425-251-6222 SWPPP Preparation Date January 16, 2023 Project Construction Dates Activity / Phase Start Date End Date Site Redevelopment TBD TBD Table of Contents 1 Project Information Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.1 Existing Conditions Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.2 Proposed Construction Activities Error! Bookmark not defined. 2 Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1 The 13 Elements Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.1 Element 1: Preserve Vegetation / Mark Clearing Limits Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.2 Element 2: Establish Construction Access Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.3 Element 3: Control Flow Rates Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.4 Element 4: Install Sediment Controls Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.5 Element 5: Stabilize Soils Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.6 Element 6: Protect Slopes Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.7 Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.8 Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.9 Element 9: Control Pollutants Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.10 Element 10: Control Dewatering Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.11 Element 11: Maintain BMPs Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.12 Element 12: Manage the Project Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1.13 Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs Error! Bookmark not defined. 3 Pollution Prevention Team Error! Bookmark not defined. 4 Monitoring and Sampling Requirements Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1 Site Inspection Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2 Stormwater Quality Sampling Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.1 Turbidity Sampling Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.2 pH Sampling Error! Bookmark not defined. 5 Discharges to 303(d) or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Waterbodies Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.1 303(d) Listed Waterbodies Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2 TMDL Waterbodies Error! Bookmark not defined. 6 Reporting and Record Keeping Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.1 Record Keeping Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.1.1 Site Log Book Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.1.2 Records Retention Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.1.3 Updating the SWPPP Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.2 Reporting Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.2.1 Discharge Monitoring Reports Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance Error! Bookmark not defined. List of Appendices Error! Reference source not found.A. Error! Reference source not found. B. Error! Reference source not found. C. Error! Reference source not found. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym / Abbreviation Explanation 303(d) Section of the Clean Water Act pertaining to Impaired Waterbodies BFO Bellingham Field Office of the Department of Ecology BMP(s) Best Management Practice(s) CESCL Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead CO2 Carbon Dioxide CRO Central Regional Office of the Department of Ecology CSWGP Construction Stormwater General Permit CWA Clean Water Act DMR Discharge Monitoring Report DO Dissolved Oxygen Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ERO Eastern Regional Office of the Department of Ecology ERTS Environmental Report Tracking System ESC Erosion and Sediment Control GULD General Use Level Designation NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units NWRO Northwest Regional Office of the Department of Ecology pH Power of Hydrogen RCW Revised Code of Washington SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure su Standard Units SWMMEW Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington SWMMWW Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TESC Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control SWRO Southwest Regional Office of the Department of Ecology TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load VFO Vancouver Field Office of the Department of Ecology WAC Washington Administrative Code WSDOT Washington Department of Transportation WWHM Western Washington Hydrology Model Project Information (1.0) Project/Site Name: Renton Chick-fil-A Street/Location: 361 Rainier Avenue South City: Renton State: WA Zip code: 98057 Subdivision: N/A Receiving waterbody: Black River Existing Conditions (1.1) Total acreage (including support activities such as off-site equipment staging yards, material storage areas, borrow areas). Total acreage: 1.32 Disturbed acreage: 0.80 Existing structures: Building Landscape Topography: Slopes 2% to 20% Drainage patterns: The existing on-site stormwater infrastructures collects stormwater from the impervious surfaces and conveys it primarily to the public stormwater conveyance along Rainier Avenue South. The existing site has no treatment measures in place. Existing Vegetation: Frontage Landscaping Critical Areas (wetlands, streams, high erosion risk, steep or difficult to stabilize slopes): N/A List of known impairments for 303(d) listed or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the receiving waterbody: N/A According to the Department of Ecology Water Quality Map, the site does not exhibit any known impairments for 303(d) or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). Proposed Construction Activities (1.2) Description of site development (example: subdivision): The proposed Chick-fil-A quick serve restaurant project proposes merging the existing Chick-fil- A lot and the northern previously Firestone lot to expand the parking area and extend the drive- thru. There will be new on-site curb, sidewalk, and asphalt pavement for parking and maneuvering and drive-thru facilities. The utilities to the new order-point canopy and trash enclosure have been modified. Additional storm water infrastructure was installed to account for the expanded lot to collect and convey it to the existing system. Description of construction activities (example: site preparation, demolition, excavation): Installation of all Construction Stormwater BMPs. Demolition of existing order-point canopy, surface hardscapes, and appropriate utilities will be performed. Installation of new stormwater pipes and structures with resized Modular Wetland for water quality. Description of site drainage including flow from and onto adjacent properties. Must be consistent with Site Map in Appendix A: Due to the built-up urban environment around the site, the adjacent lots around the subject site are all established with building, paving and landscaping. They have stormwater infrastructure in place. There is no off-site stormwater expected to enter the proposed site. A portion of the site at the southeast corner of the site currently flows offsite to existing conveyance. That condition is to be maintained. Description of final stabilization (example: extent of revegetation, paving, landscaping): The proposed Chick-fil-A quick serve restaurant project proposes merging the existing Chick-fil- A lot and the northern previously Firestone lot to expand the parking area and extend the drive- thru. There will be new on-site curb, sidewalk, and asphalt pavement for parking and maneuvering and drive-thru facilities. The utilities to the new order-point canopy and trash enclosure have been modified. Additional storm water infrastructure was installed to account for the expanded lot to collect and convey it to the existing system. Contaminated Site Information: Proposed activities regarding contaminated soils or groundwater (example: on-site treatment system, authorized sanitary sewer discharge): N/A Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) (2.0) The SWPPP is a living document reflecting current conditions and changes throughout the life of the project. These changes may be informal (i.e. hand-written notes and deletions). Update the SWPPP when the CESCL has noted a deficiency in BMPs or deviation from original design. The 12 Elements (2.1) Element 1: Preserve Vegetation / Mark Clearing Limits (2.1.1) List and describe BMPs: • C103 High Visibility Fence • C233 Silt Fence Installation Schedules: Above BMPs shall be installed prior to and during land clearing, grading, or excavation activities. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 2: Establish Construction Access (2.1.2) List and describe BMPs: • C105: Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit Installation Schedules: Construction Entrance shall be installed prior to and during land clearing grading, or excavation activities. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 3: Control Flow Rates (2.1.3) Will you construct stormwater retention and/or detention facilities? Yes No Will you use permanent infiltration ponds or other low impact development (example: rain gardens, bio-retention, porous pavement) to control flow during construction? Yes No List and describe BMPs: • BMP C240: Sediment Trap Installation Schedules: The project will construct a Sediment Trap on-site and convey all stormwater runoff to it. The implementation of a sediment trap will ensure that the construction activities onsite will not negatively impact any existing downstream facilities by affecting flow rate or turbidity. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 4: Install Sediment Controls (2.1.4) List and describe BMPs: • C233: Silt Fence • C240: Sediment Trap Installation Schedules: Silt fence and the sediment trap shall be installed/constructed at the beginning phases of construction, prior to any land clearing activities. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 5: Stabilize Soils (2.1.5) West of the Cascade Mountains Crest Season Dates Number of Days Soils Can be Left Exposed During the Dry Season May 1 – September 30 7 days During the Wet Season October 1 – April 30 2 days Soils must be stabilized at the end of the shift before a holiday or weekend if needed based on the weather forecast. Anticipated project dates: Start date: TBD End date: TBD Will you construct during the wet season? Yes No TBD List and describe BMPs: • C120: Temporary and Permanent Seeding • C121: Mulching Installation Schedules: BMPs shall be implemented as soon as land disturbing activity begins and installed where applicable for the duration of the project. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 6: Protect Slopes (2.1.6) Will steep slopes be present at the site during construction? Yes No The project site does not contain, nor will it construct any steep slopes as quantified by the Department of Ecology. Therefore, there will be no applicable BMPs to implement for slope stabilization Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets (2.1.7) List and describe BMPs: All storm drain inlets both existing and those installed during construction must be protected to prevent unfiltered or untreated water from entering the drainage conveyance system; however, the first priority is to keep all access roads clean of sediment and keep water from washing streets separate from entering storm drains until treatment can be provided. Storm Drain Inlet Protection will be implemented for all drainage inlets and culverts that could potentially be impacted by sediment-laden runoff on or near the project site. This includes inlets and culverts located offsite. Inlet protection devices shall be cleaned and replaced or removed when sediment has filled 1/3 of the available storage (unless a different standard is specified by the product manufacturer). The following inlet protection measures will be proposed for this project: • C220: Storm Drain Inlet Protection Installation Schedules: Storm Drain Inlet Protection will be provided at the start of the project and will remain and be maintained for the duration of the project. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets (2.1.8) There are no channels or outlets that require protection. Provide stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent stream banks, slopes, and downstream reaches, will be installed at the outlets of all conveyance systems. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C200: Interceptor Swale Installation Schedules: During the construction phase, the site will discharge runoff to the existing stormwater infrastructure after the runoff has passed through the sediment trap. The project will not be discharging to any natural streams, ditches, or water ways where potential erosion is a concern. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 9: Control Pollutants (2.1.9) The following pollutants are anticipated to be present on-site: All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur on site will be handled and disposed of in a manner that does not cause contamination of stormwater. Good housekeeping and preventative measures will be taken to ensure that the site will be kept clean, well-organized, and free of debris. The following BMPs will be implemented: • Cover, containment, and protection from vandalism shall be provided for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and other materials that have the potential to pose a threat to human health or the environment. On-site fueling tanks shall include secondary containment. • Maintenance, fueling, and repair of heavy equipment and vehicles shall be conducted using spill prevention and control measures. Contaminated surfaces shall be cleaned immediately following any spill incident. • All vehicles, equipment, and petroleum product storage/dispensing areas will be inspected regularly to detect any leaks or spills, and to identify maintenance needs to prevent leaks or spills. • In order to perform emergency repairs on site, temporary plastic will be placed beneath and, if raining, over the vehicle. • Any chemicals stored in the construction areas will conform to the appropriate source control BMPs listed in The Renton Stormwater Manual. All chemicals shall have cover, containment, and protection provided on site, pursuant to BMP C153 for Material Delivery, Storage and Containment. List and describe BMPs: • C140: Dust Control • C151: Concrete Handling • C152: Sawcutting and Surface Pollution Prevention • C153: Material Delivery, Storage and Containment • C154: Concrete Washout Area Installation Schedules: BMPs shall be installed as necessary to control pollutants for the duration of construction. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Will maintenance, fueling, and/or repair of heavy equipment and vehicles occur on-site? • Maintenance, fueling, and/or repair of heavy equipment will occur off-site to the maximum extent feasible. Emergencies may arise, and appropriate measure will be implemented. For any fueling that is to occur on-site, secondary containment such as a drip pan will be placed below the potential source of a fuel leak (nozzle, hose connections). Any repairs and maintenance will be described as above and plastic will be place below and above the vehicle if applicable. Will wheel wash or tire bath system BMPs be used during construction? Yes No Will pH-modifying sources be present on-site? Yes No If yes, check the source(s). Table 3 – pH-Modifying Sources None x Bulk cement Cement kiln dust Fly ash Other cementitious materials x New concrete washing or curing waters Waste streams generated from concrete grinding and sawing Exposed aggregate processes Dewatering concrete vaults x Concrete pumping and mixer washout waters Recycled concrete Other (i.e. calcium lignosulfate) [please describe] As part of the development of the site, the Project must clear the site and demo any existing structures. These activities will include concrete/asphalt sawcutting and removal. During the sawcutting phase, any concrete/asphalt slurry will be vacuumed and collected within a holding drum. The slurry will be disposed off-site. The site will also construct a concrete washout area such that after any new concrete is poured, the cement truck can wash out such that the contaminated water generated can be collected and detained until disposal. List and describe BMPs: • BMP C152: Sawcutting and Surface Pollution Prevention • BMP C154: Concrete Washout Area Installation Schedules: Applicable BMPs shall be implemented as the construction activities require. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Concrete trucks must not be washed out onto the ground, or into storm drains, open ditches, streets, or streams. Excess concrete must not be dumped on-site, except in designated concrete washout areas with appropriate BMPs installed. Element 10: Control Dewatering (2.1.10) It is not anticipated that dewatering will be necessary on the site, however if necessary water shall be disposed of per local requirements. List and describe BMPs: If dewatering becomes a concern during construction activities, the water should be pumped to the constructed sediment trap. If dewatering volumes exceed that of the capacity of the sediment trap, dewatering water should be collected and disposed off- site. Installation Schedules: Measures for dewatering shall be kept on-site for emergencies and implemented as necessary. Inspection and Maintenance plan: TBD Responsible Staff: TBD Element 11: Maintain BMPs (2.1.11) All temporary and permanent Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) BMPs shall be maintained and repaired as needed to ensure continued performance of their intended function. Maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with each particular BMP specification (see the Renton Stormwater Design Manual or Volume II of the SWMMWW). Visual monitoring of all BMPs installed at the site will be conducted at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours of any stormwater or non-stormwater discharge from the site. If the site becomes inactive and is temporarily stabilized, the inspection frequency may be reduced to once every calendar month. All temporary ESC BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be stabilized on-site or removed. Disturbed soil resulting from removal of either BMPs or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized. Additionally, protection must be provided for all BMPs installed for the permanent control of stormwater from sediment and compaction. BMPs that are to remain in place following completion of construction shall be examined and restored to full operating condition. If sediment enters these BMPs during construction, the sediment shall be removed and the facility shall be returned to conditions specified in the construction documents. Element 12: Manage the Project (2.1.12) The project will be managed based on the following principles: • Projects will be phased to the maximum extent practicable and seasonal work limitations will be taken into account. • Inspection and monitoring: o Inspection, maintenance and repair of all BMPs will occur as needed to ensure performance of their intended function. o Site inspections and monitoring will be conducted in accordance with Special Condition S4 of the CSWGP. Sampling locations are indicated on the Site Map. Sampling station(s) are located in accordance with applicable requirements of the CSWGP. • Maintain an updated SWPPP. o The SWPPP will be updated, maintained, and implemented in accordance with Special Conditions S3, S4, and S9 of the CSWGP. As site work progresses the SWPPP will be modified routinely to reflect changing site conditions. The SWPPP will be reviewed monthly to ensure the content is current. Table 5 – Management X Design the project to fit the existing topography, soils, and drainage patterns Emphasize erosion control rather than sediment control X Minimize the extent and duration of the area exposed X Keep runoff velocities low X Retain sediment on-site X Thoroughly monitor site and maintain all ESC measures Schedule major earthwork during the dry season Other (please describe) Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs (2.1.13) There are no Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs to be constructed on site that will require protection during construction. Pollution Prevention Team (3.0) Table 7 – Team Information Title Name(s) Phone Number Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) TBD TBD Resident Engineer Alex Bell, P.E. 425-251-6222 Emergency Ecology Contact Staff on Duty 425-649-7310 Emergency Permittee/ Owner Contact TBD TBD Non-Emergency Owner Contact TBD TBD Monitoring Personnel TBD TBD Ecology Regional Office Northwest Region 425-649-7000 Monitoring and Sampling Requirements (4.0) Monitoring includes visual inspection, sampling for water quality parameters of concern, and documentation of the inspection and sampling findings in a site log book. A site log book will be maintained for all on-site construction activities and will include: • A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements • Site inspections • Stormwater sampling data File a blank form under Appendix D. The site log book must be maintained on-site within reasonable access to the site and be made available upon request to Ecology or the local jurisdiction. Numeric effluent limits may be required for certain discharges to 303(d) listed waterbodies. See CSWGP Special Condition S8 and Section 5 of this template. Site Inspection (4.1) Site inspections will be conducted at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours following any discharge from the site. For sites that are temporarily stabilized and inactive, the required frequency is reduced to once per calendar month. The discharge point(s) are indicated on the Site Map (see Appendix A) and in accordance with the applicable requirements of the CSWGP. Stormwater Quality Sampling (4.2) Turbidity Sampling (4.2.1) Requirements include calibrated turbidity meter or transparency tube to sample site discharges for compliance with the CSWGP. Sampling will be conducted at all discharge points at least once per calendar week. Method for sampling turbidity: Table 8 – Turbidity Sampling Method Turbidity Meter/Turbidimeter (required for disturbances 5 acres or greater in size) x Transparency Tube (option for disturbances less than 1 acre and up to 5 acres in size) The benchmark for turbidity value is 25 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) and a transparency less than 33 centimeters. If the discharge’s turbidity is 26 to 249 NTU or the transparency is less than 33 cm but equal to or greater than 6 cm, the following steps will be conducted: 1. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Special Condition S9. Make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the date the discharge exceeded the benchmark. 2. Immediately begin the process to fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible. Address the problems within 10 days of the date the discharge exceeded the benchmark. If installation of necessary treatment BMPs is not feasible within 10 days, Ecology may approve additional time when the Permittee requests an extension within the initial 10-day response period. 3. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book. If the turbidity exceeds 250 NTU or the transparency is 6 cm or less at any time, the following steps will be conducted: 1. Telephone or submit an electronic report to the applicable Ecology Region’s Environmental Report Tracking System (ERTS) within 24 hours. https://www.ecology.wa.gov/About-us/Get-involved/Report-an-environmental-issue • Northwest Region (King, Kitsap, Island, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom): (425) 649-7000 2. Immediately begin the process to fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible. Address the problems within 10 days of the date the discharge exceeded the benchmark. If installation of necessary treatment BMPs is not feasible within 10 days, Ecology may approve additional time when the Permittee requests an extension within the initial 10-day response period 3. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book. 4. Continue to sample discharges daily until one of the following is true: • Turbidity is 25 NTU (or lower). • Transparency is 33 cm (or greater). • Compliance with the water quality limit for turbidity is achieved. o 1 - 5 NTU over background turbidity, if background is less than 50 NTU o 1% - 10% over background turbidity, if background is 50 NTU or greater • The discharge stops or is eliminated. pH Sampling (4.2.2) pH monitoring is required for “Significant concrete work” (i.e. greater than 1000 cubic yards poured concrete or recycled concrete over the life of the project).The use of engineered soils (soil amendments including but not limited to Portland cement-treated base [CTB], cement kiln dust [CKD] or fly ash) also requires pH monitoring. For significant concrete work, pH sampling will start the first day concrete is poured and continue until it is cured, typically three (3) weeks after the last pour. For engineered soils and recycled concrete, pH sampling begins when engineered soils or recycled concrete are first exposed to precipitation and continues until the area is fully stabilized. If the measured pH is 8.5 or greater, the following measures will be taken: 1. Prevent high pH water from entering storm sewer systems or surface water. 2. Adjust or neutralize the high pH water to the range of 6.5 to 8.5 su using appropriate technology such as carbon dioxide (CO2) sparging (liquid or dry ice). 3. Written approval will be obtained from Ecology prior to the use of chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging or dry ice. Method for sampling pH: Table 8 – pH Sampling Method x pH meter pH test kit Wide range pH indicator paper Discharges to 303(d) or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Waterbodies (5.0) 303(d) Listed Waterbodies (5.1) Is the receiving water 303(d) (Category 5) listed for turbidity, fine sediment, phosphorus, or pH? Yes No List the impairment(s): N/A Discharges to TMDL receiving waterbodies will meet in-stream water quality criteria at the point of discharge. The Construction Stormwater General Permit Proposed New Discharge to an Impaired Water Body form is included in Appendix F. Reporting and Record Keeping (6.0) Record Keeping (6.1) Site Log Book (6.1.1) A site log book will be maintained for all on-site construction activities and will include: • A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements • Site inspections • Sample logs Records Retention (6.1.2) Records will be retained during the life of the project and for a minimum of three (3) years following the termination of permit coverage in accordance with Special Condition S5.C of the CSWGP. Permit documentation to be retained on-site: • CSWGP • Permit Coverage Letter • SWPPP • Site Log Book Permit documentation will be provided within 14 days of receipt of a written request from Ecology. A copy of the SWPPP or access to the SWPPP will be provided to the public when requested in writing in accordance with Special Condition S5.G.2.b of the CSWGP. Updating the SWPPP (6.1.3) The SWPPP will be modified if: • Found ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site. • There is a change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has, or could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters of the State. The SWPPP will be modified within seven (7) days if inspection(s) or investigation(s) determine additional or modified BMPs are necessary for compliance. An updated timeline for BMP implementation will be prepared. Reporting (6.2) Discharge Monitoring Reports (6.2.1) Cumulative soil disturbance is one (1) acre or larger; therefore, Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) will be submitted to Ecology monthly. If there was no discharge during a given monitoring period the DMR will be submitted as required, reporting “No Discharge”. The DMR due date is fifteen (15) days following the end of each calendar month. DMRs will be reported online through Ecology’s WQWebDMR System. To sign up for WQWebDMR go to: https://www.ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/Guidance-technical-assistance/Water-quality- permits-guidance/WQWebPortal-guidance Notification of Noncompliance (6.2.2) If any of the terms and conditions of the permit is not met, and the resulting noncompliance may cause a threat to human health or the environment, the following actions will be taken: 1. Ecology will be notified within 24-hours of the failure to comply by calling the applicable Regional office ERTS phone number (Regional office numbers listed below). 2. Immediate action will be taken to prevent the discharge/pollution or otherwise stop or correct the noncompliance. If applicable, sampling and analysis of any noncompliance will be repeated immediately and the results submitted to Ecology within five (5) days of becoming aware of the violation. 3. A detailed written report describing the noncompliance will be submitted to Ecology within five (5) days, unless requested earlier by Ecology. Specific information to be included in the noncompliance report is found in Special Condition S5.F.3 of the CSWGP. Anytime turbidity sampling indicates turbidity is 250 NTUs or greater, or water transparency is 6 cm or less, the Ecology Regional office will be notified by phone within 24 hours of analysis as required by Special Condition S5.A of the CSWGP. • Northwest Region at (425) 649-7000 for Island, King, Kitsap, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, or Whatcom County Include the following information: 1. Your name and / Phone number 2. Permit number 3. City / County of project 4. Sample results 5. Date / Time of call 6. Date / Time of sample 7. Project name In accordance with Special Condition S4.D.5.b of the CSWGP, the Ecology Regional office will be notified if chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging is planned for adjustment of high pH water. Appendix/Glossary A. Site Map The site map must meet the requirements of Special Condition S9.E of the CSWGP B. BMP Detail Insert BMPs specification sheets here. Download BMPs from the Ecology Construction Stormwater website at: https://www.ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/Guidance-technical- assistance/Stormwater-permittee-guidance-resources/Stormwater-manuals C. Site Inspection Form Create your own or download Ecology’s template: https://www.ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/Permits-certifications/Stormwater- general-permits/Construction-stormwater-permit Appendix A IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS Dial 811 Callbefore you dig. below.Know what's CHICK-FIL-A RENTON TED-40-4063ALEX D O NALD B E L L PR O FESSIONAL E N G INEERREGIST E R E DSTATE O F W ASHI NG TON21036182 SCALE: 1"=30' Appendix B Appendix C Construction Stormwater Site Inspection Form Page 1 Project Name Permit # Inspection Date Time Name of Certified Erosion Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) or qualified inspector if less than one acre Print Name: Approximate rainfall amount since the last inspection (in inches): Approximate rainfall amount in the last 24 hours (in inches): Current Weather Clear Cloudy Mist Rain Wind Fog A. Type of inspection: Weekly Post Storm Event Other B. Phase of Active Construction (check all that apply): Pre Construction/installation of erosion/sediment controls Clearing/Demo/Grading Infrastructure/storm/roads Concrete pours Vertical Construction/buildings Utilities Offsite improvements Site temporary stabilized Final stabilization C. Questions: 1. Were all areas of construction and discharge points inspected? Yes No 2. Did you observe the presence of suspended sediment, turbidity, discoloration, or oil sheen Yes No 3. Was a water quality sample taken during inspection? (refer to permit conditions S4 & S5) Yes No 4. Was there a turbid discharge 250 NTU or greater, or Transparency 6 cm or less?* Yes No 5. If yes to #4 was it reported to Ecology? Yes No 6. Is pH sampling required? pH range required is 6.5 to 8.5. Yes No If answering yes to a discharge, describe the event. Include when, where, and why it happened; what action was taken, and when. *If answering yes to # 4 record NTU/Transparency with continual sampling daily until turbidity is 25 NTU or less/ transparency is 33 cm or greater. Sampling Results: Date: Parameter Method (circle one) Result Other/Note NTU cm pH Turbidity tube, meter, laboratory pH Paper, kit, meter Construction Stormwater Site Inspection Form Page 2 D. Check the observed status of all items. Provide “Action Required “details and dates. Element # Inspection BMPs Inspected BMP needs maintenance BMP failed Action required (describe in section F) yes no n/a 1 Clearing Limits Before beginning land disturbing activities are all clearing limits, natural resource areas (streams, wetlands, buffers, trees) protected with barriers or similar BMPs? (high visibility recommended) 2 Construction Access Construction access is stabilized with quarry spalls or equivalent BMP to prevent sediment from being tracked onto roads? Sediment tracked onto the road way was cleaned thoroughly at the end of the day or more frequent as necessary. 3 Control Flow Rates Are flow control measures installed to control stormwater volumes and velocity during construction and do they protect downstream properties and waterways from erosion? If permanent infiltration ponds are used for flow control during construction, are they protected from siltation? 4 Sediment Controls All perimeter sediment controls (e.g. silt fence, wattles, compost socks, berms, etc.) installed, and maintained in accordance with the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Sediment control BMPs (sediment ponds, traps, filters etc.) have been constructed and functional as the first step of grading. Stormwater runoff from disturbed areas is directed to sediment removal BMP. 5 Stabilize Soils Have exposed un-worked soils been stabilized with effective BMP to prevent erosion and sediment deposition? Construction Stormwater Site Inspection Form Page 3 Element # Inspection BMPs Inspected BMP needs maintenance BMP failed Action required (describe in section F) yes no n/a 5 Stabilize Soils Cont. Are stockpiles stabilized from erosion, protected with sediment trapping measures and located away from drain inlet, waterways, and drainage channels? Have soils been stabilized at the end of the shift, before a holiday or weekend if needed based on the weather forecast? 6 Protect Slopes Has stormwater and ground water been diverted away from slopes and disturbed areas with interceptor dikes, pipes and or swales? Is off-site storm water managed separately from stormwater generated on the site? Is excavated material placed on uphill side of trenches consistent with safety and space considerations? Have check dams been placed at regular intervals within constructed channels that are cut down a slope? 7 Drain Inlets Storm drain inlets made operable during construction are protected. Are existing storm drains within the influence of the project protected? 8 Stabilize Channel and Outlets Have all on-site conveyance channels been designed, constructed and stabilized to prevent erosion from expected peak flows? Is stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent stream banks, slopes and downstream conveyance systems? 9 Control Pollutants Are waste materials and demolition debris handled and disposed of to prevent contamination of stormwater? Has cover been provided for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and other material? Has secondary containment been provided capable of containing 110% of the volume? Were contaminated surfaces cleaned immediately after a spill incident? Were BMPs used to prevent contamination of stormwater by a pH modifying sources? Construction Stormwater Site Inspection Form Page 4 Element # Inspection BMPs Inspected BMP needs maintenance BMP failed Action required (describe in section F) yes no n/a 9 Cont. Wheel wash wastewater is handled and disposed of properly. 10 Control Dewatering Concrete washout in designated areas. No washout or excess concrete on the ground. Dewatering has been done to an approved source and in compliance with the SWPPP. Were there any clean non turbid dewatering discharges? 11 Maintain BMP Are all temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs maintained to perform as intended? 12 Manage the Project Has the project been phased to the maximum degree practicable? Has regular inspection, monitoring and maintenance been performed as required by the permit? Has the SWPPP been updated, implemented and records maintained? 13 Protect LID Is all Bioretention and Rain Garden Facilities protected from sedimentation with appropriate BMPs? Is the Bioretention and Rain Garden protected against over compaction of construction equipment and foot traffic to retain its infiltration capabilities? Permeable pavements are clean and free of sediment and sediment laden- water runoff. Muddy construction equipment has not been on the base material or pavement. Have soiled permeable pavements been cleaned of sediments and pass infiltration test as required by stormwater manual methodology? Heavy equipment has been kept off existing soils under LID facilities to retain infiltration rate. E. Check all areas that have been inspected. All in place BMPs All disturbed soils All concrete wash out area All material storage areas All discharge locations All equipment storage areas All construction entrances/exits Construction Stormwater Site Inspection Form Page 5 F. Elements checked “Action Required” (section D) describe corrective action to be taken. List the element number; be specific on location and work needed. Document, initial, and date when the corrective action has been completed and inspected. Element # Description and Location Action Required Completion Date Initials Attach additional page if needed Sign the following certification: “I certify that this report is true, accurate, and complete, to the best of my knowledge and belief” Inspected by: (print) (Signature) Date: Title/Qualification of Inspector: Tab 9.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT The Construction Bond Quantities is included in this submittal. A Declaration of Covenant for Flow Control and Water Quality facilities will be provided with a subsequent submittal. A Water Quality Facilities Summary Sketch is provided in Figure 9.1. Planning Division |1055 South Grady Way – 6 th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7200 Date Prepared: Name: PE Registration No: Firm Name: Firm Address: Phone No. Email Address: Project Name: Project Owner: CED Plan # (LUA):Phone: CED Permit # (U):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:NO Water Service Provided by: If Yes, Provide Forest Practice Permit #:Sewer Service Provided by: SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET PROJECT INFORMATION CITY OF RENTON CITY OF RENTON 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 Phone Engineer Stamp Required (all cost estimates must have original wet stamp and signature) Clearing and Grading Utility Providers N/A Project Location and Description Project Owner Information Renton Chick-fil-A Expansion Atlanta, GA, 30349 000720-0149, 000720-0215 Chick-fil-A LUA21-000440 404-305-4407 1/16/2023 Prepared by: FOR APPROVALProject Phase 1 abell@barghausen.com Alex Bell 21036182 Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Ave S, Kent WA, 98032 425-251-6222 375 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA, 98055 5200 Buffington Rd Additional Project OwnerRainier Ave S and Renton Center Way TBD AddressAbbreviated Legal Description: THE SOUTHERLY 95 FEET AS MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 OF THAT PORTION OF THE HENRY H. TOBIN DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 37, IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. City, State, Zip Page 2 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION I PROJECT INFORMATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023ALEX D O N ALD B E L L PR O F ESSIONA L E N G INEERREGIST E R E DSTATE O F W ASHIN GT ON21036182 01/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Unit Reference #Price Unit Quantity Cost Backfill & compaction-embankment ESC-1 6.50$ CY Check dams, 4" minus rock ESC-2 SWDM 5.4.6.3 80.00$ Each Catch Basin Protection ESC-3 35.50$ Each 12 426.00 Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus ESC-4 WSDOT 9-03.9(3)95.00$ CY Ditching ESC-5 9.00$ CY Excavation-bulk ESC-6 2.00$ CY Fence, silt ESC-7 SWDM 5.4.3.1 1.50$ LF 382 573.00 Fence, Temporary (NGPE)ESC-8 1.50$ LF 865 1,297.50 Geotextile Fabric ESC-9 2.50$ SY Hay Bale Silt Trap ESC-10 0.50$ Each Hydroseeding ESC-11 SWDM 5.4.2.4 0.80$ SY Interceptor Swale / Dike ESC-12 1.00$ LF 169 169.00 Jute Mesh ESC-13 SWDM 5.4.2.2 3.50$ SY Level Spreader ESC-14 1.75$ LF Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep ESC-15 SWDM 5.4.2.1 2.50$ SY Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep ESC-16 SWDM 5.4.2.1 2.00$ SY Piping, temporary, CPP, 6"ESC-17 12.00$ LF Piping, temporary, CPP, 8"ESC-18 14.00$ LF Piping, temporary, CPP, 12"ESC-19 18.00$ LF Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged ESC-20 SWDM 5.4.2.3 4.00$ SY Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes ESC-21 WSDOT 9-13.1(2)45.00$ CY Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1'ESC-22 SWDM 5.4.4.1 1,800.00$ Each Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1'ESC-23 SWDM 5.4.4.1 3,200.00$ Each 1 3,200.00 Sediment pond riser assembly ESC-24 SWDM 5.4.5.2 2,200.00$ Each Sediment trap, 5' high berm ESC-25 SWDM 5.4.5.1 19.00$ LF Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section ESC-26 SWDM 5.4.5.1 70.00$ LF Seeding, by hand ESC-27 SWDM 5.4.2.4 1.00$ SY Sodding, 1" deep, level ground ESC-28 SWDM 5.4.2.5 8.00$ SY Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground ESC-29 SWDM 5.4.2.5 10.00$ SY TESC Supervisor ESC-30 110.00$ HR Water truck, dust control ESC-31 SWDM 5.4.7 140.00$ HR Unit Reference #Price Unit Quantity Cost EROSION/SEDIMENT SUBTOTAL:5,665.50 SALES TAX @ 9.5%538.22 EROSION/SEDIMENT TOTAL:6,203.72 (A) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL Description No. (A) WRITE-IN-ITEMS Page 3 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.a EROSION_CONTROL Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost GENERAL ITEMS Backfill & Compaction- embankment GI-1 6.00$ CY Backfill & Compaction- trench GI-2 9.00$ CY Clear/Remove Brush, by hand (SY)GI-3 1.00$ SY Bollards - fixed GI-4 240.74$ Each 1 240.74 Bollards - removable GI-5 452.34$ Each 14 6,332.76 Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal GI-6 10,000.00$ Acre Excavation - bulk GI-7 2.00$ CY Excavation - Trench GI-8 5.00$ CY Fencing, cedar, 6' high GI-9 20.00$ LF Fencing, chain link, 4'GI-10 38.31$ LF Fencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' high GI-11 20.00$ LF Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 20' GI-12 1,400.00$ Each Fill & compact - common barrow GI-13 25.00$ CY Fill & compact - gravel base GI-14 27.00$ CY Fill & compact - screened topsoil GI-15 39.00$ CY Gabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh GI-16 65.00$ SY Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh GI-17 90.00$ SY Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh GI-18 150.00$ SY Grading, fine, by hand GI-19 2.50$ SY Grading, fine, with grader GI-20 2.00$ SY 200 400.00 3735 7,470.00 Monuments, 3' Long GI-21 250.00$ Each Sensitive Areas Sign GI-22 7.00$ Each Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground GI-23 8.00$ SY Surveying, line & grade GI-24 850.00$ Day Surveying, lot location/lines GI-25 1,800.00$ Acre Topsoil Type A (imported)GI-26 28.50$ CY Traffic control crew ( 2 flaggers )GI-27 120.00$ HR Trail, 4" chipped wood GI-28 8.00$ SY Trail, 4" crushed cinder GI-29 9.00$ SY Trail, 4" top course GI-30 12.00$ SY Conduit, 2"GI-31 5.00$ LF Wall, retaining, concrete GI-32 55.00$ SF Wall, rockery GI-33 15.00$ SF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:400.00 14,043.50 (B)(C)(D)(E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 4 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.b TRANSPORTATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) ROAD IMPROVEMENT/PAVEMENT/SURFACING AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy RI-1 30.00$ SY 17 510.00 AC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000sy RI-2 16.00$ SY AC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy RI-3 10.00$ SY AC Removal/Disposal RI-4 35.00$ SY 17 595.00 Barricade, Type III ( Permanent )RI-5 56.00$ LF Guard Rail RI-6 30.00$ LF Curb & Gutter, rolled RI-7 17.00$ LF Curb & Gutter, vertical RI-8 12.50$ LF 151 1,887.50 601 7,512.50 Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposal RI-9 18.00$ LF 151 2,718.00 414 7,452.00 Curb, extruded asphalt RI-10 5.50$ LF Curb, extruded concrete RI-11 7.00$ LF 817 5,719.00 Sawcut, asphalt, 3" depth RI-12 1.85$ LF 153 283.05 164 303.40 Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth RI-13 3.00$ LF 28 84.00 144 432.00 Sealant, asphalt RI-14 2.00$ LF Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick RI-15 15.00$ SY Sidewalk, 4" thick RI-16 38.00$ SY 125 4,750.00 75 2,850.00 Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and disposal RI-17 32.00$ SY 153 4,896.00 18 576.00 Sidewalk, 5" thick RI-18 41.00$ SY Sidewalk, 5" thick, demolition and disposal RI-19 40.00$ SY Sign, Handicap RI-20 85.00$ Each Striping, per stall RI-21 7.00$ Each 35 245.00 Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk )RI-22 3.00$ SF Striping, 4" reflectorized line RI-23 0.50$ LF Additional 2.5" Crushed Surfacing RI-24 3.60$ SY HMA 1/2" Overlay 1.5" RI-25 14.00$ SY HMA 1/2" Overlay 2"RI-26 18.00$ SY HMA Road, 2", 4" rock, First 2500 SY RI-27 28.00$ SY HMA Road, 2", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500SY RI-28 21.00$ SY HMA Road, 4", 6" rock, First 2500 SY RI-29 45.00$ SY 17 765.00 1552 69,840.00 HMA Road, 4", 6" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY RI-30 37.00$ SY HMA Road, 4", 4.5" ATB RI-31 38.00$ SY Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY RI-32 15.00$ SY Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY RI-33 10.00$ SY Thickened Edge RI-34 8.60$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:16,488.55 94,929.90 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 5 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.b TRANSPORTATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) PARKING LOT SURFACING No. 2" AC, 2" top course rock & 4" borrow PL-1 21.00$ SY 2" AC, 1.5" top course & 2.5" base course PL-2 28.00$ SY 4" select borrow PL-3 5.00$ SY 1.5" top course rock & 2.5" base course PL-4 14.00$ SY SUBTOTAL PARKING LOT SURFACING: (B)(C)(D)(E) LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION No. Street Trees LA-1 Median Landscaping LA-2 Right-of-Way Landscaping LA-3 Wetland Landscaping LA-4 SUBTOTAL LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION: (B)(C)(D)(E) TRAFFIC & LIGHTING No. Signs TR-1 Street Light System ( # of Poles)TR-2 Traffic Signal TR-3 Traffic Signal Modification TR-4 SUBTOTAL TRAFFIC & LIGHTING: (B)(C)(D)(E) WRITE-IN-ITEMS SUBTOTAL WRITE-IN ITEMS: STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL:16,888.55 108,973.40 SALES TAX @ 9.5%1,604.41 10,352.47 STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL:18,492.96 119,325.87 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 6 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.b TRANSPORTATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost DRAINAGE (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 26.00$ SY * (CBs include frame and lid) Beehive D-2 90.00$ Each Through-curb Inlet Framework D-3 400.00$ Each CB Type I D-4 1,500.00$ Each 2 3,000.00 CB Type IL D-5 1,750.00$ Each CB Type II, 48" diameter D-6 2,300.00$ Each for additional depth over 4' D-7 480.00$ FT CB Type II, 54" diameter D-8 2,500.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-9 495.00$ FT CB Type II, 60" diameter D-10 2,800.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-11 600.00$ FT CB Type II, 72" diameter D-12 6,000.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-13 850.00$ FT CB Type II, 96" diameter D-14 14,000.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-15 925.00$ FT Trash Rack, 12"D-16 350.00$ Each Trash Rack, 15"D-17 410.00$ Each Trash Rack, 18"D-18 480.00$ Each Trash Rack, 21"D-19 550.00$ Each Cleanout, PVC, 4"D-20 150.00$ Each Cleanout, PVC, 6"D-21 170.00$ Each 3 510.00 Cleanout, PVC, 8"D-22 200.00$ Each Culvert, PVC, 4" (Not allowed in ROW)D-23 10.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 6" (Not allowed in ROW)D-24 13.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 8" (Not allowed in ROW)D-25 15.00$ LF 104 1,560.00 Culvert, PVC, 12" (Not allowed in ROW)D-26 23.00$ LF 26 598.00 Culvert, PVC, 15" (Not allowed in ROW)D-27 35.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 18" (Not allowed in ROW)D-28 41.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 24" (Not allowed in ROW)D-29 56.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 30" (Not allowed in ROW)D-30 78.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 36" (Not allowed in ROW)D-31 130.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 8"D-32 19.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 12"D-33 29.00$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:5,668.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 7 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) DRAINAGE (Continued) Culvert, CMP, 15"D-34 35.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 18"D-35 41.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 24"D-36 56.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 30"D-37 78.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 36"D-38 130.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 48"D-39 190.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 60"D-40 270.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 72"D-41 350.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 8"D-42 42.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 12"D-43 48.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 15"D-44 78.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 18"D-45 48.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 24"D-46 78.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 30"D-47 125.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 36"D-48 150.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 42"D-49 175.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 48"D-50 205.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 6" (Not allowed in ROW)D-51 14.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 8" (Not allowed in ROW)D-52 16.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 12" (Not allowed in ROW)D-53 24.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 15" (Not allowed in ROW)D-54 35.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 18" (Not allowed in ROW)D-55 41.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 24" (Not allowed in ROW)D-56 56.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 30" (Not allowed in ROW)D-57 78.00$ LF Culvert, CPE, 36" (Not allowed in ROW)D-58 130.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 6"D-59 60.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 8"D-60 72.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 12"D-61 84.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 15"D-62 96.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 18"D-63 108.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 24"D-64 120.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 30"D-65 132.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 36"D-66 144.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 48"D-67 156.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 54"D-68 168.00$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE: (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 8 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) DRAINAGE (Continued) Culvert, LCPE, 60"D-69 180.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 72"D-70 192.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 6"D-71 42.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 8"D-72 42.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 12"D-73 74.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 15"D-74 106.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 18"D-75 138.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 24"D-76 221.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 30"D-77 276.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 36"D-78 331.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 48"D-79 386.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 54"D-80 441.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 60"D-81 496.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 72"D-82 551.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 6"D-83 84.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 8"D-84 89.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 12"D-85 95.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 15"D-86 100.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 18"D-87 106.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 24"D-88 111.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 30"D-89 119.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 36"D-90 154.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 48"D-91 226.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 54"D-92 332.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 60"D-93 439.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 72"D-94 545.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 6"D-95 61.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 8"D-96 84.00$ LF 137 11,508.00 Culvert, DI, 12"D-97 106.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 15"D-98 129.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 18"D-99 152.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 24"D-100 175.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 30"D-101 198.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 36"D-102 220.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 48"D-103 243.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 54"D-104 266.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 60"D-105 289.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 72"D-106 311.00$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:11,508.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 9 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Specialty Drainage Items Ditching SD-1 9.50$ CY Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+)SD-3 28.00$ LF French Drain (3' depth)SD-4 26.00$ LF Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene SD-5 3.00$ SY Mid-tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep SD-6 2,000.00$ Each Pond Overflow Spillway SD-7 16.00$ SY Restrictor/Oil Separator, 12"SD-8 1,150.00$ Each Restrictor/Oil Separator, 15"SD-9 1,350.00$ Each Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18"SD-10 1,700.00$ Each Riprap, placed SD-11 42.00$ CY Tank End Reducer (36" diameter)SD-12 1,200.00$ Each Infiltration pond testing SD-13 125.00$ HR Permeable Pavement SD-14 SY 56 Permeable Concrete Sidewalk SD-15 Culvert, Box __ ft x __ ft SD-16 SUBTOTAL 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 StormFilter SF-15 Each Rain Garden SF-16 Each SUBTOTAL STORMWATER FACILITIES: (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 10 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) WRITE-IN-ITEMS Proprietary Facility WI-1 35,000.00$ Each 1 35,000.00 WI-2 0.75" Type K Copper Tube WI-3 13.00$ LF 165 2,145.00 WI-4 WI-5 WI-6 WI-7 WI-8 WI-9 WI-10 WI-11 WI-12 WI-13 WI-14 WI-15 SUBTOTAL WRITE-IN ITEMS:37,145.00 DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES SUBTOTAL:42,813.00 SALES TAX @ 9.5%4,067.24 DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES TOTAL:46,880.24 (B) (C) (D) (E) Page 11 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Connection to Existing Watermain W-1 2,000.00$ Each Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 4 Inch Diameter W-2 50.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 6 Inch Diameter W-3 56.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 8 Inch Diameter W-4 60.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 10 Inch Diameter W-5 70.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 12 Inch Diameter W-6 80.00$ LF Gate Valve, 4 inch Diameter W-7 500.00$ Each Gate Valve, 6 inch Diameter W-8 700.00$ Each Gate Valve, 8 Inch Diameter W-9 800.00$ Each Gate Valve, 10 Inch Diameter W-10 1,000.00$ Each Gate Valve, 12 Inch Diameter W-11 1,200.00$ Each Fire Hydrant Assembly W-12 4,000.00$ Each Permanent Blow-Off Assembly W-13 1,800.00$ Each Air-Vac Assembly, 2-Inch Diameter W-14 2,000.00$ Each Air-Vac Assembly, 1-Inch Diameter W-15 1,500.00$ Each Compound Meter Assembly 3-inch Diameter W-16 8,000.00$ Each Compound Meter Assembly 4-inch Diameter W-17 9,000.00$ Each Compound Meter Assembly 6-inch Diameter W-18 10,000.00$ Each Pressure Reducing Valve Station 8-inch to 10-inch W-19 20,000.00$ Each WATER SUBTOTAL: SALES TAX @ 9.5% WATER TOTAL: (B) (C) (D) (E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR WATER Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 12 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.d WATER Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 CED Permit #:TBD Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Clean Outs SS-1 1,000.00$ Each 2 2,000.00 Grease Interceptor, 500 gallon SS-2 8,000.00$ Each Grease Interceptor, 1000 gallon SS-3 10,000.00$ Each Grease Interceptor, 1500 gallon SS-4 15,000.00$ Each Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 4 Inch Diameter SS-5 80.00$ LF Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 6 Inch Diameter SS-6 95.00$ LF Sewer Pipe, PVC, 8 inch Diameter SS-7 105.00$ LF 20 2,100.00 Sewer Pipe, PVC, 12 Inch Diameter SS-8 120.00$ LF Sewer Pipe, DI, 8 inch Diameter SS-9 115.00$ LF Sewer Pipe, DI, 12 Inch Diameter SS-10 130.00$ LF Manhole, 48 Inch Diameter SS-11 6,000.00$ Each Manhole, 54 Inch Diameter SS-13 6,500.00$ Each Manhole, 60 Inch Diameter SS-15 7,500.00$ Each Manhole, 72 Inch Diameter SS-17 8,500.00$ Each Manhole, 96 Inch Diameter SS-19 14,000.00$ Each Pipe, C-900, 12 Inch Diameter SS-21 180.00$ LF Outside Drop SS-24 1,500.00$ LS Inside Drop SS-25 1,000.00$ LS Sewer Pipe, PVC, ____ Inch Diameter SS-26 Lift Station (Entire System)SS-27 LS SANITARY SEWER SUBTOTAL:4,100.00 SALES TAX @ 9.5%389.50 SANITARY SEWER TOTAL:4,489.50 (B) (C) (D) (E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR SANITARY SEWER Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 13 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.e SANITARY SEWER Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 Planning Division |1055 South Grady Way – 6th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7200 Date: Name:Project Name: PE Registration No:CED Plan # (LUA): Firm Name:CED Permit # (U): Firm Address:Site Address: Phone No.Parcel #(s): Email Address:Project Phase: Site Restoration/Erosion Sediment Control Subtotal (a)(a)6,203.72$ Existing Right-of-Way Improvements Subtotal (b)(b)-$ Future Public Improvements Subtotal (c)(c)18,492.96$ Stormwater & Drainage Facilities Subtotal (d)(d)46,880.24$ Bond Reduction (Quantity Remaining)2 (e)(e)-$ Site Restoration Civil Construction Permit Maintenance Bond 13,074.64$ Bond Reduction2 Construction Permit Bond Amount 3 Minimum Bond Amount is $10,000.00 1 Estimate Only - May involve multiple and variable components, which will be established on an individual basis by Development Engineering. 2 The City of Renton allows one request only for bond reduction prior to the maintenance period. Reduction of not more than 70% of the original bond amount, provided that the remaining 30% will cover all remaining items to be constructed. 3 Required Bond Amounts are subject to review and modification by Development Engineering. * Note: The word BOND as used in this document means any financial guarantee acceptable to the City of Renton. ** Note: All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit. T (P +R - S) Prepared by:Project Information CONSTRUCTION BOND AMOUNT */** (prior to permit issuance) 425-251-6222 abell@barghausen.com Renton Chick-fil-A Expansion LUA21-000440 375 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA, 98055 000720-0149, 000720-0215 FOR APPROVAL TBD 18215 72nd Ave S, Kent WA, 98032 107,365.38$ P (a) x 150% SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET BOND CALCULATIONS 1/16/2023 Alex Bell 21036182 Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. R ((b)+(c)+(d)) x 150% EST1 ((b) + (c) + (d)) x 20% -$ MAINTENANCE BOND */** (after final acceptance of construction) 6,203.72$ -$ 98,059.80$ 9,305.58$ -$ 18,492.96$ 46,880.24$ S (e) x 150% Page 14 of 14 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION III. BOND WORKSHEET Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 06/14/2016 Printed 1/16/2023 Figure 9.1 Water Quality Facility Summary Sketch Tab 10.0 18963.012-StormWATR CTRL 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL An Operations and Maintenance Manual is under a separate cover. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Chick-fil-A Project Site No. 04249 361 Rainier Avenue South Renton, Washington Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 January 16, 2023 Our Job No. 18963 Operations and Maintenance Manual Chick-fil-A Renton, Washington Our Job No. 18963 18963.013-O&M OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The project is subject to the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual, as such, the project will trigger Stormwater Requirements therein. The Project is required to provide Water Quality Facilities pursuant to the 2017 RSWDM. All proposed impervious surfaces on site will be treated on site. The project will implement a resized Modular Wetland Water Quality Unit installed to be in series with the existing Oil/Water Separator to provide Enhanced Water Quality Treatment to the site. A copy of the Operation and Maintenance Manual will be provided to the owner of the property and shall be retained on site. The stormwater facilities used on site will have differing maintenance schedules as outlined in the following information sheets. The following is a summary of the types of facilities and the type of maintenance that will be required: Catch Basins: Monthly Inspections to visually inspect Catch Basins for an abundance of trash/debris and/or sediment trapped inside. The task associated with this will be to remove the trapped sediment/trash. Annual Inspections to visually inspect the structure walls and bottom. Also inspect the condition of the top frame and grate and the grout around the inlet/outlet pipes. The maintenance activity here can range from full replacement of the structure to replacing/adding/ grout to fill hairline cracks and areas around inlet/outlet pipes. Oil/Water Separator: Monthly monitoring shall occur such that the discharge water can be inspected for cleanliness and sediment accumulation. This is also a viable time to inspect the unit for any trash/debris that may have made its way into the structure. Maintenance activities will include the removal of any sediment and trash/debris inside the vault and extracting any oil/sludge that has accumulated. Annual Inspections shall occur to monitor the structural integrity of the structure itself and the inlet/outlet pipes. The top lid shall be inspected for proper performance at this time. Maintenance activities can range from replacing vault to repairing inlet/outlet pipe locations. Modular Wetland Water Quality Unit: See attached pages for the Maintenance Schedule and Activities associated with the Modular Wetland Water Quality Unit. An annual budget for stormwater facility maintenance is estimated to be $1,800. That annual expense is broken down as follows: Table of Maintenance Tasks by facility. Facility Expected Frequency Estimated Cost per Year Catch Basins and Piping - Clean Thoroughly and Inspect Annually $300.00 Oil Water Separators - Clean and Thoroughly Inspect Annually $700.00 Modular Wetland Cleaning and Media Replacement Annually $800.00 18963.013-O&M Frequency of each maintenance item will be dictated by City of Renton Maintenance Checklists and Manufacturer's instructions as found in this manual. Inspection Frequency is to be performed monthly for status of many of the maintenance items for each of the facilities. Each monthly inspection will be used in determination of whether an annual maintenance frequency is adequate. Facilities may require more frequent cleaning if monthly inspection reveals sediment and debris buildup or if obvious signs of poor water quality are observed. Maintenance that requires no special equipment or specifically trained labor such as trash removal should be performed more frequently as outlined in the checklists. PLAN VIEW ELEVATION VIEW RIGHT END VIEW LEFT END VIEW SITE SPECIFIC DATA GENERAL NOTES INSTALLATION NOTES STANDARD DETAIL STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM MWS-L-4-8-V-UG FOR PATENT INFORMATION, GO TO www.ContechES.com/IP FOR DETAILS, SEE REVERSE>> Items Shown Are Subject To Change Without Notice Issue Date: April 2016 No.660-CPS-BVAULT No.660-CPS-TTOPSECTION OUTLET PIPE INLET PIPE Facet Coalescing Pack® Items Shown Are SubjectTo Change WithoutNotice FOR DETAILS,SEE REVERSE>> Issue Date: August2012 Mailing AddressPOBox588Auburn,WA 98071 Phone:800-892-1538Fax:253-735-4201Email:opauburn@oldcastle.com Delivering Reliability opauburn.com 127 660-CPS OIL WATER SEPERATOR Project Plate Area =444 Sq/ft Maximum Process Flow =415 GPM 660-CPS OIL WATER SEPARATOR Project Plate Area = 444 Sq/ft Maximum Process Flow = 415 GPM © 1985-2016 Oldcastle Precast, Inc.141