HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP273227(1) TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
' FOR
RENTON VILLAGE
' RENTON, WASHINGTON
' Revised September 26, 2005
March 25, 2005
' Prepared for:
RVA LAND LLC
C/O M. Sandorffy Company
' 520 Pike Street, Suite 1400
Seattle, Washington 98101
1
' Prepared by:
W& H PACIFIC, INC.
' 3350 Monte Villa Parkway
Bothell, Washington 98021
(425) 951-4800
' TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
FOR
' RENTON VILLAGE
r RENTON, WASHINGTON
Revised September 8, 2005
March 25, 2005
Prepared for:
' RVA LAND LLC
C/O M. Sandorffy Company
520 Pike Street, Suite 1400
' Seattle, Washington 98101
HF �i Engineer:
wASH'�g0 Nicole F. Hernandez, P.E.
o , W& H Pacific, Inc.
3350 Monte Villa Parkway
' 3 04 Bothell, Washington 98021
FsT�� ��``' (425) 951-4800
s/
ONAL JIAK
EXPIRES: SEPT.1,Z885�
r
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
1.0 Project Overview
' 1.1 Purpose and Scope
1.2 Existing Conditions
1.3 Developed Conditions
' 2.0 Preliminary Conditions Summary
2.1 Core Requirements
' 3.0 Off-Site Analysis
' 3.1 Upstream Drainage Analysis
3.2 Downstream Drainage Analysis
' 4.0 Retention / Detention Analysis and Design
4.1 Existing Site Hydrology
4.2 Developed Site Hydrology
' 4.3 Hydrologic Analysis
4.4 Retention/Detention System
' 5.0 Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design
5.1 Roof Downspout System
5.2 Proposed On-Site Conveyance System
' 6.0 Special Reports and Studies
P P
7.0 Basin and Community Planning Areas
8.0 Other Permits
9.0 Erosion / Sedimentation Control Design
' 10.0 Bond Quantities Worksheet, Retention/Detention Facility Summary Sheet and
Sketch, and Declaration of Covenant
' 11.0 Maintenance and Operations Manual
' Appendix - SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers
- Isopluvial Maps (2-year, 10-year, 100-year)
- FEMA Floodplain Map
' - King County Soils Survey
' W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IISeattle1 Data lProjectslRVA Land LLC132272 Renton Village lOfcelWordltir title-toc revised 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
' FIGURES
' 1 T.I.R. Worksheet
2 Vicinity Map
3.1 Existing Conditions Map
3.2 Developed Conditions Map
4 King County Soil Survey Map
' 5 USGS Topographic Map
6 Downstream Map
t
1
' W&H Pacific Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
1&attlellDatalProjectslRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton VillagelOfcelWordltir title-toc revised 9-26-05.doc August 11.2005
11
' 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
' 1.1 Purpose and Scope
The following Technical Information Report (TIR) and design are provided for the
' Renton Village development project. The existing site lies within a portion of Section 19,
Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, Washington (see Figure
2 — Vicinity Map). The property is approximately 4.57 acres in size. Per the City of
' Renton, the site will be required to follow the 1990 King County Surface Water Design.
Manual (KCSWDM).
' 1.2 Existing Conditions
The site currently consists of three lots: C2, C3, and C4. To the east of the site exists a
' retail building, a McDonald's restaurant, and a Thriftway store. South Grady Way
bounds the site to the north and provides access to the site. Lake Street bounds the site to
the west. To the south is an existing asphalt parking and a Cinema. The site is
' undeveloped with mounds of soil and exposed dirt cover, with small amounts of
landscaping and asphalt impervious areas. Soils on the site consist primarily of Urban
Land (Ur) which is fill soil. See the Geotechnical Report found in Section 6 for more
information on site soils. See Figure 4 for the Soil Survey Map.
The northwest portion of the site lies within the FEMA 100-year floodplain. It is
' reported by the City of Renton that there is existing flooding on the Renton Village
property due to the presence of the FEMA 100-year floodplain and insufficient
conveyance capacity in existing storm systems on the Renton Village Shopping center
area.
The existing site consists of one main drainage basin (See Figure 3.1, Existing
' Conditions Map). The total site area is approximately 4.57 acres. The specific basin
delineation is found in Section 4.
1.3 Developed Conditions
' The proposed development will include a total of four buildings with associated drive
aisles, parking and landscape. These buildings consist of a Wells Fargo bank, an
Applebee's restaurant, a Discount Tire store, and an unknown retail store to be named
' later. The existing stormwater bypass system which runs through the site will be
replaced by a new layout which will flow through the middle and around the western
' perimeter of the site.
All drainage facilities and water quality treatment facilities were designed to a complete
build-out condition, and were designed per the 1990 KCSWDM and the City of Renton
' Standards. The proposed development will consist of asphalt parking, drive aisles,
' W&HPacific Inc TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IISeattle1 Data lProjectslRVA Land LL032272 Renton Village lOfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
1
' 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
buildings, and landscaping throughout the entire site. (See Figure 3.2, Developed
Conditions Map). Existing and developed condition basin delineations are found in
' Section 4.
' W&HPacific Inc. TIR Renton Village—RV9 Land LLC
I SeattlelDatalProjectslRVA Land LLC132272 Renton Village lOfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
2
1
iGng Coanty Departrlmu t of Elevetiopme t and.Environmental Services
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) 1NORSery T
1 Past 1=f E£T Aitil� Pan 2 wCA. Aria
P Oz7E €1 t1 DE=SCFUPTpt
Project Own Project Name
er
Address Location
1 520 Township 23 i(l
Phone S
,2oG loges Range
......Section /9
1 Project !
Engine�r
ST S�Ysk�►L, � .
Company V* 1 f,f 1�l</C
Address/Phone
I?art� YP�flF PERMIT _ Parr DTHER-REVIEWS AND PERMITS
JAPP'�1C \TION
Subdivison DFW HPA Shoreline Management
1 Short Subdivision COE 444 Rockery
Grading DOE Dam Safety Structural Vaults
1 Commercial FEMA Floodplain Other
Other COE Wetlands
1
Part,b SITE COMMiJNfTY AND..DRAINAGE BAS:tN
Community
1 Drainage Basin
1 Part fi SITE CHARACTERISTICS
River Floodpiain
1 Wetlands
Stream Seeps/Springs
1 Critical Stream Reach High Groundwater Table
Depressions/Swales Groundwater Recharge
1 Lake Other
Steep Slopes
1
Soil Type Sfopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velcoties
�'A�I/' �, O-s/ ,���,���� �5 Tye ✓�F�s
' Additional Sheets Attached
Part& -DE LL0PmEN T LIMFTAT.IONS .
' REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT
Ch. 4—Downstream Analysis
Additional Sheets Attached
Part a- E$C:TiF.QU1REMENTS
' MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS
DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION
--
Sedimentation Facilities Stabilize Exposed Su ace
Stabilized Construction Entrance Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities
Perimeter Runoff Control Clean and Remove All Silt and De ins--)
Clearing and Graing Restrictions Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities
Cover Practices Flag Limits of SAO and open space
preservation areas
Construction Sequence
Other
Other
1
Part 71 SUFtFA WAYMZYST1 ! .
lr4ethcxi of ArkaEys"s
Channel. Valift Depression
Pipe System iordMiti
Cornpensatgati
1 Energy Dissapator Flow Dispersal on of Eliminated Site
Open Channel Wetland Waiver Storage
Dry Pond Stream Regional yES
1 Wet Pond Detention
Brief Description of System OperationTF.�r�o'�
1 Facility Related Site Limitations
Reference Facility Limitation
1
Part�[x=STRUCTI�P,Ai_�li�lAL�'SIS Part 1� EASENE�NTSff RAOTS
C_Cast m Place Vault Drainage Easement
1 Retaining Wall Access Easement
Rockery>4' High Native Growth Protection Easement
' Structural on Steep Slope Tract
Other Other
1 P_art 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site
' conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of
my knowledge the information provided here is accurate.
1 signed/Dale
1
1
1
1
v,
Q
ry
IW
_Z
Q
ry
GR
S
1
r
PROJECT
Sl TE
1
1
1
1
magwo
1 - -
1 SCALE: 1"=200'
vleldl
FIGURE 2
i
2.0 PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY
2.1 Core Requirements
➢ Core Requirement#1: Discharge at the Natural Location
The developed site consists primarily of one drainage basin. This basin generally
flows to the south. Stormwater will be picked up and routed in the same manner as in
the existing condition. The discharge point will be same in the developed condition
as in the existing condition. Both the site flow and the bypass line will.meet at an off-
site catch basin and enter the existing tightline conveyance system.
' Core Requirement#2: Off-Site Analysis
The Level 1 Analysis was performed and the results presented in Section 3.
➢ Core Requirement#3: Runoff Control
Flow control and water quality are provided per the 1990 KCSWDM by means of a
detention/wetvault. Upstream off-site runoff will bypass the site in a newly
constructed bypass tightline system.
Core Requirement#4: Conveyance System
The new pipe system is designed with sufficient capacity to convey the 25-year, 24-
hour peak flow using approved methods in the 1992 KCSWDM.
Core Requirement#5: Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control
Erosion and sediment controls are implemented as detailed in the King County
Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Standards.
➢ Core Requirement#6: Maintenance and Operation
On-site drainage facilities and the water quality treatment system will be privately
maintained.
' ➢ Core Requirement#7: Bonds and Liability
Financial requirements will be met prior to permit issuance.
W&HPaci is Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
Meattle11DatolProjectslRVA Land LL032272 Renton Village lOfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
3
- -
�R AVK.a0 LW�ti LSsW,>50�1 C
AVM7 3ydLs� s
J�,
_ ap 400
_
Y spa t [ee1:94 ueAaAiE
r ® i -Now�ryD 3" W"MgE,0ONtt
Age N �Noa /'' •� i�vNa
R
> 7.5 Zgl �S`"df 9Lt A
e* 10
� [� • A
Ov
�me"<OA tiN• Na iM'31pBN� GRAVEL0. I
1O1
• w 4W8M T0t� e ^ �P
' sm, �y-.'''p-ygP 9' 1G' lL V= SETBACK AREA
REC pS[
_ e
to
A A
p aR'
^
` ) ww
Q O PARIR
r r• w
\�
" }A N sT tts Rr I O
m , N89' 28'13'E
o I E
C
}P T t Q
1 pp RE�N0.l7OW7 M I m X
xae o-sRn . >4 N M ,
I
0
Ip'rplpp� u.sq $ a a
D
rn
" Iif�a m a {
In
D � p
�
ea Rn[ NPrz a-a¢T[ 9R AM MLPM1 N>IL 1SQf! § I I Pf I I O
UGHT TRANSME90N I IJNE EA4'l1ETlT 'F >"' D = P KMIG
RECORDING NOS D0613SB�]861.%0, 4 AND 72iO=1B __F _� ( E P� Al PARCEL —
4�R � �N89'281�E � mrnr D R m
es I m R r PA a
P -{
a¢n Ct—NO 3 Now-37-4 [ N89 '8" d// ,
16' AT
POWER �f-3 e \ ` A'3 P H A t T ; I
i >
N P 1
y.L+RtDRPR ,, C
P
+. F °FAbPA3t.
PARTIAL RE A
C t1 R z ?F 7S� EKHIRIT
\ y 1 t o G RECORCH C I�
/ � > 30•n �Q 9�� � "�a�;a��ey o.ab�xxe ea va,.R � P Kem
A
rn N i Isi
- 5 P
� 9
m a C�
' PO EA DEN
O RiC
REC.�N DO
B70 74 X
Ie[ � /�//�� To-9Ntr
,// P ING
4.4 tQj' m P ST
'11q, D
I` a WATER L&E EA-SENpNT-A TOMB H.E No B I Ac KNO�&
�i� N Ri lIP[IWIi !!fT[
m017
R (v+I
{Gcn 2BOI09E7 9 !
0 a DFiETED v
�4 ypp
' q� 12ATKINEGG
tir ✓ < �4 I ARr>aE R i > �� x
5g
>
I'�Le
In
LANDSCAPING
'!' ,S'MADE A1FR UNE F D
E30
REREPIACCE DING 1Y VITC WATER A
��y��p � O - •^� N0.909 �N�p!PET B$AV016+{C" �!!1B �� m
Cl�y41.0
•H C �N[
A
1V MI WA l Tuff E� FN(
DITOIYR RE NO..1103NI 6 J
EASEN�E0N1- TRA1tRFP�AnN�TuJt (
O E.1 I TM1[IRi'OII1wiIP'tblNtl1C}180I 4.
IB'L�10
ATtPp�� T;p. T a
r G
blam
DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY:
DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY
LAST EDIT: PLOT DATE: De 1s OS FIGURE 3.1 MW Monte Wits � _
kwoy
hbWtm
m
DATE BY REV REVISION CKD PRE-DEVELOPED SITE MAP
(we)aaE-rsos
RENTON WASHINGTW ' —
SCALE: PROJECT NO. DRAWING FILE NAME: A'®IN'N MFj"WW''a'^'>m 'Umdonw A[ehfbeb
1'=60' 1 32272—mtnvlll — redev
~— GO
I
- - 6
D
� N
I !J
cn 8
0
I —
...... ......
f i i i i i i i i byl fllt±
L L/
i
- --------- - -
i a)
A '
0
I
o
H SS3.
A9b
Q,
�. 4 6
OD
c�
cn 91
0 2001
a mo •�� m nrsrw
\ y vn
n �
L
a
0
� N ►�
o ,
-• tq
o I
V
DESIGNED BY.• CHECKED BY.,
DRAWN BY., APPROVED BY.,
LAST EDIT., PLOT DATE. 0012a os FIGURE 3.2 WO Mont* �Dom-amraswngtm
DATE BY REV REVISION CKD DEVELOPED SITE MAP
(YOJiN-MO/
RENTON WASHINGTON �'°mOOpm
SCALE: PROJECT NO. DRAWING FILE NAME:
1 m=60' 1 32272—RNTN14LLG—DEV
R.4 E. R.5 E. SEATTLE(CITY P.O.)io MI. 29011 6 MI. TO INTERSTATE 90 405 AkF (Joins sheet 5) AmC ISSAQUAN 12 MI.
tl cis:: ?:t' •~ , � -1- 1
Ma
3
N Ur
®II�I •� I• .� �1 - i 1
' 1
• � qgC
AAn
gD 4 1 +1
■ i = :BM • O I ♦ 9! ■• •a a
Athleti I ,■ 17�r1,`9f�
n Eiel d I l/ I Greenwood Ca
ubsta� BM x O I EvD -I
Be
•w •f1t_Oli EvC
.' U�D I` Cem i �I � An u
asebal?'i� iI --__ 'y.GRAVEL 'PIT
Park Pc �� BM
• gat
- ••Rh• r 111, ..
BeC• •- SC• D _C �AkF �� EvC
f. 71 I m �• AkF IJJ
t
WO
AgC B M 137 ^' AkF RI vL'�i
-- sta -- AmC
HE �` u - ^�6s AgD
' Substa AkF
AgC
•12G ' �°p AgD 20
M 76 9 t I n, (gC `.
c Z �: \i
I Ur
Jr I U7.1. -IAgD
--- _- — �1to — :.J 76 D
o U i p r • I AgC
, 0 R s rvoir p
Py So Tu wz
Pu m Sk I U
WO I
0 IBM
162 i20.3 AgC
PY
Sk
1 I /�/� `✓
T� InC= F X"1114 �o�iU�y so�l5
AgD
a So mill 17
jj
526p000m.ry• I
i•Li455. � f
71-
Ll
ay EM J' + tlki
_,�� III ' �•'•. •\'' :o e /�� = I� I � � '\l l
A', ate'.:•' .` O aseba11
Pi
ai1�. „!, mod_� �e�'. �T _ _ 17 , •- S�P
o, J ~ i •��r Sc, - v "moo �\ •• \\
P
=-—o--' QiN elf.
t 5258
--- —B 7j13 ————————
Golf C.tburse ;I 1 S �, ' tsbst\1 F •. • ��\•`\
$ � o � Fs ! ® pl fi,�__ %• �-��•,...a',.` of
ti ,a 30�,- ' ? Sewage \ dl /(�\\ 1'
Q o'�Oisposal
W
ilk
ti �� ;:.:III .• - .-•- ''• I ].r, o
?5251 i i ,' �; M 16
1 ILongacre$ .li i
4(IS I G' �L iiF� iiy mll - ! \1 1 •j l• n, t
Track i��I •1 11• rII i _
11 ti BM 29 I% i�I ---- �— --- — -- — u� BM o
I /
7 �^Reservoir oo
5256 Q=7,,-1• C s'll r w ._.,r �.
Z
- I
J i p _
25
12
Of
5255 II
h I �� i ��.� .. � � r �..�: ! ..•�`� ,. Ml�iaaPi• •',I. �• _ I�.II. �I�I /'•
i �Orillia
BM l
In 0) v l �� j l� ,.•
W i) )
:)n BindingX m
BSF-026-9 F = �R �� c
P A R I< N G
i •.
T i A L L ( S o Xr qP$
x1 ID� a� aJ •O
I I Z I z �,. ' s N D �m > >o� �d o
Q o o I 00 r. oti
O _
m o 0 m o d o rn - m ^�' o o ,8" Watbr LineCD —
I ► .J - ro cy, m p m in rr1 m r. Sy ` _ �1 „
K ! N C) c� ~o m O I M r - - 18"\�� .l .:,..Sanitary
G cy ( O 7 F_ m C� ii ))
A I R I' I Y1 Cj I D Y1 I .o t I i u OyJ 10' Wide
n
I o t'r1 j�O aD aoI r,,p Sanitary Sewer
�f�l/V0 TE ��2� I " ! ` x �F. °^e Easement - Auditor's
" File No. 6931804,
nt�dinq 140•I1 1 8708106375 - fi 1 r � s� �® (SEENoTf 7)
U/ TE E15HONE— I I ' j t ❑ --- \
P, - L � L
Zo 10 No arklnq +' n rnc+ - �
-4 � O
r%H A L T m
A S R. D . �`� +
ISTO
I I
O N 1 oya��m� �' a LI Lq SE ER P r s P. A R
S T A C r- ST6RWs r P A R N S T� s A I L L
O SEWE I
III 144.
CB - . s 12" ST0 M SEW R
m ,a m s !t I� STOPM 5a a I G R :A n
SE°+WEi2
oncreta YJaIk ` one. Waik
cB-N-89 56'26'=E - - _ �03.07 €we G onc- ur -
ROADVTAY EASEMENT RR, C. NO 90051E1048 r" ' wY ' s v1s _ ° s P H
}.� ,
kjWA'TER
oto�_ Lino (Approx.. ".Location),`. / - -• -" "' om m . I ' ` CONCRETE
( '. .�,� ;' / PINT A <o (s« NOTE 16 P 0 I N T "LINE EASEMENT REC. N0.
9005i50963 - ,r- -- r�i� 1 ❑r°-"
° cn
`\ CONCRETE /� s 37, w WALK
, PL
92.9 �°o�`J CONCRET -'ro Lam' Eir
0� �•y ' RAR4P o
° _o m
I m IW edit
—1.3 BALCONY �° / w9.3 0- ( C
c / " Water To OL ED]- wY rn Cr m� / `)
Flre So nkle[ I �yL wv o w� �g�`�\
o ^ a" DomesPlc _ cD_ ��`07 I`
v EXHIBIT "D"
REC. NOS. 8011070384, °p 2' n v !rrl.p tlo 8011070380 t 86i2311E36® 40�- ���< _ �
(SEE NOTE 10) - --- -
30' WIDE ROADWAY EASEMENT ^,GCv
OF y
RELEASE V"H Ut
" " 10 REC. NO. 9005161048 (SEE NOTE 10)
EXHI D - - - - - _
- - - - -I - - - OSa G \cc 404
n
Westor a Eu,,I'tent Relea )
se Rec, rd',n 900515 9 o Ia /�
74 o T , Q
m �
a`v��d
(ff
m a' m G) 0 z-
monoQ R ENT N i �. .� A �p� m� -- 1
m(Am�`c �bq=D x m rr, 2 U) n aro
o0)>>o D
-
lrorzm T H E A T R E , C� / D `Q
marn
r--!m _ a rr z7 = ,n �.
o'o z Dn(Di) CJr `n•. u m —
vmi� p D _ �� r N-, -
DZ 8 S C R E E N S W Z / {� x. / �r r
=+� FLOOD ZONE X ^ /
oz nr-, - --
6 o LOT I 11 3,2 g 4 S Q.i=T.± (SEE GENERAL NOTE 9) o L r :U N
f -M I c,
r _
m Cityof Renton Binding Site . C 2\ ;, -A 0
P1_AW N0. BSP- 026-90 °�° ' W `n CONC. CURB
.a. _ °
a _
w ay5 o I I 7' Planter
x
Concrete . - �. •
39.0 u' 1 Lp°rD�a�;�tt°a CID---� CONCRETE �• WALK
. . .
Power Easoment ��' / yin o'�ae y b °) POW
Ek
N T oG p0G p w ' Recording No.-~ „3►"od °� • V �
UVERHEAU I P AI- R
r /� (� IAPProx. hoc R 8708100374, m s
L — — — L
LINES o
i POWER NPP , o0
CONCRETE
1OVERHEAD I 1.' I I I I g t. Qj�j►
I R K '1 I N G 121' CONCRETE STORM SEWER I I G 0•,erhead Power Line ►'
13
ONCRETE `\��,`/r' g� 0udcrrYdd�� Spells �9 W POWER
Quarry
CURQB
3C� GUi�7CxT" C��O�iO HEAD
�G4�"oL�°� So v O
POWER LIMES � C
OVFRHEAO �C18cJ�j��� � N 89' 49' 09" W
NO NOS. 790921072.1 & 5686245 �, ��,�
• '2 44.72
-- ---
W °jEh D 231.16 - - SWPP
82• __w___ •
POWER nvcauGen POWER te)-1 v._ r• _ �Dvv" ��`���/'( /�t�l/
' \ ' Nocmi \ Uruc� v --` — _ _ juu�i50963 — - - u
r v m m L= POINT '� _ - -_ _ �_ 1 m m
Co. o' -Storm c Q yn0o m Z m _ — < \ . G. CONCRETE p ,a. ° n CR a- �❑�m ❑ o
p v ��G p W m !=1 ��a0 3' / 3�, W WALK � o rt
N n r �4ZSorf (f1 o y m=o-I -;� \ o C)ir, R MP -- --_-- PL 0ya ,
Ek
" r -----
L 3 y O �.1���3 o Z �� in O m=ti o C�\ BENcN �_ _J�4 —. .q CONCRETE
`, To G G� �1 s -o o = -� m0.
91.9 m
'n90�NO1i' �� v O m �❑ �� \\ 9.3` / ��/ B A L C , , --` l$.4 � RAMP I r� zQ A �o
- � ^-e r� � o �l w �� o y� v 1 - _ _ — 0NY _ �o) Iv o
O `O 2 i W m D . I w "'. 9.3_ i PVC ° n c) ^i o
° r^ff a - c> a r 2 5 ` cult iy�.
p v N�`1 t^2 c O a ti -i P. o o �� c o
CT c N -D mym v, a V. P. ra o/ " Water Tov o� w o.0
°\ m r r 9 00 00 A^0 7D r r r- V I o
Z r �u)cn��{O >v o—�_. r m Z m S — — — — — O�''j , Flre S Inkle[ 1 ❑O❑- wv cn o 0
c Z ca z m -4 - — r' ° W v cn 'v cD
f y�Z3N o Cn�om 1 - --/ - - - - - - - - - 4.'' Dom �L
`���1N9 \ �� •.r -iNm N \�+ e� _ �� EXHIBIT "D." Woto� _I �- w
y�� �- � O o ^'gym .p (p \ O, �, REC. NOS. B011070384.
� • C . co 3z'03 I 40.8 , / SolIO70388 & 8GI2311880 v Irrl lion �I
_ 40.
a�� a \ (P d : wZ — - RELEASE " OF 1 WEE NOTE 10)
�%�N o \\ 30' WIDE ROADWAY EASEMENT
EXHI "p" 10- ry DC
<-'- - - - - - - - _ _ _I _ _1 REC,-NO_9005161048 (SEENOTE o1! y! vQ°It 2
�U,u'Q}4}p°`},� En;; r:ent Relealse Recording No. 900515096 - - - - - p` - tr - t
3' C �= 12-3
so 9t%N sd0 ti C
mC� �ODOr? 1 = m s -
RENTON >� m m�D C
v ❑ Picnic (-� Z r' G1r= m' -1�_. C I N� _ 2' m 3c� o�
Tables D �� zm�Co== E Gl"'C �z� mD z z— °
Z o Do = r mO -11 o
0 (n�\1 �T O � �o C� -1 N D z m 1 H E A T ►v z �"`° z � C, -rria m z.
m�
Is, �F�y �0 G� omZ F C) ON->> R E � om m m _ Z
Y ti C �40 AFT I l Gl m O o -q K < m rT1-<<rl d\ Cn L
�j �O z J a c n o D Corr,CD f (11 N 01 �. In D D
�` S rT1 -0 —I— n c�� om m z
/ FRy� o -E _D m�� �`� zizi� S S C R E E N S �K . ----�� .
0 go m
�=m / v�i o - c FLOOD ZONE X
`Ir'Dcnrn- C� ° �° / / L OT ! � 113,294 SQ.f T.+ � (SEE GENERAL NOTE 9)
Ccac. Prt zDDo NZ(a 35.3 r D
tr
� •.• / `• O /�/ ur , m,�jyGzmo Oh,�. .� coo ; o v "' City of Re;tlton Bind t� { y / o _� - ---.
c 4 oo DD3o ��`� S I 1 e 35.3 z
/� . n~Tcnc 1.7 r-4�Z-I 1.0 _� a� PLAN -N0. BSP- 026-90 ti -0 " -7 N I
' sjo _ o�F�°•CD°rD-��m
ci
-rrr 39.0 w / � yconcrete I 3
�Fo P 4 39.0 Z
' O I A R K "I C , S' P — _ a. CONCRETE WALK 006.9o�°boa �,. `
N /y�, - fseeL00� (SEf N07f ll) goboot�d���_
CONC I s s ' T p Pr) G"NER�ON� �H A T I IAP(r/WE Record nQsNoont �tt�/' ,� a wY'���'6 0o w
4 S E MEN tiL
- RETE cuR5 ' L ' .Clr g OTt 91 �` ' ' ' P. I �oc.1R 870Q100374.
CONCRETE ? l '
_ 0 0 � �'W� Cpp$ Quarry l I • 1 IOVERHEaD . I I: 1 1 •`. 1 PGWER LINES OVERHEAD
P I-'A I R K I i '. I J wPP m
00 �p8 p Pv,' tc IlCB .flg T A LIL S I , G 1121' CONCRETE STORhq W o
3W1 DRAIN �� I SEWER I / g ao
i 0
I� °o° D F� 1"V A �s I• : 1 1 l I D 1 T C 4.e�d P o�i� i 7 i
Qp E r1�. CONCRETE
0 0 0 . -CURB 0.
�j. / 2 �d0 0 OrryO O o• d i / y,M p Q No*
Poll., p Epp QoUOOr�r�yr'� $P 15 � C -Spoils
SPallr - f�� � � L�'.� •_ o -oY,NoWQ��'oo��atib�og°o�'� �� Ouvrry S alls
O O-, COVeye
E __ .. R ALINE
_ OVERHEAD
' 8S m a� - RECORDING NOS. 7905210721 & 5686245
N 89-
g400$ �� (v:SG - N 89'54'45'. ' av AD 49. 09" W I
19 �a 00e o — 231.16 S 83' 23' 09" w 44.72 �
y SS' 'IG /! ` E'OhFR �V?P
TO �o OVERHEAD PDWER 82.06
S� S10 T`' ST c. CHAIN LINK FENCE Wood Llgh ?
46 OF 4 rF l�, -
'�� 8,o84syN/Gyw � ' STATE __ j N0 . N0. 8708140475
-
4 A 4 y- _ of WASHINGTON
' 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS
' 3.1 Upstream Drainage Analysis
The upstream basin to the Renton Village Site is not well defined. City of Renton maps
' were not able to clearly delineate tributary basins. It appears there is runoff from a
portion of South Grady Way to the north, and possible runoff from existing asphalt
parking to the west of the site. There also appears to be off-site flow from adjacent
' asphalt parking to the east as well. This upstream runoff is routed through a 12-inch
bypass pipe which later becomes an 18-inch pipe through the middle of the Renton
Village site and flows to the south and connects to an existing catch basin in the adjacent
property. Figure 3.1 —Existing Conditions, Figure 6—Downstream Map and Figure 5—
USGS Topographic Map.
' 3.2 Downstream Drainage Analysis
A Level 1 downstream analysis was performed for this site. Existing ALTA survey maps
' were analyzed and a field inspection was performed to verify the downstream
conveyance system. (See Figure 6). The downstream analysis began approximately 30
feet to the south of the site property line, where the 18-inch on-site bypass pipe connects
' to an existing manhole. In addition to the 18-inch bypass pipe inlet, two 8-inch pipe
inlets, a 15-inch pipe inlet, and an 18-inch outlet pipe tie into the manhole.
' The stormwater continues to flow south in a 100-foot long, 18-inch diameter pipe until
reaching another manhole. The pipe then becomes a 24-inch for 15 feet and reaches
another manhole before flowing 45 feet east in a 36-inch pipe. The pipe flows south for
' 220 feet before reaching an oil/water separator. From the oil/water separator, the 36-inch
pipe continues south for an additional 60 feet before discharging into an existing ditch.
The stormwater then flows 460 feet in a drainage ditch before entering a 48-inch concrete
culvert which continues west to the I-405 interchange.
' No major capacity or erosion problems were evident during the investigation. However,
the City of Renton stormwater department has observed capacity problems and flooding
on the Renton Village site
' W&HPacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IlseattlehDatalProjectsWA Land LLCI32272 Renton VillageDfficelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
' 4
' 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
4.1 Existing Site Hydrology
' The site currently consists of three lots: C2, C3, and C4. To the east of the site exists a
retail building, a McDonald's restaurant, and a Thriftway store. South Grady Way
bounds the site to the north and provides access to the site. Lake Street bounds the site to
' the west. To the south is an existing asphalt parking and a Cinema. The site is
undeveloped with mounds of soil and exposed dirt cover, with small amounts of
landscaping and asphalt impervious areas. Soils on the site consist primarily of Urban
' Land (Ur) which is fill soil. See the Geotechnical Report found in Section 6 for more
information on site soils. See Figure 4 for the Soil Survey Map.
' A portion of the site to the northwest lies within the FEMA 100-year floodplain. It is
reported by the City of Renton that there is existing flooding on the Renton Village
property due to the presence of the FEMA 100-year floodplain and insufficient
' conveyance capacity in existing storm systems on the Renton Village Shopping center
area.
' The existing site consists of one main drainage basin (See Figure 3.1, Existing
Conditions Map). The total site area is approximately 4.57 acres. The specific basin
delineation is found later in this Section.
4.2 Developed Site Hydrology
The proposed development will include a total of four buildings with associated drive
aisles, parking and landscape. These buildings consist of a Wells Fargo bank, an
' Applebee's restaurant, a Discount Tire store, and an unknown retail store to be named
later. The existing stormwater bypass system which runs through the site will be
replaced by a new layout which will flow around the western perimeter of the site, with
' another line wrapping around the southeast corner of the site.
All drainage facilities and water quality treatment facilities were designed to a complete
build-out condition, and designed per the 1990 KCSWDM. The proposed development
will consist of asphalt parking, drive aisles, buildings, and landscaping throughout the
entire site. (See Figure 3.2, Developed Conditions Map).
' 4.3 Hydrologic Analysis
' The hydrologic analysis was performed using WaterWorks software. Soils in the area are
mapped as Urban Land (Ur) based on the SCS classification system as shown in the King
County Soils Map (see Figure 3). The assumed soil conditions for this site are assumed
' to be Hydrologic Soil Group Type "C" soils. The associated curve numbers are found in
this section.
' W&H Pacific,Inc. 77R_Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IISeattleI DatalProjectslRVA Land LLC132272 Renton Village lDfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
' 5
1
' 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
' The above analysis was used for detention and water quality sizing. The standard
Rational Method was used for conveyance sizing, since the drainage basin is less than 25
' acres in size.
4.4 Retention/Detention System
The design storm for all hydrograph analyses is a 24-hour duration, standard SBUH Type
IA rainfall distribution resolved to 10-minute time intervals. Stormshed software was
' used in the hydrologic analysis of this project.
The detention vaults and associated control structures were sized using the following
' criteria:
Inflow Hydrograph Release Rate
' 2-year/24-hour developed flow 2-year/24-hour existing flow
10-year/24-hour developed flow 10-yr/24-hour existing flow
100-year/24-hour developed flow 100-yr/24-hour existing flow
' Based on soils information, the stormwater detention analysis uses hydrologic group "C"
soils for the existing and proposed conditions. The existing and developed curve
' numbers were selected from the SCS methodology and are listed next to the
corresponding land condition. The SCS Curve Number chart is included in the
Appendix.
' The drainage basin is 4.57 acres in size. The existing basin consists of both gravel
parking and an asphalt section currently used for parking. Basin information for existing
' and developed conditions is found below:
Existing Condition Area(acres) CN
' Gravel Parking 1.89 89
Asphalt 2.19 98
' Landscape 0.49 86
' Developed Condition Area (acres) CN
Landscape 0.74 86
Asphalt 3.83 98
' The pre-developed peak rates for the target storms are:
' 2-year: 1.33 cfs
10-year: 2.25 cfs
' W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IlSeattlel0ataWrojectslRVA Land LL032272 Renton VillagelOfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
' 6
' 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
' 100-year: 3.28 cfs
The developed flow rates are:
' 2-year: 1.73 cfs
10-year: 2.69 cfs
' 100-year: 3.75 cfs
A detention vault and a three orifice control structure are proposed for runoff control.
' The vault discharges are as follows:
2-year out: 1.33 cfs Orifice 1 Dia. = 5.79 in.
' 10-year out: 2.25 cfs Orifice 2 Dia. =4.17 in. El. =2.15 ft.
100-year out: 3.28 cfs Orifice 3 Dia. = 4.20 in. El. = 3.50 ft.
Live Storage Depth= 5.23 ft.
' Per the 1990 KCSWDM, a 30% correction factor is required to be applied to the 100-year
storage volume. The Stormshed detention output and control structure information are
' included in this section of the report.
Active storage volume required(pre correction factor) => 2470 cf
' Active storage volume provided(post correction factor) => 3211 cf
Compensatory Storage
' The site lies within the FEMA 100-year floodplain. Since areas within this floodplain
will be filled to meet building requirements, additional capacity will be provided for on-
site compensatory storage. This storage is required for all areas of the FEMA 100-year
floodplain which are filled in the developed condition. Earthwork Services Inc.
performed the flood storage capacity analysis on August 4, 2005. The output is found in
this section of the report. They determined the following:
' Existing flood storage capacity of the site => 1,832 cubic yards
Developed flood storage capacity of the site => 912 cubic yards
' Therefore, the amount of on-site compensatory storage required is 1,832 cy - 912 cy =
920 cubic yards, or 24,840 cubic feet, of storage.
After adding the required detention volume to the required on-site compensatory storage,
the total on-site storage required is 3211 cf+24,840 cf=28,051 cubic feet.
' Storage is provided by means of a detention vault and conveyance pipe throughout the
site. The detention vault measures 40 feet by 135 feet with a live depth of 5.23 feet. This
' W&H Pacific,Inc. 77R Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
I&attlelDoto ProjectslRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton Village lOfceIWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
7
' 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
results in storage of 28,242 cubic feet after the reduction for the middle wall in the vault.
Conveyance pipe on the site which will be surcharged during extreme events accounts for
an additional 1,080 cubic feet of on-site compensatory storage.
' Total on-site storage required=>28,051 cf
Total on-site storage provided =>28,242 cf OK
Water Quality Analysis
' Since the proposed project contains more than 1 acre of new impervious surface subject
to vehicular use, water quality is required. A concrete detention/wetvault is proposed to
meet this requirement due to site constraints preventing use of a wetpond. The wetvault
' was,sized per the 1990 KCSWDM. The water quality basin is as follows:
Water Quality Basin: B-WQ (4.57 ac total)
' Landscape 0.74 ac CN=86
Impervious 3.83 ac CN=98
' The total precipitation used was 1/3 of the 2-year, 24-hour total precipitation. The
StormShed input and output are included in this section. The resulting water flow and
associated volume are as follows:
' Water Quality Flow=> 0.34 cfs
' Water Quality Volume Required => 5,742 cf
Water Quality Volume Provided => 7,699 cf OK
The wetvault was designed in accordance with the 1990 KCSWDM. One foot of
sediment storage was provided for the wetvault portion of the combined
dentention/wetvault.
1
' W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IlSeattlellDataTrojectslRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton VillagelOfficelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
8
Creative Solutions...Superior Service
PACIFIC
3350 Monte Villa Parkway (425)951-4800 -Planning •Surveying
Bothell,Washington 98021 Fax(425)951-4808 -Engineering *Landscape Design
A/TO v/Zt
---------- -----------
T
I_A
4-4-4-
4-
T
t
z
-4- 1
Z-6
Z_ 7- C
4
f
F_
7A
----------
i 4
4
OF cSITC
57 A4- V4 C4
t
-Z'
A-
-4-
4
J r z r �
C_6^JPV-716 A45
�-4
A-1
7
-7
>
J
A"
7-
41 4 i.
4_1
L-1.
i.
T_4
T
_4
tr
-7-*
70"T-Z
7U XN3,
A
L
4-r
if
+
T
T
77
4 :
i
if
+
-t t
_ �_. } t.. t. - f..�.- ..�. .i A' 4 1 im- il A_
�T 1 r q-
_4 _4
1 4
Project: Date: Sheet No. of
Prepared by: Checked by: Job No:
Y
1
Renton Village
' CAW
9-23-05
PREDEV Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype
Event
1 ----- (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss
PREDEV 1.33 8.00 0.5003 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
PREDEV 2.25 8.00 0.8217 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 10 yr
PREDEV 3.28 8.00 1.1888 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100
yr
Drainage Area: PREDEV
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 4.5700 ac 92.99 0.20 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 4.5700 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
' gravel 89.00 1.8900 ac
PERVIOUS 86.00 0.4900 ac
asphalt 98.00 2.1900 ac
' Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Sheet SHEET 110.00 ft 0.10% 0.0110 5.48 min
Shallow None Entered 70.00 ft 0.70% 13.0000 1.07 min
1 Shallow None Entered 65.00 ft 0.80% 13.0000 0.93 min
Shallow None Entered 15.00 ft 10.00% 13.0000 0.06 min
Channel None Entered 490.00 ft 0.70% 21.0000 4.65 min
DEV Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype
Event
- - (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss
' DEV 1.73 8.00 0.6016 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
DEV 2.69 8.00 0.9367 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 10 yr
DEV 3.75 8.00 1.3127 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100
yr
' Drainage Area: DEV
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor. 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 4.5700 ac 96.06 0.16 hrs
1 Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 4.5700 ac 1 i
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
' LANDSCAPE 86.00 0.7400 ac
IMPERVIOUS 98.00 3.8300 ac
�2-
Cemp'�N5�7a Y
Renton Village
CAW
10-5-05
PREDEV Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype
_--_ Event
(cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss
PREDEV 1.33 8.00 0.5003 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
PREDEV 2.25 8.00 0.8217 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 10 yr
PREDEV 3.28 8.00 1.1888 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100
yr
Drainage Area: PREDEV
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
' Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min
Area CN TC
' Pervious 4.5700 ac 92.99 0.20 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 4.5700 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
gravel 89.00 1.8900 ac
PERVIOUS 86.00 0.4900 ac
asphalt 98.00 2.1900 ac
' Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Sheet SHEET 110.00 ft 0.10% 0.0110 5.48 min
Shallow None Entered 70.00 ft 0.70% 13.0000 1.07 min
' Shallow None Entered 65.00 ft 0.80% 13.0000 0.93 min
Shallow None Entered 15.00 ft 10.00% 13.0000 0.06 min
Channel None Entered 490.00 ft 0.70% 21.0000 4.65 min
' DEV Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype
Event
(cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss
DEV 1.73 8.00 0.6016 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
DEV 2.69 8.00 0.9367 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 10 yr
DEV 3.75 8.00 1.3127 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100
yr
Drainage Area: DEV
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
' Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min
Area CN TC
' Pervious 4.5700 ac 96.06 0.16 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 4.5700 ac
Supporting Data:
' Pervious CN Data:
LANDSCAPE 86.00 0.7400 ac
IMPERVIOUS 98.00 3.8300 ac
Pervious TC Data:
' Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Sheet None Entered 25.00 ft 2.00% 0.0110 0.49 min
Shallow None Entered 40.00 ft 2.00% 27.0000 0.17 min
Channel PIPE 558.00 ft 0.50% 21.0000 6.26 min
Channel PIPE 183.00 ft 0.30% 21.0000 2.65 min
Node ID: N-001
Desc: VAULT
Start El: 100.0000 ft Max El: 105.2300 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Length Width Void Ratio
13.0000 ft 40.0000 ft 100.00
Control Structure ID: MULTIPLE ORIFICE - Multiple Orifice Structure
Descrip: Multiple Orifice
Start El Max El Increment
100.0000 ft 105.2300 ft 0.10
Orif Coeff: 0.62 Bottom El: 100.00 ft
Lowest Diam: 5.7900 in
out to 2nd: 2A 500 ft Diam: 4.1700 in
2nd to 3rd: 1.3500 ft Diam: 4.2000 in
Node ID: RLP2
' Desc: Manhole structure
Start El: 100.0000 ft Max El: 105.2300 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Storage Id: N-001 Discharge Id: MULTIPLE ORIFICE
' RLPCOMPUTE [RLP2] SUMMARY
2 yr Match Q: 1.3297 cfs Peak Out Q: 1.3304 cfs-Peak Stg: 102.14 ft-Active Vol:
1112.27 cf
10 yr Match Q: 2.2488 cfs Peak Out Q: 2.2489 cfs-Peak Stg: 103.50 ft-Active Vol:
' 1818.56 cf
100 yr Match Q: 3.2797 cfs Peak Out Q: 3.2788 cfs-Peak Stg: 104.75 ft-Active Vol:
2470.04 cf
Earthwork Services Inc.
' Phone: (360)533-2007 270 Lund Road www.earthworkservices.com
Cosmopolis, WA 98537
FAX: (360)533-1618 earthwork@earthworkservices.com
'
August 4, 2005 Earthwork Services Job# 13289
Jay Decker
W&H Pacific
3350 Monte Villa Parkway
Bothell, WA 98021
RE: Renton Village
' Dear Jay,
Enclosed please find grid elevation, cut/fill graphics and volumes for this project, which was
' calculated using the average end area method and the following assumptions:
1. No stripping was applied to the existing terrain.
' 2. A depth of 6" from design elevations to subgrade in the paving.
3. A depth of 4" from design elevations to subgrade in the landscaping.
4. A depth of 8" from finish floor elevations to subgrade in the buildings.
5. The vault pit was off site 3' out from the bottom of the vault and sloped at a 1:1 grade to day
light.
' 6. The flood storage capacity of the site as is: 1,832 CU Y
7. The flood storage capacity of the site as designed: 912 CU Y
' TOTAL RAW VOLUMES 1N PLACE
(Volumes are in Cubic Yards)
Region Area 0) Cut Volume Fill Volume
' Excavate the Vault pit 8,980 3,336
Back/fill vault, grade site to design subgrade 179,240 4,487 1,832
Totals 7,823 1,832
' Please call after you have reviewed this information if you have any questions.
t *Raw volumes have not been adjusted to reflect shrink or swell for compaction and expansion and
are volumetric areas only.
1
' planners
r ( surveyors
engineers
landscape architects
1E6A17V1J v r/
iGL4"Ge-
T)67 ve"P45D FI�IAJ CoNs�s rs OF 777"46T 7gAZ�U.57 Cz, c C9/-
S � ,
P3 � Cry= qs 16 Y/- 2.
Tara-, y.5 C, ,1
ra7
Sf �GLGf Cy 2X,
z-YnZ, P651411-- Cis
' /eV-1K Ax a 3.99 Gt's
D._3(1 cis WQ +Z0C. -7�VZ CF
I_
f _
_
{
1 Project MNTI'/ 41144t-6-c' Subject 4:�c4r?4 Sheet No. of
Job No. 3 Z 0 72 Prepared by III AVJ Date 9 D Checked by Date
' Renton Village Water Quality StormShed Output
CAW
' 9-8-05
B-WQ Event Summary:
' BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype
Event
------- (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss
B-WQ 1.82 7.83 0.6017 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 2 yr
' B-WQ 2.85 7.83 0.9368 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 10 yr
B-WQ 3.99 7.83 1.3129 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100
yr
B-WQ 0.36 8.00 0.1318 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA wq
Drainage Area: B-WQ
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
' Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 4.5700 ac 96.06 0.07 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 4.5700 ac
Supporting Data:
' Pervious CN Data:
impervious asphalt 98.00 3.8300 ac
landscape 86.00 0.7400 ac
Pervious TC Data:
' Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Sheet sheet 25.00 ft 2.00% 0.0110 0.51 min
Shallow shallow 40.00 ft 2.00% 27.0000 0.17 min
' Channel pipe 558.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 3.13 min
Channel pipe 116.00 ft 1.40% 42.0000 0.39 min
1
' 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
' 5.0 Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design
' The proposed development will re-route the existing bypass conveyance which currently
runs through the middle of the site and discharges to the south. The new bypass
conveyance system will consist of a line running along the west perimeter and an
' additional line running along the southeast, both discharging into the same storm drain
manhole to the south of the site.
' 5.1 Roof Downspout System
The building downspouts will be directed to the new conveyance system for the site and
' will be sent to the detention/wetvault.
' 5.2 Proposed On-site Conveyance System
The project conveyance system is a conventional storm drainage collection system that
' will collect runoff from the entire site, including asphalt, roof areas, and landscaping via
catch basins and pipes. Two separate conveyance systems are proposed for the site,
consisting of standard 12-inch storm pipe laid at a minimum 0.5% slope. Both systems
' will route the water to the detention/wetvault for flow control and water quality
treatment. The vault outlet pipe is 18-inch pipe laid at 1.4% slope, which will convey the
100-year developed flow.
' Proposed conveyance systems are normally checked to review the 100-year event
performance. However, the site lies within a FEMA 100-year floodplain. The floodplain
' elevation is at 27.6 feet. Thus, the entire conveyance system will be surcharged during
the 100-year event. A 25-year backwater analysis was performed and the system
maintained a 0.5' of freeboard.
' The new pipe system is designed with sufficient capacity to convey the 25-year, 24-hour
peak flow using approved methods in the 1990 KCSWDM.
' Z
Al
' W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
Ueattle11DatalProjeclslRVA Land LLCi32272 Renton VillagelOfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
' 9
CONVEYANCE ANALYSIS WORK SHEET (100 YEAR)
' DESIGN STORM 100.00 YEAR KING COUNTY ISOPLUVIAL
DATE 9/7/2o05 100 Year,Pr- 3.800 inches(From King Co.Manual)
DESIGNER CAW JOB NO. 32272
PROJECT RENTON VILLAGE
LOCATION SW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SEC: 11 TAT. 24 N RANGE: 05 E
' NW 1/4 OF SW 1/4 OF SEC: 1 I TWP: 24 N RANGE: 05 E
CONT. CONTRIB CONT. Method INTENSITY DESIGN PIPE PIPE PIPE PIPE PIPE VELOCITY DESIGN TIME IN [UPPER STRUCTURE] Depth COVER
LOCATE BRANCH AREA RUNOFF BRANCH SUM TIME i I FLOW MAT SIZE SLOPE LENGTH CAPACITY FULL Q/Q( VELOCITY PIPE INVERT ELEVATION IE to GE OVER
FROM TO CB# ACRES (C) (CA) (CA) (MIN) UNIT IN/HR CFS (III (FT/FT) (FT) (CFS) (FPS) (FPS) (MIN) in Drop out G.E. TOP/PIPE
NORTH BRANCH TO VAULT
CB 1 CB2 0.17 0.90 0.15 Rational 0.0 0.82 3.11 0.5 P 8 0.0051 85 0.9 2.7 0.51 2.2 0.63 24.35 0.00 24.35 26.50 2.15 1.33
CB2 CB4 CB3 0.00 0.90 0.14 0.29 Rational 0.6 0.82 3.11 0.9 P 12 0.0052 67 2.8 3.6 0.32 2.6 0.43 23.92 0.00 23.92 27.50 3.58 2.43
CB4 CB5 0.22 0.90 0.49 Rational 1.1 0.82 3.11 1.5 P 12 0.0050 60 2.7 3.5 0.56 3.0 0.33 23.57 0.00 23.57 26.70 3.13 1.98
CB5 CB6 0.17 0.90 0.64 Rational 1.4 0.82 3.11 2.0 P 12 0.0049 65 2.7 3.5 0.74 3.3 0.33 23.27 0.00 23.27 26.70 3.43 2.28
' CB6 CB8 CB7 0.12 0.90 0.10 0.85 Rational 1.7 0.82 3.11 2.6 P 12 0.0048 60 2.7 3.4 0.98 3.5 0.28 22.95 0.00 22.95 26.80 3.85 2.70
CB8 CB9 WEST 0.26 0.90 0.35 1.43 Rational 2.0 0.82 3.11 4.4 P 12 0.0050 135 2.7 3.5 1.63 3.6 0.62 22.66 1.51 21.15 26.50 3.84 4.20
CB9 IVAULT 0.21 0.90 1.61 Rational 2.6 0.82 3.11 5.0 P 12 0.0050 29 2.7 3.5 1.84 3.7 0.13 20.48 0.00 20.48 26.50 6.02 4.87
VAULT 1 20.34
Branch Total CA 1.37
WEST BRANCH
' CB 11 CB 12 0.15 0.90 0.14 Rational 0.0 0.82 3.11 0.4 P 8 0.0051 92 0.9 2.7 0.45 2.1 0.73 23.40 0.00 23.40 27.00 3.60 2.78
CB 12 CB13 0.13 0.90 0.25 Rational 0.7 0.82 3.11 0.8 P 12 0.0049 82 2.7 3.4 0.29 2.4 0.58 22.93 0.00 22.93 27.60 4.07 2.92
CB13 CB8 0.22 0.90 0.45 Rational 1.3 0.82 3.11 1.4 P 12 0.0046 82 2.6 3.4 0.53 2.8 0.49 2'7.53 0.00 22.53 26.60 4.07 2.92
CB8 22.1
' Branch Total CA 0.35 -
CB3
CB3 CB2 0.20 0.90 0.18 Rational 0.0 0.82 3.11 0.6 P 8 0.0051 35 0.9 2.7 0.60 2.3 0.25 24.10 0.00 24.10 27.00 2.90 2.08
CB2 _ 2 i.92 _
Branch Total CA 0.14
CB7 - - -
' CB7 CB6 0.14 0.90 0.13 Rational 0.0 0.82 3.11 0.4 P 8 0.0051 93 0.9 2.7 0.42 2A 0.74 25.00 0.00 25.00 27.00 2.00 1.18
CB6 24.53
Branch Total CA 0.10
' SOUTHWEST BRANCH TO VAULT
CB14 CB15 0.13 0,90 0.12 Rational 0.0 0.82 3.11 0.7 P 8 0.0051 65 0.9 2.7 0.76 2.6 0.42 23.33 0.00 23.33 27.00 3.67 2.85
CB15 CB16 0.07 0.90 0.18 Rational 0A 0.82 3.11 0.7 P 12 0.0049 53 2.7 3.4 0.26 2.4 0.37 2?.00 0.00 23.00 26.80 3.80 2.65
CB16 CB17 0.14 0.90 0.31 Rational 0.8 0.82 3.11 1.0 P 12 0.0050 160 2.7 3.5 0.35 2.5 1.05 2z.74 1 0.00 22.74 26.80 4.06 2.91
' CB17 CB18 0.16 0.90 0.45 Rational 1.8 -0.82 3.11 1.4 P 12 0.0049 95 2.7 3.5 0.51 2.9 0.54 21.94 0.00 21.94 26.50 4.56 3.41
CB18 CB19 0.13 0.90 0.57 Rational 2A 0.82 3.11 1.8 P 12 0.0051 72 2.8 3.5 0.64 3.2 0.38 21.47 0.00 21.47 26.50 5.03 3.88
CB19 CB20 0.10 0.90 0.66 Rational 2.8 0.82 3.11 2.0 P 12 0.0070 60 3.2 4.1 0.63 3.7 0.27 2,.10 0.00 1 21.10 26.50 5.40 4.25
CB20 VAULT 0.21 1 0.90 0.85 Rational 3.0 0.82 3.11 2.6 P 12 0.0123 13 4.3 5.5 0.61 4.9 0.04 2).68 ::EO::O:T 20.68 26.50 5.82 4.67
' VAULT - -- -- - - -------- --- - -c�-- --- - -- ----
Branch Total CA 0.65
' VAULT TO OFFSITE
VAULT CB21 N&SW 0.00 0.90 2.02 2.02 Rational 0.0 0.82 3.11 6.3 P 18 0.0001 126 1.0 0.6 6.19 0.6 3.48 19.90 0.00 19.90 26.50 6.60 4.95
CB21 EXCB1 0.00 0.90 2.02 Rational 3.5 0.82 3.11 6.3 P 18 0.0060 15 8.8 5.0 0.71 4.7 0.05 19.89 0.00 19.89 25.93 6.04 4.39
EX CB 1 EX CB2 0.00 0.90 2.02 Rational 3.5 0.82 3.11 6.3 P 24 0.0001 106 2.4 0.8 2.64 0.8 2.22 1.1.80 0.00 19.80 26.40 6.60 j 4.45
' EX CB2 EX CB3 0.00 0.90 2.02 Rational 5.7 0.82 3.11 6.3 P 36 0.0014 14 27.4 3.9 0.23 2.5 0.09 19.79 0.00 19.79 25.93 6.14 2.99
EX CB3 EX CB4 0.00 0.90 2.02 Rational 5.8 0.82 3.11 6.3 P 36 0.0014 50 27.1 3.8 0.23 2.5 0.33 19.77 0.00 19.77 25.93 6.16 3.01
EX CB4 O/W SEP 0.00 0.90 2.02 Rational 6.2 0.82 3.11 6.3 P 36 0.0011 194 23.8 3.4 0.26 2.3 1.39 19.70 0.00 19.70 25.93 6.23 3.08
O/W SEP OUTLET 0.00 1 0.90 2.02 Rational 7.6 0.73 2.77 5.6 P 36 0.0001 74 8.4 1.2 0.67 1.1 1.13 19.49 0.20 19.29 25.93 6.44 3.49
OUTLET I19.28
ConveyQ
' BACKWATER ANALYSIS WORK SHEET(25 YEAR)
Project RENTON VILLAGE
DateSep-0 DESIGN STORM 100.000 YEAR KING COUNTY ISOPLUVIAL Is the Outlet pipe Submerged!
Designer CAW DATE 9/7/2005 100 Year,Pr- 3.800 inches(From King Co.Manual) If Yes TW Elev.=Water Surface Elev.
' DESIGNER CAW JOB NO. 32272 o ev.= c 2+Invert E ev
PROJECT RENTON VILLAGE
I 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10) (11 12 ]3 14 15 1 1 18 st. 19 20 21) (22
acre Barr nter nter tut ut et ut et Ei et In et Appr en unction unction W.L.Depth Depth
P-pe Q Ptpe Pipe "n ut et hnTetacre e. Vel TW Fnctn H Hea ea Cv v e ea ross Hea a ow A ove
egment 100 n evavon evavon ea Q/A Hea ev Loss ev a ss o- ep ev Dep --ET-ev ea ss F ow Loss E ev .E. rown onvo Q/AD .5 Inlet Hw
to c s ) m ) s ps s c s
' NORTH BRANCH TO VAULT
1.67 0.55
1.15 0.53
2.54 0.66
1.14
3.35 0.78
5.65 1.94
VAULI
CB11 CB12 0.4 92 8 0.012 22.15 23.40 0.349 1.20 0.02 23.73 0.09 23.82 0.5 0.01 0.02 0.03 23.85 0.5 23.93 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.93 3.07 -0.13 INLET CORRECTED 1.47 0.53
CB12 CB13 0.8 82 12 0.012 22.93 22.93 0.785 1.00 0.02 23.68 0.03 23.71 0.5 0.01 0.02 0.02 23.74 0.52 23.45 0.02 0.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 23.73 .27 -0.20 OUTLET CORRECTED 1.00 0.52
' CB13 CB8 1.4 82 12 0.012 22,53 22.53 0.785 1.78 0.05 23.28 0.11 23.39 0.5 0.03 0.05 0.08 23.46 0.58 23.11 0.02 0.52 0.01 0.00 0.00 23.45 3.15 -0.08 OUTLET CORRECTED 1.78 0.58
CB8 23.11
CB3
24.42
CB7 . 1.38 0.53
CBTT--rBT5-- 0.7 65 8 0.012 23.33 23.33 -672rg- 23.91 -YF9---2TTG----F5----O�-TUTU6---C. --7T2T--T-60---=9�---U-OT--TU2F----TTU-----M 0.00 24.20 - 2.80 0.2G--DUTEET--rORRECTET3- 2.49 0.60
' . _ _ 1. 0.53
� 1.7878 0.58
2.25 1 0.63
2.60 0.67
' 3.35 0.78
I
2.91 0.82
- 1.42 0.60
' 0.51 0.52
3 _
0.51 0.52
- 0.51 0.52
ConveyQ
' 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES
6.0 Special Reports and Studies
' ➢ GeoEngineers, Inc. Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services. February 24,
1992
1
' W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IlSeattlel IDatalProjectsIRVA Land LL032272 Renton Vi11age10ffice1 Wor*ir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
10
1
REPORT
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
j PROPOSED VILLAGE PLACE NORTH OFFICE
BUILDING AND PARKING GARAGE
' RENTON, WASHINGTON
FOR
RENTON VILLAGE ASSOCIATES
,
: i
GeoQ�Il-i Engineers
February 24, 1992
Gcotechnical, .
Renton Village Associates Geoenvirocal l and
Evergreen Building
Renton, Washington 98055 Geologic Services
Attention: Mr. Loren Laskow
GeoEngineers, Inc. is pleased to submit four copies of our "Report of
Geotechnical Engineering Services, Proposed Village Place North Office
Building and Parking Garage, Renton, Washington.*
The scope of our initial services is described in our revised proposal
dated October 4, 1991. These services were authorized by you on October 14,
1991. A supplemental phase of our services dealt with the use of driven
grout piles for the project. Portions of the results of our study have been
' discussed with representatives of Lease Crutcher Lewis, KPFF and The
Callison Partnership as our findings were developed. A letter report
summarizing the results of a load test program for driven grout piles was
submitted on January 29 1992.
We have enjoyed serving you on this interesting project. If you have
' any questions regarding the contents of this report and when we can be of
further service, please contact us.
Yours very truly,
GeoEngineers, Inc.
3. •-
i
James B. Thompson, P.E.
Principal.
RMM:HRP:JBT:cs
cc: Lease Crutcher Lewis
Attn: Mr. Bill Guedel
KPFF
' Attn: Mr. Ron Klemencic
Mr. John Tessem
' The Callison Partnership
Attn: Mr. Brian Cloepfil.
File No. 1183-002-R05
GeoEngineers,Inc.
8410 1 5.i th Avenue N.E.
Redmond,W'aX 98952
1&phone(206)861-6000
Fax(206)861-60-0
Geo Engineers
' T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Page No.
' INTRODUCTION 1
SCOPE 1
SITE CONDITIONS 2
SURFACE CONDITIONS 2
' SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4
GENERAL 4
SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK 4
' Site Preparation 4
Structural Fill 5
Fill Settlement 6
PILE FOUNDATIONS b
' General b
Axial Capacity 7
K Pile Downdrag 8
Settlement 8
Lateral Resistance S
Installation g
FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT 10'
ENTRIES, SIDEWALKS AND UTILITIES 10
PAVEMENTS 11
SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA 11
LIMITATIONS 12
' List of Figures
Figure No.
VICINITY MAP 1
tr SITE PLAN 2
LATERAL PILE CAPACITY DRIVEN GROUT PILES 3
APPENDIX
c. l
Page No.
FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING A-1
Y HELD EXPLORATIONS A-1
LABORATORY TESTING A-2
' List of Appendix Figures
Figure No.
' SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM A-1
KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS A-2
' BORING LOGS A-3 thru A-10
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS A-11 and A-12
1
i
' _ P,5i ttd 61 retJC6d gear, ..
Geo.ti, Engineers
' REPORT
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
' PROPOSED VILLAGE PLACE NORTH OFFICE BUILDING AND PARKING GARAGE
RENTON. 'WASHINGTON
FOR
RENTON VILLAGE ASSOCIATES
INTRODUCTION
' This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering
services for the proposed Village Place North Office building and parking
garage in Renton, Washington. The site location is shown on the Vicinity
Map, Figure 1.
r ,
We have previously completed geotechnical studies for the Renton 2 and
i Renton 3 office buildings which are situated to the east and southeast. In
addition, we prepared a preliminary design report and drilled one boring for
the proposed Renton 4 project. The results from our previous study for the
' Renton 4 project are presented in our report dated September 9, 1986. We
submitted a letter report on .January 29, 1992 which describes the results
of a test pile program for driven grout piles proposed for use on this
project.
The project includes a parking garage which will be a separate
r structure from the office building. The proposed locations of the office
building and parking garage with respect to existing site features, our
previous boring, and our current borings are shown in Figure 2.
The proposed office building will be ten stories in height with plan
dimensions of about 140 feet by 280 feet. The garage will be situated about
80 feet west of the office building. The garage will have five levels with
- ' an east-west dimension of 200 feet and a north-south dimension of 360 feet.
' We understand that the lower floor slab for the office building will be
} established a few feet above existing grade. Column loads are expected to
' be up to 800 tons.
SCOPE
' The purposes of our services are to evaluate the subsurface soil and
ground water conditions at the site and to develop geotechnical recommenda-
tions and design criteria for the proposed buildings. Our specific scope
of services includes the following tasks:
' Fsit�td CEt tuyCIE3
Geo Qkngineen
1. Explore soil, rock, and ground water conditions by drilling eight
additional test borings at the office building and parking garage
sites.
2. Accomplish laboratory tests to evaluate pertinent engineering
characteristics of the soils and rock units encountered in. the
1 borings.
3. Provide recommendations for pile foundations and large-diameter
' caissons (if appropriate) including capacity-penetration
relationships, installation criteria, and special considerations
for pile driving and caisson installation.
4. Estimate the magnitude and rate of settlement for the recommended
foundation system(s) .
5. Provide recommendations for site preparation and grading including
stripping and removal of abandoned foundations, imported fill and
compaction criteria, and utility connections to the pile- or
caisson-supported structures.
6. Evaluate ground water conditions and provide recommendations
' regarding temporary and permanent drainage measures.
7. Develop recommendations for support of lower building floor slabs.
8. Provide seismic design criteria for evaluation using UBC (Uniform
Building Code) design procedures.
g. Develop recommendations for design, of pavements.
10. Prepare a written report containing our conclusions and recom-
mendations along with the supporting field and laboratory data.
' SITE CONDITIONS
SURFACE CONDITIONS
The majority of the site is a paved parking area for an existing retail
store (Ernst) to the south, several existing retail stores to the east and
a bank (Key Bank) near South Grady Way. The garage site is mostly unpaved
' ? in the west half and paved in the east half. A fill pad which is 3 to
�- 6 feet higher than surrounding grades is present in the southwest portion
' of the garage site. The fill pad is approximately 180 feet long and
100 feet wide.
The existing parking area is generally level, except along the margins
of the fill pad, which are steeply sloping. The fill pad and a small vacant
' field north of the fill pad are both vegetated with grass and light brush.
2
1
Prints-2-ar�retpaa��sagcr, .. . � .
1 _
Geo Q1,011, ers
' Overhead transmission lines extend in a north-south direction along the
western edge of the site. The lines then jog to the southeast in the
southern portion of the site.
' SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling eight
' borings near the corners -and edges of the proposed structures, as shown on
the Site Plan, Figure 2. A description of our field exploration and
' laboratory testing programs, including the boring logs, is presented in the
Appendix.
' The borings encountered somewhat variable subsurface conditions.
However, the general sequence of fill and alluvial soils over sandstone
bedrock is consistent with previous subsurface explorations which we have
accomplished in the Renton Village complex,
The site is mantled by varying thicknesses of fill. At some boring
locations, the contact between the fill and the underlying alluvial deposits
' • is difficult to determine. We interpret the upper 2-1/2 to 7 feet of soils
' at the boring locations to be fill. Greater depths of fill may be present
in the area of the existing bank. The fill encountered in our borings
consists of Loose to medium dense fine or fine to medium sand with varying
amounts of silt, gravel and cobbles.
The fill is underlain b a complex sequence of soft eat, soft to
y P 4- . P
medium stiff silt and organic silt, and loose to dense sand overlying
' ry bedrock. The upper portion of the bedrock is highly weathered and consists
% i of loose to medium dense fine to medium sand. Moderately competent
sandstone was encountered at depths below the ground surface ranging from
40 feet in borings B-1 and B-7 to about 68 feet in boring B-8. Based on our
experience in the immediate area., the thickness of weathered sandstone and
the depth to moderately competent sandstone may be quite variable between
the borings.
' The ground water levels observed during the exploration program are
indicated on the individual boxing logs_ Standpipe piezometers were
' installed in borings B-7 and B-8. Water levels were subsequently measured
at 4.3 and 7.0 feet below the ground surface in borings B-7 and B-8,
respectively, on December 30, 1991. Fluctuations in the ground water level
' should be expected due to variations in seasonal precipitation.
3
' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
' We recommend that the new structures be supported on piles which are
driven into the moderately competent sandstone. The lower floor slabs of
the new structures should also be pile-supported to eliminate the potential
' for long-term differential settlement between the slabs and the building
frames.
' SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK
Site Preparation: We recommend that all brush and sod be stripped from
' building and new pavement areas and wasted. Existing asphalt pavement can
be left in place within the new building areas, provided that it will not
interfere with installation of piles and utilities. Existing asphalt in new
pavement areas can be left in place, provided it is broken into relatively
i
small pieces (less than 1 foot maximum dimension) as necessary to promote
drainage.
The existing bank building fronting Grady Way will likely be
' demolished. Foundation elements and slabs for this abandoned building
should be removed since they could interfere with new pile installation.
Any existing piles used for support of the bank building should be out off
at least 2 feet below the bottom of new pile caps or planned slab subgrade
J elevations. Existing foundation elements and slabs in new pavement areas
can generally be left in place; however, foundation walls or other elements
which protrude to within 2 feet of finished grade in new pavement areas
should be removed. Any existing voids (i.e. , manholes or vaults) or new
' depressions created during site preparation should be cleaned of loose soil
p g P p i
or debris and backfilled with structural fill.
' The surficial soils at the site are moisture-sensitive and will be
difficult to work on or compact during wet weather. It will be preferable
' to schedule site preparation and earthwork during periods of extended dry
weather when these soils will be less susceptible to disturbance and will
provide better support for construction equipment.
' If construction activities extend through prolonged periods of wet
weather, it may be desirable to leave the existing asphalt pavement intact
' to provide a temporary working surface. In areas which are presently
unpaved, it might be necessary to protect the subgrade from disturbance by
' providing a crushed rock or clean sand and gravel working surface.
4
.,1�dtr
Geo gEngineers
' After stripping, demolition and void filling are complete, we recommend
that pavement subgrade areas be proo£rolled with heavy, rubber-tired
' construction equipment if site preparation is done during prolonged dry
weather. If this work is done during wet weather, the exposed subgrade
areas should be probed and all but lightweight construction equipment kept
off the subgrade. Any soft, loose or otherwise unsuitable areas detected
should be recompacted, if practical, or removed and replaced with structural
fill. We recommend that the probing and proofrolling of subgrade areas be
' observed by a representative of our firm to identify areas needing remedial
work and to assess the adequacy of subgrade conditions.
' Structural Fill: All new fill in sidewalk and pavement areas should be
placed as compacted structural fill. The fill should be placed in
horizontal lifts not exceeding 10 inches in loose thickness and mechanically
compacted to a firm, nonyielding condition. Fill placed in pavement areas
or in utility trenches within 2 feet of the finished subgrade surface should
be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined
in accordance with ASTM D-1557. Fill placed in pavement areas and utility
' trenches at depths greater than 2 feet below the finished subgrade should
be compacted to at least 90 percent (ASTM D-1557). Fill placed in the
building areas need only be compacted to the degree required for support of
construction equipment and to construct floor slabs.
All structural fill material should be free of debris, organic
contaminants and rock fragments larger than 6 inches. Particle sizes larger
than 3 inches should be excluded from the top 1 foot of the fill. The
suitability of material for use as structural fill will depend on the
' gradation and moisture content of the soil. As the amount of f ines
(material passing No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly more
sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction
becomes more difficult to achieve. We recommend that structural fill
contain no more than about 5 percent fines for placement in wet weather.
' The percent fines can be higher for placement in dry weather, providing that
P g P Y � P g
the fill material is moisture-conditioned as necessary for proper
' compaction,
The existing fill pad in the southern portion of the new parking garage
' location should be considered as a source of structural fill only if it will
be worked during periods of prolonged dry weather, since this fill has a
5
Nncc= a^.rec.:iKd�3yr.
Geoff,;Engineers
relatively high percentage of fines and is highly moisture sensitive. This
fill should be capped with a layer of the clean sand and gravel fill, where
appropriate.
We recommend that a representative from our 'firm observe the placement
and compaction of structural fill. An adequate number of in-place density
tests should be performed as the fill is being placed to determine if the
required degree of compaction is being achieved.
Fill Settlement: We understand that on the order of 2 to 5 feet of
ifill will be placed in building and pavement areas to achieve the desired
grades. This fill will be underlain by variable thicknesses of soft
' compressible soils which will settle under the weight of the fill. We
estimate that 3 feet of fill will result in about 3 to b inches of
settlement. Smaller or larger thicknesses of fill will cause
proportionately lesser or greater magnitudes of settlement. We expect that
a majority of this settlement (e.g. , on the order of 50 to 60 percent) will
occur within two months of fill placement. However, a significant amount
of settlement (e.g. , on the order of 40 to 50 percent) is likely to occur
' over a period of several years due to the slow rate of consolidation in the
peat layers. For this reason, we recommend that the lower floors for the
new parking garage and the new office building be pile supported.
' The potential effects of fill induced settlements on existing buried
utilities should be considered in design. Potential effects of these
settlements on the proposed new facilities are addressed in later sections
of this report_
PILE FOUNDATIONS
General: We recommend that the new structures be supported on piles
' extending through the upper compressible deposits and lower sand strata into
the underlying bedrock. The depths at which the upper surface of the
moderately competent bedrock were encountered in our recent and previous
borings are indicated in Figure 2 and in the following table:
3
1 6
Geo NOEnbmeers
' Depth to Upper Surface
Boring..No. of Bedrock (feet)
' B-1 40
B-2 54
B-3 48
B-4 51
' B-5 56
B-'6 53
B-7 40
' B-8 68
B4-1 53
We expect that these piles will penetrate 3 to 10 feet into the bedrock,
based on the results of the test pit program and our borings.
,..{ Piles for support of the lower floor slabs in the buildings should
i
extend through the upper compressible deposits to either the medium dense
to dense sand strata or into the bedrock. The thickness and density of the
ct sand over the bedrock varies significantly across the site; however, we
' expect that the lengths of floor slab piles will generally be about 5 feet
less than the lengths of adjacent piles which will support the building
frames.
We understand that piles for the building frames will be designed to
carry downward loads of 120 tons per pile. Files supporting the lower floor
slabs will be designed for a downward load of about 50 tons. Several
different pile types were originally considered for the project including
' tJ augercast piles, drilled caissons, driven steel or precast, prestressed
concrete piles, and driven grout piles. Driven grout piles have been
selected for the project based on the results of the test pile program and
' the expected economy.
Axial Capacity: Based on the results of the load test performed on the
' test pile installed near boring B-3 and our analysis, we conclude that
14-inch-diameter driven grout piles driven to refusal in the bedrock or
' if
lower sand strata will satisfactorily support the design loads of 120 and 50 tons for the building frames and slabs, respectively. Separate refusal
criteria developed for the different design loads may result in different
tpenetration lengths into the sand and bedrock. The design loads include a
factor of safety of at least 2.0 for downward loading. These capacities may
' be increased by one-third for short-term live loads such as wind or seismic
loads.
7
1 .
Geo W.'ZoEngineers
' The allowable uplift capacity for the piles supporting the building
frame (i.e. , pules driven to refusal criteria appropriate for a 120-ton
design downward load) may be taken as 45 tons for short-term live loads such
as wind or seismic forces. This value includes a factor of safety of about
1.5, and is based on the results of the uplift test.
' The characteristics of pile materials and structural connections might
impose limitations on pile capacities and should be evaluated by your
' structural engineer. Appropriate reinforcing should be provided in the
piles to accommodate bending and tension forces. For example, a full-length
reinforcing bar should be installed in each pile subjected to uplift. Also,
' reinforcing cages should be provided in piles subjected to lateral loads.
The above pile capacities apply to single piles. If piles within
groups are spaced at least 3 pile diameters on center, no reduction for pile
group action need be made.
There is some risk from eccentric loading associated with supporting
' building frame pile caps on single piles, Therefore, we recommend that
these caps be supported on pile groups consisting of two or more piles.
' pile Downdrag: Pile downdrag forces develop when surrounding
compressible soils settle relative to a pile, thus interacting with and
' adding load to the pile. We anticipate that 2 to 5 feet of fill will be
placed over the building site. For this amount of fill, an allowance for
downdrag of 15 tons should be made for the 14-inch driven grout piles. The
downdrag forces should be added to the nominal design load for the pile to
I compute the total load acting on the pile.
' = Settlement: We estimate that the settlement of driven grout piles,
designed and installed as recommended, will be on the order of 1/2 inch or
less. Most of this settlement will occur rapidly as loads are applied.
Postconstruction differential settlements are expected to be negligible.
i
Lateral Resistance: The allowable lateral load for the 14-inch-
diameter driven grout pile can be determined with the aid of Figure 3 which
shows the distribution of moment and deflection with depth for a unit
' t lateral load (1 kip) applied at the pile head. This figure is based on an
assumed center-to-center pile spacing of at least 3 pule diameters, pile
' head, fixity against rotation, and pile stiffness parameters (modulus of
g
' F imtd ee.rc+..'ad gfl;rr.
Geo Engineers
' elasticity and moment of inertia) provided by KPFF. Normally, the allowable
lateral pile capacity is based can a maximum pile head deflection of
' approximately 1/2 inch.
Resistance to lateral loads can also be developed by passive pressures
on the face of pile caps and other foundation elements. Passive pressures
' may be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 200 pcf (pounds per
cubic foot) (triangular distribution) for the existing site soils.
Alternatively, passive pressures may be computed using an equivalent fluid
' density of 300 pcf if all soil extending out from the face of the pile cap
or other foundation element for a distance at least equal to two and one-
half times the height of the element consists of structural fill compacted
r to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance
with ASTM D-1557. The equivalent fluid density values presented above both
' include a factor of safety of about 1.5.
' I Installation: The piles should be driven to refusal in the bedrock in
accordance with refusal criteria appropriate for the design load of the pile
(120 or 50 tons). Based on the results of the test pile program and our
' borings, we expect that refusal for the heavier loaded piles will occur with
a penetration of 3 to 10 feet into bedrock.
It is important that the driven grout piles be installed with a hammer
' having,an adequate energy rating. The. Vulcan 010 compressed air hammer used
during the test pile program is an example of a satisfactory hammer. A
' a refusal criteria of at least 100 blows per foot for the last foot of driving
and 15 blows per inch for the last inch of driving with this hammer is
appropriate for piles having a design downward load of 120 tons. A terminal.
' w u of 50 blows per foot for the last foot of driving and 8 blows per
blow count p g �
inch for the last inch of driving is appropriate for piles with a design
downward load of 50 tons. We can provide refusal criteria for other
hammers, as appropriate.
' The installation procedure used during production pile installation
should be the same as that used during test pile installation. We recommend
' = that the contractor achieve the following during production pile
installation:
+ Grout wastage volume of approximately 1/8 to 1/4 cubic yards per
pile
Withdrawal of the mandrel using a continuous and uniform rate
9
rSr;L�i:, c Sci�virycr, .
Geo 10,111-Mongineers
' 0 Grout takes of at least 130 percent of the calculated hole volume.
The elevation and characteristics of the bedrock vary considerably
across the site. It is important that each pile penetrate into the desired
' bearing material. Therefore, we recommend that pile installations be
monitored by a member of our staff to observe installation procedures,
' record pertinent data, and evaluate the adequacy of individual pile
penetrations.
FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT
The lower floor slabs should be supported on piles because of the
potential for significant long-term differential settlement both between a
soil-supported slab and the pile-supported building frame, and across the
building. Provisions should be made under the floor slab to vent potential
accumulations of methane gas and to protect the slab from dampness. For
"1 this, we recommend that a 6-inch-thick blanket of coarse sand or gravel be
placed beneath the slab. In addition, a vapor barrier should be placed
between the blanket and the floor slab. The sand or gravel blanket should
be vented to the outside using perforated drain pipes spaced at 60- to
' 80-foot intervals.
ENTRIES, SIDEAALKS AND UTILITIES
' Entries and sidewalks on the outside of the new structures will
experience long-term settlement. The amount of this settlement will be
' directly related to the amount of fill placed and the time delay between
filling and construction of the entries and sidewalks. As indicated above,
3 feet of new fill is expected to result in ultimate settlements of on the
order of 3 to 6 inches. Lesser amount of fill will produce proportionally
smaller settlements.
Sidewalks should be free from the buildings so that one side does not
"hang up" and cause the sidewalk to tilt. Entries designed as a ramp with
one end supported on the building and the other on the ground should be
considered to avoid the development of abrupt changes in grade.
: i
Buried utilities might also experience some settlement. utility lines
' that tie to the structures should have flexible connections and be designed
to accommodate differential settlement without damage.
' 10
Geoaftgineers
' To minimize posteonstruction settlements due to fill placement, filling
should be accomplished at the onset of construction and the construction of
on-grade facilities (e.g. , entries, sidewalks, buried utilities and
' pavements) delayed as long as possible.
PAVEMENTS
' Pavement subgrade areas should be prepared as recommended under SITE
PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK.
We recommend that the design pavement section in automobile parking
areas consist of 2 inches of Class B asphalt concrete, 4 inches of crushed
' rock base course and an appropriate thickness of clean pit run sand and
gravel, In truck and heavy traffic areas, the design pavement section
should consist of 3 inches of Class B asphalt concrete, b inches of crushed
rock base course, and an appropriate thickness of clean pit run sand and
. � gravel.
ATB (asphalt-treated base) can be substituted for the base course to
provide a working surface and staging area during construction. Areas of
ATB that experience severe cracking during construction should be repaired
or replaced and the entire surface releveled prior to placing the asphalt
surfacing.
The thickness of pit run required beneath new pavement will depend on
the time of year of construction, the presence of existing asphalt pavement,
and the difference between finished and existing grades. We can provide
' more specific recommendations for pit run thickness once finished grades
have been determined.
' SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA
The project site is located with Zone 3 on the. Seismic Zane Map of the
' United States, Figure No. 23-2 in the 1991 edition of the UBC (Uniform
Building Code) . The site coefficient used in calculating seismic forces on
buildings is based on soil profile type. This relationship is indicated in
' Table 23-J of the UBC. For the subsurface conditions at the site, the
appropriate soil type is Sy (soil profile containing more than 40 feet of
' soft clay characterized by a shear wave velocity less than 400 feet per
second) .
' 11
ffirte �i;rccrk�ce:,
Geo aEngineers
' LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for use by Renton Village Associates and
their consultants in the design of a portion of this project. The data and
' report should be provided to prospective contractors for bidding or
estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should
' not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions.
If there are any changes in the loads, grades, locations,
' configurations or types of facilities to be constructed, the conclusions and
recommendations presented in this report might not be fully applicable. If
such changes are made, we should be given the opportunity to review our
conclusions and recommendations and to provide written modification or
verification of these recommendations. When design is finalized, we
� recommend that we be given the opportunity to review those portions of the
specifications and drawings which relate to geotechnical considerations to
see that our recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as
intended.
There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the
locations of the explorations. Some contingency for unanticipated
conditions should be included in the project budget and schedule. We
recommend that our firm be retained to provide sufficient monitoring,
' testing and consultation during construction to confirm that the conditions
encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to
' provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed
during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or
not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with the
' contract plans and specifications.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have
' been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area
a at the time the report was prepared. No other conditions, express or
i >
implied, should be understood_
' - 0 0 o -
' 12
' P,.in:ed.W recyciad pspf
GeO QQ;.Engineers
' The conclusions and recommendations in this report should be applied in
their entirety. If there are any questions concerning this report and when
we can provide additional services, please contact us.
Respectively submitted,
GeoEngineers, Inc.
IR Robert M. McIntosh
I-A _ Staff Geotechnical Engineer
2 1-»�a�s d-3' Z Herbert R. Pschunder, P.E.
- Senior Engineer
--�
' z
ll James B. Thompson, P.E.
Principal
RMM:HRP:JBT:cs
LJ
i
r
t
n
13
ff$3'•4QZ'Tc'O�' 7eMNf:,4 EP /2-3Q-9/
ldboldol
to Min
tTl
n loll
ctl
V} C7 r p � » - •lJtJdt•�` I t�L?-- 1!•;� •��' �.�� �`»» ,,• ,I.y�� �rJ � r
J/ 3Nt(Y G- } - .✓w+ i J yr.• ► !!. �'`- d ` ` � y
tt/ %"^.�� V, y...���/ �f I •�' 1� �'rt` to fit:,`,� � �✓� '{�• t
fit
111�r'/"_.� .��. L.. '�` • }._� »f ��•• � , `� � �t'{FI „`�`�a ix t t,' .,4'
RI
� CC'�7 �•-..�``• � .( —N � �:' .1~ 4 `ice i. isi L..,y,
op
N W .�J� sc[, i'.- Y. _,y'"'.. ....�+ -.•r.JY,. t ,:: � ...... 1 uY�;. � ': t/
'11 �3 � ,� .....s ^- .,,,.fin$ }"•"�, �� ��,r�:'� a �� �' ..
to a`".- .,'''�~ .�� �`�� .� ^��'"_".�^^-�;•'�'.r--'" '-e".t .,.. ,ty �3�"` roe. J�Y3`It �:�,J-�',">
--to
►7 • 'V
•
� __^JYi�"7 .•�.m f � 3.__ •,a�yt, �4'�`�'' ---( t r4 r`- J�.` � Y � r"'.14 � 'C
� f Y•, J I � t�p/�.%'S.' tw'r..��y�`'' `s Rt>•R r'-i t K yfa�?•.b~r 't� �e:
r
I
t
f N
:'�m'`�I ,`>�,. ~--• .-^., � ... ._, � ' E%IBTItt�RETkt(, I I
•� f' � ? r �1 B�� I F. fi � t wry '
56)
'� � ma `s �r x ✓r�b.1- SL. i -,T s� � � � i.
N
� n 1
C�
Fht3 t
SCALE IN FEET
• _< 'f i 4r .7����fc �-, ,'.L t \ a� .:..cam--•-�(\`>y���
`' ss 'n 1cEW�PAAKINi ahl�.t8� -- I 1
t i EXISTING AETAX.
s I
} „ 8--1 1
s �— t
$ -1 '-FOR PFEMOUS,STUDY
{ f BY GEO fNGWEERS.W.
BORING LOCATION AND NUMBER
FOA CURRENT STUD!
` �--Q--'�I • (60 DEPTH TOBk)ROCK(FEEn
�• t/ IJ
't
exisn:4 RVAIL
I NOTE:
r WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE CAOSS-•BATCHED
POR11ON OF TH9 SOUTH END OF THE
t S •V - NEW MRIQNQ GARAGE HAS BEEN
\ DELETED.
Ott T SITE PLAN
Reference: DrawCatlisonPort rshpcoNatth,Renton Wash.`datarltl2t/0l4t) Geol�,AEno ineers FIGURE 2
' Deflection Scale tin Inches) --; --0-01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
' -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 34-Moment Scale(in Kip-Feet)
0
Moment with Applied _�
Unit Load of 1 fGp
5
XrDeflectlon with Applied
nit Load of 1 I(ip
u.
m
ii
o
m 15
, A
1
20
25
t
NOTE:
GRAPHS BASED ON: 1.) 14-INCH DIAMETER DRIVEN GROUT PILE WITH REINFORCING CAGE
' 2.)FW Y AT PILE HEAD
3.)UNIT LOAD OF 1 KIP APPLIED LATERALLY AT PILE HEAD
4.)E x I FOR PILE= 2.35 x 1(s PSI
x 5.)MINIMUM PILE SPACING OF 3 PILE DIAMETERS
3
4
k
1 �
rr
k '
' LATERAL PILE CAPACITY
DRB" GROUT PILES
Gee Engineers
'j FIGURE 3
F3
A
.z
ts}
m...........
GeoEngineers
' A P P E N D I X
FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were explored by drilling
eight borings at the locations shown in Figure 2. Exploration locations
were measured in the field by taping from existing site features. Figure
' 2 also shows the location of a previous boring (B4-1) which was drilled at
the site in 1986 by our firm.
' The borings were drilled between October 22 and 30, 1991 to depths
ranging from. 44 to 72 feet below existing grade. These borings were
advanced using a truck-mounted, continuous-flight, hollow-stem auger drill.
Representative samples were obtained of each soil and rock type encountered.
') These samples were obtained using a 2.4-inch-diameter, split-barrel sampler.
' The sampler was driven into the soil or rock using a 300-pound hammer free-
falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the
last 12 inches or other indicated distance is recorded on the boring logs.
' The borings were continuously monitored by a representative of our
firm. Soils were classified in general accordance with the classification
' system described in Figure A-1. A key to the boring log symbols is
presented in Figure A-2.
The logs of the borings are presented in Figures A-3 through A-10. The
exploration logs are based on our interpretation of the field and laboratory
data and indicate the various types of soil and rock encountered. They also
1 indicate the depths at which these materials or their characteristics
change, although the change may actually be gradual. If the change occurred
between samples, it was interpreted.
Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were based on an
assumed datum. The datum was assumed to be Elevation 100 feet at a
' benchmark on a catch basin located approximately 170 feet north of the north
r �
wall of the existing Ernst retail store.
' Observations of ground water conditions were made as the explorations
were accomplished. In addition, standpipe piezometers were installed in
A - 1
P rss�c.� c q IsC Grxr. -
Geo Q Engineers
' borings B-3 and B-8 to monitor ground water levels following drilling. The
ground water levels in these piezometers were measured on December 30, 1991
and are presented on the boring logs.
' T.ABORATORY TESTING
All soil samples were brought to our laboratory for further examina-
Lion. Selected samples were tested to determine their moisture content, dry
density and compressibility characteristics. The results of the moisture
' content and dry density tests are presented on the boring logs.
Consolidation tests were accomplished on two samples to determine parameters
which were used to calculate the amount and time rate of settlement at the
building and garage locations due to the expected loading conditions. The
results of the consolidation tests are presented in Figures A-11 and A-12.
1 ,
l
1
' A - 2
' Pri,10 on reriCmd p'n—.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUPSYMBOL GROUP NAME
' GRAVEL GLEAN GRAVEL QW WELL-GRADED GRAVEL,FINE TO
COARSE COARSE GRAVEL
GRAINED GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL
SOILS MORE THAN 60% GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL
' OF COARSE FRACTION WITH FINES
RETAINED
ON NO. 4 SIEVE GC CLAYEY GRAVEL
MORE THAN 6015
RETAINED ON SAND CLEAN .SANG? SW WELL--GRADED SAND, FINE TO
NO. 200 SIEVE COARSE SAND
?' 1j SP POORLY-GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50% SAND SM SILTY SAND
OF COARSE FRACTION WITH FINES
PASSES
: NO.4 SIEVE SC CLAYEY SAND
SILT AND CLAY ML SILT
FINE INORGANIC
' f GRAINED CL CLAY
SOILS LIQUID LIMIT
' LESS THAN 60 ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT. ORGANIC CLAY
SILT AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
MORE THAN 60% INORGANIC
PASSES NO, 200
SIEVE CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY. FAT CLAY
LIQUID LIMIT
' 50 OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY. ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT
NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS.
1. Field classification is based on Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry
visual examination of soli in general to the touch
' accordance with ASTM D2488-84.
Moist - Damp, but no visible water
2. Soli classification using laboratory
i tests Is based on ASTM D2487--85. Wet - Visible free water or saturated,
usually soil is Obtained from
3. Descriptions of soil density or below water table
consistency are based on
I Interpretation of blowcount data,
visual appearance of soils, and/or
' test data.
a�
n
is
t SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Geo§4aEn2inee s FIGURE A-1
LABORATORY TESTS: SOIL GRAPH:
AL Atterberg limits
CP Compaction SM Soil Group Symbol
CS Consolidation (See Note 2)
DS Direct shear
GS Grain-size Distinct Contact Between
%F Percent fines Sail Strata
HA Hydrometer analysis
SK Permeability Gradual or Approximate
SM Moisture content Location of Change
Between Soil Strata
' MD Moisture and density
SP Swelling pressure Water Level
TX Triaxial compression Bottom of Baring
' UC Unconfined compression
CA Chemical analysis
BLOW-COUNT/SAMPLE DATA:
.l 22 ` Location of relatively
Blows required to drive a 2.4-inch I.D. undisturbed sample
split-barrel sampler 12 inches or
< , other indicated distances using a 120 Location of disturbed sample
300-pound hammer failing 30 inches.
' 17 Location of sampling attempt
with no recovery
10 iI Location of sample obtained
Blows required to drive a 1.5-inch I.D. in general accordance with
(SPT) split-barrel sampler 12 inches Standard Penetration Test
or other indicated distances using (ASTM D-1586) procedures
140-pound hammer falling 30 inches.
26 Q3 Location of SPT sampling
attempt with no recovery
Location of grab sample
' "P" indicates sampler pushed with
i weight of hammer or against weight
of drill rig.
}
NOTES:
1. The reader must refer to the discussion in the report text, the Key to Boring Log Symbols
and the exploration logs for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
2. Soil classification system is summarized in Figure A-1.
KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS
Uj
iz�2iknoinee s
FIGURE A-2
' TEST DATA 13UKINV 13_1
DESCRIPTION
' G
c Density eta 5y hol Surface Elevation(ft.); 101.4
Lab Tests (46) ef)
0 2 etches asphalt concrete 0
SP
Brown medium to coarse sand with gravel,cobbles and a trace of
' silt(medium dense,moist)(fill)
SIvI Brown silty fine to medium sand with occasional gravel(medium
MD 11 129 29 / dense,moist)(fill)
S XT
SP—Gray fine to medium sand with silt,occasional fine gravel and a
SM trace of organic matter(loose,moist)(fill)
' MD i 1 118 9 /
SM Gray silty fine to medium sand with organic matter(loose,moist)
' 10 10
SP Gray fine to medium sand with occasional fine gravel and lenses of
MD 27 96 4 / sandy silt(loose,wet)
5 '15
I
' w
LL
Z MD 21 106 3 / SM Brownish gray silty fine to medium sand with occasional fine
gravel(loose,wet)
n 20 20
' ML— Gray and brown sandy sift and brown organic silt with peat(soft,
MD 90 48 3 / I 1 ( OL wet)
1
25 i I t 25
j 1 I i
1 I I
b7I) 16 117 22 / SP— Gray fee to medium sand with silt(medium dense,wet)
N SM
30 30
ML Greenish gray silt with fine sand(medium stiff,wet)
ur
MD 30 94 6 /
i
35 35
a
MD 17 115 21 / ML Gray and brown sandy silt(very stiff,wet)
' o
40 40
Note;Sce Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
its- Log of Boring
Gee RAR9 EIlolneerS Fi are A-3 a
9
' TEST DATA BORING B-1
(Continued)
DESCRIPTION
' Moisture Dry °v Group
Content Density aidSymbol
LabTosta {Ao) 0
40 ,: SM Grayish brown silty fmc sand(dense,moist)(weatbemd sandstone) 40
SM S 31
' SP-- Gray fine sand with silt(very dense,moist)(sandstone)
45 45
Boring completed at 46.0 feet on I0129191
' - Ground water encountered at 12.0 feet during drilling
*Elevation dawmc Tap of catch basin located approximately 170
feet north of Ernst Store = 100.0 feet
' Sa sa
I
I
55 55
ue
u.
z
' a.
so 60
65 65
•N
N
N
70 70
m
sN
75 75
w
o
0
n 80 80
Note;See Figure A-2 for explanallon of symbots
tom;; Log of Boring
E C)G Enoiiieers
' Figure A-3 b
TEST DATA BORING B-2
' MoistutV c
DESCRIPTION
c
Content rou
Density a7V° Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 105.1
0 Lab Tests (%) f)
SM Orange-brown silty fine Una with gravel(medium dense,moist) 0
(fill)
SP Grayish brown fine to medium sand with gravel,cobbles and a
MD 8 111 25 trace of silt(medium dense,moist)(fill)
' S 5
SM Gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel and cobbles(dense,
MD 7 126 50t4• 13 moist)(fill)
10 _ 10
ML Grayish brown sandy silt with a trace of organic matter(medium
stiff,moist)
SM 39 6
r
i
W
W
W
Z PT Brown peat(soft.,wet)
z SM 135 d t ML Gray silt interbedded with layers of dark brown peat(soft,wet)
PT
t] 20 20
ML Gray sandy silt with organic mattes(soft,wet)
i
MD 49 71 5 t
25 25
- 1
w MD 48 72 3 ML-- Interbedded gray sandy silt with organic matter and silty fine to
SM medium sand(softfloosc,wet)
30 30
m
"N
SP Gray fine to medium sand with gravel(medium dense,wet)
1 MD 10 133 30
r
SW Gray Sine to coarse sand with gravel,cobbles and a trace of silt
I (medium dense,wet)
35 35
o MD 19 106 14 ..
' SP Gray fine to medium sand with coarse sand,gravel and a trace of
o silt(very dense,wet)
40 40
Note:Sea FigureA-2 for explanation of symbols
�;; Log of Boring
' Geo�i En i neers
Figure A-4 a
TESTSTDATA BORING B-Z
' (Continued)
n DESCR.EMON
Moisture Dry § o tucoup
Conteat Density .2 Symbol
40 Lab Testa (%) aB 40
i
MD a 122 60 ■
' 45 45
SM Grayish brown silty fine sand(dense,wet)
34
50 SW�--Gray fine to coarse tray of with gravel and a tra of silt(dense,wet) 50
MD 7 132 38 ■ SP
SM 3 38 ■
j 55
S5
I SM Gray silty fine to medium sand(very dense,wet)(sandstone)
LU
U.
z Mil 11 125 5012' �
x
CL Boring completed at 59.0 fact on 10123191
0 60 Ground water encountered at 28.0 feet during drilling 60
"Elevation datum: Top of catch basin located approximately 170
feet north of Ernst Store= 100.0 feet
i
1
65 65
a
70 70
v
c>
on
1
1 75 75
0
0
80 80
0
Note;Sco Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
Log of Boring
Geo kP,Engineers
' Figure A-4 b
' TEST DATA BORING B-3
DESCRIIMON
' Mo'istum Dry o' °' Group
Contain Density .2d Symbol Surface Elevation(fQ: 99.5
0 I.nb Tests (96 cf) 0
SP Brown medium to coarse sand with gravel,cobbles and a trace of
Silt(medium deasc,moist.)(file}
' SM Gray silty fine to medium sand with occasional fine gravel and a
MD 12 132 10 ■ trace of organic matter(medium dense,moist)(fill)
S 5
ML Gray silt with peat and organic matter(soft,moist)
' SM 42 6 ■
' 10 10
r MD, 154 31 3 ■ PT Brown peat(soft,wet)
' CS
15 15
+,
LU
LU
Z sr
_ MD 47 74 2 ■ SM Gray silty fine to medium sand(very loose,wet)
d
p 20 20
MI. Gray silt with organic matter(soft.wet)
l MD 56 66 2 ■
+ 25' 25 ML Gray Silt with peat(soft,wet}
MD 218 23 9 ■
PT Brown peat(soft,wet)
30 30
m
y
' MD 111 39 4 ■ .`!.
ML— Interbedded gray silt with occasional sand and organic matter and
35 SP gray fine sand(soft loose,wet) 35
MD 36 84 5 ■
1 A 40 40
:Q
Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
1
Log of Boring
Geot„e Engineers
' Figure A-5 a
' TEST DATA BORING B-3
(Continued)
DESCRIPTION
' Mois= Dry Grmou
Content 1>ety ca Sybopl
40 Lab Tesu M { A
SP Gray fnie to medium sand{medium dense,wet) 40
"•.'.;; SW Gray fine to course sand with fine gravel(medium dense,wet)
MD 20 106 28 '• :
+'+•' '•
d 5— —45
ww
+w w
MD 29 95 19 SM Gray silty fine sand(medium dense,wet)(sandstone)
SO Grades to vary dense 50
MD 21 107 50t1,
Boring completed at 5I.5 feet on 10128I91
Ground water encountered at 18.0 feet during drilling
' 'Elevation datum: Tap of catch basin location approximately 170
55 fect north of Ernst Stare= 100.0 feet 55
w
LL
z_
' s
Uj
Uj
60 60
z
65
,N
n
iV
74 70
fl
75 7Sy
1 : ,
O
b
80 80
' Noe;See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols
Log of Boring
Geo`��/ b Figure A-5 b
TEST DATA BORING B-4
v DESCRIFI7ON
ContentMoisture M ty cod � y nbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 100.4
Lab Tests {96) (pcO
SP
2 inches asphalt eracrctc 0
Brown medium to coarse and with gravel and cobbles(medium.
SP— dense,moist)(till)
SM Gray fine to medium sand with Gilt,occasional gravel and cobbles
MD 13 105 23 t (medium ddnsa,moist)(fill)
' g 5
M1. Brownish gray silt with peat and organic matter(soft,moist)
' MD 52 GT 3
' 10 70
MD 58 64 3
i5 15
�. SP—Gray fine to medium seed with silt(medium dense,wet)
LU
SM
w
Z MD 23 101 11
a
20 20
MD 53 69 9 Grades with lenses of peat
1
25 25
SM Gray silty fine sand(loose,wet)
MD 165 30 3 L PT Brown peat(soft,wet)
N tt t,
30 30
I�
ql
SP Gray fine to medium sand(dense,wet)
' MD 20 108 34
i 35 35
An MD 34 89 $ SM Brown silty fine sand(loose,wet)
' Q
40 40
.a
r Note:Soo Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
Log of Boring
' Gee ik" ilaineers Figure A- i
TEST DATA BORING B-4
(Continued)
ti DBSCRipnON
' Moisture 1hy c Group
Content Density i0 Q Symbol
Ub Tests {6) 0
40 40
MD 25 lot 14 r Grades to medium dam
45 45
SM Gray silty rite to coarse sand(medium dense,wet)
' SM 20 25
' S0 50
SM Gray silty fine sand(very dense,moist)(sandstone)
' MD 16 Ila 50/6' ,
Boring completed at 54 A fact on 10/30/91
55 Ground water encountered at 16.0 fact during drilling 55
' JJJ 8EIevation datum: Top of catch basin located approximately 170
w fact north of Ernst Store= 100.0 feet
r•t w
CL
LU
W
Z
f-
60 60
' 65 65
N
u 70 70
m
' t
i
75 75
LO
' o
M $0 $0
Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
tr+ Log of Boring
Geo MoEn ineers
Figure A-B b
TEST DATA 13UKINU U—`J
DESCPnMON
' Moisture D o§ ts, G
Content Densry uy aat� Syutcbooupl Surface Elevation(ft.): 100.9
Lab Tesu M ef} 0
a SP— 2 inches asphalt concrete
5M gown fine to medium sand with silt,gravel and cobbles(medium
' dense,moist)(fill)
MD iS 117 14 SM Gray silty five to medium sand with occasional gravel(medium
I
dense,moist)
'a 1 ML— Grayish brown slit with organic matter(soft,moist to wet)
1 OL
' MD 50 70 3 ML Gray silt with occasional sand and a trace of organic matzo(soft,
moist to wet)
' 1a 10
MD 193 ZS 5 PT' Dark brown peat(soft,wet)
SP— Gray and brown fine to medium sated with silt and a trace of
15 SM organic matter(loose,wet)LU
15
u.
z MD 38 82 5
0 20 20
ML Grayish brown silt with occasional fins sand and a trace of peat
(soh,wet)
i MD 79 52 2
25 25
c j : SM Gray silty fine to medium sand with a trace of organic matter
(loose,wet)
' Z MD 37 83 9 M
3a 30
r
ML Grayish brown silt with occasional fine sand and a trace of organic
' MD 76 54 7 1 matter(medium stiff,wet)
1 36 35
ML Gray sandy silt(stiff,wet)
LO MD 30 94 9 1
IL
N
g 40 40
m
Notc:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
its Log of Boring
Geo N";MA Engineers
' Figure A-7a
TEST DATA BORING B^5
(Continued)
DESCRIIMON
' Moisture Dcy 3 a. Group
Content Dlity .20 Symbot
40 Ub Tests (56) f) 40
SP Gray fine t,o medium sand(medium dense,wet)
MD 22 106 30
45 45
' MD 21 107 24 �
50 50
.-a
MD 16 116 22 XT SM Brown silty fmc to medium sand with occasional fine gravel
(medium dense,wet)
s 55 55
' w SM Gray saty'fine sand(very dense,moist)(sandstone.)
w
u.
Z 5075'
' w
60 60
0
SM 14 5013'
3 t Boring completed at 64-0 feet on 10/24/91
65 Ground water encountered at 17.0 feet during drilling 65
{ *Elevation datum: Top of catch basin located approximately 170
feet north of Ernst Store 100.00 foct
N
70 70
U
.m
Iy
1 �
1 �
j 75 75
j
�r
o
80 80
Note:Sec Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
A,%' Log of Boring
' Ge0 Engineers Figure A-7 b
MT DATA BUR(NG 5-6
DESCRIPTION
' Moisture Dry . 3 a. Gcoup
Content Denssty � Symbol Surface Elevation(ft): 94.5*
Isb Tests (56) cf)
SP 2 inches asphalt concrete 0
Brawn medium to coarse sand with gravel and a trace of silt
SM (medium dense,moist)(fill)
Gray silty fine to medium sand with occasional gravel(medium
SM 17 20 / dense.moist)(fill)
'' S 5
ML Gray silt with fine sand(soft,moist)
' MD 43 79 2 /
10 10
t
MD 244 21 2 / PT Brown peat(soft,wet)
15 15
SM Gray silty fine sand with organic matter(very loose,wet)
z MD 47 74 2 /
_ ML Grayish brown sandy silt(very soft,wet)
a 20 20
i
` MD 72 57 2 /
i
i PT Brown peat(soft,wet)
25 ,,,1 25
1 ; 1
!'r SP Gray fine to medium sand with a trace of silt and occasional fine
' gravel(medium dense,wet)
MD 27 96 13 /
n
30 30
MD 217 22 5 / PT Brown peat(soft,wet)
35 35
4
�4 l�
lt!
M MD 20 109 17 / ML Gray sandy silt(stiff,wet)
' o
40 140
Note:Sec Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
O
d�.. Log of Baring
Geoi—MEngiI1eers Figure A-8 a
' TEST DATA BORING Q-6
(Continued)
DF_SCRIF1710N
Moisture Dry 3 a r- Group
Content Density eQ,3 1 Symbol
40 Lab Tests (%) (Pcfl 40
MD 29 93 14
45 45
SM Gray silty fine to medium rand with occasional fine gravel(medium
dense,wet)
' MD 18 114 11
50 50
' MD 17 114 27 SM Brownish gray silty fine to medium sand with occasional gravel
(medium dense,wet)(sandstone)
55 55
w
w
!' tL
z MD 13 127 13
Ui
60 5M Gray silty fino sand(very dense,moist)(sandstone) 60
MD 20 lli 50/2'
' Boring completed at 62.0 feet:on 10128l91
Ground water encountered at 12.0 feet during drilling
*Elevation datum: Top of catch basin located approximately 170
65 feet north of Ernst Store= 100.0 feet 65
' N
70 70
tJ
i�
4 _1
t
75 75
Ln
fl
,$ 80 80
Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
Log of Boring
Geo t�Q!Engineers
' Figure A-8 a
TEST DATA B U K I N U b-I
DESCRIP'f1U13
' Moisture Dry c a Group
Content Density mU° Symbol Sucfsco Elevation(ft.): 100.1*
Lab Tests f%} n
0 SP 2 inches asphalt concrete 0
Brown medium to coarse sand with gravel and cobbles(medium
' dense,moist)(fill)
SM Gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel(medium dense,wet)
MD 14 111 14 ■
5
ML Gray sandy silt with organic matter(soft,wet)
' MD 40 81 2 ■
SP-- Gray funs to medium sand with silt and organic matter(loose,wet)
10 SM 10
_a
SM 234 3 PT Brown peat with wood fragments(soft,wet)
y
15 15
' 1 � J
NIL Grayish brown silt with fine sand and a trace of organic matter
r. u- (soft,wex)
Z MD 59 63 2 ■
s
n~.
0 20 20
MD 42 78 3 ■
s
25 25
i
SM Gray silty fins to medium sand with a trace of organic matter
N MD 21 106 10 ■ (medium dense,wet)
N
Y 30 30
ML Brown silt with fuse sand(medium stiff,wet)
' =m
1 MD 35 87 10 ■
1 35 35
' SM Brown silty fine to medium sand with gavel(dense,wet)
SM 30 43
' N
8ILI
,0 40 40
Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
t►�• Log of Boring
Geo Engineers
' Figure A-9 a
' TEST DATA BUKINU B-/
(Continued)
DESCRUMON
' Moiswr.c Dry °' Group
Cont. Density ia� Syrnbot
Lab TestaSM Way silty fine sand(very dense,moist)(sandstone) 40
MD 17 US 5015" t
x Boring completed at 44.0 feet an W25191
' 45 Piewmeter in"lod to 44.0 feet 45
Ground water level measured at 4,4 feet on 17130T91
*Elevation datum: Top of catch basin located approximately 170
' feet north of Frost Store 100.0 feet
' S0 150
t
55 55
'T
S
a
' p 60 60
' fib 65
3
N
tV
70 70
U
0
N
J 75 75
n
80 80
Note:Sec figure A-2 for cxplanntion of symbols
Ad, V% Log of Boring
Geo AEnoineerS
' Figure A-9 b
1
a a.✓a ur�.a a� !J iJ i U i t V Y- V
DESCRIP' ON
Moisture Dry ° Group
' Content Density Symbol Surface Mcvation(ft.): 98.5*
Lab Tests (96) c fl
0 SP— Gray fine to medium sand with silt and gravel(loose,moist)(fill) 0
SM Gray silty fmo to medium sand with occasional gravel(medium
SM dense,moist)(fill)
' MD 14 122 12
' S ML Gray silt with a.trace,of peat and wood fragments(soft,wet) 5
MD 40 76 3 t
1a 10
MD 56 66 2
OL Grayishbrowa organic silt with wood fragments and occasional
15 sand(very soft,wax) 15
j
w
us
W
MD, 89 48 2
N
0 20 20
' . MD 61 60 4 M L Brownish gray silt with fine sand and peat(soft,wet)
25 25
; i
�H
N MD 68 55 3 �
30 30
' U
m
N
i
MD 87 50 2
i
35 35
1
cSM 28 P ® 5P-- Gray fine to medium sand with sift(very loose,wet)
SM (Blow count probably reflects driving through heave)
' 40 40
Nate:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols
��� Log of B4rfng
Geo'tv�lrt,►'Engineers
Figure A-10 a
a uaa uxax U%JnIlM%3 Q-O
(Continued)
= DESCRIPTION
Moisture Dry 3 a Group
Corum Densty —20d Symbol
' 40 Lab Tosts M (Pefl
40
' Grades to se
MD ..S 99 43 I den
' 45 45
SW Gray fine to coarse sand(medium dense,wet)
' MD 37 85 11 SM Graysilty fm c to medium mad with gravel(medium dense,wet)
50 50
' SP Gray coarse sand with medium send and gravel(loose,wet)
MD 4 104 9
55 55
ul
` +wi SW Gray fine to coarse sand with gravel(medium dense,wet.)
s
MD 5 105 21
Q 60 60
SP-- Gray fine to medium sand with silt(very dense,wet)
SM
' SM 39 SO
i
' t 65 65
3
i
lM' SM Gray silty fine sand(very dense,wet)(sandstone)
b4D 13 123 61 �
N
' v
70 70
MD 22 104 5011"
Boring complctcd at 71.5 feet on IOI"f7 V91
Piczometcr installed to 71.5 fax
Ground water level measured at 7.0 feet on 12/30/91
"Elevation datum: Top of catch basin located approximately 170
75 feet north of Ernst Store= 100.0 feet 75
0
0
CF
' N
O
p 801 SO
Note:Sec Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols
t Log of Boring
Geo%;�Engineers
Figure A-10 b
' PRESSURE (LBS/FT2 x 103)
' .1 .2 .3 4 .5 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 40 50
I
. 04 t
. 08
r
. 12
i I I f I
. 16
z . 20
Lu
[ I I I I
. 24
' z . 28
. 32
0
. 36
� I
. 40
3
. 44
. 48
! I I I I
' . . 52
i
SAMPLE DRY
' BORING DEPTH SOIL MOISTURE DENSITY
KEY NUMBER (FT) CLASSIFICATION CONTENT (LBS/FT3)
h B-3 13 BROWN PEAT 154% 31
a
} 0
4
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
G e o sEnglneers FIGURE A--11
B FT2 x 103
PRESSURE (L SI )
' .1 .2 .3 4 .5 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 40 50
I
' . 025
1 I I ! I
. 050
. 075
. IOC
u
j . 125
r `J
w
3 Z
u
' z . 200
r o ! I I ! I
! ( I I I
' o . 225
0
Z . 2:,0
v ! I I I I
f t . 275
i
300
. 325
. 350
I I I I I .
a
SAMPLE DRY
BOP: ING DEPTH SOIL MOISTURE DENSITY
KEY NUMBER (FT) CLASSIFICATION CONTENT (LBS/FT3)
�> a B-8 18 GRAYISH BROWN ORGANIC 890 48
SILT
n COL)
a
' ��, CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
t
Geo1$!Engineers FIGURE A-12
' 7.0 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS
1
7.0 Basin and Community Planning Areas
rNot applicable
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
1&att1eJ DatalProjectslRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton VillagelOfceNordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
I1
r
8.0 OTHER PERMITS
8.0 Other Permits
' Not applicable
i
W&HPacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
I13eattle1 Data WrojectsIRVA Land LLC132272 Renton Village lOfcelWordl fir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
12
9.0 EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN
9.0 Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design
The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (ESCP) for Renton Village has been
developed utilizing the King County Storm Water Design Manual and City of Renton
' standards. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control requirements shall be
maintained and are specifically addressed in the King County Core Requirement No. 5
(S)vVDM). Erosion and sediment control notes per City of Renton standards are provided
' on the Erosion Control plans.
➢ The majority of the site is currently covered by asphalt and exposed soil. The
locations of the limits of disturbance are shown on the Erosion Control Plans.
➢ Perimeter protection on the site consists of silt fencing located just inside the limits
' of disturbance per City of Renton standards.
➢ Traffic stabilization is being provided by the installation of a rock-lined
' construction entrances located at the entrance from Lake Street. The construction
entrance will be per City of Renton standards and maintained according to the
SWDM 5.4.4.1.
➢ Surface water control will be provided by the installation of the permanent
' conveyance system and dention/wetvault prior to construction of the rest of the site.
The wetvault portion of the vault will act as a sediment pond and will release water
via a filter fabric wrapped control structure.
➢ Silt fences will also be utilized as necessary to direct surface water to the catch
basin/inlet sediment traps.
' ➢ Catch basin/inlet sedimentation traps will be installed at the new catch basins for
temporary erosion control.
' ➢ Dust control will be applied as needed by a water spraying construction vehicle.
➢ ESC measures will be maintained and inspected daily during non rainfall events and
' hourly during rainfall events. An ESC supervisor will be assigned to oversee the
standards, as directed on the construction documents and in the KCSWDM 5.4.10.
The City inspector will be given the ESC supervisor's name and 24-hour
' emergency contact phone number prior to start of construction. The name and 24-
hour emergency phone number of the designated ESC supervisor will be posted at
the primary construction entrance to the site. A written standard ESC maintenance
report will be used to record all maintenance activities and inspections for the site.
' W&HPacific,Inc. _ TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
I&attlellDatalProjectslRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton Village lOfcelWord&body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
13
Creative Solutions...Superior Service
PACIFIC
3350 Monte Villa Parkway (425)951-4800 o Planning •Surveying
Bothell,Washington 98021 Fax(425)951-4808 o Engineering *Landscape Design
—7
1 J
�A VIZZA-61,e, 5FDji17,1-,v T F-Lo
rkA,, -7
7-
J
4 67�
41&r in Lis��
L i
22-77-6 eZ tAL F 2. 700 -t
L
"777-7 1
-7-
J i
+
J
i J
is
4
L I
4—
A,
-1 1 J
J-
Proiect: Date: g f z b s Sheet No. of
Prepared by: GA'lj Checked by: Job No:
1 Renton Village Sediment Pond Sizing Output
SRS
8-10-05
B-sed Event Summary:
BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype
- Event
--_
(cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss
B-sed 1.00 8.00 0.3914 4.57 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr
Drainage Area: B-sed
Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 4.5700 ac 89.00 0.16 hrs
' Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 4.5700 ac
Supporting Data:
1 Pervious CN Data:
bare ground 89.00 4.5700 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
' Sheet sheet 100.00 ft 1.00% 0.0500 6.79 min
Channel pipe 500.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 2.81 min
10.0 BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY
' SUMMARY SHEET AND SKETCH,AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT
10.0 Bond Quantities Worksheet
' Financial requirements will be met prior to permit issuance.
W&H Pacific,Inc. 77R Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
IISeattlel Data lProjectslRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton Village lOfcelWordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
14
' 11.0 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL
' 11.0 Maintenance and Operations Manual
➢ King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix A—
' Maintenance Requirements for Privately Maintained Drainage Facilities. (selected
pages) 1992
1
' W&H Pacific,Inc. TIR Renton Village—RVA Land LLC
I LSeattle11DatalProjectslRVA Land LL032272 Renton VillagelOfficeUordltir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
15
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
NO. 3 - CLOSED DETENTION SYSTEMS (PIPES/TANKS)
Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance Results Expected
Component Defect Is Needed When Maintenance is Performed
' Storage Area Plugged Air Vents One-half of the cross section of a vent is Vents free of debris and sediment.
blocked at any point with debris and
sediment.
Debris and Accumulated sediment depth exceeds Ali sediment and debris removed from
' Sediment 10%of the diameter of the storage area storage area.
for 1/2 length of storage vault or any
point depth exceeds 15%of diameter.
Example: 72-inch storage tank would
require cleaning when sediment reaches
depth of 7 inches for more than 1/2
length of tank.
Joints Between Any crack allowing material to be All joints between tank/pipe sections are
1 Tank/Pipe Section transported into facility. sealed.
Tank/Pipe Bent Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape Tank/pipe repaired or replaced to design.
Out of Shape more than 10%of its design shape.
' Manhole Cover not in Place Cover is missing or only partially in place. Manhole is closed.
Any open manhole requires maintenance.
Locking Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Mechanism Not maintenance person with proper tools.
Working Bolts into frame have less than 1/2 inch
of thread (may not apply to self-locking
lids).
' Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover can be removed and reinstalled by
Remove lid after applying 80 pounds of lift. Intent one maintenance person.
is to keep cover from sealing off access
to maintenance.
' Ladder Rungs King County Safety Office and/or Ladder meets design standards and
Unsafe maintenance person judges that ladder is allows maintenance persons safe access.
unsafe due to missing rungs,
misalignment, rust,or cracks.
Catch Basins See "Catch Basins" Standard No.5 See"Catch Basins"Standard No. 5
A-3 1/90
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
' NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS
Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance Results Expected
Component Defect Is Needed When Maintenance Is Performed
General Trash & Debris Trash or debris of more than 1/2 cubic No trash or debris located immediately in
(Includes foot which is located immediately in front front of catch basin opening.
Sediment) of the catch basin opening or is blocking
capacity of basin by more than 10%.
' Trash or debris (in the basin)that No trash or debris in the catch basin.
exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom
of basin to invert of the lowest pipe into
or out of the basin.
Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or
blocking more than 1/3 of its height. debris.
Dead animals or vegetation that could No dead animals or vegetation present
' generate odors that would cause within the catch basin.
complaints or dangerous gases (e.g.,
methane).
Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic No condition present which would attract
' foot in volume. or support the breeding of insects or
rodents.
Structural Damage Corner of frame extends more than 3/4 Frame is even with curb.
to Frame and/or inch past curb face into the street (if
Top Slab applicable).
Top slab has holes larger than 2 square Top slab is free of holes and cracks.
inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch
' (intent is to make sure all material is
running into the basin).
Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab.
separation of more than 3/4 inch of the
frame from the top slab.
Cracks in Basin Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer Basin replaced or repaired to design
Walls/Bottom than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles standards.
entering catch basin through cracks, or
maintenance person judges that structure
is unsound.
Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at the
' than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/outlet joint of inlet/outlet pipe.
pipe or any evidence of soil particles
entering catch basin through cracks.
' Settlement/ Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has Basin replaced or repaired to design
Misalignment rotated more than 2 inches out of standards.
alignment.
Fire Hazard Presence of chemicals such as natural No flammable chemicals present.
gas,oil,and gasoline.
Vegetation Vegetation growing across and blocking No vegetation blocking opening to basin.
more than 10%of the basin opening.
' Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe No vegetation or root growth present.
joints that is more than six inches tall and
less than six inches apart.
Pollution Nonflammable chemicals of more than No pollution present other than surface
' 1/2 cubic foot per three feet of basin film.
length.
' A-5 1/90
' KING COUNTY WASHINGTON SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS (Continued)
' Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance Results Expected
Component Defect Is Needed When Maintenance Is Performed
Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place Cover is missing or only partially in place. Catch basin cover is closed.
' Any open catch basin requires
maintenance.
Locking Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Mechanism Not maintenance person with proper tools.
Working Bolts into frame have less than 1/2 inch
of thread.
Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover can be removed by one
Remove lid after applying 80 lbs.of lift; intent is maintenance person.
keep cover from sealing off access to
maintenance.
Ladder Ladder Rungs Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, Ladder meets design standards and
' Unsafe misalignment, rust, cracks,or sharp allows maintenance person safe access.
edges.
Metal Grates Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Grate openings meet design standards.
' (if applicable)
Trash and Debris Trash and debris that is blocking more Grate free of trash and debris.
than 20%of grate surface.
' Damaged or Grate missing or broken member(s)of Grate is in place and meets design
Missing the grate. standards.
1
r
' A-6 1/90
' KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
' NO. 10 - CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS (Pipes & Ditches)
Maintenance Conditions When Maintenance Results Expected
Component Defect Is Needed When Maintenance is Performed
Pipes Sediment& Debris Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% Pipe cleaned of all sediment and debris.
of the diameter of the pipe.
Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of All vegetation removed so water flows
water through pipes. freely through pipes.
' Damaged Protective coating is damaged; rust is Pipe repaired or replaced.
causing more than 50%deterioration to
any part of pipe.
' Any dent that decreases the cross section Pipe repaired or replaced.
area of pipe by more than 20%.
Open Ditches Trash &Debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot Trash and debris cleared from ditches.
' per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes.
Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment and
of the design depth. debris so that it matches design.
' Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of Water flows freely through ditches.
water through ditches.
Erosion Damage to See 'Ponds" Standard No. 1 See 'Ponds" Standard No. 1
Slopes
Rock Lining Out of Maintenance person can see native soil Replace rocks to design standard.
Place or Missing (If beneath the rock lining.
Applicable)
' Catch Basins See "Catch Basins" Standard No. 5 See"Catch Basins"Standard No. 5
Debris Barriers See "Debris Barriers" Standard No.6 See "Debris Barriers"Standard No.6
(e.g., Trash Rack)
r
r
' A-11 1/90
APPENDIX
W&HPacific,Inc. 77R Renton Village—RYA Land LLC
MeattlellDatalProjectsiRVA Land LLCI32272 Renton VillagelOfcelWorditir body 9-26-05.doc August 11,2005
Appendix
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TABLE 3.5.2B SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS
iSCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982)
Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type 1A
' rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration.
CURVE NUMBERS BY
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP
LAND USE DESCRIPTION A B C D
Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95
Mountain open areas: low growing brush and grasslands 74 82 89 92
Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89
' Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 76 81
Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86
Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94
Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries,
landscaping.
good condition: grass cover on 75% ��
or more of the area 68 80 ." 90
' fair condition: grass cover on 50%
to 75% of the area 77 85 90 92
Gravel roads and parking lots 76 85 89 91
Dirt roads and parking lots 72 82 87 89
Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. 98 98 98 98
Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 100
' Single Family Residential (2)
Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre % Impervious (3)
' 1.0 DU/GA 15 Separate curve number
1.5 DU/GA 20 shall be selected
2.0 DU/GA 25 for pervious and
2.5 DU/GA 30 impervious portion
3.0 DU/GA 34 of the site or basin
3.5 DU/GA 38
4.0 DU/GA 42
4.5 DU/GA 46
5.0 DU/GA 48
5.5 DUJGA 50
6.0 DU/GA 52
6.5 DU/GA 54
7.0 DU/GA 56
Planned unit developments, % impervious
condominiums, apartments, must be computed
commercial business and
industrial areas.
(1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering
Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972.
(2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system.
(3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers.
i
gC� 3.5.2-3 11/92
Rip
lip
OWN
RMA
tad
A.
nit ,#
r . -1,.Y�.,Ef
�� III �' �� �� , ►
�.
�i
►
m
OM
imp
pa
i
MIT
�I
r l A ��
r' 1
koffilp
IA
MWAN ��
. s �
O . It In V41
WON
So I
IRA 0 Iva
ORK
I OF
ion
JIM
MIMI
R r,�� •l
�E�i���• taw�• ..�����_ '* � �� b
i
h•'
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
Ra L
AM� ry
¢ a
FIRM
g,
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON AND
INCORPORATED AREASG' `
y
'kJ�fF'd`�'A �u ftxi
PANEL 971 OF 1725 ,
(SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) N1
CONTAINS: '
COMMUNITY NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX
KING COUNTY, f �
UNINCORPORATED AREAS 530071 0977 F � n
RENTON.CITY OF 530088 0977 F
POW
y`5rrN 4 1 1 la 71��i
MAP NUMBER " r7
53033CO977 F ` s
ICY MA MAP REVISED:
MAY 16, 1995
� Sfzi 4,
,r1
Federal Emergency Management Agency
St
MILWAUKE E
CHICAGC :�
16
SOUTH -
w
3
CITY OF REN rON
o 530088
w �y
,L RM285
QN(?R e HEWN _ x
w N Soo-,
ccBUf3UNGt0
r
19
ZONE AH
(EL 24)
yea _ SOUTH RENTON VILLAGE PLACE
LIMIT OF
ZONE AE G DETAILED STUDY
.a. . ;
(EL 24) ZONE A aos
�.. ._�*.
47028'07"
122°13'07"
1 .
1
1
1
1
1
SOIL SURVEY
CountyKin Area
1
g
Washin ton
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Soil Conservation Service
1 in cooperation with
WASHINGTON AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
1 Issued November 1973
1
tIf drained, this soil is used for row crops. It Ap2--3 to 8 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silty clay loam,
is also used for pasture. Capability unit IIw-3; light brownish gray (2.5Y 6/2) dry; many,
no woodland classification. fine, prominent, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/3
' and 3/4) mottles and common, fine, prominent
mottles of strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) and red-
Urban Land dish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) dry; moderate, fine
and very fine, angular blocky structure; hard,
Urban land. (Ur) is soil that has been modified by friable, sticky, plastic; common fine roots;
'disturbance of the natural layers with additions of medium acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 4 to 6
fill material several feet thick to accommodate large inches thick.
industrial and housing installations. In the Green B21g--8 to 38 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silty clay loam,
'River Valley the fill ranges from about 3 to more gray (5Y 6/1) dry; common, fine, prominent,
than 12 feet in thickness, and from gravelly sandy brown (7.5YR 4/4) mottles and medium, promi-
loam to gravelly loam in texture. nent mottles of brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) dry;
The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. No 25 percent of matrix is lenses of very dark
'capability or woodland classification. brown (10YR 2/2) and dark yellowish-brown
(10YR 3/4) peaty muck, brown (7.5YR 4/2) dry;
massive; hard, firm, sticky, plastic; few fine
Woodinville Series roots; medium acid; clear, smooth boundary.
30 to 40 inches thick.
The Woodinville series is made up of nearly level B22g--38 to 60 inches, greenish-gray (5BG 5/1) silt
and gently undulating, poorly drained soils that loam, gray (5Y 6/1) dry; few, fine, prominent
formed under grass and sedges, in alluvium, on. stream mottles of brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) dry;
'bottoms. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent. The annual massive; hard, very friable, slightly sticky,
precipitation ranges from 35 to 55 inches, and the slightly plastic; strongly acid.
mean annual air temperature is about 50' F. The
frost-free season is about 190 days. Elevation The A horizon ranges from dark grayish brown to
'ranges from about sea level to about 85 feet. gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam. The B
In a representative profile, gray silt loam, horizon ranges from gray and grayish brown to olive
silty clay loam, and layers of peaty muck extend to gray and greenish gray and from silty clay loam to
a depth of about 38 inches. This is underlain by silt loam. In places there are thin lenses of very
'greenish-gray silt loam that extends to a depth of fine sandy loam and loamy fine sand. Peaty lenses
60 inches and more. are common in the B horizon. These lenses are thin,
Woodinville soils are used for row crops, pasture, and their combined thickness, between depths.of 10
and urban development. and 40 inches, does not exceed 10 inches.
' Soils included with this soil in mapping make up
Woodinville silt loam (Wo) .--This soil is in elon- no more than 25 percent of the total acreage. Some
gated and blocky shaped areas that range from 5 to areas are up to 15 percent Puget soils; some are up
nearly 300 acres in size. It is nearly level and to 10 percent Snohomish soils; and some areas are up
gently undulating. Slopes are less than 2 percent. to 10 percent Oridia, Briscot, Puyallup, Newberg,
Representative profile of Woodinville silt loam, and Nooksack soils.
in pasture, 1,700 feet south and 400 feet west of Permeability is moderately slow. There is a sea-
the north quarter corner of sec. 6, T. 25 N., R. 7 sonal high water table at or near the surface. In
'E : drained areas, the effective rooting depth is 60
inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth
Apl--O to 3 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silt loam, grayish is restricted. The available water capacity is
brown (10YR 5/2) dry; common, fine, prominent, high. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is
dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/4) and reddish-brown slight. Stream overflow is a severe hazard unless
(5YR 5/4) mottles; moderate, medium, crumb flood protection is provided (pl. III, top).
structure; hard, friable, sticky, plastic; This soil is used for row crops, pasture, and
many fine roots; medium acid; clear, smooth urban development. Capability unit IIw-2; woodland
boundary. 2 to 4 inches thick. group M.
33
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1