HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272735(1) TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
FOR
THE 7-11 MINI-MARKET
AND
GASOLINE SALES
LOCATED AT
THE IVWC-S.W. 43RD STREET
AND
OAKESDALE AVENUE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
OUR JOB NO. 6777
� g. GF?
June 12,. 1998 oFwnsytip�
oy
Revised September 19, 1998 1
p�� 9Fd PAW7�C
Prepared By: ONAI.Et� Gl��iB
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEER lRES lnlq
18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH
KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 CITY OFRENTON
(425) 251 -6222 RECEIVED
SEP 2 1 1998
m�IV f, SF BUILDING DIVISION
i CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Nt W
"N.ENG��
I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed 7-Eleven convenience store, and gasoline sales is located at the northwest corner of
S.W.43rd Street and Oakesdale Avenue in Renton, Washington. This 1.6 acre site is within the
proposed Oakesdale Business Park. This Business Park is a 41-acre development which has been
submitted for permitting by the City of Renton. The project is located is located within the Northwest
quarter of the Northeast of Section 36, Township 23 North, Range 4 East.
The Oakesdale Business Park includes the stormwater detention and water quality treatment facilities for
the entire 41-acre parcel including this subject development. Storm drainage for the subject development
will be conveyed to this Oakesdale Business Park facility via a catch basin and storm pipe collection
system. All conveyance facilities will be sized in accordance with the City of Renton requirements.
Specific project water quality systems provided consist of a separate collection for the area underneath
the fuel island canopy. This area is directed to a trench drain and a oil/water separator prior to
discharge to the sanitary sewer system.
Storm water sheet flowing in the direction of the fuel island area is collected within a trench drain. This
storm water is then collected and conveyed through the storm water system to prevent the run on of
storm water into the fuel island area.
A copy of the Technical Information Report is enclosed which further describes the drainage conditions
and requirements for the subject site. Also enclosed within the appendix is the geotechnical report and
soils information for this project.
• An analysis of pre- and post-developed conditions is provided as requested by the City. This analysis
allows the City of Renton to compare the available detention and water quality features with the
proposed development. Future developments should include the 7-Eleven site as a part, to maintain
accuracy with the results. The attached analysis indicates that more than sufficient volume is available
for the 7-Eleven site.
i
6777.001 CFB/ph
9/18/98 11: 58 : 23 am Shareware Release page 1
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED TO INCLUDE 7-11
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: 711DEV10 NAME: 10yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 84 Acres 0.76 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98. 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14.72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 0. 65 cfs VOL: 0. 28 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 711dev02 NAME: 2yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0. 84 Acres 0. 76 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98. 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14 .72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 0. 39 cfs VOL: 0. 17 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 711ex02y NAME: 2yr/24hr predeveloped
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 69 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 1. 69 Acres 0. 00 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 81. 00 0. 00
TC. . . . . 86. 31 min 0. 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0.4000 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
PEAK RATE: 0. 07 cfs VOL: 0. 09 Ac-ft TIME: 550 min
9/18/98 11: 58 : 24 am Shareware Release page 2
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
Is 5911-DET REVISED TD INCLUDE 7-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: 711ex100 NAME: 100yr/24hr predeveloped
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 1. 60 Acres 0. 00 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 81. 00 0. 00
TC. . . . . 86. 31 min 0. 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0. 4000 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
PEAK RATE: 0. 32 cfs VOL: 0. 27 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min
BASIN ID: 711ex10y NAME: 10yr/24hr predeveloped
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 1. 60 Acres 0. 00 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 81. 00 0. 00
TC. . . . . 86. 31 min 0. 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0. 4000 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
PEAK RATE: 0. 18 cfs VOL: 0. 16 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min
BASIN ID: 71dev100 NAME: 100yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0.84 Acres 0.76 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98. 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14. 72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 0. 95 cfs VOL: 0. 40 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
9/18/98 11: 58 : 24 am Shareware Release page 3
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED TZ) INCLUDE 7-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: 71wetpND NAME: 1/3 2yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 1. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 0. 67 inches AREA. . : 0. 84 Acres 0.76 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98. 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14 .72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 0. 08 cfs VOL: 0. 03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
9/18/98 11: 58 : 24 am Shareware Release page 4
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED TiD INCLUDE 7-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. design
Description: Design detention pond
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15.50 0.0000 0.0000 16.90 16160 0.3710 18.30 33910 0.7785 19.70 54180 1.2438
15.60 1038 0.0238 17.00 17379 0.3990 18.40 35358 0.8117 19.80 55628 1.2770
15.70 2076 0.0477 17.10 18597 0.4269 18.50 36806 0.8449 19.90 57076 1.3103
15.80 3115 0.0715 17.20 19816 0.4549 18.60 38253 0.8782 20.00 58524 1.3435
15.90 4153 0.0953 17.30 21035 0.4829 18.70 39701 0.9114 20.10 60114 1.3800
16.00 5191 0.1192 17.40 22254 0.5109 18.80 41149 0.9447 20.20 61705 1.4165
16.10 6410 0.1471 17.50 23472 0.5388 18.90 42597 0.9779 20.30 63295 1.4531
16.20 7629 0.1751 17.60 24691 0.5668 19.00 44045 1.0111 20.40 64885 1.4896
16.30 8847 0.2031 17.70 25910 0.5948 19.10 45493 1.0444 20.50 66476 1.5261
16.40 10066 0.2311 17.80 27129 0.6228 19.20 46941 1.0776 20.60 68066 1.5626
16.50 11285 0.2591 17.90 28347 0.6508 19.30 48389 1.1109 20.70 69656 1.5991
16.60 12504 0.2870 18.00 29566 0.6787 19.40 49837 1.1441 20.80 71246 1.6356
16.70 13722 0.3150 18.10 31014 0.7120 19.50 51285 1.1773 20.90 72837 1.6721
16.80 14941 0.3430 18.20 32462 0.7452 19.60 52732 1.2106 21.00 74427 1.7086
9/18/98 11: 58 : 24 am Shareware Release page 5
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED TE) INCLUDE 7-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1
Description: 1/2 2yr/24hr design orifice
Outlet Elev: 15. 30
Elev: 13 . 30 ft Orifice Diameter: 1. 9658 in.
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- -------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15.30 0.0000 16.80 0.1284 18.30 0.1816 19.80 0.2225
15.40 0.0332 16.90 0.1327 18.40 0.1846 19.90 0.2249
15.50 0.0469 17.00 0.1367 18.50 0.1876 20.00 0.2274
15.60 0.0574 17.10 0.1407 18.60 0.1905 20.10 0.2298
15.70 0.0663 17.20 0.1446 18.70 0.1934 20.20 0.2321
15.80 0.0742 17.30 0.1483 18.80 0.1962 20.30 0.2345
15.90 0.0812 17.40 0.1520 18.90 0.1990 20.40 0.2368
16.00 0.0877 17.50 0.1555 19.00 0.2017 20.50 0.2391
16.10 0.0938 17.60 0.1590 19.10 0.2044 20.60 0.2414
16.20 0.0995 17.70 0.1625 19.20 0.2071 20.70 0.2437
16.30 0.1049 17.80 0.1658 19.30 0.2097 20.80 0.2459
16.40 0.1100 17.90 0.1691 19.40 0.2123 20.90 0.2482
16.50 0.1149 18.00 0.1723 19.50 0.2149 21.00 0.2504
16.60 0.1196 18.10 0.1755 19.60 0.2175
16.70 0.1241 18.20 0.1786 19.70 0.2200
9/18/98 11: 58 : 24 am Shareware Release page 6
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED Tb INCLUDE 7-11
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2
Description: notch weir
Weir Length: 0. 8000 ft. Weir height (p) : 3 . 8200 ft.
Elevation 19 . 12 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- -------
19.12 0.0000 19.60 0.7773 20.10 1.9763 20.60 3.1080
19.20 0.0582 19.70 1.0063 20.20 2.2175 20.70 3.3023
19.30 0.1919 19.80 1.2440 20.30 2.4533 20.80 3.4817
19.40 0.3637 19.90 1.4869 20.40 2.6817 20.90 3.6445
19.50 0.5613 20.00 1.7319 20.50 2.9005 21.00 3.7891
9/18/98 11: 58 : 24 am Shareware Release page 7
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED TI INCLUDE 7-11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. combine
Description: combined discharge structure
Structure: 1 Structure:
Structure: 2 Structure:
Structure:
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- -------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15.30 0.0000 16.80 0.1284 18.30 0.1816 19.80 1.4665
15.40 0.0332 16.90 0.1327 18.40 0.1846 19.90 1.7118
15.50 0.0469 17.00 0.1367 18.50 0.1876 20.00 1.9593
15.60 0.0574 17.10 0.1407 18.60 0.1905 20.10 2.2060
15.70 0.0663 17.20 0.1446 18.70 0.1934 20.20 2.4496
15.80 0.0742 17.30 0.1483 18.80 0.1962 20.30 2.6878
15.90 0.0812 17.40 0.1520 18.90 0.1990 20.40 2.9185
16.00 0.0877 17.50 0.1555 19.00 0.2017 20.50 3.1397
16.10 0.0938 17.60 0.1590 19.10 0.2044 20.60 3.3494
16.20 0.0995 17.70 0.1625 19.20 0.2653 20.70 3.5460
16.30 0.1049 17.80 0.1658 19.30 0.4016 20.80 3.7276
16.40 0.1100 17.90 0.1691 19.40 0.5760 20.90 3.8926
16.50 0.1149 18.00 0.1723 19.50 0.7762 21.00 4.0395
16.60 0.1196 18.10 0.1755 19.60 0.9948
16.70 0.1241 18.20 0.1786 19.70 1.2263
9/18/98 11: 58 : 27 am Shareware Release page 8
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention Pond Design
5911-DET REVISED TI INCLUDE 7-11
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- -PEAK- OUTFLOW STORAGE
<--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1/2 2yr/24hr design .......... 0.20 0.39 design 1 15.76 1 0.07 2655.66 cf
10 YR EVENT .................. 0.18 0.65 design combine 16.06 2 0.09 5937.96 cf
100 YR EVENT ................. 0.32 0.95 design combine 16.41 3 0.11 10183.23 cf
2 YR FINAL ................... 0.00 0.39 final combine 15.69 4 0.07 2886.82 cf
10 YR FINAL .................. 0.00 0.65 final combine 15.93 5 0.08 6428.14 cf
100 YR FINAL ................. 0.00 0.95 final combine 16.19 6 0.10 10869.71 cf
:.. :
ECNNIOAI. NfOR'N1ATIONPOR�
R
SE..
IN;f S S 'FAR I�:;>Pk��►..>::>::::>::>:>:::>::.>::.:» :.:;:;::.::;::.;>::::
.............
. ........ ..
a�
OUR JOB NO. 5911
JANUARY 29, 1998 p 2466
NRL
_1�-9 S�
Prepared By:
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
1 821 5 72ND AVENUE SOUTH
KENT, WASHINGTON 98032
(425) 251 -6222
m� �Z
CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
b
I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION
1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed Oakesdale Business Park is an approximately 41-acre site located at the northwest
corner of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and S.W. 43rd Street in Renton, Washington. The site is situated
in both the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 36, Township 23 North, Range 4
East and the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 36, Township 34 North, Range
4 East, Willamette Meridian, King County, Washington.
Site development will occur in two phases. Springbrook Creek flows roughly west to east through
the property. Phase II and III will consist of development of approximately 31.5 acres north of
Springbrook Creek. Phase I will consist of development of approximately 9.8 acres south of
Springbrook Creek. This Technical Information Report and accompanying set of design plans are
prepared exclusively for Phase I of the development.
Phase I of the Oakesdale Business Park includes a lot line adjustment and construction of a storm
drainage conveyance system, wet/detention pond, and sanitary sewer main line to serve each
proposed lot. Parcel owners will then be able to develop individual lots and tie into the proposed
systems. No grading and/or paving improvements are proposed for Phase-I at this time.
A ridge line from the southwest corner to the northeast corner of Phase I roughly parallels
Springbrook Creek and divides on-site drainage into two flow directions. Ultimately, all flow from
Phase I is combined at the outlet end of the quadruple 72-inch corrugated metal pipe culverts
conveying Springbrook Creek under Oakesdale Avenue S.W.
5911.005 [KWL/kn]
Page 1 of 2
King County Department of Development and Environmental Services
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
PROJECTPART 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PART 2 PROJECT LOCATION
•
Project Owner Zellman Development Company Project Name Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 1
Address 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036 Location
Phone Los Angeles, CA 90017 Township 23N
Project Engineer Karl Lundberg Range 4E
Company Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Section 36
Address Phone 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, Project Size 31.5 AC
WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 Upstream Drainage Basin Size 0 AC
PART 3 TYPE OF • OTHER
❑ Subdivision ❑ DOF/GHPA ❑ Shoreline Management
❑ Short Subdivision ❑ COE 404 ❑ Rockery
❑ Grading ❑ DOE Dam Safety ❑ Structural Vaults
■ Commercial ❑ FEMA Floodplain ❑ Other
❑ Other ❑ COE Wetlands ■ HPA
COMMUNITYPART 5 SITE • DRAINAGE
Community
Green River
Drainage Basin
Springbrook Creek Green River
PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS
❑ River ❑ Floodplain
■ Stream Springbrook Creek ■ Wetlands
❑ Critical Stream Reach ❑ Seeps/Springs
■ Depressions/Swales ❑ High Groundwater Table T
❑ Lake ❑ Groundwater Recharge
❑ Steep Slopes ❑ Other
❑ Lakeside/Erosion Hazard
SOILSPART 7
Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities
Puyallup Flat Low Low
Urban Flat Low Low
❑ Additional Sheets Attached
PART 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS
REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT
❑ Ch.4-Downstream Analysis
El
ElAdditional Sheets Attached
591 1.002[KL/tal
Page 2 of 2
King County Department of Development and Environmental Services
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS FOLLOWING
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION
■ Sedimentation Facilities ■ Stabilize Exposed Surface
■ Stabilized Construction Entrance ■ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities
■ Perimeter Runoff Control ■ Clean and Remove All Site and Debris
❑ Clearing and Grading Restrictions ■ Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities
■ Cover Practices ❑ Flag Limits of NGPES
■ Construction Sequence ❑ Other
❑ Other
PART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM
❑ Grass Lined Channel ❑ Tank ❑ Infiltration Method of Analysis
■ Pipe System ❑ Vault ❑ Depression SBUH
❑ Open Channel ❑ Energy Dissipater ❑ Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation
❑ Dry Pond ❑ Wetland ❑ Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage
■ Wet Pond ❑ Stream ❑ Regional Detention
Brief Description of System Operation Tightline conveyance system to wet / detention pond to provide
detention and water quality prior to release to Springbrook Creek
Facility Related Site Limitations ❑ Additional Sheets Attached
Reference Facility Limitation
PART STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PART :9 r:ASEMENTS/TRACTS
(May require special structural review)
❑ Cast in Place Vault ■ Drainage Easement
❑ Retaining Wall - ❑ Access Easement
❑ Rockery > 4' High ❑ Native Growth Protection Easement
❑ Structural on Steep Slope ❑ Tract
❑ Other ❑ Other
PART 14 SIGNATURE OF R• •
I or a civil engineer under 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 fffv
here is accurate. 777
ce
5911.0021KL/tal
SNUYV 11
TBEA TMENT PLART Y EXIT
- �� S �• 2
4 405 = T s
.N 19 d
f
uth. �'•.0 m< m
S
VSW 19 ST EXITT Ta1G6 t
5+ w
: COt swtsW
Evans C •v. a
Black Or �� .L. O
dan BI tl t _ SW23ST
u
o
glvd SW 27 ST ~
S28S
c
Treck Or � t 67
SITE ` N
w 3o sr r
Y j
\ 2 5 sw 31 sr > 3 0 V
o SW 3 to
SW 34 ST
h
u a`
u o U
$c a' o yc 36
J d SW-39 ST
o c S37S
v _
�! SW 38 ST Y cQ ;
6 O E u
SW A,ST
Saxon Of
YALIET
Uilm � ME11CAl
ST
i SW 43 ST CENTER
Rives 10 S
i slazsT 36 H �
t
'6 168 ST t 10
S lacier rn t 5 t a8 ST t^
SA 69 ST o $
z
SITE LOCATION MAP
NTs
Reference: Greater Renton City Alap, 1987 Edition
II. PRELIMINARY CONDITION SUMMARY
2.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
Approximately one-third of the site lies north of the ridge line and drains directly into Springbrook
Creek. The remaining two-thirds of the site sheetflows in a primarily southerly direction before
reaching a poorly defined ditch, which conveys drainage toward Oakesdale Avenue S.W. The
drainage is collected in a larger and better defined ditch just outside the Oakesdale Avenue S.W.
right-of--way and is collected in the underground piping conveyance system of the roadway. Runoff
is conveyed north beneath the east side of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and is discharged into
Springbrook Creek at the outlet end of the quadruple 72-inch CMP culverts.
Existing soil conditions are listed in the King County soil survey as Puyallup (SCS hydrologic group
B)and urban(variable). Type B soil texture is described in the King County Surface Water Design
Manual as moderately fine to moderately coarse. The geotechnical engineering study by Earth
Consultants Inc. dated December 8, 1997, contained in Section 6.0 of this report describes the
soil's texture as fine. Therefore, we have used curve numbers that correspond to Type C soils,
which have texture described as moderately fine to fine.
3.0 DEVELOPED AND FUTURE SITE CONDITIONS
On-site flow patterns will not be significantly altered by the construction of the pond, storm
drainage, and utilities as shown on the plans. As parcels are developed, however, storm drainage
will be collected in a series of catch basins located in paved areas and conveyed to the storm
drainage system provided to each lot. Storm drainage in future developed conditions of Phase I will
be conveyed to the pond.
4.0 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS/DETENTION SYSTEM
The storm drainage conveyance system is designed to convey the peak flows from the 25-year/24-
hour design storm at full flow conditions. The rational method is used to determine peak flow rates
and Excel spreadsheet software is used for the computer calculations.
The wet/detention pond is designed using hydrographs generated by the Santa Barbara Urban
Hydrograph method. The pond is designed to release peak flows from the developed 2-year and 10-
year/24-hour design storms at peak rates less than or equal to the existing condition peak rates for
the 2-and 10-year/24-hour design storms, respectively. A 30 percent increase in volume over the
required volume for the 10-year/24-hour design storm has been added. WaterWorks software is
used to calculate the peak flows, design volumes, and outlet control.
Water quality is being provided in a wet pond portion of the wet/detention pond. The required wet
pond volume of total runoff from the developed 6-month/24-hour design storm has been doubled
to eliminate the need for a biofiltration swale preceding the wet/detention pond.
5911.005 [KWLA n]
\1'4, \ \ \\
1 I
' 377.26'
At
I f
r rSb , CO
�
x ,
Zji
Fl
WN
P(UG
Jo
P,� Ma+) —» _,-,+fro. -- --- --?Se
Ssr •J Q�at�A• .... - P(OH) 1, 'J0+
P(ON)
I / O P(OH)
rn
74) 1
` a,\ x�a •Ar
It
' 1. JJ '4y
ir
I 'L � i?�Ji �� x O � � • � ' I �� � 11 11 1 - ��SJa
x� it D
I 1
1
'! `,\ \ IV,II
x
\ \ x�i
tD
o
4 I 1 I 1 \\
\ 1
11 11
I� '• I I _ _- ' -. �\ \,`\`\ � \I 11\ '1 +, �11111 1' 'tx'4� \\I 111
I � I � 1 `'�•:'Yp xtJ Sf � /) P•? •'\\\x \ 1 � 1 ��'',�I 1 1�, , \
Q\-tt \\ \`x'dl
61
I� 1 I �:Z:;
x x I � 1 •.
x
00
■ x .�
,px •
x x
O \ x rd • \
x rn , , x`, •� x ► \ �rJ
Iry
V Y� ', J•
O rn xJ<�
,A
- 0 Z � x m
T \ x
1,, '`{r G, x� *J xx �4
x� ,}ram__ ^_ �.,y—-� ,✓�-..�••. r
qr
cn
20
i � •� x .��`� ,•
843.20' e, ,
_.._
dale -
nue
�� __ ••: Sege ORT ,i 1W•� ' I
\� Diso sal
GS Ur Ur :12G
I NE, J •j •-i
' , C M 16 9 ,L
j Ur �., J =,-i
- i Pu
XVEi Ur
Pu
�Longacre$i�i�'j I Pu ��• .. ••
eD
G R PY I W o n
Y Ur ii Ur ..�.. I U u' ..0•.l
I n
131 o i Track —
M, — — — z10
1 •� � a;i 29 Ur Y
u I ❑ R s rvoir w
Url �� Ng_
PY �• So Tu i i
�i 2 '
i O Pu Sk
12 W
Wo M
I 1 A
Pu I � u ' f
1 ��.� ' 0 1
I �� .� i 25 ' a 166 I
PY Sk
SITE
I
I Ur
I I c Wo l
; i I
jl oil u (Tu i
Or l 1 !7 \ , •• IBC
I I a �+ SO
Pu
Pr Iwo I
I ur; y• ' a �
l Ur
L; N: I •; 1
F1 2 cy 1 Ur
-
u ' Ng B
AgC• I
Wo
351
v
Nk �` Ng
Br Re �� I
1 Ur Wo
I
PY
I Ur Os So $O YaT I
I W I
I o ' ml I
Wo L C
KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY MAP
1" =2000'
KI N G COUNTY. WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN
MANUAL
(2) CN values can be area weighted when they apply to pervious areas of similar CN'
CN points). However, high CN areas should not be combined with low CN areas (un esslthe0 /
low CN areas are less than 15% of the subbasin). In this case, separate hydrograph
generated and summed to form one hydrograph, s should be
FIGURE 3.S.2A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS INKING COUNTY
SOIL GROUP HYDROLOGIC
GROUP* SOIL GROUP HYDROLOGIC
Alderwood GROUP*
Arents, Alderwood Material C Orcas Peat
Arents, Everett Material C Oridia D
Beaushe B Ovatl D
Bellingham C Pilchuck C
Briscot D Puget C
Buckley D >Puyallup D
Coastal Beaches D Ragnar
Earimont Silt Loam Variable Renton B
Edgewick D Riverwash D
Everett C Salal Variable
Indianola A/B `Sammamish C
Kitsap A Seattle D IQaus C Shacar D
Mixed Alluvial Land C Si Silt D
Nelton Variable Snohomish C
Newberg A Sultan D
Nooksack B Tukwila C
Normal Sandy Loam C Urban D
D Woodinville Variable
D
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS
A. (Low runoff potential). Soils having high infiltration rats, even when thoroughly wetted, and consisting
chiefly s deep,well drained sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water '
transmission. s sung
B. (Moderately low runoff
de eoshaving
yderate ln rates when aN �' and
consisting chiefly of morate yfintomoderatelcoarse textures. These soils have thoroughlywater transmission.
rate of
C. (Moderately high runoff
consisting chiefly u Soils off poteehta tl�aye oills having slow Infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and
fine to fine textures. These soils have a slow crate of water transmisies downward o�nt of water, or soils with moderately :
D. (High runoff potential). Soils Navin very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting
chiefly of clay soils with a high swe
g potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a I
hardpan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material- These soils
have a very slow rate of water transmission.
I
From SCS, TR-55, Second Edition, June 1986, Exhibit A-t. Revisions made from SCS, Sol Interpretation
Record, Form #5, September 19gg-
3.5.2-2
11/92
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TABLE 3.5.2B SCS WESTERN WASIIINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS
SCS 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 8' 89
Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 81
Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86
Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 94
Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries,
landscaping.
good condition: grass cover on 75%
or more of the area 68 80 O 90
fair.condition: grass cover on 50%
to 75%of the area 77 85 90 92
Gravel roads and parking lots 76 8s 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 0 100
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 DU/GA 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
commerdial business and
industrial areas.
(1) 'For a more detailed description of agricultural land use cure 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 -7umbers.
3.5.2-3 tlJ9_
�!L GL.YSS�IGAi/o.�l
�i�irh K�.vG Go »cL �Li VL''/
�y = )rVY,'9GLu/'
(fir l v294^j (�,vD -� ✓.v��aa�
ra
W LL VJ
V1 V1 Kf
un O O
IN eN = � � s �iN(r v.Vp
—er v Lti Slv
v
nC4r cN L 46 R3vt'1-DPd��i�Pt'72vtouS
o
Af
r
44
7-OTqL Oi;`7VClAP9Z ,jp,g•4 �iNc ✓I� JG po7r,rjj70A
i
.olr 1,71ag2vtaus /�,.: Z B, 4 �4c.
i f
i
G�rSTiti
IIS L� S6l4L� rlo�.+, a.S"l� Fo2�3G�BrLv 56(
I
D�VLsL�� cc►.�Dt�-ro.�/ ,- f}sso.,,� Gc�o
/SOU ` _ htEcJ, O.2S7; S•wGu*t�
KING COUNTY, WAS ►-{ INGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TABLE 3.5?B SCS WESTERN NYASI[INGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS
SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982)
Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type to
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: 78 e5 89
Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 81
Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 8t 86
Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 94
Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries,
landscaping.
good condition: grass cover on 75%
or more of the area 68 80 O go
fair.condition: grass cover on 50%
to_75%of the area 77 85 9.3 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 3 100
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
20 DU/GA 25 for pervious and
2.5 DU/GA 30 impervious portion
3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5 DU/GA 38 of the site or basin
4.0 DU/GA 42
4.5 DU/GA 46
5.0 DU/GA 48
5.5 DU/GA 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
commerdial 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 cumbers.
-' 3.5.2-3
III. OFI+ SITE ANALYSIS
IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
1/29/98 5: 21: 50 pm Barghausen Engineers page 1
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
5911-DET
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: dev02yr NAME: 2yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 1. 48 Acres 8 . 41 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14 . 72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0.0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42.00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 3 . 30 cfs VOL: 1. 35 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: dev100yr NAME: 100yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9.89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 .90 inches AREA. . : 1.48 Acres 8.41 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10.00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98.00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14.72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: - 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0.0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 .00 s: 0.0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 6.94 cfs VOL: 2 .87 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: dev10yr NAME: 10yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 .90 inches AREA. . : 1. 48 Acres 8 .41 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14 . 72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25 . 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100 . 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0 . 0025
PEAK RATE: 5 . 02 cfs VOL: 2 . 06 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
0
1/29/98 5: 21: 50 pm Barghausen Engineers page 2
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: ex02yr NAME: 2yr/24hr predeveloped
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 9 . 89 Acres 0. 00 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 81. 00 0. 00
TC. . . . : 107 . 53 min 0. 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0. 4000 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Shallow L: 450. 00 ks: 5. 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 0.41 cfs VOL: 0.50 Ac-ft TIME: 660 min
BASIN ID: ex100yr NAME: 100yr/24hr predeveloped
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9.89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 .90 inches AREA. . : 9. 89 Acres 0. 00 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 81. 00 0.00
TC. . . . : 107 .53 min 0. 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20
TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0. 4000 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Shallow L: 450. 00 ks:5. 00 s:0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 1. 79 cfs VOL: 1. 68 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min
BASIN ID: exlOyr NAME: 10yr/24hr predeveloped
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9.89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2.90 inches AREA. . : 9.89 Acres 0.00 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 81. 00 0. 00
TC. . . . : 107 . 53 min 0. 00 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0.4000 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0.0100
TcReach - Shallow L: 450. 00 ks: 5. 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 0. 99 cfs VOL: 1. 02 Ac-ft TIME: 550 min
1/29/98 5: 21: 51 pm Barghausen Engineers page 3
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
5911-DET
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
PEAK TIME VOLUME
HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib
NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area
cfs min. cf\AcFt Acres
2 0. 397 1360 53553 cf 9 .89
3 0.981 810 82292 cf 9 . 89
4 0. 366 1450 50506 cf 9 .89
5 0.735 1140 73230 cf 9.89
6 1. 361 800 106924 cf 9.89
1/29/98 5: 21: 58 pm Barghausen Engineers page 4
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST
STORAGE LIST ID No. design
Description: Design detention pond
STORAGE LIST ID No. final
Description: Final detention pond (+30%)
1/29/98 5: 21: 58 pm Barghausen Engineers page 5
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
5911-DET
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. design
Description: Design detention pond
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
14.50 0.0000 0.0000 15.90 21403 0.4913 17.30 46332 1.0636 18.70 72775 1.6707
14.60 1529 0.0351 16.00 22932 0.5264 17.40 48132 1.1050 18.80 74752 1.7161
14.70 3058 0.0702 16.10 24732 0.5678 17.50 49932 1.1463 18.90 76730 1.7615
14.80 4586 0.1053 16.20 26532 0.6091 17.60 51732 1.1876 19.00 78707 1.8069
14.90 6115 0.1404 16.30 28332 0.6504 17.70 53532 1.2289 19.10 80805 1.8550
15.00 7644 0.1755 16.40 30132 0.6917 17.80 55332 1.2702 19.20 82903 1.9032
15.10 9173 0.2106 16.50 31932 0.7331 17.90 57132 1.3116 19.30 85001 1.9514
15.20 10702 0.2457 16.60 33732 0.7744 18.00 58932 1.3529 19.40 87099 1.9995
15.30 12230 0.2808 16.70 35532 0.8157 18.10 60910 1.3983 19.50 89198 2.0477
15.40 13759 0.3159 16.80 37332 0.8570 18.20 62887 1.4437 19.60 91296 2.0959
15.50 15288 0.3510 16.90 39132 0.8983 18.30 64865 1.4891 19.70 93394 2.1440
15.60 16817 0.3861 17.00 40932 0.9397 18.40 66842 1.5345 19.80 95492 2.1922
15.70 18346 0.4212 17.10 42732 0.9810 18.50 68820 1.5799 19.90 97590 2.2404
15.80 19874 0.4563 17.20 44532 1.0223 18.60 70797 1.6253 20.00 99688 2.2885
1/29/98 5: 21: 58 pm Barghausen Engineers page 6
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
5911-DET
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. final
Description: Final detention pond (+30%)
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
14.50 0.0000 0.0000 15.90 27825 0.6388 17.30 60232 1.3827 18.70 94607 2.1719
14.60 1987 0.0456 16.00 29812 0.6844 17.40 62572 1.4365 18.80 97178 2.2309
14.70 3975 0.0913 16.10 32152 0.7381 17.50 64912 1.4902 18.90 99748 2.2899
14.80 5962 0.1369 16.20 34492 0.7918 17.60 67252 1.5439 19.00 102319 2.3489
14.90 7950 0.1825 16.30 36832 0.8455 17.70 69592 1.5976 19.10 105047 2.4115
15.00 9937 0.2281 16.40 39172 0.8993 17.80 71932 1.6513 19.20 107774 2.4742
15.10 11925 0.2738 16.50 41512 0.9530 17.90 74272 1.7051 19.30 110502 2.5368
15.20 13912 0.3194 16.60 43852 1.0067 18.00 76612 1.7588 19.40 113229 2.5994
15.30 15900 0.3650 16.70 46192 1.0604 18.10 79183 1.8178 19.50 115957 2.6620
15.40 17887 0.4106 16.80 48532 1.1141 18.20 81753 1.8768 19.60 118684 2.7246
15.50 19875 0.4563 16.90 50872 1.1679 18.30 84324 1.9358 19.70 121412 2.7872
15.60 21862 0.5019 17.00 53212 1.2216 18.40 86895 1.9948 19.80 124139 2.8498
15.70 23850 0.5475 17.10 55552 1.2753 18.50 89466 2.0538 19.90 126867 2.9125
15.80 25837 0.5931 17.20 57892 1.3290 18.60 92036 2.1129 20.00 129594 2.9751
1/29/98 5: 21: 58 pm Barghausen Engineers page 7
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
5911-DET
DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST
NOTCH WEIR ID No. 100yr
Description: 100yr notch weir
Weir Length: 0. 6000 ft. Weir height (p) : 2 . 3000 ft.
Elevation 16. 60 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 2yr
Description: 2yr/24hr design orifice
Outlet Elev: 14 . 30
Elev: 12 . 30 ft Orifice Diameter: 3 . 1250 in.
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. combine
Description: combined discharge structure
Structure: 2yr Structure:
Structure: 100yr Structure:
Structure: overflow
RISER DISCHARGE ID No. overflow
Description: Overflow riser
Riser Diameter (in) : 12 . 00 elev: 19. 00 ft
Weir Coefficient. . . : 9.739 height: 20. 00 ft
Orif Coefficient. . . : 3 .782 increm: 0. 10 ft
1/29/98 5: 21: 59 pm Barghausen Engineers page 8
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention-pond-Design
________________________________________________
5911-DET
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. combine
Description: combined discharge structure
Structure: 2yr Structure:
Structure: 100yr Structure:
Structure: overflow
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------
14.30 0.0000 15.80 0.3246 17.30 1.3728 18.80 2.4692
14.40 0.0838 15.90 0.3352 17.40 1.5399 18.90 2.3606
14.50 0.1185 16.00 0.3455 17.50 1.7028 19.00 2.2197
14.60 0.1452 16.10 0.3555 17.60 1.8590 19.10 2.3530
14.70 0.1676 16.20 0.3653 17.70 2.0061 19.20 2.7061
14.80 0.1874 16.30 0.3748 17.80 2.1420 19.30 3.1883
14.90 0.2053 16.40 0.3840 17.90 2.2647 19.40 3.6945
15.00 0.2217 16.50 0.3931 18.00 2.3722 19.50 3.6514
15.10 0.2370 16.60 0.4019 18.10 2.4626 19.60 3.5396
15.20 0.2514 16.70 0.4708 18.20 2.5341 19.70 3.7801
15.30 0.2650 16.80 0.5845 18.30 2.5849 19.80 4.0042
15.40 0.2779 16.90 0.7221 18.40 2.6133 19.90 4.2150
15.50 0.2903 17.00 0.8748 18.50 2.6176 20.00 4.4147
15.60 0.3022 17.10 1.0369 18.60 2.5961
15.70 0.3136 17.20 1.2041 18.70 7.5472
1/29/98 5: 22 : 1 pm Barghausen Engineers page 9
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Detention pond Design
5911-DET
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE
<--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf)
1/2 2yr/24hr design .......... 0.41 3.30 design combine 16.55 2 32783.77 cf
10yr/24hr design ............. 0.99 5.02 design combine 17.07 3 42109.291lcf
2yr/24hr final ............... 0.41 3.30 final combine 16.21 4 34778.23 Ef-
10yr/24hr final .............. 0.99 5.02 final combine 16.91 5 51072.03 cf > '
100yr/24hr final ............. 1.79 6.94 final combine 17.29 6 60073.80 cf'
i
i
i
�sLZLZ ! O SLZ`LZ
L(?L,.SZ ! 5-1- d
ooe9� Z Q'aoy'�z
QL9'Iz
Zrg67-, s•f �"�G9'�t I
a o bG8'Lf �s-�I
I
(47) ICA (��) -rv� ���� P (as) y 7a
r"Y'd r� SPQAc1 S 2 wn-1 0,4
i
i
•+�iii�li�w ��
�`. ��. ,E• sue" �►
rywq
t
WE
t�,�►,,;�� :�,yam! ����,1►`���► IVA
Fig
ape
�����•..'%fir- -
• � \ ►rid
fil
Qlma
SWO
ll�,�i +`
gn
Elf
L Q
END LM
wm
vp
���� "'•'�' �� yak �� �
. , . . . . ?�,,��t+����r�� -gyp •
V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
670 C-?0
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS-PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR
using the Rational Method& Manning Formula
KING COUNTY DESIGN FOR 25 YEAR STORM /
JOB NAME: 7-Eleven @ SW 43rd&Oakesdale Ave NOTE: ENTER DEFAULTS AND STORM DATA BEFORE BEGINNING
JOB#: 6777 DEFAULTS C= 0.85 n= 0.012
FILE#: 6777stm.xls d= 12 Tc= 6.3
A= Contributing Area(Ac) Qd= Design Flow(cfs) COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD"Ir"-EQUATION
C= Runoff Coefficient Qf= Full Capacity Flow(cfs) STORM Ar Br
Tc= Time of Concentration (min) Vd= Velocity at Design Flow(fps) 2YR 1.58 0.58
1= Intensity at Tc (in/hr) Vf= Velocity at Full Flow(fps) 10YR 2.44 0.64 PRECIP= 3.4
d= Diameter of Pipe(in) s= Slope of pipe (%) 25YR 2.66 0.65 Ar= 2.66
L= Length of Pipe (ft) n= Manning Roughness Coefficient 50YR 2.75 0.65 Br= 0.65
D= Water Depth at Qd (in) Tt= Travel Time at Vd (min) 100YR 2.61 0.63
FROM TO A s L d Tc n C SUM A A'C SUM A•C I Qd Qf Qd/Qf D/d D Vf Vd Tt
----- ----------------- --- ------------- ---- ---- ---------- ----- ---------- ------------------- ----
----- ----------------- --- ------------- ---- ---- ---------- ----- ---------- ------------------- ----
CB6 CB5 0.26 1.00 60 8 6.3 0.012 0.85 0.26 0.22 0.22 2.73 0.60 1.31 0.462 0.478 3.82 3.75 3.71 0.27
C85 CB2 0.65 1.00 98 12 6.6 0.012 0.85 0.91 0.55 0.77 2.66 2.06 3.86 0.533 0.519 6.23 4.92 4.99 0.33
CB4 CB3 0.39 0.50 97 8 6.3 0.012 0.85 0.39 0.33 0.33 2.73 0.91 0.93 0.979 0.800 6.40 2.65 3.00 0.54
CB3 CB2 0.11 0.35 121 12 6.8 0.012 0.85 0.5 0.09 0.43 2.59 1.10 2.28 0.483 0.490 5.88 2.91 2.90 0.70
CB2 C81 0.19 0.45 113 12 7.5 0.012 0.85 0.69 0.16 1.36 2.43 3.31 2.59 1.279 #DIV/01 #DIV/01 3.30 #DIV/O! #DIV/O!
DIVISION BY 0 EQUALS SURCHARGED CONDITION = SEE HGL CALC. FOR HW DEPTHS
ADJUSTED SLOPE OF ABOVE CALC TO DETERMINE Q 25 ONLY
Page 1
! 0 0
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS BACKWATER ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET
DEFAULTS LEGEND AREA- full cross sectional area of the pipe(sq.ft.) OC EL- oultet control elevation
n- 0.012 UP CB- upstream catch basin VEL- full velocity in pipe(ft/sec) IC EL- inlet control elevation
SIZE- 12 DN CB- downstream catch basin VEL-HD-velocity head(ft) AVH- approach velocity head(ft)
Ke- 0.5 Q- design flow(cfs) TW EL- tail water elevation Kb- bend loss coefficient
Kb- 0.05 L- length of pipe segment(ft) FL- FL-friction loss(ft) BHL- bend head loss(ft)
Kj 0.14 SIZE- indicate pipe diameter(inches) EN HGL-entrance hydraulic grade line elevation Kj- junction head loss coefficient
n- Manning's"n"value Ke- entrance head loss coefficient JHL- junction head loss(ft)
OUT EL.- outlet elevation of pipe segment EN HL- entrance head loss(ft) HW EL-head water elevation
IN EL.- inlet elevation of pipe segment EX HL- exit head loss(ft)
1UP CB I DIN CB Q(cfs) L SIZE n OUT EL. IN EL. AREA VEL VEL-HD TW EL. FL EN HGL Ke EN HL EX HL OC EL. IC EL. AVH Kb BHL JHL HW EL
CB4 C133 0.6 60 8 0.012 18.98 18.38 0.35 1.73 0.05 18.47 0.13 18.60 0.50 0.02 0.05 18.67 -0.11 0.050 0.002 18.56
C B 3 C B 2 2.1 98 12 0.012 18.38 16.91 0.79 2.62 0.11 18.03 0.28 18.31 0.50 0.05 0.11 18.47 0.00 0.050 0.005 18.47
C B 6 C B 5 0.9 97 8 0.012 18.48 17.51 0.35 2.60 0.10 17.89 0.46 18.35 0.50 0.05 0.10 18.51 -0.03 0.050 0.005 18.48
C B 5 C B 2 1.1 121 12 0.012 17.51 16.91 0.79 1.42 0.03 18.03 0.10 18.13 0.50 0.02 0.03 18.18 -0.29 0.050 0.002 17.89
C B 2 C B 1 3.4 38 12 0.012 16.91 16.76 0.79 4.30 0.29 17.3 0.29 17.59 0.50 0.14 0.29 18.02 0.00 0.050 0.014 18.03
C B 1 C B 5 105 12 0.012 16.76 16.30 0.79 0.00 0.00 17.3 0.00 17.30 0.50 0.00 0.00 17.30 0.00 0.050 0.000 17.30
INITIAL TW ELEV BASE DON ASSUMED FULL PIPE CONDITIONS DOWNSTREAM
C B 2 C B 1 3.4 38 12 0.012 18.98 18.38 0.79 4.30 0.29 21.55 0.29 21.84 0.50 0.14 0.29 22.27 -0.28 0.050 0.014 22.00
CB1 cb5 3.3 105 12 0.012 18.38 16.91 0.79 4.26 0.28 21.55 0.78 22.33 0.50 0.14 0.28 22.75 0.00 0.050 0.014 22.77
Q=25 YEAR STORM
1b5 is per Oakesdale Phase 1
6777b kwtr.x s Pag 1
BASIN MAP E)(V+M'r 7.
r -W
o 40
ll
IE-1
IE-14.5
105 LF 12'SD 0 0.31X p QL&PPE I
E-17-51
N W494r W
AT
ce#5,TYPE 2
-W(BY chots)
PM OWMALE PK I SHED 4 OF 9
FLN1.2"
-IL3 IE
SD I
ca
To(,m
<
1014.95(:f
0 J, -S-AC
.0
Opp
t
PVC
35)70
Mmpmuls
f-M
5LF Sr 4t
7- wc,--scp. A X'IVTUK effVaM�.
401 1 C8 TYPE I NON ps
IIE
'T •
—EX.SSW
U-M20
%%
I co—s E-
'TO CB-..
A.
----------
SSAH
Ac ...............
•
..... ----------
.... ......
....... ....
44
..........
;yo
7
zfc -1(cz;o r-7 7............ �je
. aF
27 tX 4FJ 21 Oow-W,
- - --------- -
E-lam
IE-2DAO
OOOP
ZEIr Ca
RW-?2.n. _CC"CM
z CW Q
.37(,
SOV
'OF
/
4UU
v PL
7.
SID(
................. .........
....................
Ex.SSW,
ME RM-23.47
MW 3v
--------------- ----------- ---------------- - SWR
47. --------W-23.00
-----------------------
---------------------------------------------------- ......
SWK——-------- ----------Z------
Wj
-":�l 1�114 x�
vw,
24,WN,
...........
r r I 0 Oi r
7 1 1,
40
1/29/98 5: 0: 39 pm Barghausen Engineers page 1
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 , Renton
Storm Drainage conveyance calculations
5911-con
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: CB1 NAME: Drainage to CB 1
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 2 . 23 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 40 inches AREA. . : 0. 22 Acres 2 . 01 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . . 12 . 81 min 6. 30 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20
TcReach - Sheet L: 50. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0200
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2. 00 s: 0. 0150
TcReach - Channel L: 500. 00 kc:42. 00 s:0.0025
PEAK RATE: 1. 51 cfs VOL: 0.57 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: CB2 NAME: Drainage to CB 2
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 2 . 29 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 0. 23 Acres 2 . 06 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98. 00
TC. . . . . 12 . 81 min 6. 30 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 50. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0200
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0150
TcReach - Channel L: 500. 00 kc:.42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 1.55 cfs VOL: 0.58 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: CB3 NAME: Drainage to CB 3
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 2.68 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 0. 27 Acres 2 .41 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98. 00
TC. . . . . 12 . 81 min 6. 30 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 50. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0200
TcReach - Sheet L: 100.00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0150
TcReach - Channel L: 500. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 1. 81 cfs VOL: 0. 68 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
1/29/98 5: 0: 39 pm Barghausen Engineers page 2
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 , Renton
Storm Drainage conveyance calculations
5911-con
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: CB4 NAME: Drainage to CB 4
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 2 . 23 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 40 inches AREA. . : 0. 22 Acres 2 . 01 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . . 12 . 81 min 6 . 30 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20
TcReach - Sheet L: 50. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0200
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0150
TcReach - Channel L: 500. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
PEAK RATE: 1.51 cfs VOL: 0.57 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
1/29/98 5: 0: 39 pm Barghausen Engineers page 3
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 , Renton
Storm Drainage conveyance calculations
5911-con
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
PEAK TIME VOLUME
HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib
NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area
cfs min. cf\AcFt Acres
1 6. 370 480 104455 cf 9 .43
1/29/98 5: 0: 46 pm Barghausen Engineers page 4
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 , Renton
Storm Drainage conveyance calculations
5911-con
----------
REACH SUMMARY
Network Reach N1
REACH <-AREA> <-DIA> LENGTH SLOPE < n > DSGN 0 % PIPE Ndepth %Depth Vact VfulL C_Area
ID (Ac) (ft) (ft) ft/ft ------ (cfs) ------ (ft) ------ (fps) (fps)
ConfLuence with with Network N2
Confluence with Network N4
P1 9.43 1.50 153.00 0.0033 0.0120 6.37 90.78 1.20 79.92 4.21 4.07 C81
Network Reach N2
REACH <-AREA> <-DIA> LENGTH SLOPE < n > DSGN 0 % PIPE Ndepth %Depth Vact Vfull C_Area
ID (Ac) (ft) (ft) ft/ft ------ (cfs) ------ (ft) ------ (fps)- (fps)
---------------------
P2 2.29 1.00 244.00 0.0031 0.0120 1.55 66.99 0.63 62.87 2.97 3.02 CB2
Network Reach N4
REACH <-AREA> <-DIA> LENGTH SLOPE < n > DSGN 0 % PIPE Ndepth %Depth Vact WWI C_Area
ID (Ac) (ft) (ft) ft/ft ------ (cfs) ------ (ft) ------ (fps) (fps)
P4 2.23 1.00 76.00 0.0033 0.0120 1.51 63.11 0.60 60.41 3.04 3.12 C84
0 P3 4.91 1.25 213.00 0.0031 0.0120 3.32 79.53 0.89 71.18 3.55 3.49 CB3
PIPE REACH ID No. P1
From: To:
Pipe Diameter: 1. 5000 ft n: 0. 0120
Pipe Length 153 . 0000 ft s: 0. 0033
Up invert 15. 0000 ft down invert: 14 . 5000 ft
Collection Area: 9 .4300 Ac.
Design Flow 6. 3695 cfs Dsgn Depth: 1. 20 ft
Pipe Capacity 7. 0167 cfs
Design Vel 4 . 2068 fps Travel Time: 0. 61 min
Pipe Full Vel 4 . 0750 fps
PIPE REACH ID No. P2
From: To:
Pipe Diameter: 1. 0000 ft n: 0. 0120
Pipe Length 244 . 0000 ft s: 0. 0031
Up invert 15. 7500 ft down invert: 15. 0000 ft
Collection Area: 2 . 2900 Ac.
Design Flow 1. 5463 cfs Dsgn Depth: 0. 63 ft
Pipe Capacity 2 . 3081 cfs
Design Vel 2 . 9739 fps Travel Time: 1. 37 min
Pipe Full Vel 3 . 0160 fps
1/29/98 5: 0:46 pm Barghausen Engineers page 5
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 , Renton
Storm Drainage conveyance calculations
5911-con
--------____
REACH SUMMARY
PIPE REACH ID No. P3
From: To:
Pipe Diameter: 1. 2500 ft n: 0. 0120
Pipe Length 213 . 0000 ft s: 0. 0031
Up invert 15. 6500 ft down invert: 15. 0000 ft
Collection Area: 4 . 9100 Ac.
Design Flow 3 . 3163 cfs Dsgn Depth: 0. 89 ft
Pipe Capacity 4 . 1697 cfs
Design Vel 3 .5492 fps Travel Time: 1. 00 min
Pipe Full Vel 3 .4871 fps
PIPE REACH ID No. P4
From: To:
Pipe Diameter: 1. 0000 ft n: 0. 0120
Pipe Length 76. 0000 ft s: 0. 0033
Up invert 15. 9000 ft down invert: 15. 6500 ft
Collection Area: 2.2300 Ac.
Design Flow 1.5069 cfs Dsgn Depth: 0. 60 ft
Pipe Capacity 2 . 3877 cfs
Design Vel 3 . 0377 fps Travel Time: 0.42 min
Pipe Full Vel 3. 1200 fps
e
OL
LIM
NO
•• . • ��'�*�►/fir- ,- ,
•�/�� 1/r/��iY/ts ��i2�� %c�5 ��Mi R-v4-��`-" /V�� o� c�•�U.S:.�ia l.�
weTR�v� ✓c .M e ��d p 2 x C 1�3 ZY�l� -r ,e VOL
827 c 1 ) E- S�� rP rTnsLu P2wia�r
�z �•�- Cs�) �avG- .a- Cs� ) d C�—� yoc, (c t� �voc.�F)
!O.S /o, 3�4
llc�o7� !•� l�/S uai
1Z,o 12,9 7 1 I7,SUQj
!4,
40 lG,74 1 4-7,22
c-P—
1/29/98 5: 21: 9 pm Barghausen Engineers page 1
Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2
Wetpond Design
5911-DET
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: wetpond NAME: 1/3 2yr/24hr post-developed
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9.89 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERV IMP
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 0. 67 inches AREA. . : 1. 48 Acres 8 . 41 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 98 . 00
TC. . . . : 20. 12 min 14 . 72 min
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20
TcReach - Sheet L: 25. 00 ns: 0. 1500 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Sheet L: 100. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0025
impTcReach - Sheet L: 100.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
impTcReach - Channel L: 1600. 00 kc:42 . 00 s:0. 0025 -
PEAK RATE: 0. 83 cfs VOL: 0. 34 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
VI. SPECIAL REPORT AND STUDY
i
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
SOUTHWEST 43rd STREET
AND OAKSDALE AVENUE SW
RENTON, WASHINGTON
E-3000-3
December 8, 1997
PREPARED FOR
ZELMAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
it. CAMS
WAsl������ ,
O
s IONAL
Kyle R. Campbell, P.E.
Manager of Geotechnical Services
Earth Consultants, Inc.
1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 201
Bellevue, Washington 98005
(425) 643-3780
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
ABOUT YOUR
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
More construction problems are caused by site subsur- technical engineers who then render an opinion about
face conditions than any other factor. As troublesome as overall subsurface conditions, their likely reaction to
subsurface problems can be, their frequency and extent proposed construction activity, and appropriate founda-
have been lessened considerably in recent years, due in tion design. Even under optimal circumstances actual
large measure to programs and publications of ASFE/ conditions may differ from those inferred to exist,
The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how
the Geosciences. qualified,and no subsurface exploration program, no
The following suggestions and observations are offered matter how comprehensive,can reveal what is hidden by
earth, rods and time.The actual interface between mate-
to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays. vials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report
cost-overruns and other costly headaches that can indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may
occur during a construction project. differ from predictions. Nothing can be done to prevent the
unanticipated, but steps can be taken to help minimize their
A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING impact. For this reason, most experienced owners retain their
REPORT IS BASED ON A UNIQUE SET geotechnical consultants through the construction stage,to iden-
tify variances,conduct additional tests which fnay be
OF PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS needed.and to recommend solutions to problems
A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur-
encountered on site.
face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
set of project-specific factors. These typically indude:
the general nature of the structure involved. its size and CAN CHANGE
configuration; the location of the structure on the site
and its orientation: physical concomitants such as Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly-
access roads. parking lots.and underground utilities. changing natural forces. Because a geotechnical engi-
- and the level of additional risk which the dient assumed neering report is based on conditions which existed at
by virtue of limitations imposed upon the exploratory the time of subsurface exploration,construction decisions
program. To help avoid costly problems,consult the should not be based on a geotechnical engineering report whose
geotechnical engineer to determine how any factors adequacy may have been affected by time. Speak with the geo-
which change subsequent to the date of the report may technical consultant to learn if additional tests are
affect its recommendations. advisable before construction starts.
Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and
otherwise,your geotechnical engineering report should not natural events such as floods,earthquakes or ground-
be used: water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions
•When the nature of the proposed structure is and, thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical
changed, for example. if an office building will be report.The geotechnical engineer should be kept
erected instead of a parking garage.or if a refriger- apprised of any such events.and should be consulted to
ated warehouse will be built instead of an unre- determine if additional tests are necessary.
frigerated one:
•when the size or configuration of the proposed GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ARE
structure is altered; PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES
•when the location or orientation of the proposed AND PERSONS
structure is modified:
•when there is a change of ownership,or Geotechnical engineers' reports are prepared to meet
• for application to an adjacent site. the specific needs of specific individuals. A report pre-
Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility for problems pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade-
which may develop if they are not consulted after factors consid- quate for a construction contractor, or even some other
ered in their report's development have changed. consulting civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise.
this report was prepared expressly for the dient involved
and expressly for purposes indicated by the client. Use
MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS" by any other persons for any purpose. or by the dient
ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES for a different purpose, may result in problems. No indi-
vidual other than the client should apply this report for its
Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions intended purpose without first conferring with the geotechnical
only at those points where samples are taken, when engineer. No person should apply this report for any purpose
they are taken. Data derived through sampling and sub- other than that originally contemplated without first conferring
sequent laboratory testing are extrapolated by geo- with the geotechnical engineer.
Earth Consultants Inc.
('"wc-hnical Fnuincwrs.(Knologisis&I4m ircxxnrnral ti<irrnisrs
December 8, 1997 E-3000-3
Zelman Development Company
707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036
Los Angeles, California 90017
Attention: Sanford Kopelow
Dear Sanford:
We are pleased to submit our report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, SW 43rd Street
and Oaksdale Avenue SW, Renton, Washington." This report presents the results of our field
exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analyses. The purpose and scope of
our study was outlined in our October 7, 1997 proposal.
Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion the site can be developed generally as
planned. In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread and
continuous footing foundation systems bearing on at least two feet of structural fill following
the successful completion of a preload program, or surcharge program in areas where minimal
raising of site grades will be required. Slab-on-grade floors can be supported directly on the
fills required to bring the site to grade.
We appreciate this opportunity to have been of service to you. If you have any questions, or
if we can be of further assistance, please call.
Very truly yours,
EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ic 1-4
Kyle R. Campbell, P. E.
Manager of Geotechnical Services
KHC/krtd
1805- 136th Place N.E.,Suite 201,Bellevue,Washington 98005
Bellevue(425)643-3780 Seattle(206)464-1584 FAX(425)74-608-60 Tacoma(253)272-6608
TABLE OF CONTENTS
E-3000-3
PAGE
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
General . . . 1
Proiect Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Subsurface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Laboratory Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Site Preparation and General Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Preload/Surcharge Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Retaining and Foundation Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Slab-on-Grade Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Seismic Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Excavations and Slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Site Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Pavement Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Utility Support and Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Additional Services . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
APPENDICES
Appendix A Field Exploration
Appendix B Laboratory Test Results
ILLUSTRATIONS
Plate 1 Vicinity Map
Plate 2 Boring and Test Pit Location Plan
Plate 3 Typical Settlement Marker Detail
Plate 4 Typical Footing Subdrain Detail
Plate 5 Utility Trench Backfill
Plate Al Legend
Plates A2 through A9 Boring Logs
Plates A10 through A30 Test Pit Logs
Plates A31 through A38 Previous Exploration Logs
Plates 61 through B5 Sieve Analysis
Plates B6 and 67 Atterberg Limits
Earth Consultants. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
SOUTHWEST 43RD STREET AND OAKSDALE AVENUE SW
RENTON, WASHINGTON
E-3000-3
INTRODUCTION
General
This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study completed by Earth
Consultants, Inc. (ECI) for the proposed development on the northwest corner of the
intersection between Southwest 43rd Street and Oaksdale Avenue Southwest in Renton,
Washington. The general location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1 . The
purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and based on the
conditions encountered to develop geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site
development.
Project Description
We understand the site is to be developed with several dock-high, tilt-up concrete warehouse
buildings, with associated parking and driveway areas. These structures will range in size
from approximately 7,000 to 170,000 square feet. The preliminary locations of the buildings
0 are shown on Plate 2. We understand some raising of site grades will be required to achieve
the dock-high floor elevations. At the time this report was written, design loads for the
proposed structures were not available. However, based on our experience with similar
structures, we anticipate wall loads will be in the range of three to five kips per lineal foot,
and column loads will range between approximately seventy five (75) to one hundred twenty
(120) kips. Floor loads for the warehouse and office areas will be in the range of three
hundred fifty (350) and one hundred (100) pounds per square foot (psf), respectively.
If any of the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulted to review
the recommendations contained in this report. In any case, ECI should be retained to perform
a general review of the final design.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface
The subject property is approximately 48.0 acres in size, and is located northwest of the
intersection of Oakesdale Avenue Southwest and Southwest 43rd Street in Renton,
Washington (see Vicinity Map, Plate 1). The most significant topographic feature on the
property is Springbrook Creek which approximately bisects the property in a southwest to
northeast direction. With the exception of the Springbrook Creek channel, the topography of
the property is relatively flat. The elevation of the Sprin br es
between approximately eight to ten feet below the elevation of the surrounding site.
i
Earth Coniuttantg. Mc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997
Page 2
Several abandoned one- and two-story structures are present on the site. These structures
were associated with the agricultural and industrial operations previously performed on the
property. An automobile wrecking yard and associated warehouse are still in operation at the
northeast portion of the site. Several stockpiles of automobile waste (auto fluff) are located
at the northwest corner of the site.
Subsurface
The site was explored by drilling four borings and excavating 21 test pits at the approximate
locations shown on Plate 2. In addition, we previously performed five borings and six test pits
for a preliminary geotechnical engineering study prepared for the site dated June 4, 1986.
Please refer to the Boring and Test Pit Logs, Plates A2 through A38, for a more detailed
description of the conditions encountered at each location explored. A description of the field
exploration methods is included in Appendix A. The following is a generalized description of
the subsurface conditions encountered.
The borings and test pits generally encountered ten (10) to tw_e _L20 feet of InnsP to
me ium ense, in adsilty_saad—Varying amounts of fill were encountered in
t e explorations. The upper compressible materials are generally underlain by medium dense
to dense silt, silty sand and poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silt.
Expansive soils were not encountered on the site.
Groundwater
Groundwater was observed in all four borings while drilling at depths of ten (10) to twelve and
one-half (12.5) feet below�hP Pzistin. ground surface Groundwater was encountered in t se �
pits 'FP-102, TP-108, TP-118 and TP-121 at depths ranging from eight (8) to fourteen (14)
ee a ow exit _
Groundwater conditions are not static; thus, one may expect fluctuations in groundwater
conditions depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other
factors. Generally, the water level is higher in the wetter winter months (typically October
through May).
Earth Conauttanta. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 3
Laboratory Testing
Laboratory tests were conducted on several representative soil samples to verify or modify
the field soil classification of the units encountered and to evaluate the general physical
properties and engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. Visual classifications were
supplemented by index tests, such as sieve analyses and Atterberg Limits on representative
samples. Moisture contents were performed on all samples. The results of laboratory tests
performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample depth on the
individual boring log or on a separate data sheet contained in Appendix B. However, it is
important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil
conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test
results and their use in guiding our engineering judgement. Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI)
cannot be responsible -for the interpretation of these data by others.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings with
slab-on-grade floors after the successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
• A preload program involves placing the fill necessary to raise grades to the finish floor level
and allowing the settlement induced by the fill to occur before construction of the building
commences. A surcharge program involves placement of additional fill to elevations above
the finish floor elevation and allowing settlement to occur. The purpose of the preload and
surcharge programs is to reduce the amount of expected post-construction settlements from
fill and static building loads. Based on the soil conditions and our experience with similar
conditions, the estimated total post-construction settlements are in the range of one to one
and one-half inches, after successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
In general, for this project, a preload program can be used provided the finish floor elevation
is a minimum of two feet above the existing grades. A surcharge
eegtogL will be necessary
in areas were the existing gr es a -wit in two feet or less of the planned finish floor
elevation. Specific surcharge recommendations for individual buildings can be made once
building locations and finish floor elevations are available.
Foundation elements should bear on a minimum of two feet Qf-srLslctural fill. Depending on
grade modifications, this will require overexcavation of native soils. Slabs-on-grade shoul
be supported on a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural fill, or one foot of
cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof.
Earth Conauttanta, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 3
Laboratory Testing
Laboratory tests were conducted on several representative soil samples to verify or modify
the field soil classification of the units encountered and to evaluate the general physical
properties and engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. Visual classifications were
supplemented by index tests, such as sieve analyses and Atterberg Limits on representative
samples. Moisture contents were performed on all samples. The results of laboratory tests
performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample depth on the
individual boring log or on a separate data sheet contained in Appendix B. However, it is
important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil
conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test
results and their use in guiding our engineering judgement. Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI)
cannot be responsible-for the interpretation of these data by others.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings with
slab-on-grade floors after the successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
• A preload program involves placing the fill necessary to raise grades to the finish floor level
and allowing the settlement induced by the fill to occur before construction of the building
commences. A surcharge program involves placement of additional fill to elevations above
the finish floor elevation and allowing settlement to occur. The purpose of the preload and
surcharge programs is to reduce the amount of expected post-construction settlements from
fill and static building loads. Based on the soil conditions and our experience with similar
conditions, the estimated total post-construction settlements are in the range of one to one
and one-half inches, after successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
In general, for this project, a preload program can be used provided the finish floor elevation
is a minimum of two feet above the existing grades. A surcharge Dfpata�m w�i_I_I be necessary
in areas were the existing g es -wit in two feet or less of the planned finish floor
elevation. Specific surcharge recommendations for individual buildings can be made once
building locations and finish floor elevations are available.
Foundation elements should bear on a minimum of two feet tural fill. Depending on
grade modifications, this will require overexcavation of native soils. Slabs-on-grade shoul
be supported on a minimum of one foot of imported rc�anular structural fill, or one foot of
cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof.
Earth ConGuttanta, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 4
We understand it is planned to utilize the on-site auto fluff as fill material after it is treated
wit cement. Remediation Services�orporation prepared a Draft Engineering Design
Report dated August 1997 which provided site remediation recommendations. Included in
this report are laboratory test results for unconfined compression strength tests performed on
samples of the auto fluff mixed with various percentages of cement he report indicates the
fluff will be mixe-i_-w-.ilh 7`5 percent cement for remediation purposes. Based on the
uncon of ed compressive strength test results ,+n our opinion,the 7.5 percent cement/auto fluff
mixture would provide a material suitable for use as structural fill. Specific geotechnical
recommendations for use of the treated auto fluff will be presented in a supplemental report.
This report has been prepared for specific application to this project only and in a manner
consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the
profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area for the exclusive use of
Zelman Development Company and their representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied,
is made. This report, in its entirety, should be included in the project contract documents for
the information of the contractor.
Site Preparation and General Earthwork
• The building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation, organic
material and other deleterious material. The root mat of the existing vegetation can be lei
in place i my d-ed-a minimum of two f _ .t and nnP and one-half feet of structural
fi underlie foundations and pavements, respectively. The vegetation should be removed
Following the clearing operations, the fill placement should commence. The ground surface
where structural fill, or slabs are to be placed should be proofrolled. Proofrolling should be
performed under the observation of a representative of ECI. Soil in loose or soft areas, if
recompacted and still excessively yielding, should be overexcavated and replaced with
structural fill or crushed rock to a depth that will provide a stable base beneath the general
structural fill, or will provide suitable support for slabs. A geotextile fabric could also be used
to aid in stabilizing the subgrade.
Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under buildings, roadways, slabs, pavements,
or other load-bearing areas. Structural fill under floor slabs and footings should be placed in
horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve 0 2) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM
Test Designation D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near
the optimum moisture content. Fill under pavements and walks should also be placed in
horizontal lifts and compacted to 90 percent of maximum density except for the top twelve
0 2) inches which should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density.
Earth Conauttants. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 5
The existing site soils are moisture sensitive due to their relatively high fines content. As
such, even after placement as structural fill, they will become disturbed from normal
construction activity during or after periods of wet weather. Once disturbed, in a wet
condition, they will be unsuitable for support of floor slabs and pavements. Therefore, the
upper foot of subgrade should consist of a granular material suitable for use during wet
weather or the upper foot of on-site fill soil could be cement treated.
If the earthwork operations are conducted during the dry weather season as planned, it is our
opinion that the on-site soils can be used as structural fill, including use as utility trench
backfill. However, it must be emphasized that the native soils must be aerated in order to
lower the moisture content to levels that will allow adequate compaction. Normal grading
operations will provide some aeration; however, additional working of the soil will be
necessary prior to or during grading in order to lower the moisture content to levels that will
allow adequate compaction.
If the on-site soil is exposed to moisture and cannot be adequately compacted then it may be
necessary to use an imported free draining granular fill. Fill for this purpose and for use in wet
weather should consist of a fairly well graded granular material having a maximum size of
three inches and no more than 5 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus
3/4-inch fraction. Samples of materials proposed for use as structural fill during wet weather
should be provided to us for testing in order to determine the suitability of the materials.
Preload/Surcharge Program
We estimate settlements of two to four inches could occur from the placement of dock high
fills and buildings loads. In order to induce the majority of this settlement prior to
construction, we recommend the use of a preload and/or surcharge program. We estimate
the preload/surcharge would remain in place for a time period of four to six weeks. A preload
program consists of placing structural fill to the finish floor a evation and allowing
consolidation of the compressible soil beneath the buildings to occur prior to constructing the
buildings. As mentioned previously, surcharge fills should be placed above finish floor
elevations in areas where building pad grades will be raised less than two feet above existing
site grades. We anticipate surcharges would be approximately two feet in height. More
detailed surcharge recommendations can be made when finish floor elevations for individual
buildings have been established. In building areas where greater than two feet of fill is
required to achieve finish floor elevations, a preload can be used.
A surcharge program consists of placing structural fill to the finish floor elevation, and then
placing additional fill above the finish floor elevation as a surcharge, and allowing
consolidation of the compressible soil beneath the buildings to occur prior to constructing the
buildings. Based on the soil conditions and our experience with similar conditions, the
estimated total post-construction settlements are in the range of one to one and one-half
inches, after successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 6
The preload/surcharge fill should extend at least fiv -tirnnd-tha-building footprints. The
side slopes of the fill should be sloped at a gradient of 1 V r If future expansion
of any building is anticipated, the preload fill should extend at least twenty (20) feet in the
direction of the future addition. The purpose of extending the surcharge is to reduce the
possibility of settlement of the then-existing building from future building or surcharge loads.
Because the purpose of the preload/surcharge is to induce settlement, it is necessary to
monitor both the magnitude and rate of such settlement. TQ acc__ rQ Jja .phi;, sP"ttlPmeat�_.
markers should be installed within the buildinq pads. The number of settlement markers
placed will depend on the size of the building. As a general rule, one settlement marker
should be placed for every 10,000 to 15,000 square feet of floor area. The settlement
markers should be placed on the existing "site subgrade before fill is placed. A typical
settlement marker is depicted on Plate 3, Typical Settlement Marker-Detail. Once installed,
and while fill is being placed, the settlements caused by the filling operation should be
recorded daily.
For the first two weeks after the preload/surcharge fill is in place, readings should be acquired
at two to three day intervals. Subsequently, readings may be obtained on a weekly basis,
until either settlements cease, or the anticipated remaining settlements are within the
previously specified settlement ranges.
We should be retained to install the settlement markers and acquire the settlement readings.
Should the readings be made by another organization, the measurements must be provided
to us in a timely manner to allow for interpretation of the data. This will help avoid any
misinterpretation or misunderstanding regarding the success of the preload/surcharge program.
The settlement markers must be kept intact during earthwork operations. In our experience,
earthwork equipment (dozers and trucks) often destroy or damage markers. This adds to the
project costs as the markers typically must be replaced and makes the settlement data
obtained less reliable. In order to attempt to avoid this scenario, we recommend the project
specifications include a requirement that the earthwork contractor is required to immediately
replace any damaged settlement markers and have the settlement readings re-obtained at his
own cost. This requirement makes the earthwork contractor more conscious of the
importance of the preload/surcharge program and will aid in maintaining the integrity of the
monitoring program.
Fill for landscaping purposes should not be placed near the building since additional fill could
induce further settlements after the building is constructed. If such fill is planned, the preload
fill should be extended to five feet beyond the planned landscape fill, or a lightweight fill
should be used.
Earth Conauttanu, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 7
Ol
Foundations
In our opinion, the proposed buildings_can be supported on conventional spread and
continuous footing foundations bearing on a minimum of twQ, feet Qf structural fill after
successful completion of the preload an /or surcharge program., Depending on grades it may
e necessary to_overexcavate the existing soil in-order to_ravide tthe two feet of_s_tructural
fill. If extremely soft soil is exposed in the foundation excavations, it may be necessary to
extend the excavation to provide additional structural fill beneath foundations.
Exterior footing should be bottomed at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches below the
lowest outside grades. Interior footings may be bottomed at a depth of twelve (12) inches
below the top of the slab. Footings may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of two
thousand five hundred(2,500) pounds per square foot (psf). Loading of this magnitude would
be provided with theoretical factor-of-safety in excess of three against actual shear failure.
For short-term dynamic loading conditions, a one-third increase in the above allowable bearing
capacities can be used. Continuous and individual spread footing should have minimum
widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (24) inches, respectively.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the
foundations and the supporting subgrade or by passive earth pressure on the buried portions
of the foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against the existing
soil or backfilled with compacted fill meeting the requirements of structural fill. A coefficient
of friction of 0.4 may be used between the foundation elements and the supporting subgrade.
The passive resistance of native soil or structural fill may be assumed to be equal to the
pressure exerted by a fluid having a unit weight of three hundred (300) pounds per cubic foot
(pcf). These lateral resistance values are allowable values, a factor-of-safety of 1 .5 has been
included. As movement of the foundation element is required to mobilize full passive
resistance, the passive resistance should be neglected if such movement is not acceptable.
With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range of one and.o.ae-hal 4AGt1es
is an cii gated with differential movement of about one inch. Most of the anticipated
settlements should occur during construction as the dead loads are applied.
Footing excavations should be observed by a representative of ECI, prior to placing forms or
rebar, to verify that conditions are as anticipated in this report.
Earth Consultants. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 8
Retaining and Foundation Walls
Retaining and foundation walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed
by the retained soils. Walls that are designed to yield can be designed to resist the lateral
earth pressures imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pcf. For
walls that are restrained from free movement the equivalent fluid weight should be increased
to fifty (50) pcf. These values are based on horizontal backfill and that surcharges due to
backfill slopes, hydrostatic pressures, traffic, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not
act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design
lateral pressure. Calculation of lateral resistance should be based on the passive pressure and
coefficient of friction design parameters given in the previous foundation section.
If it is'desired to include the effects of seismic loading in the design, a rectangular pressure
distribution equal to six times the wall height should be added to the above lateral earth
pressure values.
Retaining walls should be backfilled with a free-draining material conforming to the WSDOT
specification for gravel backfill for walls (WSDOT 9-03.12(2)). The free-draining material
should extend at least eighteen (18) inches behind the wall. The remainder of the backfill
should consist of structural fill. A perforated drain pipe should be placed at the base of the
10wall. Drain pipes should be surrounded by a free-draining soil that functions as a filter in order
to reduce the potential for clogging. Drainpipes located in the free-draining backfill soil should
be perforated with holes less than one-quarter inch in diameter. The drain pipe should be
surrounded by a minimum of one cubic foot per lineal foot with three-eighths inch pea gravel.
Alternatively, retaining wall drainage systems such as Miradrain could be used. If any such
product is used, it should be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
Slab-on-Grade Floors
Slabs-on-grade should be supported on a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural
fill, or one foot of cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof. Cement treatment
of the subgrade, if used, should consist of mixing a minimum of 8 percent cement by weight
into the upper twelve inches of subgrade soil.
Slab-on-grade floors supported on a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural._fil-I,
or one foot of cement_treated.on-site.soil, or a combination thereof may be designed for a
mo ulus of soil subgrade reaction of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic inch (pci)
Earth Consuhants. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 9
Concrete slabs resting on soil ultimately may cause the moisture content of the underlying
soils to rise. This results from continued capillary rise and the ending of normal
evapotranspiration. As concrete is pffLaeZb.1p., moisture will eventually penetrate the slab
resulting in a condition commonly known as a "wet slab", and poor adhesion of floor
coverings may result. In our experience, these conditions rarely occur in dock-high, open air
warehouses, except in areas were floor coverings are used.
To minimize the potential for a wet slab, in areas where floor coverings will_be_u_sed_,.suitable
moisture protection measure should be userTypically, such protection measures include
pm�rYt of avapor-barrier and a capillary bream. A capillary break, if used, should consist
of a minimum of four inches of clean sand or washed rak. Samples of materials proposed
for use as a capillary break should be submitted to us for review and/or testing prior to their
use.
Seismic Design Considerations
The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The
largest earthquakes in the Puget Lowland are widespread and have been subcrustal events,
ranging in depth from thirty (30) to fifty-five (55) miles. Such deep events have exhibited no
surface faulting.
OStructures are subject to damage from earthquakes due to direct or indirect action. Direct
action is represented by shaking. Indirect action is represented by movement of the soil
supporting foundations and is typified by ground failure (rupture), liquefaction, or slope failure.
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which soils lose all shear strength for short periods of time
during an earthquake. The effects of liquefaction may be large total and/or differential
settlement for structures with foundations founded in the liquefying soils. Groundshaking of
sufficient duration results in the loss of grain to grain contact and rapid increase in pore water
pressure, causing the soil to behave as a fluid for short periods of time. To have a potential
for liquefaction, a soil must be cohesionless with a grain size distribution of a specified range
(generally sands and silt); it must be loose to medium dense; it must be below the
groundwater table; and it must be subject to sufficient magnitude and duration of
groundshaking.
Earth Consuttants. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 10
the loose soils encountered
Based on the information obtain from our borings, during our field
exploration consist of interbedded silts and silty sands. Given this information, it is our
opinion that the potential for widespread liquefaction over the site during a seismic event is
low. Isolated areas may be subject to liquefaction; however, the effect on structures is
anticipated to be minimal if the recommendations contained in this report are followed.
Should liquefaction occur, the liquefying zones would be several feet below the footings of
the buildings. We estimate liquefaction induced settlement would be in the range of two
inches, which is slightly higher than the estimated post construction settlements (1 .5 inches)
discussed earlier.
The UBC Earthquake regulations contain a static force procedure and a dynamic force
procedure for design base shear calculations. Based on the encountered soil conditions, in
our opinion a site coefficient of S3 = 1.5 should be used for the static force procedure as
outlined in Section 1634 of the 1994 UBC. For the dynamic force procedure outlined in
Section 1629 of the 1994 UBC, the curve for Soft to Medium Clays and Sands (soil type 3)
should be used for Figure 3, Normalized Response Spectra Shapes.
Excavations and Slopes
The following information is provided solely as a service to our client. Under no
circumstances should this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming
responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is
not being implied and should not be inferred.
In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and
federal safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from our field exploration and
laboratory testing, the soils expected to be exposed in excavations can be classified Type C
as described in the current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations.
Therefore, temporary cuts greater than four feet in height should be sloped at an inclination
no steeper than 1.5H:1 V or they should be shored. Shoring will help protect against slope
or excavation collapse, and will provide protection to workmen in the excavation. If
temporary shoring is required, we will be available to provide shoring design criteria, if
requested.
If slopes of this inclination, or flatter, cannot be constructed, temporary shoring may be
necessary. Shoring will help protect against slope or excavation collapse, and will provide
protection to workers in the excavation. If temporary shoring is required, we will be available
to provide shoring design criteria.
Earth Conauttants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 11
Permanent cut and fill slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2H:1 V. Cut slopes should
be observed by ECI during excavation to verify that conditions are as anticipated.
Supplementary recommendations can then be developed, if needed, to improve stability,
including flattening of slopes or installation of surface or subsurface drains. In any case,
water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slopes. All permanently-
exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion
and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil.
Site Drainage
The site must be graded such that surface water is directed off the site. Water must not be
allowed to stand in any area where buildings, slabs or pavements are to be constructed.
During construction, loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to
reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Final site grades must allow for
drainage away from the building foundations. We suggest that the ground be sloped at a
gradient of 3 t for a distangeleas t a et away from the buildings, except
in areas that are to be paved which can be jj1P.pe.d-at-a-g[ad1e.Lt of 2 pereeQL _.
If seepage is encountered in foundation or grade beam excavations during construction, the
bottom of the excavation should be sloped to one or more shallow sump pits. The collected
water can then be pumped from these pits to a positive and permanent discharge, such as a
nearby storm drain. Depending on the magnitude of such seepage, it may also be necessary
to interconnect the sump pits by a system of connector trenches.
Foundation drains should be installed where landscaped areas are immediately adjacent to no
dock-high portions thz building- In our opinion, oundation drains are not necessary in areas
where pavements extend to the building walls. The drains should be installed at or just below
the bottom of the footing, with a gradient sufficient to initiate flow. A typical detail is
provided on Plate 4.
Under no circumstances should roof downspout drain lines be connected to the foundation
drain system. Roof downspouts must be separately tightlined to discharge. Cleanouts should
be installed at strategic locations to allow for periodic maintenance of the foundation drain and
downspout tightline systems.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 12
Pavement Areas
The adequacy of site pavements is related in part to the condition of the underlying subgrade.
To provide a properly prepared subgrade for pavements, the subgrade should be treated and
prepared as described in the Site Preparation and General Earthwork section of this report.
At a minimum, the top twelve (12) inches of the subgrade should consist of imported granular
structural fill suitable for use dur'nq wet weat er conditions compacted to 95 percent of the
maximum ry ensity (per ASTM D-1557- It is possible that some localized areas of soft,
wet or unstable subgrade may still exist after this process. Therefore, a greater thickness of
structural fill or crushed rock may be needed to stabilize these localized areas. As an
alternative to placement of a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural fill,
consideration could be given to cement treating the subgrade soil. Specific recommendations
for cement treatment can be provided upon request.
The following pavement sections are suggested for lightly-loaded areas:
• Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB)
material, or
• Two inches of AC over three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB) material.
Heavier truck-traffic areas will require thicker sections depending upon site usage, pavement
life and site traffic. As a general rule the following sections can be considered for truck-
trafficked areas:
• Three inches AC over six inches of CRB
• Three inches of AC over-four and one half inches of ATB
Asphalt concrete (AC), asphalt treated base (ATB), and crushed rock base (CRB) materials
should conform to WSDOT specifications. Rock base should be compacted to at least 95
percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard. We suggest the use of Class B
asphalt.
Earth Consuttants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 13
Utility Support and Backfill
T_he ate soils should provide adequate support for utilities located abov _ tP_h�_groundwater
table. The soil that is located below the groundwater table may not provide adequate support
in their present condition. The inability of soils located below the groundwater table to
adequately support utilities would result from both the loose condition of the soil and the
effect of the groundwater table de-stabilizing the trench bottom as the trench is excavated.
Thus, if utilities will be located below the groundwater table, remedial measures will likely be
required in order to provide adequate support. Remedial measures could include dewatering
the trench, using steel sheeting to create a barrier of flow to the groundwater or placement
of quarry spalls in the bottom of the trench as it is excavated. Use of a geotextile to provide
separation between the native soils and quarry spoils may also be necessary if heaving soils
are encountered.
Utility trench backfill is a primary concern in reducing the potential for settlement along utility
alignments, particularly in pavement areas. It is important that each section of utility line be
adequately supported in the bedding material. The material should be hand tamped to ensure
support is provided around the pipe haunches. Fill should be carefully placed and hand
tamped to about twelve inches above the crown of the pipe before any heavy compaction
equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts
having a loose thickness of less than twelve 0 2) inches. A typical trench backfill section and
compaction requirements for load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on
Plate 5.
Trench backfill beneath building, parking and roadway areas may consist of native soils or
imported materials provided they are near optimum moisture content as determined by our
field representative. Based on current conditions, the majority of the on-site soil would require
aeration to reduce the moisture content to near the optimum to allow compaction. During wet
weather, a granular fill, as described earlier, should be used.
LIMITATIONS
Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed, selective
laboratory testing and engineering analyses, the design information provided to us by you, and
our experience and engineering judgement. The conclusions and recommendations are
professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in
this area. No warranty is expressed or implied.
Earth Consuttants. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company E-3000-3
December 8, 1997 Page 14
The recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test
pits. Soil and groundwater conditions between test pits may vary from those encountered.
The nature and extent of variations between our exploratory locations may not become
evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the
recommendations of this report and to modify or verify them in writing prior to proceeding
with the construction.
Additional Services
As the geotechnical engineer of record, ECI should be retained to perform a general review
of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation
recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the
construction specifications.
ECI should also be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to
observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow
design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the
start of construction. We do not accept responsibility for the performance of the foundation
or earthwork unless we are retained to review the construction drawings and specifications,
and to provide construction observation and testing services.
Earth Conaultsnts. Inc.
<r i 1V^
/iV�. r c ar.` PE( ! rT5T ?j I+tl I
�.� < 1 T 1 tJl rack
1•w. . 11 1 � !
p - �- yi.Y�� \��•I.V.•r I 1
TRECK t►it
2625
r '
�1
LA, ' f i 4w}fNgfLT �4 ttgp
OA
1r1 • tN f
I �Idr ;
- cb
A_ UNKLER RLVO y .
N Tt UPlANO OA 1 ! 7'cc CkWA
IF
t4YTfA ! 1 r I i2n < rr
t TH T ,
1 jt
'� f ltalMli ,�R V)
UALUY
r-iRtjAhQ -
! {' � f � t'f�Y7EX
} h � Op f
i f n 0% ! ' 1 1s IBM
•�
t n ST 1
W-.ALE.PAU ^Z� C ;91ST j i$T - ST
1 ► �
i 4 ?to i s ,..
R fl, < IS2Nft -I Qi
<<r2t2 a ER7.gpf S t Q
<' .,,i "�. S • 1 I t. / C ITT
36
.3 � T
� M. sirs,
Ztcr V 3 1�QTN 3T �} ! S roRN gY �E107TN
4: �� t i. to 71 -./ 1
r s !XTH * AT t t� •s HOrH 3T 11 1gQ�H STD
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Geaechnial Engineers•Geo"ists&Environmental Scienfists
Vicinity Map
Reference: Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
King County/Map 41 Renton, Washington
By Thomas Brothers Maps
Dated 1990 Drum. GLS Date Oct.'97 Pmj.No. 3000-3
Ctwm*ed RAC Date 10/2M7 Plate 1
zo �
T Approximate Scale
0 100 200 400ft.
LLEGENtf
Approximate: :��- �::�::•':::: .,,= 1 Location of
ECI Boring, oj•
E-3000- 1997
__ _ , Oct:
TP TP-1 01-a-Approximate Location of
ECI Test Pit, Proj. No.
E-3000-3, Oct. 1997
• TP-116 . G-101 A Approximate Location of
ECI Grab Sample, Proj. No.
E-3000-3, Oct. 1997
B-> -�- Approximate Location of
ECI Boring, Proj. No.
TP-115 E-3000, May 1986
----� TP-I -o- Approximate Location of
TP-6 1 '- ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. .
r.
... —!-J E-3000, May 1986
Auto Fluff Area
14
a
Wire Fluff Area
Proposed Building
[___j Existing Building
` Boring and Test Pit Location Plan
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
ib
Renton, Washington
becked RAC Date 1013M7 Plate 2
SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
:•;;•:•:
Yf:}
:...:
r}`.
'iF.kv:
ii}i r ..h r yS:�:.�'
:.^::::::::: ......::::::.:::::.�:::.v:::::.v::.
rY..v a:.:.....}.............:.............::.:.
.4:.'h......
:.a .
r.h i ::::::::::::::: ::ii::<.
......................................................................
ih.
t.1..
'•J:Yjw;:i<f':'F:�f::iiif::iii v:iiiiii:-:-.:i
tttv,.v. ..................:
:?Nvii?:��"•{f:�fi:;f:F::AI.:.:<niriifi:~i...... y
�.vt.i4r
fc•:.4t.:.
J,..4. �+
: .r:ii4'.:, ,t✓:rrrr. r:: :.,<-f.-:#.,.F .rr.1:^:.}?%"k2::=iti":::}::`:%.:::2:::^:}
Surcharge or Preload
Surcharge or Preload
-::f:-::�3a1�.£<�r�}w::{...�'ai.' :}R.:xA:""•^r..uo: rl.Y1R.,.4%.,:.,-.^,.Sx-;u.a::-".3.;':'.Krn..':+'F�=Y '`:::'^.::%`
a .:... . Fill
Fill
,{.�• .?�.'H .i:{-af�' } }S' ron'C: '.,'k•:�Yi-'+kti::-.-:,.�;{,,`AyxG" .r,,;{F,e.y£ t
.4. T{xr:4 Y>f'Ir}i:!<- li:f::.� Q:.\i:x:•.::-?r{r.. v:4: .v4n:}�
�5--h,,•'ti'.'c.v{ r�..d-:. `ta-'�• rff:'Lafv}i}:}:;..:.;i:::->.!AA+-�.A,.'•"".�::n�; rb,r„
....`-...F':. ::: .,.�.::.r:..-:.i-}:::::<•}'4>�f.:;:.}-.
{. ..........
:.f.:--::x::::iii':nC!:'tinr::.-:.:<-xL?.)!?•>.v.�f.::....:t.vri...-: ...!J:;f:L�:i:%�i:C:i?_:}v_:i4r?}i}}:.:
...r.-:::::w,�. ................v ... ..... ...n
.::.....r.::-::::. ..:..-:-:.:.!;:?•}-}:{...,.
...
�•:n-
nn.Kvn{r{.
i::ii
.-".�:..:.;..v
'-}x:>,:Jfc�{">.i}-}:}F}%:i::-:?!;.r>,ia::i::::
ii.fr.`.!�iii'<::i;v:fr}..,•r:.r.:fYr,..-`f":''4r::!r..t-r:.vr... '-":d.>�aii:%-Y`::i:':;
::n:...}:
:-:
. IIIc111=111� 111-.111-111=
STANDARD NOTES
1) Base consists of 3/4 inch thick, 2 foot by 2 foot plywood with center drilled
5/8 inch diameter hole.
2) Bedding material, if required, should consist of Traction Sand.
3) Marker rod is 1/2 inch diameter steel rod threaded at both ends.
4) Marker rod is attached to base by nut and washer on each side of base.
5) Protective sleeve surrounding marker rod should consist of 2 inch diameter
plastic tubing. Sleeve is NOT attached to rod or base.
6) Additional sections of steel rod can be connected with threaded couplings.
7) Additional sections of plastic sleeve can be connected with press-fit plastic
couplings.
8) Steel marker rod should extend at least 6 inches above top of plastic
sleeve.
9) Marker should extend at least 2 feet above top of fill surface.
TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL
Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
�. .F,, ,., x, Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Tate 10/30/97 Plate 3
O
Slope To Drain
s
t
9
_ _ O
O •O
6 inch min. - - =�•��r� - e
0 lb
••:o:. .: :a,:�!•'..• .o. ° - 18 inch min.
4 inch min.
Diameter :. .;::: - • , °°-° • °
Perforated Pipe Q ° • °° '°• °
Wrapped in Drainage •° ' =°° °
•o• .. ..+,•. o c• o o •O o 0o e
Fabric :,0. °• ° ° °
2 inch min.
2 inch min. / 4 inch max.
12 inch
min.
SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
LEGEND
Surface seal; native soil or other low permeability material.
Fine aggregate for Portland Cement Concrete; Section 9-03.1(2) of the
WSDOT Specifications.
ODrain pipe; perforated or slotted rigid PVC pipe laid with perforations or
slots facing down;tight jointed;with a positive gradient. Do not use flexible
corrugated plastic pipe. Do not tie building downspout drains into footing
lines. Wrap with Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric or equivalent.
Ealrtrl COCISUItaI"1tS Il•1C. TYPICAL FOOTING SUBDRAIN DETAIL
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
` oWchf"dE"%"°`R` `E.W''",r'RdW Renton, Washington
Prof. No. 3000-3 Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 4
Non-Load Supporting Floor Slab or
Areas Roadway Areas
° ° • ° Varies
_ ° o 0 0
85 4 - K � ._ ram•=
.Y 1 Foot Minimum
-
Backfill
Varies
f:
PIPE
.o .
OQo�_'its•.• ,Ao:•,• a.o•
OQ•�O.•Q� b 0—C,
Bedding %°o• ed ••• Varies
oo�o . moo-O�o•;PDy�-�opeQ�°O� o-a
..,pQ.•ot7o�Qo°•Q��'•p:ll:'d'••oa�oo°oa.
LEGEND:
Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab
r..,
O.O p••
. °, ••, . Base Material or Base Rock
Backfill; Compacted On-Site Soil or Imported Select Fill
Material as Described in the Site Preparation of the General
Earthwork Section of the Attached Report Text.
95 Minimum Percentage of Maximum Laboratory Dry Density as
Determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557-78 (Modified Proctor),
Unless Otherwise Specified in the Attached Report Text.
Bedding Material; Material Type Depends on Type of Pipe and
Laying Conditions. Bedding Should Conform to the Manufacturers
Recommendations for the Type of Pipe Selected.
TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL
Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No.3000 3 Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 5
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
E-3000-3
Our field exploration was performed on October 20 and 23, 1997. Subsurface conditions at
the site were explored by drilling four borings and 21 test pits. The borings were drilled by
Associated Drilling and the test pits were excavated by Northwest Excavating, using a track-
mounted excavator.
Approximate exploration locations were determined relative to existing landmarks.
Approximate locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
method used. These approximate locations are shown on the Boring and Test Pit Location
Plan, Plate 2. The locations of borings and test pits performed in 1986 are also shown on
Plate 2.
The field exploration was continuously monitored by an individual from our firm who classified
the soils encountered and maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative samples,
measured groundwater levels, and observed pertinent site features.
All samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System
which is presented on Plate Al , Legend.
Logs of the borings and test pits are presented in the Appendix on Plates A2 through A38.
*The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory
examination and tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the
approximate boundaries between soil types.'In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual.
Representative soil samples were placed in closed containers and returned to our laboratory
for further_ examination and testing.
s
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Boring Log
Project Name: Sheet of
Zelman Pro Parcels A, B and C 1 2
Job No, Logged by. Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.:
3000-3 RAC 10 23 97 10 23 97 B-1
Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method:
Associated HSA SPT
Ground Surface Bevation: Hole Completion:
f 24' ❑ Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite
U _
No. - o L ti o Surface Conditions:
w Blows a E a +' E N E
�96) Ft. a a e u a
N ' N N
SM ((TToppsoil to 4")
F1LL•Gray silty fine SAND, loose,wet, considerable wood, plastic,
1 glass debris, some slag
2
7.4 59 3
-through debris at 3.5'to 4.0'
SM Brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel;medium dense,wet
LL=35 PL=29 5
PI-6 12_9 18 S"coarse sand lense
s
7 MIL Gray SILT, loose, saturated
40.0 5 8
9
10 - -increasing sand and sandy silt,very lose, groundwater table
39.7 2 encountered
11
12
26.1 s +' 13 PS Blacl poorly graded fine to medium SAND,loose,water bearing
z` 14
15 -Increasing silt, some silty sand
11.0
¢' 16
4
17
o;l
18
r
" 19
v
� o
Boring Log
Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton,Washington
m
Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS F Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date i l/3/97 Plate A2
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Test Pit Log
Sheet of
Project Name:
Zelman Pro erty Parcels A, B and C
Date: Test Pit No.:
Job No. Logged by
3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-121
Excavation Contactor:
Ground Surface Elevation:
N.W. Excavating
Notes:
U _
_ o L a d o Surface Conditions: Grass
W L + a U n
(%j L a i i
SM FILL Muffler, metal debris, brown and gray silty SAND with gravel,
dense, moist
1
2 -coke cans
16.3 3 -plastic
4 -brick debris
5 -pipe fitting
6 ML Gray SILT, medium dense, moist
7
LL-38 PL-30 36.8
PI-8
8
9
10 -caving due to seepage
38.7
11 -becomes wet and dense
12
13 = Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table
encountered at 13.0 feet during excavation.
r
o,
Test Pit Log
Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Erqor&«•. r,e, +sCfiff,e." Renton, Washington
J
a prof.No. 3000.3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A3
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
BORING NO.
Logged By RWB
ELEV. +14±
Date 5/10/86
US Depth (N) W As - Built
Graph Soil Description Sample Blows Well
p CS (ft.) Ft. (��� Diagram
sm Silty SAND, brown, loose, moist a•
5 0' .�
t- • u: . >
.:{a ;,ka,•:-:-:-: 3 8 _
sp SAND, dark gray, medium to fine, medium 10
dense wet.
is Silt Z increases with depth grading to 13 .
- silcy sand 15 `
19 24 %1
20 oo.: o.
V = 15 .a '�'� _x '
25
f sm = 10 30
30 0
�I . ml Sandy SILT, light gray, medium dense,
some organic fragments, wet
35
19 V.
40 ;
sp SAND, dark gray, medium to fine, dense T 52 > —
to very dense wet �.
52
—50
j-- 31 ..
55
'off: sm c:
30
Total Depth = 58. 5 feet
(B) denotes bentonite pellets
BORING LOG
STER-NOFF METALS PROPERTY
1 RE`+TON, WASHINGTON
Earth
Consultants Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May'86 Pl=A31
BORING NO.
--2-
Logged By RWB
Date
5/10/86 ELEV. +14±
(N) As - Built
Graph CS Soil Description �fP)h Sample Blows (�01 Well
Ft. Diagram
sm Topsoil, silty SAND, brown
32
Silty SAW, brown/mottled, medium to 5 1-4r+•
�.• . .u . 2 •a.
fine, subangular to subrounded, loose,
~�:� wet 6 30 >
�.; _
} to �
sm.
N •
_
15
medium dense
�i+ 10 22
is#S:S#f# =�:. •:>?•:
•.> �
25
rffrf dense ;.;
Total depth = 29 feet
(3) denotes bentonite pellets
BORING LOG
i
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Earth
Consultants Inc. .
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 I __j
Date May'86 Plate A 3 2
BORING NO.
Logged By RWB
ELEV. +14±
Date 5/10/86
US Depth (N) W As - Built
Graph CS Soil Description eft l Sample Blows °� Well
Ft. Diagram
sm Silty SAND, bluish-gray, medium dense, . •
(fill) , noticeable odor = 17 30
--- --- - --- 5
sm Silty SAND, gray, loose, wet, some odor
sm Silty SAND i0
--- ------ - - _- 6 0. •7
::I:I:1::1::1:::; 7 7, u 0
29
mh Clayey SILT, tan, soft, some organics 15
t/m SILT and PEAT 12
—20
}<< sm Silty SAND, gray, fine, loose to medium -
dense ^'
= 10 20
12 :> _
Y 30
Clayey SILT, tail, medium high,- plastic, 12 17 --
I � 1/m _s�_Qrcarics 35 ���
.. =- sm Silty SAND, medium to fine, dense, wet 47 4. >
.40 ^I
Total depth = 44 feet
(B) denotes bentonite pellets
BORING LOG
�` /; i•.,. STERYOFF `tETzLS PROPERTY
I: RE\TO`, ASHINGTON
Earth
Consultants Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May'86 Plate A33
BORING NO.
Logged By RWB
ELEV. +14±
Date 5/14/8b
(N)
Graph CS Soil Description Depth Sample Blows (W
Ft.
ml Sandy SILT, gray, some clay. Brick = 9 32
rubble at surface, mottled, low 5 SZ
plasticity _l_ 4 35
110
III ----- — = 2
i, _ --- -- 15
=ram= pt PEAT; brown fibrous, very soft, wet
__ ----- = L3 30
sm Silty SAND, gray, medium to fine, 20
medium dense, wet = 15
1ITf _ -25
of SILT, gray, very soft, organic, wet
—ol— Tan SILT--- 30
} «}
sm Silty SAND, gray, medium to fine 0
t]: sand, very loose to medium dense, wet 35
16 16
ii; '•
5
!.{�ff�1•LL f t •.
29
Total depth = 49 feet
BORING LOG
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Earth i
Consultants Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May' 86 Plate A34
BORING NO.
Logged By RWB +14±
ELEV.
Date 5!14l86
US (N)
Graph CS Soil Description Depth Sample Blows (W)
ml SILT, brown, soft, wet 5 30
5 SL
rx 10
t�r� sm Silty SAND, brown to tan, fine sand,
IT ;j::l:j loose to medium dense = 2 22
15
fcl{}•:} = 24
25
25
Total depth = 29 feet
BORING LOG
'` �,• STER-NOFF METALS PROPERTY
jI I I RENTON, WASHINGTON
Earth j !'
Consultants Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date Ma,y'86 Plate A35
TEST PIT NO.
Logged By RWB
Date 5/10/86 Elev. +14±
Depth W
(ft.) USCS Soil Description (9'a)
0 FILL
N/A FILL, unit consists of shredded non-metalic auto
parts in sand/silt matrix. Unit is gray and wet
5
sm Silty SAND bluish gray, medium to fine loose
o
occasional clay-silt inclusions
10 Total depth 9 feet
15
Logged By .�_ TEST PIT NO. +14+
Date 5/10/86
�- Elev. -
0
N/A FILL, mixture of steel slag mixed with native soil,
traces of oil
ml/mh Clayey SILT, bluish gray, mottled, soft, medium
plasticity, moist
10 Total depth = 8 feet
15
TEST PIT LOGS
0' M
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Earth
Consultants Inc
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proi. No. 3000 Date Mays 86 TPlate A36
TEST PIT NO. _ —
Logged By RWB
Date 9/10/86 Elev. +14t
Depth W
(f.) USCS Soil Description M
0
sm FILL, silty sand, black with some oil
ml SILT, tan with fine sand, loose, non-plastic,
moist
5 i111 l
Total depth = 6 feet
10
15
Loge / RWB 10/86 TEST PIT No.
Elev. +14±
Date
0 -LLB.:
} ml/ Sandy SILT, brown to tan, loose to medium dense,
..�_ , _
I. sm some roots
7�J I1
a X 1'
5 y
Total depth S feet
10
15
TEST PIT LOGS
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Earth
Consultants Inc. '
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proi. No. 3000 Date May186 Plate A37
TEST PIT NO.
Logged By RWB
Date 5/10/86 +14±
EIev. __
Depth
(ft.) USCS Soil Description W
!�'o l
0
N/A FILL, debris includes ash-slag, brick, concrete
and scrap iron
------- ----
�I I ish- ra
ml SILT, bluish-gray,
5 � g y, slightly mottled, occasional
I organics, noticeable H2S odor
Total depth = 7 feet
10
15
Logged By R`%'B
Date 5/10/86 TEST PIT NO. 6 Elev. +14-
} I ml/ Sandy SILT, brown, fine, loose, moist
.i Sm
'ALL I -- --------�
- -
5 ml Clayey SILT, brownish-gray, mottled, soft, moist
l llll to wet
Total depth = 7 feet
10
15
TEST PIT LOGS
STER 'OFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Earth
Consultants Inc. `
GE
OTECHNICAL ENGINEERING a GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date ,tay'86 Plate A38
A
P
P
c
N
D
1
X
B
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
E-3000-3
Earth Consultants, Inc.
M---
ANALYSIS
.
4:961 ffel • • ' •
•
■■■1•■�t■t■■■.■■■■■■=E=m■�■■■■La ': ►Sii.•!■��■.�■■■�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■.
• ■■■ ■■■■■1■ ■■■.■.■■■■■ ■■■■������■tl1■�.■.■■■■1•�■■■/■.■■��
■ttt.■■■■■tt■■.■�■■■.�■■■��■■■t■1■■■�■■�`■■■\S�.■.■■■■■�■■■/■■■fit■■�
' ���t�■.■��■.■■fit■�■■■■t1■■■t■t■■l�■■.lid.■tltltt���■■������
�■■■■■�■.■��■.��■■�■■1•■■■■■■■■.■�■.Ili.■�■■■■/�■■■■■.■■�ttt■.
• ■■■t■■■■t.■■■ ■.■■■■■t■ ■ttt.■■■■■■■■.■■■1■.�.■.■■t■■�■t■■■.�tt■� •
�t■■ ■■■ ■��■.■■■■■■■ ■■■■. ■■■�■.■1�■lV�.■.�■■■�■■■/■��■■■ M • •
��■■■■■■.■��■.=1•� ■■■■.■■■■■■■■.■1lm■■si..�■■■■■�■■■■.■■��■■■■.
�■■■�■�t.■��■.t■■■■■■�■t■■■1■1•tt■■■■tl■11�■tl�.■.■■t��■tt■■.■■tt�ttt•
Ott■■■�■.■��■.■■■�■■�■■■■■1■■■■■■■�■.t'■■■��.■.■■��■■■■■��■■■� �
_■■■t■■■■■.■mm■.■■■■■�_�_■�_■■■■■�_�_■■.\!.■■ice.■.■■■■■�_■■■■■�■■■■■1�
Ott■■■t■■�■fit/■.t■■t■��■��t■■■■■.■■����.■■1■■tt■�■tt■■.t■tt■1�
=mmmmmmi Sal
ONE IMIM
��■■tt■■.■■■■■■.■■■t■t■�■■■■.■■■■■■■■.■■.plus.■.■■tt■�■■■■■.t■t■■�
i�liiii�i •
® ® Content W
m�
• B-1 25 Gray poorly graded SAND 25.0
B-3 12.5 SM. Gray silty SAND 30.8
■ B-4 5 SM Brown and gray silty SAND 6.6
. •
ANALYSISE- E -
SIEVE • •
• • .PH
ti[ a � • i . • •.
• ■�■� 1001M �_�•��■�.a�r..���:cap: .■rr■aaW�aa�•r.�■.■■�■�■■■■■.�■���� '
ME MEW ME MOM Im �MEMM� sommomm
=Emma.mom= ■ ON MEE ■�mo.■.m ■■■■mm�
am am mmmbql
• m■m�■.mom==■���►\�■�.�.■.���■■■■■N
M■=�■.wpm /�����■�■�.■.���■■■■■.���
on OMEN ON
a ON
ONONO ■ m�M ■�■�1■.���■■■■■.mom=
�■� mm ME■■M am���.■����■■�■� m■� ■■■■■■..■�■■■■■.m�■�■
�MOM �m/mm■.mom=�■�����■�■wasson.■.���■■■■■==��
am
ME— On
Man ME
tic 09
109
=awl Mons room M
:rt
Moisture
m�
cl)
• • • • •
•IML Gray sandy SILT •
..
• TP-103 ML ' Brown SILT
� • � . •
• •• L7IR•T.I#�
• �■ii■ii■i<arm`5.����!!YWYIIIYiYaY�����1i�.SI EVE ANALYSIS 'MV
w-;elm on an
�
iiii■i■■/i■■i■■ `■■tii■■iii■■:J■rl►i:tQlR:7/i■■1■■■�■■t■■i■■i■ttti
■■■■i■■■i■■■■i■i■■■i■■i■■�■1!■■■t■■■■i■■i/itd!J■iit■■�■■■■■■■■■tt
• ■ ■ ■■■i■i■t■t■/i■■i■■ ■��■ti■■■■■i■i/�.■i■■■■■■■■i■■■■■i■■■i■
■■■■■■t■i■i■■■i �li■■i■i■■ii.■iiii■■■ommii�
ii011011ii■i■i■■■i■■i■■1 ■■t■.■t1�■■i■■■■/■■■■i.■i■■i ■■iii■'
�i■■■t�■i■ii■i■■i■/ ■ ■■1[�■■■i■i/�.■i■■1■■■�■■■■■■■i■t��
�■■■iiM■t■i■i■■i■■ ■■■■i■�t�■/■■■■■i■t■■■i.■i■■■■■�■■■■■i■■i■■■■i
�MMM1M .i■■/ii■■ ■/ ■■t■.■/■■► ■■li■■i/�.■i■■■■■I�■t■■/i■■■i■■tti
�iiiOEM i■■■■ = Ism s■�■■lt�i■.■■ O ISMi■i�■■■■■i■■i�
■tti■■■■■■i■ii■i■■■i■■ ■ ■/■ lk,= ■■■■■■�.■■■i■■■�■■■■■i■■ice
• �i■■i■i■■■■■■i■■iii■■�■■�vi■i■�.■iiii■■■■■iiii
.iiii■i�■ii.■�i�■ii■■ii■■t■■i■i■t:■■■■i/■i/.■■litt■■■i■■t■■/iii■tti■
iiii■■■■■■iiii■■■■ii■ii►�■i/=.■ii■i t■■■■iMENEM i
wit■■■■■i■i■■/it■■i■/ ■■t■i■/i■/t•■■i/� /i■■■■■1�■■■■■it■it■■■i
�iii■i■ii■.■.ii�i■i■i■■■■i■■�■i■■■■i■.■.iii■■■.■iiii
• iii■i■i■ii/ii■iii■■■ii■ii■s�■t■/�.■ii■i�■■MEN iii■■■i
�i■■■■■■i■i■■/i■■i■/ ■■■ii■ii■i\l■i/�./■■i■i�■■t■■■■i■i�
�i■■■■■■i■t■i■li■■I■i■■1�■■t■�t■1�■■■i■�.�./i■■1■■■�.■■■I■i■■■■■/� .•
■■/i■t■■i■t■■■1/it■i■/ ■■t■iit■■■■■i■�7■O.■ii■t■�■■■■■i■■■■�■■■■i
�i■■■■■■i■■■■■■i■■ii ■■■■ii■t■t■■i■■►M/�i■■■■/ice■t■■■i■�i�
iii■i■.■i■�■i■■iii■�■�■■■ii■■■N■�.■i■■■ice■■■■■i■■■i� •
• �i■■■■■■.■it■■i■■■■�i�■■t■i■■■■/■■■i■■i►��.■it■■t■�■■■■■i■■■ice •
�_iit■■■i■it■■i■■_�■■�_■�■/i_t■ti■ti��_./ii_■■■_■■■■/i■■■■.�_ �
• ' •. • �iIME■■■i■i■■■■■■i■■i■■�Iff
■i■ii■■ti■■i/■iii.■ii■■■���\��i■■ice •
■i�■i�ii■■■!■■i.■■i■■i■■iii■ �■■■■■■iiii■■■■■iiii
�i■■■■■■i■i■■■i■■i■■�■■■■iii■■i■■�■`�.■it■■i�■■■■■iii�
i■i■ii■i■sii�■i■iiii■i■■si1■.■iiii■■.■t■■iiii
• �i■■t■■■i■it■■i■■i■■�■i■iiii■i■it•� iii■■■■■iON ' •�
�■■■■■■■■■i■ii■i■■i■■�■i■iiii■i■� Boom ON
iii■■■■i■i■■/iiii ■■t■ii i■■■i■■i/�.■i■/ice■■■■■i■■i�
�ii■i■i■ii■iiii�■�i iii■■i■�.■i■■ice■■■■■i■.i�
i ■
�it■■t■■i■ii■i■■i■.�!■■iiii=■i■��■iii�■■■■■i■■ice
• -i■■■t■■i■■■i■iii■/�■�■■li ■i■fit•■i■■■■■�■■■■■i■■i�
�i■■■■■■.■i■■■i■■ii ■■■■i■■i■■■i■■i■�./it■■■■�■■■■■ii■i�
iii■■■■�■i■■■i■■i■■�■■■i■■li■■■i■■t■■�.■it■■■■�■■■■■i■■i■■t■i
�i■■■■■■i■ii■i■■1�■/ ■■t■i■/i■■■■■■■i/�./i■/■■■�■■■■■li■■i�
�i■■■■■■i■ii■i■■i■■ ■■■i■■it■■�■i■�ISM= ■■■i■�i� .
• �i■■i■i■i■■/i■■i■■�■■tti■/i■■■i■■i/�./i■/■t■�■■t■■it■it■■■i '
�i■■i■i■ii■i■■i■■ ■tt■iii■■■t■■■i/ ■iii�■■■■■i■■ice
�i■■■t■■.■ii/i■■I� �■■t■i■/�■■i■i/�./t■■/■t■�■■■■■it■ice
�i■■i■i■■■i/i■■i� ■■■tii■i■■■i■■i■�./i■■1■t■�■■■■■i■■ice
• ■■�i■■it■■■■■i/i■■ii�■■�t■ii■i■■i■■■■■i.■i■■ ■■■■■i■■ice ..
■■■■i■■■t■■■■■i.ii�i■■i■■1 ■■■■i■.ii■■■■■i■1��/ii��■■■■/i■■ice
■■■■ii■■■■■i■ii■■■■■iii■■■■i■■i■■■i■■i/■tt■i./■■■/��■tt■/i■■ice
■iiii■ii■iii■■ ■■■iiiii■i.�.■i■■ice■■■■■it■ice
�i■■■t■■i■ii■it■i� ■t■ti■/i■■■i■■t■/�.■i■■■t■�■t■■■if�i�
■■■■■i■■1■■■Jil■i■.I■iill■■■1/■ii■■■■i■■��■■ ■■�i■i�/i.■��■/■■iti�■■■■■ii■i� �.
: .
•
i�iiii�i •
H. (D z DESCRIPTION
• 1 • Brown SILT
• TP-105Brown silty SAND
• 1. Gray SILT •
��t■��■►�t■1■rrt���■■�m�■■rr•■r M■rtEtEN�/■■■■rt■t��
• tt!•�t■ttr�■tt1��r��■��■tttt■�ttrlil®tall■�■t■!�m■rt�tr�t■■■■mt■tt�ttt■r
• �tt�rttrtt■■t■��1\�t■t�t��■tttrt�tmt■t■■ so■t■ ■■■■t■t■ttt■tt!•
• '' �t�t■tt�t�■t■t■■\`�tt�t��■���t■t!•■�tltl•)•�■�����■■■■����
��t■�t�■rt■■���t���■tttt■t���tO■tt■■ttr� ■�t�tt■fit■mom t■�t�t■t�
INNS= ■mom■�t����■��■■■�■�■tt■■ttr�r■�t�tt■fit■■■tlrt■tt�tl•
��ttlttrt�■t■t■■����t� ■tttt■trtt��t�■�t1�� ■rt�tt■fit■■■■�rtt��
. �tmom trt■�t�■t■�■rrtt�t\11'■ tom■NO IN�t■■■■�ttl�ttl•
���■■■■r■■■■�■■■���■■■1►�■■■■t�■Itr■■/■■■�■tom■�t�r■�t��_�_t■■■■fit■�_ttttt■
MEMO
�t■tt■�■��■fit■�■■���t�tt��tt■■tom■�!�■I����%����� 1 •
��t■ENOW fit■■���_t11�_■\��_�_t■tom■�_■�I�■����_�■■■■���_�_
��_t■tt■tt■t�■ t■r■tl•��_��■t��_ MEN
i���__�_%�����t■�_�_
•• tt�m■r■■����t��Ott►�t■tt■■tt■■�r■�t�tt■�������t�tt�tttttr '•
rtt■■ttt■■■�Ir■t■t■■�■t■tit/■tt■�■tttt■tom\�Ilt■tt■■tt■■■trt■m■rrtt�tt■tt■t■■■tl�t■tt�t■��
�t>•t■�mon� m
t■tl•t■ ■tl•NOt�t1>t�■ME mmt■tt��t■■■■rt■t�ttl• •
��ttitt��■��■��t�m�■tt�t�tt�--t■■■ ■� rrt��t■■■tIt■t■ttt■tttttr ,
_ttrt■tt■r■t■t■■��■ONE= tt■■NO tl
ttt■Wit■■■tt■ ��m In M11 IN_r■�r��/■■■���ttt■t� •
• •. , �tt�t■Ott■■t■ ■�t■�t■�■tttt■ MOM
to r■t■omom
�������t■ttt■tttttr
_ttt■t■ttr�■t■ ■Ot■_t■_■tl•t�tt��tt■tl�■�_t/■t■tr�_�_/■■■tl���� •
• ■��t�■�■�■■■I���t■ ■t■t�t���t�■tt\\ MEMO �������t■tt�tttttr '• •.
• �ttt■ttltt■t�ONE r■��INNS= 0 t!•trtt�t■tt■■t■1��r■r�tt��t■■■■fit■�tttt!•
��t■tt�EM mom��M1 M=■tttttlt��t■tt■■tt■►POE �t■■■■��tt�tttttr
�tt�t■�t�■t■t■■t■�tt�t■ ■tttt■t�tt�t■t!•■tt■■►� rNOtt■fit■■■■t■ttltrt>•
�tt�t■tt�t�■fit■■fit■■fit■ ■tt!•�ttrt�tt■■tt■■��0■����t■■■■t■t■�� •
• -_���■��■�����■tttt■�t�tt�t■tt■■tt■■��r■N=tt��t■■■t/rt■ttt■t�
�_tt�t■_ONE■t■t■■fit■�_t■�_■tl• tt�t■tt■MEMO�_�momm■mt�tt■�_t■■■■Amt■ttt■ttttt■
Am
�■tit■t�t�■fir■���1Ml 010111 ■
No NO MWo �rr■01■■��Mt1���� �t■tt�t�
■t�ttltt��■fit■■��Z tttl ■tt■ tt■■�\rtl��011111 logo ON .•
t■■�t��t�■ ■��■■■rl�■1���■���tt�■■/t■■■ ■�■�\low 1■■■tt■ttt■■■tmom
■�■■�_t�
MW NO NONE
omm
ttttt�t��tt�tt■■t■t■■fit■_t■_■tt■t■t■_��■t���1•�■ �_t■■■Et■t■tt�tt�
• Ott!•t■tl•t�■t■r■�ttlttt■t■�■�rtt��tt■�tr■��■�t�tttl�t■■■tIt■t■ttt■ttttt�
�����■t■■■■���t■�■tt��tt���■��� ■t■�tt��t■■■■rt■ttt■ttttt�
• tt�t■tt�■■I/■ rl■1��1■�t■11■■tl■I■t■t■■tttt■■tll■■1■■1�■t■t■ttr/■1 ■■����/■■■■r��� •�
•
• > DESCRIPTION Content NMoisture
CA
cr
mm
•
Brown
Brown •
■ Brown SILT
SIEVE ANALYSIS
� • � • •
• •� t■■■■•t�a■�t�■a�����a�• —��•��t�ltt�■t■■r■tt���l�tl�■t�a�■■■!��■!■■■i� '
• .� �■��■�t�■■■t■!�t■■ttltl�■■`�t■tt■t!■�■\!■ttt��■�■t1■t■��t■■l�tl�� •
����t�/fit■■��t■■■■�■����■■�/�■���■����■■■■■����
• • .• �■t!t■■■tl�■�■■■fit■■tilt■1�■�■■Intl�\�l��l�ttl■t■�■■■■■fit■t■■tt■■� �
• �����■��■�����■��■���■ice■��■����■■■■■����
�■l•■■tl•■�■fit■!�■■tttlttl�■■tl•■■■l•■■�■■t1�1��■�����■■■■����
�■■!�■■■■�■fit■■�■■■t■1■■�■■■tom■■■1•■■■1•■�!■tt►'!�l��tt■��■■■■����
MEW
� �t■■■�■■■�■��■��ttti��■t■t�■tlttlt■■�■�l�I�l�■tlt■■��t■■!fit■tt�� .�
�����■a■■■��■■■��■��■��■�■�■■■■tom ■�■■��■■■■■onsommmNNE 111101
• fit■■■■��■fit■■fit■���■■tom■■■�t�tt1■■�1��■fit■■���■■■■���■■�
•• �����■��■�■1���/���■■tom■�1��■��■���■■■!fit■�� �
■�■t■��!■■�■■!�■■tom■■ll�■■ 111111
■ am
■��0■■■t■�■■mmm�■■■�■MlMt■■t■��a■■■■�■■���
�■t■=MNWMWWM ■■M■■■■■��■■■tom■!■■■t��■■�■��l�t■1■■■��tt■!�lM
TWIN momm■NEWSOME
��■�� ■��■■■■■tom■�■��!�■l•■t■�■■■■!��■t■■t■■�
�■■1��■■■■�■�■■l�tlt■�t■�■■tt�■■fit■■l•■■l•■1��!■1t■1■■■��■■■■��■■■1�
■l•■■■■■■■■�■��■�■■fit■�■tit■■■■�■�■■�■1■■■t��l�t■■■■�■■■■■lm■■t'■■■■l•
■■'■t!■■■t■tom■■1MtlMttltttl■■�■�t!■tt1�■�■t�!■� ■■1t■■■■�■■t■!fit■t■■�
��■ ■■! ■■■tl•■■ ■��■!■■�■■t1■■ttt�mlm■■■■■ ■t■■mommmimmimm !�■■��
• ■ ■■■■■■�■�■■l��tttlt■�■�■■tttit■ ■■�■�m1��■t■omm �■■■■fit■tt��
mmm� son
son
�omm9l WWII 10101111 Omni emomom Is son
NNE
:Ila
DESCRIPTION
• •
® •
•
cn• ' • •
•
..
Pi
TP-118 Gray
dsanySILT
• •
•
100
80
x 60
w
0
z
U
40 —A-Line
cn
I
a_
20
C L-ML
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT
Natural
Key Boring/ Depth Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. P I. Water
Test Pit (ft) Content
• B-1 7.5 Gray SILT ML 35 29 6 34.7
B-2 10 Gray SILT ML 37 31 6 37 .5
Atterberg Limits Test Data
Earth Consultants f Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C Renton, Washington
\ Goacar�Engtr«rs.ceo+os�•�,wonm,ry sc5cr,clss
Proj. No.3000-3 Date Nov. '97 Plate B6
100
80
x 60
W
0
z
U
�- 40 `—A-Line
Q `
d
�C
20
C L-ML
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT
Natural
Key Boring/ Depth Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. P 1. Water
Test Pit (ft) Content
• TP-109 4 Gray SILT ML 36 28 8 37.1
TP-113 1 Brown SILT ML 42 30 12 42.2
TP-115 S Brown SILT ML 36 29 7 35.4
TP-117 5 Gray SILT ML 38 31 7 39.5
TP-121 7 Gray SILT ML 38 30 8 38.2
Atterberg Limits Test Data
I Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
c.�-rwcyEActi« C<o"q M&En%lon.. Scx Renton, Washington
Proj. No.3000-3 Date Nov. '97 Plate B7
VIL BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS
I
r
1
r,♦
i
l\
' I
i
•
•
.ry
�! E
- , i � t
ft��
9 All
k.��.
�.LN
-..ewJ •v
/ a.�.r alaxem'
WA4
j,�'71�J� L, �t.. .l�I�:i.�!Tt 1' �s®try►=--��'��,,,�'+1;v,�y�� �o�
/�ri� , '� •��/C'�+.ice -, , -fit•_1 .'
�i `� t#!fs?��;�`�',:.J: ..::::- ti'�tN• 1> �cn,a�,r: i i`��'��►�� � ��������t�\�II�'
.sue ,.,R •�..• .:�•:.,� �*A�.• . I ..
�.��5%•r� .y t1• .c A --'`�+�at: : ��: eea���om:.�:�•••/ I�Jr' 1�� ��.r__ ���s'+� '�1 ����1
`.
_I!!i h� `1�::.v a :i• / �..i%r''r` �;.�1��.`;���Fip'o �l�,! ,raj• .,,��;.�,a �.;,,,���,d`�� yr:• .....:,��:��. 1;1W
lit
I
\ S I
O I
? I
M
• I1 � 1
• I
1 I
t'
I �
i
� a
i I
� ! I
� � 1
1 .
,
i
•
• �;�'.
/ Wes
NJ
� IVA iAll
:. '
J+ ��• kr*94�s'.c it':e1 ai3Rai
RMN
�' ' .�ufi?%'i / 11 �1�9.t�`w`tM'`1• I+ to �• ''
'/)1� 2/�:��E�lir� � L\s7R +1�:fI✓ F.l��.�°Y°s �! 1i}1° yp!'T,! y�FJ Y +• {�j�t ��•♦�•/'
+ �� '1 '�_. i 1 rti�1..S.�"S '1 7 M .•�^`�` `F •.::it�j' '1 I y ��� �..' �.��•rdl
�`.1 ��y��� , ^4a�, ,y+.a,,,t'� af?�,�}�3� w,,.r.�t� ;��•�.,.�. � a r.•�eSIEEEEE�i �:;�� �,� ' '� �.'c`. d
��,ll���Vr,, •:'' y\ 5:tw"' .zi �"'}�� rlw _ o,�?�.Cnr�+-a4.•ao �Ei�'`�Cli.�b� 117.it±�.�� �`°j. C'`?{'i �trYi"5�•J.dii�:
� ��P - t�,:9S�'tteJ) � ••*�/"' f+' ! �r;�'1��/ `,. �:j r"L�1 r'�_' ar... °r.iti... ��i ki.y��yy� '1.,•.{II/'4.�
v� ��� Y 177' } •�7.4:�.L� ��J'.Sn...-...i�.►:.�{cri491'sr:.wr l:+Wr:.C•... �.
:+''�`L 1 ,1 �'i•/'•�:.[IiwRM�'r.�:��6�.GA1:S?- rw=.w G1iY'us•.CjNe� ��
171E R! J� I�f.F=� �':T. ` ' I '► vel
t�C I� �IUti�'L',•••l+« •1:"kf t� .• �"� - '• `i� S`71 ��/f/>r ` {�-_� q.. Y .�
w+ �" +tx:tt�b4'i") N. 1� � �E E� +�$„b�F►_I� E� �'�\��.J���15r'�� �
C r: � Ff/ ;vv�!Q td'Utl��c �": *`�'� v7.I.{q�+v'.L�7•.eoA r:` a�''� � �����xf ��(�J �= a '•� � ��" ,�1
���.GG/}fc� `61't' ..'yr.<+++4i*�..��•imu i..','Y N ,� %f � �. _- _ �T
�,p.ct'st1rEEEEE!rr�.:u�;.�a.•._._ -:.ti.�;�:cR `' lLT�,
aLE�..�.f�� f +saa.c r::'i [ -x'rsd"hi•;d:•::�_o w�r♦�;- ___�tf � L P.fd.�\v �� -•0�
•IIEboE� .rlTlH as ��r{. , •Q \.,, w:.s,rl.V � 1 :�\. .7�
) `-\.• �T='-• r�•�, mil=
�p �m4l•ql.-yy ►�
r.t.'l .•. w.'r....i .•,err.,:���✓.�<�• ^� «.�� �fiF''l:9 a`�.dXtSdi��!6 � �1 tr�"`;1 :
+i.•x�, fAt'7 .+.•a!, ,r"'i:a!<...tC�3G1� � f
..�'t`r.•:.J�•.1/4 1<:,2•.,1.. �1Cti+P �,JI: L .-.it. .•r,• � '
�.•�1�r! 1 I _
r ;EtEEEif� • r
VIII. OTHER PERMITS
IX. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN
X. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
XL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION
MANUAL
F__ L STA. 3+55f
�- I 0 CIVIL INSTALL : POTHOLE AND FIELD VERIFY DEPTH, LOCATION AND DIAMETER PRIOR
1.
Ne z UTILITY PLAN ; (1) 10"x8" TEE (MJxFL) TO CONSTRUCTION. SEE NOTE ® EX. VALVE CALL BEFORE YOU DIG:
Z (1) 8" GV (FLxMJ) 3+55f
NE;�� i C
W 3 \ (1) 10" PLUG (MJ) _ EX. 10" DI WATER (W-500B)_________ 1-800-424-5555
J
o a o v= A,
W
ice{_ ----- - 'I'------- - >
(n ♦� I (1) TEMP. B.O. ASSY. h 1 STU�j TO WESTSrDE�OF ' Q
0 1 =20 1 OAKSf]ALE AVE. I
0 I 0
a- 0 10 20 40 50 LF-8" DI i I • : Co
DI7 ,)r P01-116T0yLE14 UTILITY NOTES Z3 SECONDARY POWER SERVICE TO BUILDING METER TELEPHONE SERVICE TO BUILDING(S) ,
01)
SEE ELECT. SERVICE FOR DETAILS. (2) 4" PVC SEE ELECT. SERVICE FOR DETAILS. (1) 4" PVC I -� 1 I ' C
CONDUIT WITH PULL WIRE. G.C. TO COORDINATE CONDUIT WITH PULL WIRE. G.C. TO COORDINATE STA. 3+05 RT 35' 1. ABANDONED UTILITY LINES LOCATED ON-SITE SHALL BE REMOVED AND PLUGGED WITH O
AND VERIFY REQUIREMENTS WITH PUGET SOUND AND VERIFY REQUIREMENTS WITH U.S. WEST FIRE HYD. ASSY< HYDRANT MARKER ; CONCRETE OR WOOD T20 COATED AT PROPERTY LINES TO CITY REQUIREMENTS. � '0"r 25' STORM AND ENERGY. (TYPICAL OF 2 SERVICES) iI PER CITY S�D. PER CITY STD. 3 1 ( )
UTILITY EASEMENT PRIMARY POWER SERVICE TO TRANSFORMER !!(1) 8 x8 x I P N B103 I ; C
PER "OAKSDALE SEE ELECT. SERVICE FOR DETAILS. 1 4" PVC (TEE(MJxFL) ' ; , 2. CITY LINES MAY NOT BE COVERED UNTIL AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN TESTED AND
BUSINESS PARK O 1 6" GV MJxFL) . I ; APP Y N D V AGENCY. UPON COMPLETION OF THE BACKFILL
I\1 CONDUIT WITH PULL WIRE. G.C. '10 COORDINATE :I
`;i 'Z.6D'"'""""'' OPERAATIONS, THOE U I ITY LINES GOVERNING
BE RETESTED.
z AND VERIFY REQUIREMENTS WITH PUGET SOUND 3� 1� 8" MJ PLUG � I � tE.- �.,95(1211 CO,rC W, i �
i ENERGY. • SEE DETAIL SHT 7. I jI_n 4 8�112° MP E� QS
JDRANT
I 1 NXSTAING„ST RZ FIRE HYDRANT
1 -�+
SSMH #1 i JOINT ACCESS EASEMENT E 1 u __-- " Q N C
BY OTHERS Ii, -....................... ,' - - �� i,
36 LF 6" PVC SIDE SEWER STA. 1+36 t _ 3+0 - ' -`� -L_ 0
STA 0+00 SDR 35 ® 2.0% MIN. CLEAN OUT
I 'r 3. ALL UTILITY LINE EXCAVATION BEDDING AND BACKFILL MATERIALS, AND COMPACTION C
CONNECT TO SSMH I RIM=24.5f �`, ., . r< ,` >r rn, ,
MATCH FINISH STA. 2+50 l
a , SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER'S
INVERT EL=10.40 I CLEAN OUT :' �: : - _ _- _. ;•••_. '.. '-';: �RfGfT�thdit .i�#TIONS AND THE GOVERNING AGENCY R_._ OE3AD- .................. STA. 2+55 I ... c , REQUIREMENTS. UTILITY LINES
J f` -- `� `- ..•---.. -•• -R1M.=_22.5f IE=15.557 I "; --,,� R 1 INCLUDE STORM DRAIN, WATER, SEWER, IRRIGATION, ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE, GAS,
I I _-----
_ --� : MATCH",,FINISH
„ ( {� 3AND LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION LINES.
�-" t P 58 8 43 b1' f7� "�) GRADE ' Ji .
^ «
!q
G �„- +.,,e,1,.lJ
L 's �, . \`
z
Co ALL ONSITE W SERVICE SHALL BE COPPER TUBING CONFORMING TO ASTM B-88 O
f, I I I I ? ! I �f1.11 I , '< � . . 4r. , TYPE K ANNEALED. THE TUBING SHALL-=k�_
z 1,{ • RIh =21,27 ( ) BE COUPLED USING FLARE TYPE COMPRESSION (�
_ j [ I I I , " "_ ::`>„ Ef' , FITTINGS CONFORMING TO AWWA C800 (150 PSI WORKING PRESSURE).
1 II I` �.. . .:: :k.--1 e<8?� OIL c) I )
Q
4r fi"_PVC SDR; 35 SIDE SEIN I I I I
ER ; q;' '° 3E- 14.97(12" COtiC 4 ) 5. SANITARY SEWER PIP U
-.. - - _ I1E' SEWED y '' 3 I DR 3 ) WITH FLEXIBLE GASKETED JOINTS U
.... . i - I I ;2% MI -_ I PIPE JOINT TYPE SHALL
E (GRAVITY) SHALL BE PVC (S 5
:I ; g •: ��,��3 >�� .»� � �' ;::" e' G_.° ti 3 I BE RESTRAINED GASKET.
:� I ; I I I 1a LF, 6 I VC SDR .2_ i�IN r.f ' 1 O
__
I.
�: a Z
JE
I'll
-_.,
SSMH #2
x 1 6 MAXIMUM
I�: I'llP i c 'e 1 ALLOWABLE DEFLECTION AT EACH JOINT SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE-HALF OF
:I :. I11
I ; 1. 3D :...................... ...... �` °,:,:>:;w,: ;,"_.,,* , THE MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDED PERMISSIBLE DEFLECTION.
W/ BACKFLOW STA. 1+50
I I (TIDEFLEX) PER DETAIL SHT. 7 _ a <;I 1 ! 7. MINIMUM SLOPE
:<,,;;.><r :::;t>::3.:,..t., ;:.tm ,,,,.,,.:t., FOR 6-INCH SIDE S fey: / , EWER SHALL BE 2 PERCENT. MIN. PIPE COVER 24".
Q I1 ' STA. 0+36 IE-13.45 / ■ rrs »> � .:�V '
S s>.. .:xz ?:: ,.3) *.:
Z:E:.
I:
L•' v„Lazf'.vs:�..,;,::<: :: v'ho'.%3>3.:,:`'.';`s`; I I 1
TWQ-WA ;';::< 'I:<>:< _<,.: fit.: I 8. SEWER SERVICE SHALL II - '- -* RIM=24.3t €° Y LL INCLUDE DETECTION TAPE
} a.< ln.a
IE-11.12 6 IN g a CL N
I
( )
EA OUT 1
" ,tr:t
::t�.
P `Y3+o 1
{ IE-11.22 6 OUT i��IE- 2
1 w
s
L k...
CONY CONVENIENCE*
NCE.
E :fibs
... ..-...-...-:-....... ..... ....... ...'�'�--..-».-r..-:-..-:Door- .. ...... .. .�� .•--- ....... ....... _.._.. :: : '
,.f.k
:, r f \ ,, c �,4 1 LEGENDS w
w ,i t E . '^ ate.,:�. ,::,.,,n: T( I
0 P.O.C. TO B e brr: ;._. .: ;z; E
STORE :;."..:: I J
____ .---_ ....- ....-.. _.... �, %<^ `:S.rr,::.:<..n.J. :S`i{<;::asp ..4 I f�
T :: ,- :f.. ., 8 VERIFIED I
} rr>', r EXIST. OVERHEAD POWER
a a 'x «.ff, Lo I I P OH`1 Q
II { - a w`v
r - { FF 23.30 : -`E .
F :..�:':r:';.'4
• !F
«,
4�k%% 1
Q
CL C E
':V:h�3. .:ti it ... .:.s
t
`9
� EXISTING STORM .... .. ...... .... ... .....
O I S OR
..,,;:'.r,::.,.r::.r:.rr.ra:,a33:: ,..4.., .. DRAIN _.
° " e SD _
t ..:::::,;v:;3,::<:;3::,::;:,y, �.::.:rr.Eo:".ss:co:,j..�.,::::,o.:>.,:to.: ... ...
I a o .x.. oa >:n3::f:>:::::1:ryr.3y; I _........ W
REFER TO ARCHITECTUAL "'
e
�.r:.
Q I v
I
I I
U
I
PLUMBING AND DRAWINGSs Z
r;
1
cI CoEXISTING - ---
GQ T
FTC e ni WA ER
1�, Cc
FOR <-<;_<.;::�;jf.«:>..:.::.><> >,::>::>:ff::::::r�s
✓-' ... I .; U E :: .,; I °: ;: ADDITIONAL INFORMATI " `
W { _ _ _ _ ._. ....... ...._ ...... w J
Lr-- 1 .1 e '
I 1M' { T
1 v
9 I
�I7 W I- I 1
ss
4 f ` fay I O
W f..
6 STUB & CAP »:A CART W tr>sr,:>:...
MBA 3„t:,
t
EX I -
'-, I STI N -
tr G SAN. S EWER
\ L... ....I e
.�t: - Z
o
FOR FUTURE T IS PEA'`>.
Cn Co
0
��yy o ❑❑ i i
F�-1 v ❑ ❑ •I
Ii ....... ...� .... ,....... :r YID I
.-3 CAR WASH ! - z
I
C ., ... , q, �. • ..,.,... I ••'� '.
_ _
Q
L. 1 : :........
L�j -��_.. . t: tt . .. .. ::. 3
1
J
IE 18.70 , t..; .: :.r.::�:.:.: W
\ \ G
;: P R f`; O P S- , :. ::::t::3::3::r:,<;>.rrr:.rr::.rr,rr• r ASPHA T
.� O • e V
Q \..�\ '. � ° • '``: ;.=>>:`u.<. 1 PAVEMENT Z
_ _
_ • I
U _ 1
z
Co ..-._ ........ ..... a I -
°
7 .�.. 'iF •V::3'�i'.i" x T �^
I� • I-
l3 l,
��'I 1
H \ I3 �• I :Ci :• `'r�Ats , s.�, w r rs I vJ
O �' e�'�\ Fc3� l r//y..s,,:r� EX. L1' H` u_130''�
/ Y:;so
(,, t I(( 0 PROPOSED HEAVY DUTY' m
�' I I; - »-�_ - - -II _ �, G ( '. i '1 E CA i ; ASPHALT PAVEMENT
• E i
II II v �• e. - • I ;tt.r:' , ft'A..::':;3'`:"v'2:.:. , I
ELL L_ 3
'/' ° :; ':v'%s':crm::.t.;;1.��.�,,,�`r,..yk'rfo' ;v;: .o. ik. t r Mi{�irq G> •' w
I I - -... ...... ....... ...II f \ G :a e ° . ° Il jE i PROPOSED CONCRETE �. '
- _----- _,-_ -,.- J.
I : I
y
I .... ...
I. ... , ,
I y
•,i::: .::n ... .. ...
':i .. .. ... .. ;: .. ...
G tl,
N 1 �a : :-r
II e ° _I Q Q
III I'. 3..,.t . -
- - - -
OIL/WATEI SEPA1�`ATR 8 SATEJALVL MJ} _....r. :
cc
- �� - , O ( I PROPOSED SANITARY :.: WER 0 SS C
Q
T� I -) E'TIL?Y V-ULT S6O-SA I-SMUT-OFT VALVI �` i 1 �' ICo
Z< : I A.PPY'I}VED UIV. {NORMALLY CLt35E11) ( o Z L Ij A\t"`.I " \OR I f 1 PROPOSED WATER _Z
EQ I €
` ,
s� Q L _ _ - _... ....... ...... .. w - I 3 N ! ; Y
�� o I� C C83, TYPE 1 ' 1 7PE C<36, TYPE 1 :j
1 0#6. <•--- •- • I sD
II ( - 3 0 I . PROPOSED STORM DRAIN
{
w� h I . 3 M 22.33 RM=22.33 " [
'� - - - - -I I �, i Z 0
II IE i :11 .1 4 N 1E=1�,1 t8 IN IF=18.64 OUT ? I
L.
II q I � 9, 4 €lTj t9.1r0UT) r I PROPOSED SAN. SEWER CLEANOUT •
Il I q $ O 3 OOi J CO
z RI
w
_T II I - - - - I ; _ L !E-3.1OrS
- e ,. . v :. ...: SD fi 5 i ' 1
J Z Z II 1 -�--. . �G ' ; • V �. . R. . o% iE�3.10(E) 1 PROPOSED GAS
I
a: 3
W FUTURE RETAIL _ - - :: 99r e e . d ! : y � ,• a ,� e . I G w
i Z �,e II F - - - - 40 ,L " ' 1 <33 LF 6" • ° "�' e °v'' �� L�), ' I I 1
z w NOT A PART II ' �. , aQ ....-,:ej EXISTING GAS
f
CL 50 CL -, •' SDRL35 �P2 09�. G :au':. : .. ��..A � 1�. G
G :.I ° �.... :.x /..........E:X. MH
- _ e Z _. 9 / I '
L�jOF THIS PERMIT I� - - - - I I . -Z R M=2'.b
EI II G,' COIVG. I a ° . . o I. ''- '� �JSs I' -� \ r} W!I [[ I[/ I
3 n v `� 4 e = e ° I 1 li 1t 3� e �-7 1
: -a �. I I.' IE-:' 821 N• i
FF 23.30 II _ - I 3 ° G,��,', 0 .., ( 3 ,
;I DETAIL 4 U t IS A ANOF' -. I . °� °� - °°a ° ' ° s �' i r A THE EXISTING WATER MAIN SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE, BASED ON
II - - - - II +; �(� ��1, 4 j t O FIELD SURVEYS AND AS-BUILT RECORDS. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR �-
r. e a f a G a J 'C�; , n a ,' / 1
v d' T C�<! f 1 »
II : ( °a4 ° _ 3- cn /� I SHALL "POTHOLE THE EXISTING WATER MAIN PIPE TO VERIFY
I tT
41, e' s d. _.�. w. �
_ .._... _.... A _:.r..4 .... I I-
3I I G :f- � a ' e ' • .-. LL<-,.. , ., t I_ THE DIAMETER AND LOCATION INCL. ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO
( )
II - - - - I F' "' • ��, 3' ° .I - �� , ; ' I ; CONSTRUCTION. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN THE LOCATION OF THE
1A.
I :G
EII I '�` a A `�' ., '' 'fir. ���\j �`� ' - �= EXISTING PIPE OR INCOMPATIBILITY OF THE DESIGN SHALL BE
-' - - --• -. -a - - -- -- ' --47- . "" • ; 1+Q0 I BROUGHT TO THE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION OF THE OWNERS REPRESENTIVE,
w
°. Z.: . I U U
p 6 I i I p I II - ' ...._a.. _.....- 3 ° e .I °: r F.:X. CB 1 x AND BARGhAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS (425-251-6222 . Z >
W w W
w
I ,:.:.....,, .n,.,..:t.....».
,I
> ..
z I
x.. ...........< fi.:nt.,ntr s.:.:::t...t,..,.,..: r.r E O Z
Z Y i
U U K ...J I R
i., ;�:.s ,:.
� w w x a
1. , ..,<..::.:.... ...... ..;.. ..,,:...t::,,::...::.r:.:>..., .... ..,...,..t,r.:..;,:.....:..:: ,�....1 h..�2;i 2 i,.�rac W)
to U Q �., ,....,. :..r.:: ,J:�'J>2E.n, ,Ln.,t".:.0:..::::::...... u. �uiJ I?ct,r,r:,. .... <.. g
,...::.:.:..:.. :.:..:,.r.::.:.
4
;:3.:r.. �.:.:,
1 �
V I IL.1 I I C � L. CONIC E' C'CT NO;a::arr =1�•4y TES
1 : . _ _ Q
::.:,,..:.,:t...:r:::::::: .:
E'
t
......:.....:. .... ... .3.. : ,..
1 w
w
r - - o
0
.3
r f
.....,.n...... .�... ......:.. ,.._,..,.... »,,.,.:.:.:ar:rrrr.,..,.:;.... '..r;.:t.;: .' / __ ,: CAUTION:
�1 „.:,. 6, Z
d f....................... .... *� r::: .:.:r.::.t „ ... n.. W
s
� COPPER WATER ,:3 3:;::1; :: _..
,.:.:n..::n v IC Q1J� »:::.:::::::.:.r:::....:.:,,... r::...:,... .... .::.. ......,
Z 5 L ....,...:.. „ T NTRA. w
..:.,........:::.:::::.... n:: ..: :, , .. i HE CO CTOR SHALL BE R n..,.. .,..». s....., . .. ESPONSIBLE
/...,,.::,:.>..: t.<vt...:.:....... n.......,... . ..,. ...,..... . . . ..., .... .,...,...;:.:,......:....:. ,.x. ,..,: r FOR VERIFYING THE
,.::..:.,:::t.:.:..n.:...:..:::. ...:.::..,.:. ,,.::. . ..:. , �. r.,::..,„t.., , ,. ! � 1 � I LOCATION DIMENSION AND � 0
»r:...;:. ..»..,.: ::: .:,::n..:.:. :.:. .... ............... . I i DEPTH z
Q �. 1'►?'Ei�CEIE - f
TA,AIR W T y..:nH ,,, !
/.... . _ ._ ........ ..:::..:.». ,:..... »r.....:r:. r ... : ,..n.., . i OF ALL EXISTING UTIILITI
l,0 1� Z i s_na.:::.::.:.. . ...:: n, ,.... .. f I ES WHETHER SHOWN SbF .•«. r ON THESE PLANS OR NOT o
;: .::.::.:;:.:..:... <�.:.:. .:r.,..r:>.:t:.:r:.:: . e BY POTHOLING T z
l: ..::.:::.:.:.. .,. i HE
r
i. �.......... .. ..__.......:: _......_.: ..., .. .. .... ...:.. :. J !
c�
_.... .......... »:::... . ........... . t< »: - r t UTILITIES AND w
�,::. SURVEYING THE HORIZONTAL
... .>r............... _..... ;:.: ,...::..:.: .. ..,.. ........,..:...,,.,::;.:rr.,..::.,r.:.. ,.. ..,.. . ,. .. I LAND N
n............. __..._.... _.. . ..... _........ .:. ,..:, n.,. . ., . . ..,..... , ...., . n..,. .....,. . r VERTICAL LOCATION PRIOR TO C z -
/ ....,r......... .. ... .. ,, n .:,:.. :, . ,.,r.,,,,.::t,.n.,:, r � CONSTRUCTION.
::.,.,...::. :: .... .......Y>,»H fir........ ....: r:Y.,r^.r;.: , ». ...Or ,.:;, <.,v:..,, , Y.'% -:�..: t,-:;;.?n,.-:....,. :., :+tv: ,. .::y,(o ., >
3• i ;:: .: ...,.:. :Y «�""..:i:.: .. uar •.. a�,F.x.' .. r?. ..».: ,,.. ... , / 11 1
.?..:. . �.1i.„4 3.... � eh� N .r t THIS SHALL INCLUDE _ r7 N Co >
w ..:..:.::............ ... f`x: O l"i C - CALLING UTILITY LOCATE ® 1 800-424- Q
,... ::.. ,., / AL�,1U` I RII O AT f , 5555 AND THEN POTHOLING o N r� z
..... ............ . . . .. ..'.. r , ALL OF THE EXISTING cD w
- � t- - - - - ,< �::, .<.. ,� . ;::.,.:. ,..... ..,. ,::; . - - >, i NG UTILITIES AT AT ao 00
tt cI 6 E3 LOCATIONS OF NEW UTILITY,...,».... :...:.. :.:,t.,..::".. a.:.,. , .. , 1 tI ICEx�, K EX, CITY CROSSINGS TO PHYSICALLY o w
w - -nn 7 1
». ... ,::::. VERIFY WHETHER OR NOT CO z z
_ - - _ r..>:,:::: : . EXIST. L- ------� 1 { ... „ ,/ r - <7r CONFLICTS LOCATIONS OF SAID UTILITIES
__ _-�_ -- .,.1A :,.......»,..: „ ..,. ., . .,. <:: R•M ES AS SHOWN ON T..:.:...,t....:.....:.:....:. .. ....:.:.:... ,.>.:,,. ., ..<,Y F F_.aJt . s THESE - c�
I. �. ... I I . , „ COPLANS ARE fxASED UPON THE UNVERIFl P Q In n c� "�
:'� c.... z r ED UBLIC INFORMATION AND A n z�� RE SUBJECT TO V
-f- Irrts�::::,. . ':: ..: ,. 16.,,. 12 {,GNa� ; } '\ ARIATION.
3
srr.rrr::: , � N Z -
...:, ........:n:.,.r..,\.::.:.�:.. ire..:,'::f3:az:'.:.:...:�...f:»,:...,....>.rs;:,.:, ,(
a::;::.:::::;: .;:::r . t E'er N
js / , IF CONFLICTS SHOULD OCCUR THE CONTRACT r.;., .;,:;,,t:.... ..:...:..,. 3 .. h,H
<,,....::>. /� r_X< E: ,._ n 12„ a OR SHALL CONSULT BARGHAUSEN w
- -...-_.-.. �,r--- - w 1-.- `' �,: E.-11 .17�,: M. E) , ENGINEERS. OR _�
} -®" a'� __ '. . / I ` CONSULTING INC.C. RESOLVE ALL PROBLEMS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH Lo Lo > t
I CONSUL G
ap I a / AIR WATER UNIT ' 01 / 1 CONSTRUCTIO`�. N z N N
i / �U -\rc I' SIGN<° )-i;OXI `1 1 ,� oo w "- ,d. > 5
STA. 7+37, LT 48' :rj a SEE ARCHITECTUAL ° /- %, 1 Y U N
1-1 2" WATER METER WITH _11- 4sz'h� ^c< = '
. N 8, ' " W PLANS �� ,/ I ..� s X �
::<r.::. ��
G:J Jvr � '6
t,�� SC.SayuQ" %/ �.! �\ r... E' SDa1'r+
_592 SERVICE TO LANDSCAPE i-.. r
r' I _,f .,.,,
i F' 1 t i
•k
. Fi. Aha:
_ �.4<�S
C j i3(
'1
KF OW 3 »BAC L DEVICE HIN �»,.. w�1a� '� �1 BE D �C.
rah" ten, ,� ��• CfAP �O z ) \..
(
I][. i / N •D 2
.•R 'JAUL• �•r�
` ". a of. :rs
t,. :.;�ar X. mot'`-
/.a Nf`>^ ,r,%3..: ./yfi. .ten a' V/
M R ON PRIVATE P ,.:;:::> �' 11�ETE ROPERTY
C:' 4 e
s / L 'd
,5 "s-• 1 ,2k ::�.:::::.�:.:r:�rr:3wr..1..:.\v. ____� .
y' G r- .. �,• 1 i ! 3�4a �. S7 r
- y ,.::.:::::..:::»:::::::,::»n..... In •"- I =1".?5 �/
o G ° ° ' • . s ° i :�t- �i (' I ' r �' JP E W A S
U " e v - e . . . . ° , °. s G. a , d . ° 4E - E X dim I . . 's' ° e _ '• d ' .° . -mac- . 1 j ,�1�3v rL'N� C� 7� V'
, .�.-• /'
a ..•• sitl •,-i ° 4 a - ' 6 I -11, j 1 ,` tG �j J ?j '��
a ..._.A..�,:__�._�- , .. • }.;, COf�C. SI�EttiA ` A - e� �. ���� _ ..- .. _ ..-:.-..�__.:, _• �T �. ��: •� CITY OF RENTON c�
a 3 a 1
, .
_Q. ° e - � �L , RECEIVED `� p I
e
I
I 1
'CrQ
U .............. ,.,,.............. - _. __ 1
\ ....................._. -r --rl' X �_ _
--_. �_.✓..
....... _�_
sV 1 S w
ui S.W. 43rd STREET ` `\ E,. s 3 ._, I EP 2 \ \
...........
SAWCUT AND TRENCH PATCH �X" 0 ' II :-�• gAr� FE.Ef: R.M / , �98 2s52 2 \,
o Z ! RiM 24.64 D �' '� I{ ` af'C B ' i��P,}P r. _,>.. a R I I !E=i.67r3P" CONIC, W' 1 �� F0/S T E��`����`� ��PER CITY STD. SEE DETAIL SHT 7 I --'-r ' `S t ` ' ' i UINCa DIVISION
,...3:...: _ice_.. 6 .RON, -5 8 �„' {`
01 L
EX. 12 DI CL. 52 --,�._�=---- i 1I ------ 60 li:- < 1f E" .�N, E) S10IVAL E� 5J r o ----- -- --- --->�_ --- _ _ W .1ER tiA1F : -- - -------=== --------------- ir:_:>z•-------------------I ----------�
CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN (w-0328) EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT �r EX�Ii�iATER V, L vE ;E:=2.60{,E) EX.. 1 0.1, WATER ,i�x 0 2g - - ' �i CON
PER CITY STD. (TYP. OF 2 BY CITY) INSTALL "STORZ" ADAPTO �, INW�{ANHOLE ' �- %2!, o, � Wcife, EXPIRES Ot-07- 9
........._- ...._._ ............_____ .-,-� ,.,-..._,., IE-2.-.0( W,
r _.
- _ I,
0 7+00 8+00 - I I
RIM=2. . 1
p AI AI
CITY
RECOMENDED
- -- -- t -
IE=?5.61(12" CON S 9+00 II 1 r 'r`_X. SDMH 0+00 (N) FOR APPROVAL �EPARTMENTOOF PUBOG WORKS
/ y -
z iE=10,91(36" CGNC' W) 10+00 (E) BY
PIN
``' POTHOLE AND FIELD VERIFY DEPTH, LOCATION AND DIAMETER PRIOR__ ......-_............... ft-- t
TO-CONSTRUCTION, SEE NOTE ^ 11 - -� (( - ------.•.., I`=''031(54• CONC E` UTILITY PLAN
z �J
Ii
< 9 �/I- --- - d
S � !1 aY
w d = I w I ( � I ,� a ), d II Y - Z
Q 1 - C.� �T C� (Y� I Cy T CY U/, 1�_YF" O r !' .•••-....• �7 _ M
.................. _-_�� _ ..._A.........p h 1 7 _ --___
\n _ /7 • J 1 I I DESIGNED - O
DATE - FILE NO. -�
DRAWN _.__ --
g
ZQ 0
_-..._._.____._.
Z -�'c �� 1 MISC. REVISIONS BW JG 7/20/98 CHECKED - SCALE 1' = 20 FIELD BOOK___ _ W i � PAGE
NO. REVISION BY APPR. DATE APPROVED _ 7 U
- -t I DIRECTOR F 4
File: P:\SDSK�ROJ\6777\ENGINEERING\6777-U.DWG Date/Time. 09/18/1998 10:46 Scale: 1-20 chuck Xrefs: Z6777T,Z6777S,Z6777B,Z6777-T, o PUBLIC WORKS SHEET_ OF
I .