Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272735 • TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT FOR OAKESDALE BUSINESS PARK PHASE RENTON, WASHINGTON OUR JOB NO. 5911 JANUARY 29, 1.998 REVISED JUNE 26, 1998 REVISED AUGUST 17, 1998 I r LU/� Prepared By: 28146 BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 0,��Fo TA�\��``'Q 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH SS�0 Al- KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 ._ GHq� (425) 251 -6222 ^ S� Q7 � 2 ZsS = CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Hc ENG�� I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION . 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Oakesdale Business Park is an approximately 44-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 12.3 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/ph] 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 pfovided 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 Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph(SBUH) is used to determine peak flow rates and Water Works software is used for the computer calculations. The wet/detention pond is designed using hydrographs generated by the SBUH method. The pond is designed to release peak flows from the developed 2-year, 10-year, 100-year/24-hour design storms at peak rates less than or equal to the existing condition peak rates for half the 2, 2-and 10-year/24- hour design storms, respectively. WaterWorks software is used to calculate the peak flows, design . volumes, and outlet control. Water quality is being provided in the 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 [KWL/kn/ph] ^ SMUYVI� TnEATMENT PLANT CIJ�I E X I T � 2 • - ` , 4 405 S - T �• I c o'3 3 '9 r :C a S 1, sw19ST. _ EXIT :: Ta1Go 1 y1 In sw is wn Evans ;� O :C. Black Or L •• SW 23 ST 1 Egan A m o a &vd SW 27 ST $28 S t Treck Or �67 SITE $w 29$T N 0 w 30 sr cc�. • y 25 SW31ST 30 V C $\N 3 w 3 SW 34 ST d d r a 3 3 y 3 d c $ a j m $W 39 ST m v S37g e vr` SW 38 Si S 3 N • o SW 41 ST Saxon Or /9? VALLEY 0611i ` r MEDICAL S T ti I SW 43 ST CENTER • � 6 ae Rivas, S s,azsT 36 � o a '31 ea °dd en + t v S lacier S S 188 ST t 5 S T ti ¢° $ 89 ST d o SITE LOCATION MAP NTS Reference: Greater Renton CtivA/ap, 1987 Edition • 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 • DESCRIPTION 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 12.3 AC _ WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 Upstream Drainage Basin Size 0 AC PART 3 TYPE OF APPLICATION PART 4 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 PART 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Green River Drainage Basin • Springbrook Creek, Green River CHARACTERISTICSPART 6 SITE ❑ River ❑ Floodplain ■ Stream Springbrook Creek ■ Wetlands ❑ Critical Stream Reach ❑ Seeps/Springs ■ Depressions/Swales ❑ High Groundwater Table ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ Additional 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 • 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 1 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PART 12 EASEMENTS/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 -• • 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 here is accurate. Signed/Date 591 1.002iKL/tai II. PRELIMINARY CONDITION SUMMARY Sew ge pRTNE , ---� o° 2 Disp Sal • � Nu Ur � Ur •... � Ur 1 •, ••• C•• L M16 .i •_ _i i • J��� �� If. i Pu 9 i "L � Z I UrPu ` t ;;longacre4,-i- , Ur 1 L Py I Wo ep i "eC. u 1 nl 011 i�r� Ur .n .ii• ° Track 1 •U •" u tilt. 29 ri Ur 'ti/ Ur I�1 y W \` W � / P So Tu •j i O m 2 W Pu m Sk I ( Wo I 1 Pu I rk 25 0 = • U' SITE 169 I PY �_ I Sk 1 I i A Wo :r =—= nl I Or T 1 u ( u I j ° InC So Mi • I l Fy 1 Pu .Wo i S. i Wo Q� 1 � 1. i Ur N; -y• 1 u I Ur I g g I BM A 351 3 _ _- f 1 C ( 1NO g 1 Nk� i l ➢ 1 Ng Ur I r •Br Re o° v •I (� Wo Os O I I Ur I Fly( Os I '.vo I ' a ' So So �— MaFN I KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY MAP 1 = 2000' KING COUNTY. W A S H I N G T O N, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL (2) CN values can be area weighted when they apply to pervious areas of similar CN's (within 20 • CN points). However, high CN areas should not be combined with low CN areas (unless the low CN areas are less than 15% of the subbasin). In this case, separate hydrographs should be generated and summed to form one hydrograph. FIGURE 3.S.2A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS IN KING COUNTY � HYDROLOGIC HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP GROUP' SOIL GROUP GROUP' Alderwood C Orcas Peat D Arents, Alderwood Material C Oridia D Arents, Everett Material B Ovall C Beausite C Pilchuck C Bellingham D Puget D Briscot D Puyallup QB Buckley D Ragnar B Coastal Beaches Variable Renton D Earlmont Silt Loam D Riverwash Variable Edgewick C Salal C Everett A/B 'Sammamish D Indianola A Seattle D Kitsap C Shacar D Klaus . C Si Silt C Mixed•Alluvial Land Variable Snohomish D _ Neilton A Sultan C Newberg B Tukwla D • Nooksack C Urban Variable Normal Sandy Loam D Woodinville D HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS A. (Low runoff potential). Soils having high infiltration rates, even when thoroughly wetted, and consisting ' chiefly of deep,well-to-excessively drained sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. 6. (N,tiderately low runoff potential). Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and consisting chiefly of moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. I 1_ • C. (Moderately high runoff potentiai). Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and consisting chiefly of soils with a layer that impedes downward movement of water, or soils with moderately � fine to fine textures. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. D. (High runoff potential). Soils having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a hardpan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rave of water transmission. From SCS. TR-55, Second Edition, June 1986, Exhibit A-1. Revisions made from SCS, Sol Interpretation Record, Form #5, September 1988. • 3.5.2-2 11/92 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TABLE 3.5.2B SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON 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 65 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 9•0 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 M 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 Enc;neering 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 11 9, V e, /t"Y/qaU/, Gel' "WEr eAl ek Pw6- is rz29e`0 e A) -7 glv pl:tFo 14,1041W 4A^IP!f eA-oPeD A A C4 04 C4 N <f Al VeLooa F2- 2-,o i Po 7 '2 .4;, iv 170A..) FIAJo v M L�5- v 16 Us 7do A-.) 6-7L.�- 3049 III. OFF SITE ANALYSIS rn ff I .. VJ d w X y°J tJ°, 11 I ,•\\ •\ ° ^^ x x I ICJ 1 "Tel I I cc) i \\ tt\ I 'x�r X I I ' , \ \ \ \•\ ,\ m I � I 4,F \ \\ -- % `.,r,;K� •� RUC)�' '-- ,b _-' __ x x --� t \ �Ji•P(OH) 11x/°'J 1 1\1•\ m—_ —...._.. X 0 x`j ' ' I ' HMO/H/)� 1 �r /•T�T/ ° i�.a•( '�.;9i:'i: `\ 1`�t: �1 '4) � CSC :':;t''ai % O •. 1 � 1\ � � I ' I � � i 1 � 1 ,1Fn D 1 II I ii1; � \ � x� � �• I •11 I . X'.oJ 1 \ �.II I I � (~ ._. _ `\ \ 1\ 1 V `1 1 ` ` RrJ 1 \•+ Vi�11'°°� I •II� I �r I�0 4 �1 •\ •� \ 1 �, 1 `, \ 1 i X I 1 1 \\x II. C Moe �'��� \ „ ' \ \` \ ` \ 1, •\ \\ k \ .ds x •\ �``.``1 1 � , \ ,,i\ \ \V''. cm % L �4: • X,v ?O r- k x x ` `•'_,` \•�rB \ D \ rn XA °��. ' a e J v 3� ei \ ?J j7 Ln C� O ..��, xr XI Z x ? Q Z x2i ` m ?o x ro?_. . xp4j yJ? 'Qo x �—1•--•• '�G.._ x/d sty ' � x "_—_ ••—.•.a...a::��,.:.�'"�'_•___._,_�,_'-----_..._ 843.20' OAKESDALE BUSINESS PARK - RENTON, WASHINGTON - PHASE 1 3 (A V) GRADING/STORM DRAINACIE PLAN w V) I ------------L-k rw............... ate. w . ........ 0 z 0 :2 Z rj) . ......... z 2f tf It 10'IM �iito z 0 t4P -------------------------------------------- SO r", z w---------------- 0 f F— STRUCTI.M < A F_ A t', I r—'\ SHEET Lj .......... ...................... 32 LF 1117 CPEP ----------- 24 It EX.Ir CONIC.SO TO BE REMOVED ............. .......... EX.SSUH CHAIN LINK FENCE • RrA-24.27 . ..... IE-6.8 112•CDNC W) 00 "E T CrTr,,QF RE z V WDE ASPHALT PEDESTRAIN TRAL 'E I z W COMMERCIAL SHOMLINE SETBACK IE 13.67(12'CONC 'EX. WH 0,co 12 • a-ET ZO �w 2 (D 25 ST09M DRAINAGE AND UMMS EASEM34T IE:13.67(lr CDNC t1j PLUG Ex 12"W AT CB Vi&/DETENT)001� ,Fig ct ce to C7 SE w z if 20• E)OTTOM EL • WET POND EL-1�6 t3 IE-129(12-CONC 'J,)................- Lu LINE EL-W IE-7.05(t2" IV X 72- RENTON RM"AY AND 0 b 2- -—-_----_--- UTCMES c"I Or a ....... REC.NO.7407,EASCIIENT 2 ...................... < k Q'IZ ?JW JN) CONC 0 wN RIM-20.55 ......... t..S_ C, ............. IE .55(12*COIAC W) C-6.55(t2-CONC E) 2 v EX.SSW . .. ........ MU-19,96 cl) `E I.E:�:6 1 CONC - coNc ..:........... WIWW PAD LIP-_-::i 7 EK.SS MH w ----------- IEll4.I8(I2_CONC E) --- -------- I�E :2 38 w ........... . 2:35�s .......... ...... --—----- Lj \_59 LF is'CPEP*.0 0.25% q, IE .................... 2 <I z IE-2.9 S u f.:t! NE-6.SX12-W4C 6) I M*L WIDTH U&IRGENCY OVERFLOW 51ILLWAY r0/F'10`ERM EL-16.5 14 12- S�20' 1 'uj SEE DUAL SHEET 'L E)c c8 m's 6 RIM-20.38 oz -14.06(12'CONC W) RIM-28.0i I IE 01 c,4 z lZ l,O IE-tS 65 CUP E) c�CI ............. .. ........ I , OE-13.96(12 PVERFLOW SPUWAY EL CS t TYPE 2-4W -I55�`%ADJUSTED PAN;�EL_j.......... —------- -- : H 7. owl. : A -AD ........... 2-4r • 14. ..... ...... �16.40: L I I I ...... ............ u.7r-1 1, 1. P! . ;.i. 1,II - 7: 10 i i 'F cpv 0 0" ADJUSTED PARCEL H j 25 STORM DPAK-17E v N I AND ununEs EAscww ....... ........ ------------- z ............................................ ..................0 - _.A.L J_ .............. ..6. ----------- �El I MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 4 FEICOWAaCED CITY OF RENTON FOR APPI10VAL [:)EE-F-AF9TMC-tJT C�r-PL)E3L_tC Wt�KS NOTE: By— FNSHED FLOOR OF ALL FUTURE BUILDINGS fly GRADING/STORM DRAINAGE 0 SHALL BE A MMM OF V AI)OW THE FEW z 100-WM FLOOD tEpLm-21.55 uy PLAN (1 OF 3) MIN FIF EL-21.55 O z 0 2 REVISED FOR 50'SETBACK JGH AS 7 31 9e I REVISED PER CITY REVIEW JGH uj _s_Z9 Iil. w. M..o `" °—SS—TTTT AS 5 AM CITY OF AS GRADING/STORM DRAINAGE ow 7M RENTON PLAN Planning/Building/PuDlie Work. Dept. ,,,, ,d,r.<o..e.AS Gregg mmerman P.E.,Administrator RENTON, WASHINGTON NO. REVISION I 8Y DATE APPR B r 4 n --- 77 IN 14 I �•I )•_v!, � "Yid�'\� \ \ '•.. O ............ •. .: rnI i �ty�,,,)��•..•.'�......'c-.r` ro sorn•trw aea.tr \ � ':�. �'•':,;,`'.•,g_ . \i W ' D II ' \ \': \ \ \�a Q (� z it ' � \ ` O I � I 4, \ \ \D r ey ..�. T•�-1� -u 0 1 \:;jot 4 14 � _ _ D i1 �n \ \•\ 1. ; 1,\, Il `` \ \$'' `',1 4 371' e t Not•t t•trt: ........................................................... ..... _ .. - - -'S........... ... ,�� _ �i.:?•.:_1. \ \ N r. �� t \: Y t• zCn at M "A I ti �• Me • c))�7 I�•�' I I I '• I Jy�4 p(m) -'L_.,-1)L lDr UNEOP \ YYTY M. IA' IS ♦ � ,r .9 M oN �E.' t es" ;I q •�•�•�•�u• '-••�/ . •�.-.-•� .••i�•xle�•�..Y.�.�.�.�•.r•�.�.�•�.�.�....... ...... �.�1-1�.'�•W•�tx es es— .m MATCH UNE SEE SHEETS 2 AND 4 � m In • ,��, LJ M ' _ ) - I �- O Ol'- cm w> TITLE: LOCATION: h z P�GHAV 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH D f m Z KENT WA 98032 N.W.CORNER OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. (206)251-6222 AND S.W.43RD STREET �' I m $ o (206)251-8782 FAX OAKESDALE BUSINESS PARK r Etp°j' CIVIL ENGINEERING,LAND PLANNING PHASE fO Np Ewo SURVEYING, EWRONMEHTAL SERVICES RENTON, WASHINGTON B.C.E.JOB NO. 5911 IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGIy -7,- 7 • t�L-�7L5.�/r'Zoi✓ �i✓� (/GAL-u/�1s�- iYrB:t' ws EsZ- 2,0,O �L CS 4V6 ,V (5C a Cyr VOL (GC) �uar-- C6r) �7ym ►�_� �� �o� O O 7475 �f Z,57s` ZQ/ ?SO 4))700 2� e,4 2,75 74; �Z7 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN • FIGURE III-1.1 Volume Correction Factor to be Applied to Streambank Erosion Control BMPs Based on Site Impervious Cover so 45 /I D�IIO 40 35 0 LL 30 0 } O_ ' W 25 ac • O 0 20 15 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 SITE IWERVIOUS COVER C%O 47 III-1-3 FEBRUARY, 1992 • File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : S911-DET ieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei ° MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK; OUT ° ° DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK; No. No. ST6 OUT HYD ° ' 112 2yr/24hr design 0.20 3.30 design 1 19. 12 0.21 1 ° ' 10 YR EVENT 0.99 5.02 design combine 19.S6 0.91 2 ° ' 100 YR EVENT 1 .79 6.94 design combine 19.91 1 .74 3 ° °2 YR FINAL 0.00 3.30 final combine 18.23 0. 18 4 ° ° 10 YR FINAL 0.00 5.02 final combine 19.38 0.S4 5 ° ° 100 YR FINAL 0.00 6.94 final combine 19.68 1 . 17 6 Press any key to exit ° .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... a eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef • Menu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions I File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : S911-DET Shareware Release ie[±leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ©isplay Level Pool Results eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei ° Match Inflow Storage Disch Peak Peak. Peak ° Description Peak Peak; ID ID Stage Volume Out ° ° 1 /2 2yr/24hr design 0.20 3.30 design 1 19. 12 45833 0.21 ° 10 YR EVENT 0.99 5.02 design combine 19.S6 S2200 0.91 ° ° 100 YR EVENT 1 .79 6.94 design combine 19.91 57267 1 .74 ° 2 YR FINAL 3.30 final combine 8.23 47423 0. 18 ° ° 10 YR FINAL 5.02 final combine 19.38 71386 0.S4 ° ° 100 YR FINAL 6.94 final combine 19.68 77SO4 1 . 17 ° O k. F ° ° 000nneae ° .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... a eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef 8/31/98 1: 47 : 45 pm Shareware Release page 1 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 Detention Pond Design 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 • 8/31/98 1: 47 : 45 pm Shareware Release page 2 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 Detention Pond Design 5911-DET 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 8/31/98 1: 47:45 pm Shareware Release page 3 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 Detention Pond 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 • 8/31/98 1:47 :45 pm Shareware Release page 4 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 --------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- 1 0. 205 1470 30058 cf 9 .89 2 0.914 980 59223 cf 9 . 89 3 1.744 680 93999 cf 9.89 4 0. 180 1470 26509 cf 9. 89 5 0.544 1450 38671 cf 9.89 6 1. 169 980 72929 cf 9.89 • 8/31/98 1: 47 : 49 pm Shareware Release page 5 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 • Detention Pond Design 5911-DET STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST STORAGE LIST ID No. design Description: Design detention pond STORAGE LIST ID No. final Description: Final detention pond (+44%) • • 8/31/98 1: 47 : 49 pm Shareware Release page 6 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- 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 • 8/31/98 1:47 : 49 pm Shareware Release page 7 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 Detention Pond Design 5911-DET STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. final Description: Final detention pond (+44%) 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 23270 0.5342 18.30 48830 1.1210 19.70 78020 1.7911 15.60 1495 0.0343 17.00 25025 0.5745 18.40 50915 1.1688 19.80 80105 1.8390 15.70 2990 0.0686 17.10 26780 0.6148 18.50 53000 1.2167 19.90 82190 1.8868 15.80 4485 0.1030 17.20 28535 0.6551 18.60 55085 1.2646 20.00 84275 1.9347 15.90 5980 0.1373 17.30 30290 0.6954 18.70 57170 1.3124 20.10 86565 1.9873 16.00 7475 0.1716 17.40 32045 0.7357 18.80 59255 1.3603 20.20 88855 2.0398 16.10 9230 0.2119 17.50 33800 0.7759 18,90 61340 1.4082 20.30 91145 2.0924 16.20 10985 0.2522 17.60 35555 0.8162 19.00 63425 1.4560 20.40 93435 2.1450 16.30 12740 0.2925 17.70 37310 0.8565 19.10 65510 1.5039 20.50 95725 2.1975 16.40 14495 0.3328 17.80 39065 0.8968 19.20 67595 1.5518 20.60 98015 2.2501 16.50 16250 0.3730 17.90 40820 0.9371 19.30 69680 1.5996 20.70 100305 2.3027 16.60 18005 0.4133 18.00. 42575 0.9774 19.40 71765 1.6475 20.80 102595 2.3553 • 16.70 19760 0.4536 18.10 44660 1.0253 19.50 73850 1.6954 20.90 104885 2.4078 16.80 21515 0.4939 18.20 46745 1.0731. 19.60 75935 1.7432 21.00 107175 2.4604 8/31/98 1: 47 : 50 pm Shareware Release page 8 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 Detention Pond Design 5911-DET DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST 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. 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 COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. combine Description: combined discharge structure Structure: 1 Structure: Structure: 2 Structure: Structure: • 8/31/98 1:47 : 50 pm Shareware Release page 9 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 • Detention Pond Design 5911-DET 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 • 8/31/98 1:47 : 50 pm Shareware Release page 10 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 • Detention Pond Design 5911-DET 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 • • 8/31/98 1: 47: 50 pm Shareware Release page 11 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 • Detention Pond Design 5911-DET 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 0.1555'719.00 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 • 8/31/98 1:48: 23 pm Shareware Release page 12 Oakesdale Business Park, Phase 2 Detention Pond Design 5911-DET 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 3.30 design 1 19.12 1 0.21 45832.72 cf 10 YR EVENT .................. 0.99 5.02 design combine 19.56 2 0.91 52199.52 cf 100 YR EVENT ................. 1.79 6.94 design combine 19.91 3 1.74 57266.99 cf 2 YR FINAL ................... 0.00 3.30 final combine 18.23 4 0.18 47423.23 cf 10 YR FINAL .................. 0.00 5.02 final combine 19.38 5 0.54 71386.29 cf 100 YR FINAL ................. 0.00 6.94 final combine 19.68 6 1.17 77503.59 cf /� '� �� --fit -:�,` � � /►� -.�. ■E�AAllr/� �� ` �' �, ..�►,;. _.yam:�, .� ��1 FF,A limp RAI all I FA Ilk MAP .wot A� 1 m� . ice' � f► ��� � � • � wS �� � • 41 Dam-low ail SO _ �� � ..'!►_.:wig/.1a�. � iia �'�►. , WA WEWE mast WAS i • V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 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 i • 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 Q % PIPE Ndepth Y.Depth Vact Vfull C_Area ID (Ac) (ft) (ft) ft/ft ------ (cfs) ------ (ft) ------ (fps) (fps) Confluence 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 Q % 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 Q % PIPE Ndepth %Depth Vact Vfull 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 CB4 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. Pl 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 .037.7 fps Travel Time: 0.42 min Pipe Full Vel 3 . 1200 fps • • Imps E �a • ,�,'� • ����.,`-_ ' � � r� ��fir+MOM IMMIRA�1.� • fir; ti �' `�/�� ✓l/Lv/t��� 2d�V1/L�f1 i c�5 ��M/��'_' /V� �� ��O:S�r<' L�'� We7lb ,b ✓oL-um i7-- eedD = 2 x i3 2Ye/Z 4 aQ 7J^-X VOL x ( /4-,SZ7 /O, 374 Cj JI,�7� !•� 1�/S ug -7, 14,a6:j 7 11-- )4,D /6,74 1 ✓�L�.ne r�r:rv:6�;r .- 5 �, 4��G. c.k�' � > 2a.1o5 q �.�' � a% i 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. . . . : TYPElA 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 l • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY SOUTHWEST 43rd STREET AND OAKSDALE AVENUE SW RENTON, WASHINGTON E-3000-3 December 8-, 1997 PREPARED FOR ZELMAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY a, cAMA • o was 8 ,�1 F r�,� Ft , - 10 ` O� 2 G7 6 7�p rL( ."/ANAL 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 matter how comprehensive,can reveal what is hidden by The following suggestions and observations are offered earth, rock 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 may be OF PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS needed.and to recommend solutions to problems encountered on site. A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur- face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS set of project-specific factors.These typically include: the general nature of the structure involved, its size and CAN CHANGE configuration:the location of the structure on the site Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly- and its orientation:physical concomitants such as access roads,parking lots.and underground utilities. changing natural forces: Because a geotechnical engi- • veering report is based on conditions which existed at and the level of additional risk which the client assumed 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 advisable before construction starts. affect its recommendations. Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates natural events such as floods,earthquakes or ground- otherwise. your geotechnicalengineering report should not be used: water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions . and.thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical When the nature of the proposed structure is report.The geotechnical engineer should be kept changed. for example. if an office building will be e apprised of any such events,and should be consulted to erected instead of a parking garage.or if a refriger- 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 client involved and expressly for purposes indicated by the client. Use MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS" by any other persons for any purpose.or by the client 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. J Earth Consultants Inc. V�it 7' `^-ow.Chni(-al Fngineer5.C.")l gists h F.m•ir(W)mrnral Scirnri.5rs 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 ithe 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. Kyle R. Campbell, P. E. Manager of Geotechnical Services KFCI" 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 Pr iect Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SITECONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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 B7 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. Proiect 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 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 structure's, 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 n es between approximately eight to ten feet below the elevation of the surrounding site. Earth Conauttants. Inc. 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 twee (20) feet of IQ0Se o me dium ense, in sty-sand—Varying amounts of fill were encountered in the 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 b_ orings while drilling at deaths of ten (10) to twelve and one-half (12.5) feet be listing nrntnd surface. Groundwater was encountered in pits P-102, TP-108 -118 and TP-121 at depths ranging from eight (8) to fourteen (14) -ftee a ow existi - 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 Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Zelman Development Company E-3000-3 December 8, 1997 Page 3 e 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�o am will be necessary in areas were the existing gr es are-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 feetsttuctural 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_struct_ural fill, or one foot of cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof. +� • Earth Consultants. 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-Corporation 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 cemen he report indicates the fluff will be^r11ix@sL w_Ah 7.5__percent cement for remediation purposes. Based on the unconfined compressive strength test result 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 left m place i a minimum�f two fear and-nne and on� e-half feet of structural fil 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 (12) inches which should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density. • Earth Coneuttants. 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 mofe 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 t havnn wilding footprints. The side slopes of the fill should be sloped at a gradient of_1hLL1Y gr 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. S4 acc rqr �� h�his, settlerner ��_. markers should be installed within the building 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, 0 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 Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Zelman Development Company E-3000-3 December 8, 1997 Page 7 Foundations In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread and continuous footing foundations bearing on a minimum of tw fee ctural fill after successful com letion of the preload an /or surcharge program.. Deeending on grades it may e necessary to.oy. rexcavate the existing soil in,order to_P_ro-yide the two feet of , "sU ur I 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 12,500) 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 a e-ha4 4p4ahes is ant ci ipated 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 • wall. 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_fill, or one foot of cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof may be designed for a ---------------modulus of soil subgrade reaction of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic inch (pci). • Earth Conauttanta. 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 pgrmeahle, 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_used_ Suitable- moisture protection measure should be use a-. -Typically, such protection measures include p acemenf of a vapor barrier and a capillary bream. A capillary break, if used, should consist of a minimum of four inches of clean sand or washed ruck. 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. Structures 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 Conaultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Zelman Development Company E-3000-3 December 8, 1997 Page 10 • Based on the information obtain from our borings, the loose soils encountered 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 shoririd 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 Consultants, 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 slo ed at a gradient of 3-pamennt for a distance leas t e f et away from the buildings, except in areas that are to be paved which can be��op>wd at a_gta�ie�t_of 2 pereen 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 the 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 durina wet weat er conditions, compacted to 95 percent of the maximum ry ensity (pe�_g�TM D-1 5 7-78Y 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 reguest. 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 Consultants. Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Zelman Development Company E-3000-3 December 8, 1997 Page 13 Utility Support and Backfill Thee soils should provide adequate support for utilities located above the Mun�dwater table. The soil that is located below the groundwater table may not provide adequate support in 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 .0 equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than twelve (12) 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 tb 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 Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Zelman Development Company E-3000-3 December 8, 1997 Page 14 e 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 Consultants, Inc. PKWYIr I I j racRIC. t ,'s�ff `HFES <•Tr. A.fr. ` Y ' �� \\- �• i I: _ .. ��,:.:c_,''..,`"G�..}I � .3r • •P: fH��N. N f y-� t "J .i'.�Y�y�'_vN. < __ l,' ..t `� r '- 1.... t' V � �� ��d - = r %� -,•� I � I c.Tll TRECR N all I 26 25 PST rq, L I 1 \ r � � } I �t' tw�p 'cK a > a? 1 tH i C A1 t i t I lei i Mt1:3ctER &rrvtt�i y IRCEYCY in > / 't b +rLIA l ; Qism !!a 0 ST ! SE PARK �s�' S v :81ST;;ST 5 j + ST ry6 i t t f <N NI '�•'� t' � y , - i4L4.CI _ 36 31 Q 7W tt �i r Q �' f yrH S 196TN 9T ; `t S rH 97 4r 7f11 qr Uj IL AT TN Earth Consultants, Inc. Geolechnical Engineers,Geologists k Environmental Scientists Vicinity Map Reference: Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C King County/Map 41 Renton, Washington By Thomas Brothers Maps Dated 1990 Drwn. GLS Date Oct.'97 Proj. No. 3000-3 Chocked RAC Date 10/28/97 Plate 1 20 ' B-2_�� >"::�� T - t: ;.,:fir,%t;1 Approximate Scale r - 0 100 200 400ft. LE LEND ft B-1 -.- .'. .. ::r: A Location o :;::= Approximate f : m ECI Boring, Pro' r. ors�f E-3000-3 Oct. 1997 > � .. TP-101-■-Approximate Location of ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. E-3000-3, Oct. 1997 TP-116 . G-101 • Approximate Location of ECI Grab Sample, Proj. No. E-3000-3, Oct. 1997 B-/ -�- Approximate Location of ECI Boring, Proj. No. i -DTP-115 E-3000, May 1986 -o-----� TP-1 -o- Approximate Location of 7P-6 '- ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. .r. E-3000, May 1986 r Auto Fluff Area Wire Fluff Area Proposed Building Existing Building Boring and Test Pit Location Plan Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C g Renton, Washington becked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 2 SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING S::�f:it+O::rk•:xv..ri{^:a'..:i}}}:{:•LCi{:ti:ii:v:iiYv'i: :..w::Fv.�::. {n}:;;:J}:i:::::::....::.:::::nv::::v....:.:.......................... :•./••:.}Y-}:4:•..m ::.{i}}.{Q::iS>::-i:':i4::S:?:isisSS:ii::`vi:vi:iiii:3?S:f}i:'vifYiiJii :i%r}{. t,:'i:.•Yd• . ' Surcharge or Preload oadSurcharge or Preload Fill r,•:..}:w}<}.:.tr. ,,;€,�',a, •7••`. .n s' :{+'rr• :<:<✓`:tt} -;e}fF::. Fill A.k+? ,E.. ��': ..♦ .�'.;��` �+. :4:•i;:>:-:nS::4�' 4i} <{ ♦X$•. •:,w'$`:'.i{... .4-�+-nc-:{{Si v'n:'i}{::fi":i:\;i: •}:.>:`<-};: :::° ::�`{:8.:;v.{:�Fa�.c F�#'.r7�.:F.}. '}x:..a�.xs.;-•�-�-:'-:";`.;:.;xs:•.:♦:.}�::�t�d4}..,s.}.}r}:ui;s•,4 t-,�.{sy}.a:,,.r ^�a•,`:,,:t•:.Ry:.} f,.r :z4r;: f.: vr:.Y:•r .n�-- < : f Sv:::xv}:}::n•.:4:'i::}::^:.;{A:.<•. a}t tx.r :ihf{..0. r..}... ...?........... }x.;..�};:::?w;;{•rs}'!t.•?'s}£:�i:});. snn}.xF.b. :•::,r.}.•:¢}:...••:nt••:.v:::na::::::..: �... t:rY.•:n+ .a•:'..�•;:}}?:iiv::<>ix}..�::L:i':::�L. + : :::::::::n•.S};:SSSSS}:}:(.:S::{::F':SS:•.. }}:. ,::.v4r4-:si}w.....:::;:{:::. v,:•':}i::t:Y-:;?:}: .:f-.,n:":'•:5t}:}.tvv.:.r•::{ti+ ,:{4.!" {fi:•}Si{}}:a.J}: :,:: ^};:}}�;ii:`v�:{{r} y<}_},C-.:-i}':.v..S}:t:}.}Yf.:•}iva rrivE'::2' a1v ♦:r\w:.... n:•..v n:::•::::nv .!} `.:r:;.::.....: .}i ;,.rr•r,.;so{:F•.ttn},}s-.4. 4}>........};%-}:>.{.}}::::x:^.'.:::i•;:y;:i;}:;•}: .................... . ........................................................ I11— 111 111-- i11=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 E,0"G"�`F""' Renton, Washington Prof. No. 3000-3 Dfwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 3 O • O �O - �_ Slope To Drain o _ 4 O • -O 64 O • • y o a 6 inch min. 18 inch min. 4 inch min. �°• I Diameter __� .':. °'°••,° °o ° Perforated Pipe •'.. : Wrapped in Drainage Fabric 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. O Drain 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. TYPICAL FOOTING SUBDRAIN DETAIL Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C `E""'°"""'MSC"V" Renton, Washington Proj. 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 o ° Varies O•e° . 95 ° °• o p' 0 0 1 F ' 95 oot Minimum Backfill 80 90 Varies PIPE o mod: O,e •t�0"o: n o Bedding •': o• ..^�'• .0 0? Varies P.O.' .000°.. oo�. .e.00 o•o o.o.. ••.0 o•Oo oo o8•..O ��'o' Op..Do;po Q0. Q°'0•• p Oo.. O O. .00o4. .00.. !o LEGEND: Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab [ O;o . IF ° . Base Material or Base Rock IF 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 G 014MtV iCM EX4&VV'M C410b9tsM&F Scx*NNS 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. Earth Consultants. Inc. Boring Log OProject Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 2 ,fob 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 Elevation: Hole Completion: f 24' ❑ Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite U _ W No. o L N o Surface Conditions: t Blows a E 4. +' E N E (% Ft. a o LL M a SM (Topsoil to 4') FILL-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' 4 SM Brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel;medium dense,wet LL=35 PL=29 5 PI=6 12.9 $ 18 "coarse sand lense 6 7 ML Gray SILT, loose, saturated 40.0 5 8 g 10 - -increasing sand and sandy silt,very lose, groundwater table encountered 39.7 2 11 12 26.1 8 134_SP-SNIBlaci poorly graded fine to medium SAND, loose,water bearing 14 + 15 -increasing silt, some silty sand 11.0 11 <'6 16 o.. 17 o ' 18 „o r 19 v \ v Boring Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C ceoomt"ca'Erorvccm"t U`O'OO'"` W sclerAm Renton,Washington Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A2 Co 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of • Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C 2 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 Elevation: Hole Completion: f 24' ❑ MO itorin Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite W NO. — 0 t — N O Blows a � a +- Q U M N Ft. o v m i U ti N N ML GraySILT, loose, saturated 55.3 10   PT PEAT layer and organic silt 0, 21 ML Gray SILT, loose, saturated 22 23 P-S Black poorly graded fine to medium SAND, loose to medium dense, o water bearing 24 25 -10%fines 25.0 12 26 27 28 .2 :.:0: :. 30 MH Brown elastic SILT and organic silt, soft, saturated, interbedded 58.6 a 31 organic fragments ' Boring terminated at 31.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 10.0 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings and bentonite. r o v Boring Log 00 I Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C m1 cc ° cr enorkeemGeawosw&awua "sdcrAsmRenton, Washington r)l tt Proj.No. 3000� Dwn. GLS Date NOv. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A3 J 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro erty Parcels A, B and C 1 2 __T Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Ct pletion Date: Boring No.: 3000-3 RAC 10 23 97 23 97 B-2 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 23' ❑ Monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite u — Surface Conditions: L o NO. O — N 0 WCL -CBlows a E a 4' E LL N E %) Ft. ? tl 7 SM FILL Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist -contains organics 1 -becomes gray, no apparent organics 2 13.3 19 3 SM FILL Brown to black silty SAND, medium dense, moist -contains organic debris 4 -copper wire 5 34.4 10 6 7 10 8 no recovery -cuttings same as at 5' s 10 _ LL=37 PL=31 P1=6 43.5 6 11 ML Gray SILT, loose, saturated (native) -contains organics 12 41.5 5 13 -trace sand 14 15 -becomes very loose 44.3 2 -contains peat interbeds 16 17 18 r �' 19 Boring Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C C4000 ' Renton,Washington J Proj. No. 3000-3 Dn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Ptate A4 m 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 2 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 3000-3 RAC 10123197 10 23 97 B-2 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 23' ❑ Monitorin Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite W No. o t cn o Blows a E a ,_ E N E Ft. a ° �` . a OL N N N ML GraySILT, loose, saturated 84.4 s   PT Layer of PEAT and organic silt 21 SM Gray silty SAND, medium dense, saturated 22 23 24 25 29.9 16 26 Boring terminated at 26.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 10.0 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings and bentonite. r c \ Boring Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C o ,"Erwor,«m &ErwirOrWWr"sCIOMm" Renton, Washington 0 m Proj. No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A5 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro erty 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-3 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: t 24' ❑ Monitorin Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,seated with bentonite U _ W No. _ o L ° N o Surface Conditions: Blows a E a. +' E N E Ft. " a 's LL a a U, Vf N N SM ((4"Topsoil) RLL• Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist i 2 ML Mottled brown and gray SILT, medium dense, moist -trace fine sands 33.3 11 3 -contains small roots 4 5 35.3 7 -becomes loose 6 7 a SM Mottled brown and gray silty fine SAND, medium dense, moist • 16.3 16 9 10 15.6 13 11 12 13 - SM Gray silty fine SAND, loose, saturated 30.8 6 -increase in silt content -30%fines 14 15 -contains large (4") pieces of wood 44.7 10 -becomes medium dense 1s 17 18 r 19 c Boring Log 00r) Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C s GcoectO"al9kr-tM C40hD �° --f" Renton, Washington m Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A6 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro erty Parcels A, B and C 2 2 ,Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 3000-3 RAC 10 23 97 10 23 97 B-3 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated H SA S PT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 24' ❑ monitoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite w No. — O L — N O Blows d E Ft. a oe u s N N N P-S Black goody graded SAND with silt, medium dense, saturated 26.8 28 `o;€ -sand is fine to medium grained 21 22 a 23 24 >' 25 -contains large piece of wood < o 45.8 14 e , 26 27 .� 28 ►;:: +qq_.p.A.:: 29 . 30 -no recovery 27 °< 31 Boring terminated at 31.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 12.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings and bentonite. r o Boring Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C m �I C�° " 'n` Scb="b" Renton, Washington m r) J Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A7 m 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Property 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-4 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated NSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 24' ❑ Monitorin Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite o L ! ti o Surface Conditions: L 4 Blows (L a t Q. U 11 (%) Ft. a o u a s GM FILL SiltyGRAVEL, medium dense, moist ML Brown SILT with fine sand, medium dense, moist 1 2 15.7 12 3 4 5 SM Mottled brown and gray fine SAND, medium dense, moist 6.6 11 -37%fines s 7 . s -becomes loose s.s s 9 10 18.8 7 1t 12 13 SM Gray silty fine SAND, loose, saturated 33.3 7 14 15 SM Black silty fine to medium SAND, loose, saturated 30.0 8 16 -14%fines 17 18 r 19 c Boring Log +m Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C m C4obDchr'c3'Er4pr `tObO'a` Renton,Washington Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov.'97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A8 m 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 Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 2 2 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 3000-3 RAC 10 23 97 10 23 97 B-4 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 24' ❑ Mo itoring Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite No. O L — V7 O W Blows a E rl +- E 0E Ft. ° ° u r a P-S Black poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense, saturated 26.9 22 0 -sand Is fine to medium grained Boring terminated at 21.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 12.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings and bentonite. r � I v Boring Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C 9 ( GeorodrUcd alonoc . 4 EYwtramfYal somasts Renton,Washington -J Proi.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov.'97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A9 m 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-101 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _ o L • o Surface Conditions: lass W L n + a U n SM FILL' Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist 20.0 1 2 3 4 s ML Gray sandy SILT, medium dense, moist s 22.1 -mottlings from 5' a 9 10 21.6 11 12 13 -ILLIL -1 14 Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C Renton,Washington J a Proj.No. 3000� Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate Al 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 OPrENo. e: Sheet of Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 Job Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: DSL 10 20 97 TP-102 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: u — — Surface Conditions: Grass w — o L — W o N � N N SM FILL Brown silty SAND with gravel, dense, moist 5.5 1 -plastic 2 3 SM 2.sod) brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist 4 27.8 5 6 W. 7 -sloughing in sides • 8 -fines content decreases 70.5 9 10 11 12 Q -slow inflow of groundwater 13 Test it terminated at 13.5 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 4 ' Renton,Washington J a. Proi. No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date NOv.'97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 PlateAl r- 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 1 • Job No. Logged by. Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-103 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _ _ o L _ w o Surface Conditions: Grass W r D ' a 0 n j • li.. a 7 7 N SM Brown silty SAND, loose to medium dense, moist 35.3 1 ML Brown SILT, medium dense, moist 2 3 4 12.9 SM Gray silty fine SAND, loose to medium densei moist 5 6 7 • e -becomes dense 9 32.3 C 10 -becomes wet 11 12 13 -6"diameter log 14 40.9 15 16 Test pit terminated at 16.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o Test Pit Log •m Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C Renton,Washington a Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Oate 11/3/97 Plate Al 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C __T 1 1 Job No. Logged by. Dat Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 1 012 0 s7 TP-104 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U o L ° N o Surface Conditions: Grass W (%) ° i ° 'L a 5 3 N N W SM FILL Dark brown/gray silty SAND with gravel, medium dense to dense, moist 1s.s 1 -concrete debris 2 3 4 5 ML Brown SILT, medium dense, moist 34.1 s 7 -12"diameter log • a -becomes dense 25.3 9 10 11 Test pit terminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r Test Pit Log Faith Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C g •• s� Renton,Washington a Proj.No. 3000-3 t?wn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate 13 J 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000� DSL 10 20 97 TP-105 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _ _ o L N o Surface Conditions: Grass v� L n ' ' N . a e a i N fN 0 SM FILL Brown silty SAND with gravel, dense, moist 23.4 1 2 3 -4"layer of sod 4 SM Brown silty SAND, dense, moist 21.8 5 6 7 8 9 -decrease in fines content 11.4 ' 10 11 12 Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C C<10�EN01=M c4°`°o9ft°arwuunnvrtWscs"9' Renton,Washington J a Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97. Plate Al 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro erty Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-106 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _ _ o L y o Surface Conditions: Grass W L + ' a U 0.��� a ? a LL' A D 7i (L7 N N N SM FILL-. Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist 23.7 1 ML Brown SILT/sandy SILT, medium dense, moist 2 3 -becomes gray 4 -roots (4%6"diameter) 30.4 5 6 7 • 8 g decrease in fines 10 21.0 11 12 13 Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C M Renton, Washington J a Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate Al 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10120197 TP-107 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _ _ — o o Surface Conditions: Grass w a n a + a u � N N N SM FILL, Brown silty SAND with gravel 21.4 1 1 2 ML Gray brown mottled SILT, medium dense, moist 3 SM Brown silty fine SAND, medium dense, moist 24.3 4 5 6 -silt content decrease • s s 13.5 10 11 12 13 14 15 Test pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o- v Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C ceoroUiNcd amvvecm Geoid s 4 envltumms"sc"%dstl Renton,Washington J cLI Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate Al 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 1 DSL 10 20 97 TP-108 Excavation Contactor. Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U W L o } ! d o Surface Conditions: Grass a � a +: 0V7 0 0 ML Brown sandy SILT, medium dense, moist 45.8 2 3 SM Grades to brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist 4 27.8 5 6 7 • s -decrease in fines content s 36.1 10 -becomes wet 11 12 -caving 13 14 -silt lenses, extremely slow in flow 15 Test pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 14.0 feet during excavation. r o- Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C Geoho " &MWt" r&rAW Renton, Washington J a Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate Al 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 Project Name: Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C Sheet of .lob No. Logged by: 1 Date: 1 3000-3 DSL Test Pit No.: Excavation Contactor. 10 20 97 TP_y 09 N.W. Excavating Ground Surface Elevation: Notes: w r o } N o Surface Conditions: Brush a U E N E L p M ? O N N H SM FILL Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist 1s.3 1 -powdered brick, metal 2 3 ML Gray sandy SILT, loose to medium dense LL-36 PL-28 33.4 4 P1=8 5 6 SM Grades to gray silty SAND, medium dense, moist 7 8 29.2 9 -caving 10 11 12 13 -becomes wet and mottled 30.7 14 15 Test pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing encountered during excavation. grade. No groundwater r` o Earth Consultants Inc. Test Pit Log cc--t-:"a�x , Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C Renton, Washington Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A 1$ Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hots,modified by engineering tests, analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannotle,accept responsibility interpretation by others of information presented on this log. for the use or Test Pit Log Project Name: Zelman Pro e Parcels A, g Job No. and C Logge3000�3 Dst by- Sheet DSL Date: Excavation Contactor: 10 20 97 Test Pit No,: 1 N W. Excavatin TP-110 Notes: Ground Surface Elevation. U o L _� w a E a , a �° Surface Conditions: Brush s E y E L H y V1 ML Brown sand y SIL7, loose to medium dense, a1.s 1 moist 2 3 4 SM Grades to gray silty SAND, 5 medium dense, moist 27.9 s i 8 9 -decrease in fines content l 2S.o io Iff 11 12 -becomes wet 13 -Caving 14 Test pit terminat en ed at 14.0 feet below existing countered during excavation. g grade. No groundwater a CO� P B u�1tants Inc. Test Pit Lo Zelman PropertyP g � Proj.No. 300o�3 Parcels A. B and C Subsurface DWn. GLS Renton, Washington anal conditions depicted represent Date Nov '97 Ysis and judgment The P sent our observationsChecked RAC interpretation b y are not necessarily at the time Date 11/3/97 y others of information representative of of a and es�tion of this expplorato Plata A 19 presented on this log, and locations.W ry hole,modified b e cannot a.�. -. y enoin..,;...... Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman PrTtDSL A, B and C 1 1 • Job No. Date: Test Pit No.: 3000� 10 20 97 TP-111 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:N.W. Excavatin Notes: W L o C _' y o Surface Conditions: Brush a a +- a. U n (%) A a O LL E N E A � ] 0 V7 Vl N ML Brown sandy SILT, loose to medium dense, moist 19.3 1 2 3 4 36.6 5 6 7 • 8 9 -becomes wet 37.0 10 -caving 11 12 -6'diameter log 13 14 Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o- v Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C .e „a.,sacrA" Renton, Washington J F Proj.No. 3000-3 Subsurface conditions depi Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A20 cted 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 • Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-112 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavatingt Notes: U W c ! rn o Surface Conditions: Blackberry Bushes a s +: a U n a oo v a ZE M 10 U, (n V7 N ML Brown SILT, loose to medium dense, moist 32.2 1 2 3 4 5 SM Grades to gray silty SAND, loose to medium dense, moist 33.0 6 7 $ caving 9 10 -becomes wet 31.4 11 12 13 14 Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o v Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C , GeoCchrygy enalxv Ccob4tm 4 arwuorn=ta1 scYrulri3 Renton, Washington J F Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A21 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. e cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Test Pit Log Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C 1 • Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-113 Excavation Contactor. Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U W L o + ! N o Surface Conditions: Grass a n a + a U 3 A a (`7 o A N Vl ML Brown SILT, loose,wet 37.4 1 LL=42 PL=30 PI=12 2 3 4 -mottled 5 6 39.7 7 • s SM Brown silty SAND, loose to medium dense, wet 26s 9 -caving 10 11 Test pit terminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade due to caving. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o- Test Pit Log 0 Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C `e " a%axcmGeo&°�°aWUaVrXrtW sc""b" Renton, Washington J a Proj.No. 3000-3 l w GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A22 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 e Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No Logged by. Date: Test Pit No.: 3000� DSL 10 20 7 TP-114 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: u — • — Surface Conditions: Blackberry Bushes O L 0 O W .0 i d U U. y 0 N N ML Brown SILT with sand,loose, moist 31.9 2 3 4 -becomes sandy 34.8 5 6 7 • 8 28.9 9 SM Brown silty SAND, loose to medium dense, moist to wet 10 11 12 -caving 13 ML Gray sandy SILT, medium dense,wet 14 33.5 15 16 Test pit terminated at 16.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C ce� Q sm Renton,Washington a Proj.No. 3000� Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate 3 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 m Project Nae: Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C --T - 1 1 Job No. Logged by Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 s7 TP-116 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _ o L • y o Surface Conditions: lass W t ' a U .0 ML Brown SILT, loose, moist 40.1 2 -becomes mottled 3 4 5 SM Grades to brown silty SAND, loose,wet 6 33.0 7 • 8 -becomes gray s -caving 10 40.1 11 -peat seams 12 13 Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o ~ Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C EMUMVr""Sdffv&M Renton,Washington rL Proj.No. 3000-3 Dn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate 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: ---71 1 Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C �Date: Test Pit No.: Job No. Logged by. 0 97 TP-118 3000-3 DSL Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: a — surface Conditions: Bare, shredded wire pile — O L _ y o W to +- - a 0M (%) r a o u. i i yC3 y V7 ML Gray sandy SILT, medium dense, moist 16.9 1 2 3 4 45.4 5 6 -caving . 8 SM Gray silty SAND, medium dense,wet 9 Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 8.0 feet during excavation. r o Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C ,,� �� " ' Renton,Washington J d Proj.No. 3000� Dwn. GLS 0ate Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering to sts 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C 1 1 Job No. legged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000� DSL l0 20 97 TP-119 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: _ o L o Surface Conditions: Bare W Ln ' a can %j O U_ M 7 L 0 N a N F1U_ Rubber upholstery,wires, metal debris 2 -minimal natural soil 3 4 5 Test pit terminated at 5.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o Test Pit Log Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C Renton,Washington a Proj.No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate 8 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 Project Name: Sheet of Zelman Pro erty Parcels A, B and C 1 1 1 Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.: 3000-3 DSL 10 20 97 TP-120 Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavatin Notes: U _ _ _ o L a 0 o Surface Conditions: Bare W C n a u n FILL-Wood waste, rubber, metal,wires, upholstery 1 2_ --T -minimal natural soil 3 4 5 Test pit terminated at 5.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. r o Test Pit Log �mlit Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C m GC°'°�E' Om �`°�"`a'"'`°"""""' Renton,Washington J a Proj. No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. `97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 _P71at.�=A29 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 Project Name: __FSheet of Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C __T1 1 Job No togged by. Date: Test Pit No.: 30003 DSL 10 20 97 TP-121 Excavation Contactor. Ground Surface Elevation: N.W. Excavating Notes: U _o L ! N o_ Surface Conditions: Grass n i a U n ) i s i U_ i i L y N N SM FlU_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 LL=38 PL=30 36.8 7 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 Gcoie�'"'EraVCCM ° Renton, Washington J a Proj.No. 30003 Dwn. •GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate 3 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 CS (ft•) Ft. (�°) Well sm Silty SAND, brown, loose, moist S - U . •� I..... 5 , o r-I Ic- 3 �8 . sp SAND, dark gray, medium to fine, medium 10 e dense, wet. 13 Silt % increases with depth grading to silky sand 15 20 C Z 1525 a)'. ~ •'cu sm = 10 30 30 ml Sandy SILT, light gray, medium dense, some organic fragments, wet 19 i 40 .G. : � . sp SAND, dark gray, medium to fine, dense T 52 > : — to very dense, wet 45 52 V 50 n; _ 31 >' = 55 30 Total Depth = 58. 5 feet (B) denotes bentonite pellets BORING LOG STER-NOFF METALS PROPERTY !� RENTON, WaSHINGTON Earth Consultants Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date `•[ay'86 Plate A31 BORING NO. Logged By RWB ELEV. +14t Date 5/10/86 US Depth (N) W As - Built Graph CS Soil Description (ft.) Sample Blows Well Ft. M Diagram sm Topsoil, silty SAND, brown 5 32 ::.v :0.. E brown/mottled, medium to D Silty SAW, -0 CL fine, subangular to subrounded, loose, �::....... wet 6 10 sm 4 4'. 15 medium dense 10 22 20 COU ca: 9 ——————— 25 dense 35 Total depth = 29 feet (B) denotes bentonite pellets BORING LOG STEERNOFF METALS PROPERTY h RENTON, WASHINGTON Earth Consultants Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING a GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 1 Date May'86 I Plate A 32 BORING NO. 46 Logged By RWB Date 5/10/86 ELEV. +14± US Depth (N) W As- Built Graph CS Soil Description ( t ) Sample Blows (% Well t Ft. ) Diagram <<<` sm Silty SAND, bluish-gray, medium dense, . • < --- -(fill) ,-noticeable odor = 17 30 ; , • , s• o' —. .:.: 5 sm Silty SAND, gray, loose, wet, some odor 0 sm Silty SAND 10 I - - - 29 6 15 � : oo mh Clayey SILT, tan, soft, some organics .`� J --^' 12 t/ml SIL'T_and PEt1T L s sm Silty SAND, gray, fine, loose to medium dense 10 20 E 12 :> _ 30 — T 1/m Clayey SILT, tan, medium high, plastic, 12 17 --- - arics L5 -- ,,, sm Silty SAND, medium to fine, dense, wet 47 ' 0 s. - c 40 c" Total depth = 44 feet (B) denotes bentonite pellets BORING LOG l /•,:, STERYOFF METALS PROPERTY (; RENTON, `,daSHINGTON Earth Consultants Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No, 3000 Date `lav'86 Plate A33 BORING NO. Logged By RWB ELEV. +14± Date 5/14/86 US (N) Graph CS Soil Description (ft.) Sample Blows N ml Sandy SILT, gray, some clay. Brick = 9 32 rubble at surface, mottled, low 5 Q I plasticity T 4 35 10 lilt ---- - 15 = 2 tS � pt PEAT; brown fibrous, very soft, wet 13 30 2 0 _,:•�-,. .�: sm Silty SAND, gray, medium to fine, medium dense, we 25 = 15 -- --- '��I I I I --- - very soft, organic, wet ILT, ra , - 2 IIIIIIII — -------- IIIIIII� —ol— Tan SILT—_— 30 } «} = 0 sm Silty SAND, gray, medium to fine sand, very loose to medium dense, wet 35 16 16 0 29 Total depth = 49 feet BORING LOG STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY i i iI RENTON, WASHINGTON Earth 1 Consultants Inc. �' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 8c GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date ;day' 86 P late A34 BORING NO. Logged By RWB ELEV. +14± Date 5/14/86 Depth (N) W Graph us Soil Description (ft ) Sample Blows (,�o) CS Ft. ml SILT, brown, soft, wet 5 30 5 Q .. }tf 10 sm Silty SAND, brown to tan, fine sand, =I; ` I•�•;�:1 loose to medium dense 2 22 15 �'13 sib._: 24 20 _ 24 28 25 Total depth = 29 feet BORING LOG STERNOFF 'METALS PROPERTY �I ;: I RENTON, WASHINGTON Earth Consultants Inc. �� I' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May'86 Plate A35 TEST PIT NO. �- Logged By RWB Date 5/10/86 Elev. +14± Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description M 0 FILL N/A FILL, unit consists of shredded non-metalic auto parts in sand/silt matrix. Unit is gray and wet 5 �=x sm Silty SAND, bluish gray, medium to fine, loose, occasional clay-silt inclusions 10 Total depth = 9 feet 15 Logged By RWB TEST PIT NO. �_ Elev. +14± Date 5/10/86 0 tN/AFILL, mixture of steel slag mixed with native soil, traces of oil Clayey SILT, bluish gray, mottled, soft, medium plasticity, moist 10 Total depth = 8 feet 15 • TEST PIT LOGS I'I I STERNOFF `METALS PROPERTY RENTON, WASHINGTON Earth Consultants Inc. ' ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING B GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date day' 86 Plate A36 TEST PIT NO. Logged By RWB Date 9/10/86 Elev. +14t Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description M 0 sm FILL, silty sand, black with some oil ml SILT, tan with fine sand, loose, non-plastic, moist 5 i Total depth = 6 feet 10 15 Logged By 0 RWB/86 TEST PIT N O. Elev. +14t Date 0 ml/ Sandy SILT, brown to tan, loose to medium dense, i sm some roots 5 Total depth = S feet 10 15 TEST PIT LOGS !' STERNOFF 'METALS PROPERTY r• RE`1TON, WASHINGTON Earth ; Consultants Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May' 86 Plate A37 TEST PIT NO. • Logged By RWB Date 5/10/86 Elev. +___ Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description M 0 N/A FILL, debris includes ash-slag, brick, concrete and scrap iron III -4ILI! ml SILT, bluish-gray, slightly mottled, occasional 5 organics, noticeable H2S odor Total depth = 7 feet 10 15 Logged By RWB Date 5/10/86 TEST PIT NO. 6 Elev. 114y 0 (I ml/ Sandy SILT, brown, fine, loose, moist ti i I sm - 5 ml Clayey SILT, brownish-gray, mottled, soft, moist to wet Total depth = 7 feet 10 15 TEST PIT LOGS STER_NOFF XETALS PROPERTY !j ! RENTON, WASHINGTON Earth Consultants Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj, No. 3000 Date May'86 Plate A38 A P P E ' N D X B • APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS E-3000-3 • Earth Concuttanta, Inc. SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH U.S. STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM 0 O O to tt M N O O 9 O O O O pp00 00 O 0 C4 v 00 t0 N M d to 000 N O O O Q O O 0 Q o 100 Li � 10 CD CD 90 m 20 0 80 p x � m m j = 30 m 70 m 40 -i TI 60 C7 z D 50 � 50 Cn av - m CD -< U 60 40 o 70 � 30 m J n 80 —{ t 20 9 n N (moo 90 C3 10 roFFIFITE 100 (D O '7 O O O 0 0 O O O O O D] cD V re) N e- CR lD d M Ili � O O O CI) O O O O O O O O O O o w to v M CAGRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o o O O O o rrr (DD D O n Z ' COBBLES COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUMSAND FINE FINES (p V) GRAVEL E ro N r n m Moisture r n Z Boring or DEPTH USCS DESCRIPTION Content W LL PL n N D KEY Test Pit No. ft. J (r o �",o cn 25.0 -- -- � m U B-1 25 SP-SM Gray poorly graded SAND v to a B-3 12.5 SM Gray silty SAND 30.8 -- -- a Qi n B-4 5 SM Brown and gray silty SAND 6.6 -- -- •— — B-4 15 SM Black silty SAND 30.0 -- -- SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSISLIV _ SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHE NUMBER OF MESH PER INCpoH U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MOdM p O / N tD d M N '- p `D c%� v 00 0 N M �! t�t�D 003 N � O O O p 0 O O O O 0 0 OZ `D .. 100 w _ 10 d � 90 w Ct7 20 x m m n30 r m 70 n c1 Z z O -� 40 TI 60 n o a .-f 50 DDO 50 CD rr co m CD Z - 40 o m -< � t _ 17 70 n 30 m J () 80 -{ 20 n N C (D C r 90 w 10 OO O O 100 n fiff 'a " 0in - m N O W V m N (D O O 0 O tO N O O CD OO O O O O 00 lO O M N O O O O O O rcr (D A M N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0 O C COBBLES COARSEGRAVEE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE FINES SAND E ro FV r pi s1 m r m n Moisture � (D Z KEY Boring or DEPTH USCS DESCRIPTION Content W LL PL � m D Test Pit No. ft. J ft O Cn to O TP-101 1 SM Brown silty SAND 20.0 -- -- 'o w m CD CL TP-101 10 ML Gray sandy SILT 21.6 -- -- m n 0 TP-103 1 ML Brown SILT 35.3 -- -- SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN IN E NUMBER OF MESH PER NCH U.S STAN N MM DARD GRAIN IZE I %-- y o 00 to g M No O 0 j a a m N '0 O tp N M It U)(0 000 O N O O O O p O O O O 0 O _ 100 w O 10 O O 90 I m 20 80 f x m m :0 30 C7 O —I 40 -� cn -n 60 O � Z m so so m W m Q so z . . 40 C 0 m 70 30 Ln 80 —{ 7 20 cD n N ( N c9 90�. d O 10 a 100 n coro tD M N r- 00 W V M N V (D O ° O OOM N O co tD V M N D O COW cD '— 00 lD V M N O p O O O O O O O O O O M N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS ' o ° n Z FINES � 7 � COBBLES COARSE FINE COARSE MEDI SAND FIN GRAVEL E r0 N r W IL m F N n Moisture LL PL KEY Boring or 7THrBrown DESCRIPTION Content (%)� a' n D a r• (D Z 1 N D Test Pit No. J rt O � to m -- -- O TP-104 34.1 p, n--- TP-105y SAND11.4n w """"•• TP-106 y 30.4 -- -- SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHE NUM13ER OF M SH PER INCH U.S. STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM ..y �_ 00 to 9 m N pp O 00 p £? o cn m O tD N M d Lr)t00 co- N O O O 0 0 O O O O w � - Ei 0 10 o ?i` 90 w x Cn 20 p Bo 0 m m �^ 30 l J m 70 m O -zI 40 -n 60 n O a �r m 50 D� p 5o _ m m m CD 60 1 40 W 0 m_ (� G) 70 m_ � = 30 J � O 80 { c� 20 n N cD 90 a 8 10 a n ro 100 D O C) O O O O O O O O O O 00 W Q m N e- 0u lD Q m N ' O O O O O O O O O O O �] 0 0 o CO LO Q "� N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o O o O o 0 W Z COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE FINES CD C (n COBBLES GRAVEL SAND £ O N r a a m \ 0 D Moisture LL PL ( D KEY Boring or DEPTH ISM DESCRIPTION Content (%) Test Pit No. ft. O O v Cn o O TP-109 1 Brown silty SAND with gravel 15. 3 -- -- d a -- -- -—— TP-111 1 Brown sandy SILT 19.3n ........... TP-112 1 Brown SILT 32.2 -- PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT aJ a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N M V to co h CO M J 1 1 L00 1 1 L00 J flT I I I I T ---- N Zoo Z(]� 61 0 coo* 0 J £00 ------------ ------ 400' 0 Q q00- U z 0 900- CC w 900' 800' U, Z W N 800 LO' LL N L0 W _Z g a ZO ZO' E0' >- £0- = b0 q0' 90- 90' 00z 80 L O a N I— Z 00L w z a r Z w LL U y ff t I I 09 s' w no os o q. U 0b 5� 0 N o£ ffiHs'z 2 a � a 5 LU 8• W a OZ L N o 3 M w H ?1 w 9 L z N t7 Q Ul 4 U. W N CCN rt 08 Z C7 Ir 3 >, m £ O 0 Q t7 U Sa w Ca z Z Q 9 cn W eh 8 W N Z > 0L LL W = 8rE J Cn U Z/L j Z r rl rl 8S OZ w W � o L { 0 z 0E cc o v co brll Q 0 z 1 w Z/L I Oq O U C 1 I O Z 09 0 O 08 m}� w £ I OOL n N q w J r I 9 I cow 00z O Y O Q 00E Zl0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0) W 1� cD In V M N PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE ANALYSES Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C '\I1 1 �'i ' (iYxi<iuiu.dl'ny(uxra.G+kni ti6ka irtxxixncdtix ua Renton, Washington rP,oj No.3000-3 Drwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked P, Date 11/4/97 Plate BS 100 80 x 60 w o z } QF- U 40 `�-A-Line Cn g a. 20 CL-MLMal, 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 I Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C \ 1 ���En �iEnN��IW� Renton, Washington Proj. No.3000-3 Date Nov. '97 jPlate B6 100 80 x 60 w 0 z � Q U �_- 40 X"—A-Line cn Q o_ I� 20 • CL-ML 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Boring/ Depth USCS L.L. P.L. P I. Water Natural Key Test Pit (ft) Soil Classification 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 5 Brown SILT ML 36 29 7 35.4 O 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 Earth Consultants Inc. Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C coae�Enak�s.c�o"tss.F�.nro+menfWsc;R,tKcs Renton, Washington Proj. No.3000-3 Date Nov. '97 Plate B7 VIL BASIN AND COMMiINITY PLAN AREAS It I P � �►�s�Y�11�1� `. � ''' ��� ��. ..fir • w t4V14 f-ILAI, ") MIMP AP e .. !�A ,► � �� JP i i o i y • I _ I t • 1 1 I 0 t l 1 • 1 I � 1 t I B 1 � p r i .a _ _� t�i� t• � f� /Iaa• o ` o S •psi ��'�� _ � �� NJ IF :� L r� ''Se: �.5.•r(�� d9�tf" J.Y 6 (il 'eq YO I.�•4�j`,/�. j� tyi,'�'. .r,♦ ..c.:«,rd� r�y�`►1Iff Yid/w+r1 pp ff.- "� ':,,,� (t' ;7�)r �wsi ` r•� c r�•R � � ,' aP M� .�� y_r a.u.." �� 'r 'I.c....xa sla4} .•••�7�` 1�d tl a+•. J¢lj ,�'( ■5% � i 9 ' . +,•mo•'� a�1 � �.rs '� /I:�'P ""'..�"�� t'ill7!'1'` '�`•lf�.. Y. IT, La11 \ � •i Y "� �� 7 �.M '.L��'i h,'�_�,.,.,ti�+i' ������evL Jlr�a11��(v, .....:+[•rx� J '� >!.i , +� �`.a� ors' �. 1�l t•�,d .E, r- ,, TY 1'r►;7•t_tai.t«d....r'i r..r'1 S �,t�aws s4 ,�+7+b4b A,►-y�-,,. �� rl� r.'p°•.�, .� .•oif f In Y•Y � ,��>.9�► A►�""�lyt�+•�t�y�• �iii lf�l � may % I/%�����/A+ � �•� �1911SP; •11 Va}ta_ i yp ..SC[Gam i.3.�r fI .8 ir>=`d���,1,1+�•.�.�F`� 4 p & ll_� , \ l�E�,tfA ■ (C1.1[��L.•�U11 $S4S� IIG.N�. � • w^ �MY��t• 0 1!" �n y��►�1 'K� f=' 14�, �.a- � /� „, s!ffi� J.►rtS +4? SJPiIi -a-+' �_�, �► 13' � � 3yy��y�:,'a11.,�V .•%, �ID�y a3':,:•�L,C�im��"`i�'c�i�� � �s•I,r,;t�'`.•;�'�i'lam x;.rt:;' '�;;jp�yF',�:'�„hs'�i:'�-R 'Tr"" � • VIII. OTHER PERMITS AD • IX. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN • X. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS r XL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION MANUAL T F!LENAME: pL =L'JT JA(E: ?LOT SCAL'L: PAPER SPACL: JOB NC: C0: (-] iI T �D SURVEIED: c L : AS SHGWN )ATE. HORIZONTAL /983/1991 /► DESIGNED: A- CITY OF FEMA 100 YEAR FLOODRLAIN 70 T DRAWN: R E N T O N EXHIBIT PAGE: DRAWING NO: — JGH i ONE ;NCH DATUM n CHECKED: AT FULL SCALE Planning/Building/Public Works Dept. IF NOT ONE INCH Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator o NO. REVISION BY I DATE APPR APPROVED: — SCALE ACCORDNCLY RENTON, WASHINGTON SHEET: OF: z 171 z a� c*, z X z OD Rp s sLIN 00 C 1. a 0 ' v Z to I '.� �+f 4.'� '�b A""�••< •ir �W' •Q .` N i 1 $•� °Yg 7 . I 1 `o:•' ,� I fl O i 1 N sp I 1 `. 0 r N01*11'17'E ass r O o --- i _ i1 ' D to W 10 00 I i f r' ��� :'r.. c> �� •tea. _ � � -- .iz •''3 . I i z �. NAM. D + , r-..... , cn i1 F "•' _ '.� ` <CD 0 III` , t 00 rn c 2<O ::ro rnzrn-v p �� $T q,. 1 I II zl F 1 rl - - - - - - - 7- - - - - - - - - - — — — — — — — —% 41 LAZ yF 0 {{I i x Y II rn ±Z cn 0, Z Z I I � nM •na �' � rn 1 I I I I 1 I \\\t � •5>. 1 IIIIIII `1 0 ` IIIIII �'�� dl 3 •• 'v ............. F.. `` '+> a III II D — ...•• ' 1 I / N g ...................................................... y .... ........ �•\ ./ �\ ,.:. �!•• `. y� ` N �111 __ .................14..... \ \.. �.� �� �3 •� r,,. .. :P •••••--§ ........ ..•...... w �.y�.T.T.�I•wwrw�.�iG •K•. :3 •7(• +a .. ..-... .., •.Li i�fiJ• T.7i77:TA1R .A� 3.:F.• 1 O 1 1 ••�'. .... iii it•:.L'- w, 1 •1> •,- .n 48 0 , ■ i R 843.20 ,I ��. _ • -- -�ram_..._.___... ^a a m M s CA v U1CA _-.----------------- -_ -------------------- Q -litz- M ■ ---I-- - ------ 0 M m T 1 1 1 11 0 I III4. co a) — 00 � r cz Q ED 0 y q TITLE: LOCATION V t� 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH z KENT, WA 98032 O ESDALE AVENUE S.W. N.W. CORNER AK D a (206)251 _6222 AND S.W. 43RD STREET (206)251 n U 8782 FAX OAKESDALE BUSINESS PARK 1p PHASE 1 G Q.`'' CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, �T/iyG EN01% SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RENT ON,, WAS,HING-I-ON i B.C.E. JOB NO. 5911