Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272190(1) Short Plat (SHPL If cry ) RL-QUEST FOR PROJECT W Prchm. PI a( (PPII ) CAGH To: Technical Services Datc 3 - '?S— Wod 6 7<�, c/ Grccn// From: Plan Rcvicw/Projcct Manager Lt.- seer Project Name S T T�a�,e hl �v► PC,4 (70 characters max) Description of Project. C0Nf 77?ve.170A e4' SA Al r-4 w .4 ex7f"riq" . s7tA*A--� MRA/A44611df S Vs° &vr /�'^�c� rv,�rry I'E'O/'�/� ��� S�cT�ti ( s N�'��'a�r �G ut�'7` �•.�'� � Circle Size of Waterline- 10" t 2" Circle One: Nc%v or xtensio Circle Size of Sewerline_ 10" 12" Circle One: New or Extension Circle Size of Stormline: l2" 15" 18" 24" Circle One: New or Extension Address or Street Name(s) Dvlpr/Contractor/Owner/Cnslr. s6j(IC,�/}�� � ��AM W�S� //0d_OreC * A&d (70 max) Check each discipline involved in Project Ltr Drwg N of sheets per discipline �w�:��C.Q•i IObP���� .i � C?"Trans-Storm (c.��_s�GEwrpt� (Ha.v�y f�°E��,� ✓ — — � (Roadway/Drainage) (Offsdc nmprovcmcnts)(includc basin name) (include MC shccu) 0? Transportation 3�Ltb +j sr4f.�T�unncli i — P (Sigulizaiion,Ctunr,c(iution,la�4n� Q/ C �•SS����A�Woe.�a )- MAyr ��F ' Wastewater 2.Z%A. �;►�g, l�!#Q 1 j/ � + r t,� — (Sanitary Scwcr Main)(include basin name) q3YcN.f.7, 8'�MA 3-Sty. tve. l-2vA416 Water avu, a vcs, ydrants) i — (Include e«np he 6c Horizontal Ctrl Sheeu) TS Use Only � (yr�' � — r�19C7 approved by TSM Date ormslmisd92-090 DOC/CD/bh •� r Technical Information Report Bruns Plat Renton, Washington 93108 Prepared for: CamWest Development, Inc. .iryof,;���on 924 Bellevue Way NE, #101 Bellevue, Washington 98004 (206) 637-9747 Prepared by: Pacific Engineering Design, Inc. 130 Andover Park East, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98188 (206) 431-7970 f. l F:617� lt� March 9, 1994 Page 1 of 2 King County Bullding and Land Development Divlslon TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Project Owner Project Name Address Location Phono Township Project Engineer Range Section Company Project Size AC Address Phone Upstream Drainage Basin Size _ AC Subdivision E:] DOF/G HPA E] Shoreline Management Short Subdivision COE 404 0 Rockory Grading 0 DOE Dam Safely Structural Vaults CJ Commercial FEMA Floodplain Other Other 0 COE Wetlands 0 HPA Tilly,11 . . - - MI Community Drainage Basin (� River Floodplain Stream Wetlands Critical Stream Roach Sopps/Springs 0 Deprossions/Swalos C] High Groundwater Table 0 Lako Groundwater Recharge Stoop Slopes O Othor 0 Lakeside/Erosion Hazard KM- . Soil Typo Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities O Additional Shoots Attatchod 1/90 Pago 2 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT [] Ch.4-Downstream Analysis (- O O 0 Additional Sheets Attatched MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION CI Sedimentation Facilities ED Stabilize Exposed Surface 0 Stabilized Construction Entrance 0 Remove and Restoro Temporary ESC Facilities O Perimeter Runoff Control Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris 0 Clearing and Grading Restrictions Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Cover Practices Flag Limits of NGPES Construction Sequence 0 Other Other Grass Linod Channel Tank Infiltration Method of Analysis 0 Pipe System Vault 0 Depression CI Open Channel 0 Energy Dissapator 0 Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation Cl Dry Pond 0 Wetland Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage Wot Pond Stream 0 Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation Additional Sheets Attatched Drainago Easement Cast in Place Vault 0 Other Access Easement 0 Retaining Wall 0 Native Growth Protoction Easomont Rockery>4'High Tract Structural on Stoop Slope Other I or a civil onginoor under my supervision have visited the site. Actual silo conditions as observed woro incorporated into this workshoot and the attalchmonts. To tho best of my knowledge the information provided hero is accurato. syns"Ofe 1/90 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I . PROJECT OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II . PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . OFF SITE ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . VI . SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . VII . BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS . . . . . . . V III . OTHER PERMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN . . . . . . X. BOND QUANTITY WORK SHEET, RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET AND SKETCH, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI . MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL . . . . . . . . R I . PROJECT OVERVIEW This site is located in northeast Renton with the south property line abutting NE 19th Street . The site is approximately 200 feet west of Union Avenue NE. The total site area is approximately 2 . 2 acres with a relatively flat to gentle slope to the southwest . There are no existing structures on-site. There are some existing trees in the northwest portion of the site with the remainder being grass and weeds . The site will be built into approximately 14 single family lots with one looped road through the site . On-site detention and water quality will be provided. ► _ w 4w 4 4 4 4 SEE E MAP COPYRIGHT 1991 77to J8 AmN V J 80_TI AV r s Syj1 �a 1'• ,]� �2 3�B2ND�Jk `ca^�I_AYS(JZg BIS1 mAYN >� N� —Nl>!'�� ••got �� � '� .An `' I_I., $?;�1p, �--y'1� oj, m•� H <av �~ � :o ass e4111 g AV sE� els'C s y 5 $ �` 6AV - I.Iv.._. 85.TJ1^PL .SE,-I D 84TH r A S r 9_ 8�I1'^i in H .. t'Yf rysy AV S ^ N A y x z Mr iBITN � AV i � =' '� .e '^i � (� � ' �,v�$-•'H°"' %'�%t l' 11 A � Y L w 1 r H S >C �9( � � ? y,✓ H QL�L 1 � J--A 1 ■nr Ar'" n � ITI of 4y .y `FF td`.p r�. !� a'pY `� ' 31NItlU O T( qq ' 9dd m monsxxLc 3 41 ox �,1��raixL r sE avpJ "' "301Sa3Alx A$ : ^o y 967H Ay^SEx •. zi x - LOOAN AV N ' H ~ BUWETT IV N c MN r, i S�r F tY 15�'h VM W. 1 A m r "' Xt :., < NOitJN1Hs 'A P_A. AV r.� IJ z o FRWY M-1=-1.AV N ! � PEN_ I JONES N w AV E NE '" Iv - a0 r _ KENN I KA NE. _ m m N IINCOLN AY ME '� '� I(. -_-_ _.m_ .f' ,_. �—_. �9 m N (4r -.:r r, .: �_— hm F �- N a MDNTE c AV SE g•LI L NC_O �°, �I�_ f•W Ii ITI �, ANEAnccx AV A m ABERDEEN a^'ol�ME: _ +7 V NEEY t "Y`h<I: ptti AV NE l <A4 8LV8 I m m 1v I" - - ..._ AV .G�,. NE m•p i ,a ,w 112TH AV SELI!M„ ,g_ ll Sf Ol u m. m z 0 BLAINE AV NE. m. ^' ~z a� / '&. m -- --— !ITM Ar [>'iITIH v"¢AV SE, �w "; m �BAIK ,� 1yy LC� �A NL sr _�__"I q a m ,� " CrNT I-.. S AV NE' A r f^a' mo IIIIA SF - m11)Ir 11 Ql AV T113TH PL •>ti a. r.;X � AV NE OAYfON-N AV- 'x^,.p NE Lis r* `� _-S nim_• r�C� _ —_S[a•tM L v x EOMONDS y om A mar- ti ,1.'3 '� .. ry' d�s�• 3 E m` A �' AV NE 4a�y - - I"-1 116TH AV s< AV =g _ e z L .- NABRfNp ON F"6�yf�t :ENE '^, ^' ^J �,19 1177H mg T�7 :`.' r" X 1.-IV HARRf e`AV y e AVW+t3. xE xwxLxcrax P ^z'� use AY S �.. 11811AT,,...H 7A? HavnXc IND-EXYly„N JEFFERSON A w _: ~ y, 6 )k Y nwr o a ., q�q ITV g =t1A ss ? �� x IUAn r a } ,120TH-QVSE: R .S, n' n KIRK p $V+ JI..._KIRKLAN r aV �q�EFFERSDM AV ME 1 Lp�1 ..9,;,;gls Ark '+m r,? s -T3 AV HE t ld '^ - ?r,y. . elsr Ar u LYN 11� �. m ,)� {�i � '.nN,.. $ �i•� i Isr e ;Te 122N0 k L '+LAYTIS "q^ AV "' rn MONROE MrDOD Ay-ENE ,ns I�y, -L`tie'F�' ...� l ssn •:g ......SC.... 7 K 12157 P�.:. SE_m 1 AV NE - .' x trip.r It •lZ0) y 3S ld ^ay#• S '� _ =-m-YrNVxT'_z_. ..A_.m 1r)N40E A -_NE!-__- .... _ _ I_.- 'A"il ',�--3t n lr 1 _ ' SE A A F r 3S AY.. R Nlr 1 m ,p1 L/r ..I�e Y /t6 vrY LLsr x� IES Ap � tl -OLYMP m AV NE Av L'.-_-F^ r�`�!r {,- •.s w �' ' `n 1 ,s rives R "-1 YI[ICE m q'Y'Yi >S AV ILL 2t " 's3 F�<r� �- 7 'a 1•^n a yam"•. M' _ EN Ay'a m rl AY Ncr� K^ AY E♦ -fy 9lrV% AV NE nl -- "BY F J SF N a� YICL_ �'y N - 129TH ry� i m n Tura AV .,�•" A xolilNS .. ,rAv sE : 129T_H �'?b TArbN WITIMI'AY ME AV $E AY Pt V' 'r5'a L�II9nl Ix AYJS[�+ -AP . r horn n EUNION'^! y AV Mt !AY■ m s� u N 1 0� —SE-- 132ND - AV ---- - $ m _ ._. _.. v--132ND P� � X -o �. YAsxa , = Dx2t'I 1,d I ?.'n'j \F. VAY'A - � 4-3,j .VAS i . Ir«wM ~ CT'NI,_134 1N• `Ad N+b�r�,��5 �S `7 .m NEWCAST(E L i AM11d ES AWN-wLSLs L Tt� 3x N o AV SE tt NNflIFMI n _ ArACg1F5 AY OE d 4' 35 {IL9S'\ -_ly�$� -S[ 4" 1 -—E A � R COAL CREEK KWY AV �Z w � x u a r 177111 qy_ NE �+� tlxFME1Rp1 NE SE Lys 138THl� K' AV S_C s2*s J I``'�a• �m 8.-1"' �� .4t' r+s r-• '��> �i_r� � NL� � L>e .r � 1a9n1 m 9 a^ mf`!=140TH zip a 38TH" �- p [6 _.I �------ -T"�.AV S 142ND 4 AV :•YA OA L. wsy F YW N_ n -_--- +. 143RD AY d <" i Nf , •;�Ar nt p R � q lJ, •-• �146TH AY SE� o u= ♦v Y 7 14M A � r� ' 'j� S 'r N 7 M 1IV130 dvw le!) 33s '00 9 N I N II . PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY The preliminary review meeting letter from the city is included in this section. Pl=iing/Building/Public Works Department Carl Clymer, Mayor February 7, 199A Mr. Eric H:Campbell Cam West Real Estate Development, Inc. PO Box 308 Kirkland, WA 93033 SUBJECT. Brun Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. Campbell' Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the preliminary plat. 1 hope that the staff comments were constructive and will assist you in designing a project that meets the intent of the City's codes and policies. As promised I have put together a tentative schedule for the processing of your preliminary plat. The project should proceed as follows: Environmental review - approximately three months taking into consideration comment and appeal periods. Public Hearing - Once the .appeal period has expired for the Determination of Non-Significance the public hearing on the preliminary,plat can be advertised 10 days prior to the hearing (hearing date is dependent the Hearing Examiner's schedule). Following the public hearing the Examiner takes two weeks to render a decision. Following the decision there is a two week appeal period. The above is only an estimate of the time it will take to process the preliminary plat, the schedule can be thwarted and delayed by issues raised by outside parties, staff and/or the applicant. At the pre-application meeting density was discussed and a ranee between 5.6 units per acre to 8 units per acre was given with corresponding figures for the number of units that can be provided for the subject site. Staff has interpreted the density requirement in the code to define 8 du/ac as the maximum ailowed aensity,"however there nave been recent discussions among staff to interpret the density requirement to mean that 9 du/ac is the goal rather than the maximurn allowed density. This issue is currently being discussed among staff and an interpretive policy will soon follow. If 8 du/ac is the maximum allowed density then according to our calculations only 14 lots can be created. Another issue concerning density has been presented to the City Council. This issue asks for clarification on the ability of the Hearing Examiner to determine Inc appropriate density for a subdivision when them is a density range, such as in your case where because of the density range 10 to 14 lots could be created. Before staff recommends or supports a certain density, this matter needs to be resolved in order to save the applicant from possibly having to redesign a preliminary plat in order to comply with the blearing Examiner's decision. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 THIS PAPPR CONTAINS YM'o REGYCLEP WA7ESUA!-10%POS 1'CANSUM6H "' . d,. `. •.J 1 JJ1 11 VV ..l li:W`—1✓—/a��•J. : i....,.. , •�•..� Mr. Eric H. Campbell February 3, 1994 Page - As mentioned at'the pre-application meeting, variances approved by the Hearing Examiner would be neoded in order to deviate from the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Each variance will be considered based on Its merits to the project and surrounding area. Staff will work with the applicant to help.insure that the variances, if needed, can be justified and that the overall design of the plat reflects the intent of the City's policies and codes. If you have any questions please call me at 235-2518. Once a revised plan is prepared I would be happy to circulate it for review and comments prior to formal application. �45ilaHucrtor ely, rl Ja Project Manager cc; Jim Hanson Neil Watts I TOTAL P.03 .'.;: III . OFF-SITE ANALYSIS Runoff sheet flows to the south property line and into an existing ditch and storm system. From there runoff flows westerly through some existing driveway culverts and an open ditch for approximately 225 feet and enters a type 2 catch basin. Runoff exits this cb to the south through a 18" culvert that crosses NE 19th Street . Runoff enters and exits another type 2 catch basin adjacent to the south side of this street . Runoff enters an open swale to the south that has been landscaped by a homeowner for approximately 150 feet . From there runoff continues flowing southerly for approximately 700 feet through a well defined swale . At the end of this swale runoff enters Honey Creek and flows northwesterly for approximately 1 mile at which point it joins with May Creek and continues westerly to Lake Washington. The drainage channel for the entire 1/4 mile is within a clearly defined stable channel with varying widths , side slopes , and depths . The average channel width is 2 to 6 feet with side slopes ranging from 1 : 1 to 4 : 1 . The channel appears stable with no evidence of scouring or abnormal erosion. IL M 11 y \•• �. �' I \J xs80 Ma -- — -4f — } — gip- =- �� — - F11 5266 ,1 :1 Hill f, _ J \�a f o•• I j `' �; ;1 I • 5J \ 5265 r + 390II, '� ` r •ocs xoso \ •p (A NA I ?� IN 1� \ . . is �1• \�- 5263 3p _ 3t9� -��� - -`l\\ �_ •r./— - \ T. 23 N. ��<. _ —A,➢�r_� 1 g M � ;_ter � % -� "\ , \ ---- -- - I — , u, 33 62 i .• a,. \ g III •, ,, \ IL •• `T.�� . I t"377 •�• II� �f'i •%a�-•'�I •��� ro �•�•)�•. �I'I, .�� •� Trailer 'ark Q ' HKE tlir• I BMA BM , . it I - • INTERIOR—GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.WA�HINGTON•O.G.-1969 47030' fRENTONI 562 10' S63 s65OOOm-E. 122007'30" 15781 NW �-Z, —E 1:24000 iVZ0(f 4,0`V ROAD CLASSIFICATION �q 0 t MILE s� Heavy-duty........ --- Light duty..................... 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET Medium-duty Unimproved dirt= IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS Runoff and collection systems for this site have been sized using the 1990 King County storm Drainage Manual . The detention system has been designed for release at the 2 , 10 , and 100 year existing conditions . The SBUH methodology has been utilized using the "Water Works , release 2 . 9" computer program. This site will detain runoff in an underground wet vault . This vault will be located within the Right of Way near the west property line . Runoff will be discharged to the storm system located within NE 19th Street . PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN INC. PHONE LOG ❑ CONFERENCE ❑ CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS MEMO ❑ INFO ❑ DISTRIBUTION: PROJECT �`�UI)L`S PLAT PROJECT NO. cl 310 g INCOMING CALL ❑ DATE TIME OUTGOING CALL ❑ PERSON PHONE NO. COMPANY FAX NO. FILE ❑ ........................................................... .................. f G/1� • l� i •01'7 . .................... " ✓ . n C,�= S J.2... 0 :..rX�s.�>>. .:....:. .... ......:.................... ..................................... . 2. ........ ..... .... fi'?.VJQ!a ...`.72. .... .... .... ....:... .... .:....:.... . . . . : . .....:....:....:....:....:....:.........:....:....:....:....:... . . .... ........... . . a,.l`�... .� .... .. ►.?.. =.. .... 6 .... .... .... .... .. ........................:....:....:.... _. 2n,Q . - .G.Z a .......... ....................................... . . . ........ ... . . ...... ... SIGNATURE 130 ANDOVER PARK EAST, SUITE 300 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 (206) 431-7970 FAX:431-7975 3/ 9/94 cific Engineering Design page 1 Bruns Plat 93108 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A10 NAME : Developed 10 year SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA . . . . . . . : 2 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 .00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION . . . . : 2 .90 inches AREA . . : 1 . 13 Acres TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 .00 min CN . . . . : 86 .00 TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 6 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 .20 AREA . . : 1 .07 Acres CN . . . . 98 .00 PEAK RATE : 1 .20 cfs VOL: 0 .39 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min BASIN ID: A100 NAME: Developed 100 year SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA . . . . . . . : 2 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 .00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION . . . . : 3 .90 inches AREA . . : 1 . 13 Acres TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 .00 min CN . . . . : 86 .00 TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 6 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA . . : 1 .07 Acres CN . . . . 98 .00 PEAK RATE : 1 .76 cfs VOL : 0 .56 Ac-ft TIME : 470 min BASIN ID: A2 NAME: Developed 2 year SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA . . . . . . . : 2 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 .00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION . . . . : 2 .00 inches AREA . . : 1 . 13 Acres TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 .00 min CN . . . . .. 86 .00 TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 6 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 .20 AREA . . : 1 .07 Acres CN . . . . 98 .00 PEAK RATE: 0 .73 cfs VOL : 0 .24 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min 3/ 9/94 Pacific Engineering Design Inc page 2 Bruns Plat 93108 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: a10 NAME: Existing 10 year SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA . . . . . . . : 2 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 .00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION . . . . : 2 .90 inches AREA . . : 2 .20 Acres TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 .00 min CN . . . . : 85 .00 TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 55 .35 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA . . : 0 .00 Acres CN . . . . 98 .00 TcReach - Sheet L : 300 .00 ns:0 .2400 p2yr : 2 .00 s:0 .0120 TcReach - Shallow L : 120 .00 ks:9 .00 s: 0 .0120 PEAK RATE : 0 .42 cfs VOL : 0 .28 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: a100 NAME: Existing 100 year SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA . . . . . . . : 2 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 .00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION . . . . : 3 .90 inches AREA . . : 2 .20 Acres TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 .00 min CN . . . . : 85 .00 TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 55 .35 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA . . : 0 .00 Acres CN . . . . 98 .00 TcReach - Sheet L : 300 .00 ns:0 .2400 p2yr : 2 .00 s:0 .0120 TcReach - Shallow L : 120 .00 ks:9 .00 s: 0 .0120 PEAK RATE : 0 .71 cfs VOL: 0 .43 Ac-ft TIME : 490 min BASIN ID: a2 NAME : Existing 2 year SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA . . . . . . . : 2 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 .00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . . . . : USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION . . . . : 2 .00 inches AREA . . : 2 .20 Acres TIME INTERVAL . . . . : 10 .00 min CN . . . . : 85 .00 TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 55 .35 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA . . : 0 .00 Acres CN . . . . 98 .00 TcReach - Sheet L : 300 .00 ns :0 .2400 p2yr : 2 .00 s :0 .0120 TcReach - Shallow L : 120 .00 ks:9 .00 s: 0 .0120 PEAK RATE : 0 .19 cfs VOL : 0 .15 Ac-ft TIME : 490 min 3/ 9/94 Pacific Engineering Design Inc page 3 Bruns Plat 93108 HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY PEAK TIME VOLUME HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area cfs min . cf\AcFt Acres 1 0 . 187 490 6350 of 2 .20 2 0 .418 490 12016 of 2 .20 3 0 .708 490 18916 of 2 .20 4 0 .725 480 10374 of 2 .20 5 1 .204 470 16835 of 2 .20 6 1 .762 470 24310 of 2 .20 18 0 . 187 550 10374 of 2 .20 19 0 .418 530 16835 of 2 .20 20 0 .704 510 24310 of 2 .20 L 3/ 9/94 Pacific Engineering Design Inc page 4 Bruns Plat 93108 STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST RECTANGULAR VAULT ID No . V1 Description: Vault Length : 105 .00 ft . Width : 20 .00 ft . 3/ 9/94 Pacific Engineering Design Inc page 5 Bruns Plat 93108 DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No . C1 Description: Combo Structure: R1 Structure: Structure: 01 Structure: Structure: MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No . 01 Description: Orifice Outlet Elev: 100 .00 Elev: 98 .00 ft Orifice Diameter : 2 .6572 in . Elev: 101 . 10 ft Orifice 2 Diameter : 3 .0234 in . RISER DISCHARGE ID No . R1 Description: Riser Riser Diameter ( in ): 12 .00 elev: 102 .34 ft Weir Coefficient . . . : 3 .782 height : 104 .00 ft Orif Coefficient . . . : 9 .739 increm: 0 . 10 ft 3/ 9/94 Pacific Engineering Design Inc page 6 Bruns Plat 93108 LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- (-PEAK-) STORAGE (--------DESCRIPTION---------) (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- (-STAGE) id VOL (cf) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ex 2 yr - dev 2 yr ........... 0.19 0.73 Vl 01 100.96 18 2009.36 ex 10yr - dev IOyr ........... 0.42 1.20 V1 01 101.60 19 3362.04 ex100yr -dev100yr ............ 0.71 1.76 V1 C1 102.39 20 5015.76 klflli{,,I f r Z i r- ugtr� �F�`• '�i�y 1 ,;A C r",irk �l` E� /• �i.� �.�• !`w`� .. 0 �•r i.� �� 1 , Lake i k1 A 1 , 1 G. i � �';lif�k: � {�j 1'1 1' rl' �� 11...E � , � �; ~�`� •'� 1.{� f g Yli�l'. �,1�/j R1x, t 1 1 / 1� ��` z�r��t �I I � � \r�f�� �;�� �-+-1 �'+111.�� • �f/ rGor glen "( .: �;.�• �. i lit• J��r .f ' ,i 1 y: r \ ^Y u�. 'I � �, 1 y 1 , , :.�J Y t•' li +�\�. -�i 'J �I .l n + ll{{ 1• Y ll` I ,\ ^ y f .l \ IjH,� lf;:. t 4 �. �C. "I� rD nr.,.X, 28b y 1 , Ami" a 11 � ti W hi t. ,1 ng� . r ` - �� 1r_ l•� r 1:j''"� II 1 ra\ar i _ y �` ' i \ '! � — � - �;.-1 Z -'`-- 2�b�.' 1 21b. < �`'�-��•\ ��.:T.I,, ,yr �yy _ lrl ,.��t� r air � `'► ����) ,� r�+r,�,� '` Fy i �,. .•� e 1;�j.. r,.+�" y# \`•��; 1 J1 It d4 1 ,�. � �' '✓tl �-�-1 50 \� _� � � NilowAjea RIV �•; � _ pl w I \ i •• i s ' I • �F i P I � �'� � `zr. rF� 11 t r,�^��",l .J �,R r with a wotlands Duwamish 4W In thn Wetlandse e. The a" have ® Open Water a 1J rriety of ap are m • tq Service Bash Boundaries 9 ieir Iota- 5_ 10 Sub-basin Boundaries -e tt rering se- -2 le bast ns. ' F in 7 rt vo � l 4 h' �J l4 � it ail ro � it ' +• .., za�K �, ,��• Ir � t i >;,� I !� t� ,��1'. '' :.i b�nrJ• f� ,1 1 ,,� r.�`• �II V.\ � ` .,!° � : {{ \� � it { 1' I\ Iti\• !1 � �.I JI .... t ��i.G ��. 1. ,r �it t � I V•JI µ,l��' li ,Z �•� -�� � 1. h�� Gf•`� �,,, x.r�� I e \l i \'Ci ;✓'� i 1' � 4\\ I \v \�t \ �, �� `�Y �y 1 t. 1 ' 'r:� r co�rt�,.,nnor � r �� �� � .•,� .. �1. A\\\A. i,A l I I.1: ri 7 aoniaar 4 �-' 1 1 j� �1 ,, � � F+.• , �'=tC q`qr .. /r rl, ��;r ;� I y �,b I .'• T '• I ` I \ ,\�� • `.Y• C`.. 'Jr ` '''�a`` 11 I(J lI�j, �SI� i f,..•t, S.,a Tti IT /\ !� 1 6 \ 1 ID xtend be. �- Class o Flood in_ Streams and 100- Duvramish 4 snow the •-.-•-+-• Class 2(with salmonids) streams. Year Floodplains Class 2(perennial;salmonid 7 13 use undetermined Class g 14 • • • • • s 10 Unclassified 6 11 i2 V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS The conveyance system has been designed using the 1990 King County Guidelines . The on-site storm system has been sized to convey the 100 year developed flows . The "Flowmaster" computer program has been used to check pipe capacity . VI . SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES A copy of the soils report is included in this section RZA AG RA, Inc. �� t_c1J �' NE 122n�i Way�� 100 Kirkland, WA 98034-691Si i206� 820-4669 FAX (206) U"21-3914 25 October 1993 11-09182-00 Cam West Development, Inc. 924 Bellevue Way Ne, Suite 101 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Attention: Mr. Eric Campbell Subject: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Proposed Residential Development NE 19th Street and Shelton Avenue NE Renton, Washington Dear Eric: This letter report presents the results of our Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation for the proposed residential development at the intersection of NE 19th Street and Shelton Avenue NE in Renton, Washington. The subject property and the approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this evaluation are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. Test pit logs with interpretive descriptions of the soil conditions encountered at the exploration locations are enclosed with this letter report. Infiltration rate test results are discussed in the report text. The following engineering considerations and recommendations are based on the subsurface exploration performed for this project on 19 October 1993. The scope of our services consisted of the field exploration program, visual assessment of the site conditions, on-site infiltration rate measurements, geotechnical engineering analyses, and preparation of this report. This letter report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices for the exclusive use of Cam West Development, Inc. and their agents, for specific application to this project. The scope of work for this evaluation was performed in accordance with our confirming letter for geotechnical studies, dated 18 October 1993. ` AG RA Earth&Envuonmental Group I � Cam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 2 Site and Project Description The site is located at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Northeast 19th Street and Shelton Avenue Northeast in Renton, Washington. The property is approximately 300 feet square and 2 acres in size, and has an overall vertical relief of approximately 5 feet. At the time of our exploration, the site was covered with grass and brushy vegetation, a few scattered small trees, and a grove of conifers on the west property boundary. We understand that the proposed project would consist of constructing a new cul-de-sac, several single- family residential home sites,and associated utilities. We understand that an on-site surface water infiltration structure is also proposed. We anticipate that grading cuts and fills of approximately 5 feet or less would be required to complete the site preparation. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on our understanding of the project at this time. As the project was in the preliminary planning stage at the time of this writing, we recommend that this report be reviewed and modified as needed to accommodate any significant changes from the assumed conditions. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION The subsurface exploration procedure for this project consisted of advancing seven soil test pits with a rubber-tired backhoe on 19 October 1993. One water infiltration rate test was completed in test pit TP-2 in general accordance with procedures presented in the King County Surface Water design manual. Test pits logs with interpretive descriptions of soil conditions encountered are appended to this report. The depths shown on the logs are approximate, and were measured from the ground surface at the time of exploration. Where soil contacts were undulating or gradational, the depths shown represent typical values. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The near-surface soil conditions on the site generally consisted of dense silty gravelly sand glacial till soils mantled by medium dense weathered glacial till, with approximately 0 to 3.6 feet of variable fill soils at the test pit locations. Each test pit encountered approximately 0.6 to 2.0 feet of topsoil and sod. Published United States Soil Conservation Service Maps for the area denoted site soils are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, AgC. �� A G R A Earth&Environmental Group Cam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 3 None of our test pits encountered groundwater seepage, though our exploration program was completed during near seasonal low groundwater. We did observe soil coloration in our test pits which would suggest that a seasonal perched groundwater condition may occur on the site. A perched groundwater table occurs where vertical infiltration is impended by a dense soil layer, such as the glacial till soils, and horizontal migration atop the dense strata occurs. Variations in groundwater levels should be anticipated in response to fluctuations in seasonal precipitation, on and off-site land usage, and other factors. Infiltration Rate Testing One subsurface maximum infiltration rate test was performed in general accordance with the guidelines published in Section 4.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual. The approximate test location is noted on Figure 1, and the test depth was approximately 4.0 feet below ground surface. The test was run as a "falling head"test, with head changing from approximately 4.0 to 3.5 feet during each timing cycle. Our testing indicated an actual average infiltration rate (Im) at the test location of 0.5 foot per hour, or 12 minutes per one-tenth of a foot. This value should be applied in accordance with the King County Surface Water Design Manual, utilizing the recommended overall factor of safety for the infiltration structure of 2.0. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The subject parcel is located north and east of the intersection of Northeast 19th Street and Shelton Avenue Northeast in Renton, Washington. The proposed development would include construction of a new cul-de- sac and several residential home sites. Access driveways, utilities, and landscaping will be provided for the proposed development. In our opinion, the development as proposed is feasible utilizing spread and continuous footings. The following paragraphs contain our detailed recommendations related to site preparation, structural fill placement, foundation design and construction, permanent and temporary slopes, retaining wall design, and drainage considerations. Site Preparation Because the site grading plan for the proposed development is not available at this time, we have provided general site preparation recommendations in this report. Prior to site grading, any site surface runoff and groundwater scopage should be collected and routed away to a proper drainage to facilitate earthwork and foundation construction. All building, pavement, and sidewalk areas, and areas to receive structural fill /' AGRA Earth&Environmental Group + r Cam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 4 should be cleared of all vegetation, topsoil, uncontrolled fill, and debris. Based on our explorations, we estimate a stripping effort will typically encounter 0.6 to 2.0 feet of topsoil and localized areas with up to 3.6 feet of previously placed fill which will require stripping. Thicker topsoil depths should be expected around and beneath tree root balls, and the nature and distribution of man-placed fills is likely to vary across the site. We recommend that foundation, floor subgrade, pavement areas, and areas to receive "structural fill' be prerolled and compacted with a roller or other suitable heavy equipment to a firm and non-yielding condition in order to achieve a minimum compaction level of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM:D 1557 test procedure. The upper 1 foot of subgrade soil in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the its modified Proctor maximum dry density. Due to the silty nature of the on-site soils, prerolling and adequate compaction can only be achieved when the soils are at or near their optimum moisture content. Any soft, wet, or significantly organic areas disclosed by prerolling should be excavated as necessary to reveal firm, non-organic soils and backfilled with "structural fill" if necessary, as discussed in the following section of this report. The need for or advisability of prerolling due to on-site soil conditions during or after wet weather should be evaluated at the time of construction. Earthwork done in the presence of excess soil moisture or during wet weather conditions may be difficult due to the silt content and moisture sensitive nature of some of the near-surface sand and gravel soils. If required, a representative from RZA AGRA could observe the soil conditions prior to and during prerolling to evaluate the suitability of stripped subgrades prior to structural fill or foundation placement. In this way, the adequacy of earthwork may be evaluated as it proceeds. Structural Fill All fill placed in building areas, below sidewalks, and for backfilled utility trenches should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein for structural fill. Prior to structural fill placement, the surfaces to receive structural fill should be prepared as previously described in the Site Preparation section of this report. All structural fill should be free of organic material, debris, and other deleterious materials. The maximum individual particle size of soils used for structural fill applications should be less than 6 inches in diameter. MA G R A Earth&Environmental Group Cam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 5 Structural fill should be placed in lifts no greater than 8 inches in loose thickness and each lift should be uniformly compacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. The upper 1 foot of soil under paved areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. If required, a representative of RZA could be present during grading and fill placement so that a representative number of density tests maybe conducted as the structural fill placement occurs. In this way, the adequacy of earthwork may be evaluated as it proceeds. Permanent sloping fills should be compacted to the same 90 percent density as the body of the fill, as determined by the ASTM:D-1557 test procedure. This may be accomplished by overbuilding the slope and cutting back to a compacted core, or by compacting the slope face when fill placement is completed. In any case, no uncompacted fill should remain on site except in non-structural and planting areas. The suitability of soils for structural fill use depends on the particle size distribution and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines, that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve, increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Generally, soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight, based on the soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve, cannot be compacted to a firm, and non-yielding condition when the moisture content is more than a few percent above optimum. The optimum moisture content is that which yields the greatest soil density under a given compactive effort. The near-surface site soils could be used for structural fill provid ed ed that they are suitably free of organic ' material and cleared of debris, and that their moisture content is carefully maintained within about two percent of optimum. Placement of the soils would more readily be accomplished during the drier summer months when the soils could be moisture conditioned by spreading and/or windrowing. Foundation Considerations ' The proposed structures may be supported by conventional spread and continuous footings. Footings may be constructed on either the undisturbed, native, medium dense to very dense silty gravelly sands or on ' structural fill,placed above properly prepared subgrade soils and compacted to 90 percent of their modified Proctor maximum dry density. We recommend that footings founded on the above recommended bearing ' soils be designed with a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). All footings should have a minimum width of at least 18 inches. The base of the exterior footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final ground elevation or the top of floor slabs, I A G R A IEarth&Enwronmen,'al Group ICam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 6 I whichever is lower. Interior footings need only extend 12 inches below surrounding finished grades or floor slab surfaces. The above recommended allowable bearing pressures may be increased by up to one-third to accommodate transient and seismic loads. All footings should be founded in the prescribed bearing strata; foundations should not be set in or above loose or disturbed soils or any existing uncontrolled or uncompacted fill. As the near-surface soils are silty, site work in the presence of water or during wet weather may disturb the bearing strata. We recommend that the contractors exercise proper excavating techniques to minimize the disturbance of the exposed Ibearing soils. IWe estimate the total settlements of foundations founded in the prescribed bearing strata may be on the order of 3/4 inch with differential settlements estimated to be on the order of 1/2 inch or less. As the Isubgrade soils are primarily granular, settlement would be essentially elastic in nature and occur as the load is placed. Foundation settlement is often a function of how the footing subgrade was prepared. The footing I excavations should be free of loose or soft soils, slough, debris, or water prior to pouring the footing concrete. If disturbed or soft soils are left within the footing area prior to concrete placement, future settlements may be greatly increased. For that reason, we recommend that the footing subgrade soils be Iobserved by a representative of RZA prior to pouring footing concrete to confirm that the condition of the bearing soils are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. ` Slab-On-Grade Floor Slab-on-grade floor subgrades, if used, should be prepared in accordance with the previous site preparation recommendations. The slab-on-grade floors should be founded on prerolled or compacted native ground or structural fill compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D 1557). We recommend that the floor slabs be underlain by a minimum 6-inch thickness of washed rock or pea gravel containing less than 3 percent fines by weight, based on that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve, with at least 30 percent retained on the No. 4 sieve. This granular fill is intended to serve as a capillary break and working surface. An impervious moisture barrier should also be placed between the capillary break and the floor slab. Pavement Construction The subgrade for the new cul-de-sac paving should be prepared as described above in the Site Preparation section of this report. Any fill required to achieve design grades below paving should be placed in RAZ MY A G R A Earth & Environmental Group I F , n Cam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 7 I accordance with our recommendations above for "structural fill'. Pavement subgrades prepared as Irecommended should provide adequate support for minimum pavement section thicknesses set forth by King County for the applicable road service category. IDrainage Considerations I The site soils are somewhat silty and highly susceptible to disturbance when wet. Prior to construction, site surface water or groundwater encountered during grading should be routed away from construction and building areas. Based on soil weathering, due to the possibility of high periodic groundwater conditions, Iwe recommend that the buildings be provided with a perimeter footing drain system to collect available water. The footing drains should consist of a perforated pipe fully enveloped by pea gravel or washed rock. IFooting drains should discharge into a tight-line drain network away from the building via gravity to a suitable discharge point. Site grades should be planned to provide a positive surface gradient away from Ithe buildings and to avoid ponding. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system. Instead, a separate tight-line drain network should be installed to direct rainfall away from Icompleted buildings. CLOSURE IThe conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on our understanding of the proposed project and our subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering evaluation. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were accomplished within the authorized scope of work and site constraints to formulate our recommendations. We recommend that RZA AGRA be provided the opportunity to review the geotechnical aspects of the project plans and specifications in order to confirm that the recommendations and design considerations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented for this project. The integrity of the foundations depend on the proper site preparation and construction procedures. RZA AGRA, Inc. would be available to provide geotechnical engineering services and construction observation services during earthwork and foundation and utility construction phases of this project. If variations in subsurface conditions were observed at that time, RZA would be available to provide additional geotechnical recommendations to minimize time delays as the project proceeds. YAGRA Earth&Environmental Group Cam West Development, Inc. 1 1-091 82-00 25 October 1993 Page 8 I We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, or require further information after reviewing this report, please do not hesitate to call us. IRespectfully submitted, IRZA AGRA, INC. I / Bruce W. Guenzler IEngineering Geologist �`S z Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. :'' : ' x Associate IBWG/KDM/ah EXPIRES 11 /2U� Enclosure: Figure 1 Site and Exploration Plan Test Pit Logs TP-1 through TP-7 RAZ I I I I A G R A Earth&Environmental Group ( \\ .. 3ti:, SF 3�_ 11BdiN__--__._-- Sf _ E Yuen St SL _ 915r SE N�IiE St sc� 7se 4vM 4I1 TP-4 auNTP-3� 4 r ' o � 9 L_ ss i.sI zk IGUS p G • � � �I �0 } fu N 1�g S[ Iw N SI t rARK I I M MCI a 1 sE iwTx S C_s[=�wr. 1 I Z rao rt y\ �~+�� � 1-` / ST M `,i. ' SE IP1R0 V Si )• w K J O �--�TK \ L1100� yN ST . • 3 a rAn• iG� ..l A30 } y y • � � (t it ..I `z y —— IS In } n I\ � � alY• ST Y fr�r 3 W K3' •�WNC�s>E'J L_I.SS rOKtx ST; E11, '. • - „ K 1 Se Iw IN SI a �' r z r—'_=- 3 —SUNSET W • �''T - � -- ' � �'\ I �r 1(M1 .iY •f^yF � i ;r t` s �• � �, I r.. TP-7 (INFILTRATION TEST) u , Ix "E - Y11 ;� _ s 3 ut v iL a TP-5 ME YE-10IN lM y ;..'.ST l z1 G it 9rN Sim �:i St Iler 'A rm p b s� ME MM, S `§ - 1-_ SE 1lOIN } Ll IM-MSTr y� ME 7TM ST ' a ._ E r You•""... _. 2r tz:w_ � 1 I a W 3 � _428 W a> TP-6 / IC70 TP-1 C7 - TP-7 LEGEND I SHELTON AVE. N.E. ASPHALT CULVERT N m TEST T NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCAF r CAM-WEST RZA-AGRA W¢ 1109182 SHELTON AVE. N.E. d 19th ST. W ENGINEEAtNGdENvIPONMENrALSEAVCES DESIGN SWC; RENTON,WASHINGTON Z 0 40 80 11335 N.E. 122n0 Way DRAMyN DmW Suite 100 SITE & EXPLORATION PLAN SCALE IN FEET Kirkland Washington DATE QCT LW DRAWING BASED ON PLAN BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES.DATED 9-29-93 9B0.3i-6tilB SCALE NOTED_ FIGURE 1 TEST PIT LOGS Depth (feet] Soil Classification 11-9182 Test Pit TP-1 Approximate ground surface elevation: 428 feet 0.0 - 1.9 Loose, moist, brown, TOPSOIL, with sod 1.9 - 4.1 Medium dense, moist, tan to mottled gray, silty gravelly fine SAND 4.1 - 6.6 Dense to very dense, moist, gray, silty gravelly fine SAND 6.6 - 7.9 Dense to very dense, moist, gray, fine SAND some silt and gravel Test pit terminated at approximately 7.9 feet No caving No seepage Test Pit TP-2 Approximate ground surface elevation: 430 feet 0.0 - 0.6 Loose, moist, brown, TOPSOIL, with sod (Fill) 0.6 - 2.2 Loose, moist, brown buried TOPSOIL 2.2 - 4.1 Medium dense to dense, moist, tan to gray, silty gravelly fine SAND Test pit terminated at approximately 4.1 feet Infiltration test completed at 4.1 No caving No seepage Test Pit TP-3 Approximate ground surface elevation: 430 feet 0.0 - 1.1 Loose, moist, brown, TOPSOIL, with sod ' 1.1 - 2.0 Medium dense, moist, tan to gray silty gravelly fine SAND 2.0 - 7.1 Dense to very dense, moist gray, silty gravelly fine SAND Test pit terminated at approximately 7.1 feet ' No caving No seepage I 11-9182 Test Pit Logs, Page 2 Deot_ h (fgPt) foil Cla sifi lion rTest_ P__-4 Approximate ground surface elevation: 429 feet 0.0 - 1.6 Loose, wet, brown, silty SAND, with brick (Fill) 1.6 - 2.5 Medium dense, moist, tan, silty gravelly fine SAND 2.5 - 6.1 Dense to very dense, moist, mottled gray to gray, silty gravelly fine SAND 6.1 - 7.1 Dense to very dense, moist y gra , gravelly fine SAND, some silt Test pit terminated at approximately 7.1 feet No caving No seepage Test Pit TP-5 Approximate ground surface elevation: 430 feet 0.0 - 1.3 Loose, moist, brown, TOPSOIL, with sod 1.3 - 3.3 Medium dense, moist, tan, silty gravelly fine SAND 3.3 - 5.9 Dense to very dense, moist, mottled gray to gray, y, silty gravelly SAND Test pit terminated at approximately 5.9 feet ' No caving No seepage Test— Pit TP-6 ' Approximate ground surface elevation: 428 feet 0.0 - 0.5 Loose, moist, brown, TOPSOIL, with sod 0.5 - 1.1 Loose, moist, tan, silty gravelly fine SAND (Fill) ' 1.1 - 3•6 Loose, moist, brown, organic TOPSOIL, with sod 3.6 - 4.6 Medium dense, moist, tan, silty gravelly fine SAND ' 4.6 - 7.8 Dense to very dense, moist, mottled gray Y to gray, silty gravelly find SAND Test pit terminated at approximately 7.8 feet INo caving No seepage I I 11-9182 Test Pit Logs, Page 3 Depth (feet) Soil Classification Test Pit TP-7 Approximate ground surface elevation: 428 feet 0.0 - 1.4 Loose, moist, brown, organic TOPSOIL, with sod 1.4 - 4.0 Medium dense, moist, brown, silty gravelly fine SAND 4.0 - 6.7 Dense to very dense, moist, gray, silty gravelly fine SAND Test pit terminated at approximately 6.7 feet No caving No seepage Date excavated: 19 October 1993 Logged by: BWG VII . BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS NA VIII . OTHER PERMITS NA IX. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN The site erosion control plan has been designed using the 1990 King County Drainage Manual as a guide . This site is very flat and should not present any special erosion control measures . // • •� �� ..\ ztiwa .�..... .. 70J �ns \\ °•qr* ' I 5 �1 ' •:.:'IIS pm Hrlle 2 AgC 1 .I U I II ` \ I ' 7- Ur �J Ai F I ,7�t; �. / �1 •'� BeD • Y � � � .t J � i BeC ,', "InC l P� AgC AkF F 1W I.., A6D AgC I ` BMA j. �.BN •' ' ' y I---- — ---- — -- B ----- ----- 8 B 5 •AgC 42 BeC m r D AFC Ar'D BeC Pin rlewpo /Ur 1 H1115 BeCAgC ' I l m AmC BeD I AkF i, EVB II BeC Ur i KpDy° on C k ° BM BeC y_ yZ M Newca 1 ,�i93 • \: •• �; , I BeD.,, AgD• 3 BM 998• r-� I EvC BeD ••eC I ; AgC Bh ;i AgC I ;� AgC., 7 EvC 9� P• U AgB i OVID BM -- •. ------ --�"------- B 0 BM — ------- --E------------8 i - M BeC n- ;.AgD 7, 690 692 •'AgC No I ../ AgC ,: y I : AgC BM n I OvD • e ` 605 1 I ' 1 r co j h e' •� 8m \ O O C'. M ( O BeC 'AgC 13 BeD •u AgD 34 i AgCi AgD X AgD n kF' /All AkF I OvD A I EvB f AgC l BeG EvG AgC I , p �• GRA VEL `, I , Py. PIT AkF l OPL. •bM 329 KvB c OvC t�� 8M• 0 T x t' a w0 ••••••lii AgD f RdC � a AkF �� .•..r/� �� �O ` ../,BeD�I •. , a . AgC o� 4 InC 1 " S �, •.•0. .i, :.�'� ,•= l sAgC,.-* --- - _ .—sue `Bh ✓ �� r Sm r t ''• Ur , �s AmC `dG , v Trailer ark 1 w ) s �,• j M c -�1 j. R®ry ir. 0 ao0 ml • l_ BM BM ti BM 1�dC• <i l '" •1 4. - AC C AgC .. AgC 7a TON 1.7 Ml. RdC 10, 1220( , N Orthophotobase compiled in 1970 by USGS. Pla 1 2 Miles detail obtained from USGS 7t/2 minute series m, 5000 10000 Feet Polyconic projection. 1927 North American datu 10,000-foot grid based on Washington coordinat :o. north zone. X. BOND QUANTITY WORK SHEET, RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET AND SKETCH, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT KING COUNTY, W ; I-IINGTON, SURFACE WA R DESIGN MANUAL RETENTION/DETENTION SUMMARY SHEET Development Date Location ENGINEER DEVELOPER Name Name Firm Firm Address Address Phone Phone • Developed Site acres Number of Lots • Number of Detention Facilities On Site • Detention provided in regional facility F-1 Regional Facility location • No detention required El Acceptable receiving waters • Downstream Drainage Basins Immediate Major Basin Basin A Basin B Basin C Basin D TOTAL INDIVIDUAL BASIN Drainage Basin(s) A B C D Onsite Area Offsite Area Type of Storage Facility Live Storage Volume Predeveloped Runoff Rate 2 year 10 year Postdeveloped Runoff Rate 100 year 2 year 10 year Developed Q 100 year Type of Restriction Size of Orifice/Restriction Orifice/Restriction No.1 No.2 No.3 No.4 No.5 t/M XI . MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION MANUAL MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR DRAINAGE FACILITIES PICK UP TRASH AND DEBRIS AROUND PROPERTY ON A DAILY BASIS . ANY VEGETATION WHICH MAY BE POISONOUS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: TANSY RAGWORT, POISON OAK, STINGING NETTLES OR DEVILS CLUB SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY . (COORDINATE REMOVAL WITH SEATTLE/KING COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT) . ANY ITEMS SUCH AS OIL, GASOLINE, ETC. , SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AS NOT TO HARM PLANTS , ANIMALS OR CAUSE POTENTIAL FIRE HAZARDS . (COORDINATE REMOVAL WITH SEATTLE/KING COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT) . GRASS SHOULD BE MAINTAINED AS NEEDED, NEVER EXCEEDING 18 INCHES IN HEIGHT, THEN MOWED TO 2 INCHES . OTHER LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOULD BE KEPT UP ACCORDINGLY AS NOT TO CAUSE INTERFERENCE TO THE COMPLEX. ANY RODENT DAMAGE TO DAM OR BERM SHALL BE REPAIRED IMMEDIATELY AND RODENTS DESTROYED. (COORDINATE WITH SEATTLE/KING COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT) . INSECTS SUCH AS WASPS AND HORNETS SHALL BE DESTROYED OR REMOVED IMMEDIATELY . REMOVE TREES .CAUSING INTERFERENCE WITH MAINTENANCE OR COMPLEX ACCESS . ANY POND SIDE SLOPES WITH EROSION OVER 2 INCHES DEEP SHALL IMMEDIATELY BE STABILIZED . WHEN ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT EXCEEDS 10% OF THE POND DEPTH THE POND SHALL BE CLEANED OUT TO DESIGNED DIMENSIONS AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES TAKEN IF NEEDED. ANY DIKE THAT SETTLES 4 INCHES BELOW THE ORIGINAL ELEVATION SHOULD BE BUILT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN ELEVATION . REPLACE ROCK IN EMERGENCY OVERFLOW/SPILLWAY AS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN ORIGINAL DESIGN STANDARDS . STRUCTURAL NOTES DESIGN: DESIGN IS IN ACCOR6ANCE WITH THE 1991 . B.C. �r ' SUBMIT COMPLETE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REINFORCING AND PRE-STRESSED PLANKS . CONCRETE AND REINFORCING PLACEM9l1T REQUIRES SPECIAL INSPECTION PER U. B.C. 302 (C);' 1 . LOADS: ROOF ,PLANKB ::D.IL. 120 paf SOIL. . - HS20 TRUCK 36 rvv s z7z�40 9 �5 _ RESTRAINED WALL - pc OT SUR 1tA GE ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING - 2060 psf (ASSUMED) CONCRETE: WALLS, SLABS. FOOTINGS: f ' c .m 3500 psi at 28 DAYS - MIN 6 SACK MIXI GROUT: f 'c - 3000 psi at 28 DAYS - MIN- 5 SACK .MIX IL REINFORCING: GRADE 60 EXCEPT BENT DOWELS, GRADE 40. MIN . LAP 2 ' - 0" , PRESTRESSED PLANKS : f ' c - 5000 -� psi STAMPED CALCULATIONS BY A WASH. STATEN T LICEJfSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL. -SOIL: ALL FOOTINGS TO BEAR ON FIRM UNDISTURBED BEARINd MATERIAL. SOILS ENGINEER SHALL VERIFY ACTUAL EXISTING CONDITIONS AT TIME OF VAULT -EXCAVATION AND IF DIFFERENT FROM ASSUMED ,CONIfITIONS„NOTIFY • ENGINEER. VAULT IS NOT DESIGNED FOR HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE. PLACE BACKFILL EVENLY= TO EACH WALL AL AROUND VAULT. BACKFILL SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN THE a SOILS REPORT BY AGRA EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ( Np J BACKFILL UNTIL TOP SLAB IS IN PLACE AND ATTAINS r f 'c - 3000 psi . YSFL �K Z)�'-�5�/��v C7 l��avTb N' /g r n/C u tic Tia 1 77/A "' LO .7M f lrj I rI cof-t0E E flr�� col U1 p g 1 �� � II �: __/ ---/ STRUCTURAL NOTES .A INS eL• 494.44 � I DESIGN : DESIGN IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THL 1991 U. B. C . goo, r 1J�•C', -0 I I I i . SUBMIT COMPLETE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REINFORCING AND _ or ry t* CT�fr> R- y PRE-STRESSED PLANKS . CONCRETE AND REINFORCING ;L• f! Cava, — � � w LL � � � � PLACEMENT REQUIRES SPECIAL INSPECTION PEk U. B .C. I bPf�- I I — .. . ti"v I El. 4C0 1�1'hft�Vli [ \ 302 (C) 1 b , �� • �� I �- ,I z 4 e 7�"i tr LOADS : ROOF PLANKS D. L. - 120 psf SOIL. 51 ;p� q 2 O�x1Hf FIT `f n 2 li — I FouC HeO vur-f — L. L. - HS20 TRUCK 3` toN3 .-..7Z,40 G 1 _ RESTRAINED WALL - pc + OOT SUR tIA GE —" SI -' ,(JV• EL • g3•'1"1 �:011 I I �' 3� h ►Itit� (' �'S ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING - 2000 psf (ASSUMED) i0v• El.• 4t,� .J I I S fFFOA FOOTINGS :CF)Ile I 2i Gd CONCRETE: WALLS, SLABS , • ' c - 3500 psi at 28 DAYS - MIN 6 SACK MIX :.•..:.j ..... �`� •..-. . . . . •,.; . .. ' . ' " •. .• I : ' •t .. .' , .. .: , .•. .. • ,1.1 ' .' . .•;. •J..' ,' .. '...•, '•' .•. . •:. : . • ,•. . .•.,•t . .. .• . , . . . , •;p, " '•• •....•. .. . . . .'.io_. •: ..� � _. 4�� 0 f ' c- ( GROUT: = 3000 psi at 28 DAYS - MIN. 5 SACK !!IX oult'E1 To - - — — — — -� _ b' REINFORCING : GRADE 60 E�I to G 2 p,C, p EXCEPT BENT DOWELS , GRADE Gb #1 G A 3-U C � • � 40. MIN . LAP 2 ' - 0" . SI 4 •o to PRESTRESSED PLANKS : f ' c = 5000 psi MIN - SUBMIT FOUNDATION PLAN 1 STAMPED CALCULATIONS BY A WASH. STATE LICENSED b � r M M cfi#h i,b FTt� �E� � STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL. �'� �b"�l � Pf�InE 240� 9o�lD t,oGl�ll'& <,IrI�i ' W IV 00 NOL-C-S /l,T 14�095 ofv` 1111 r7 N*IZ. � 15llo•c. SOIL: ALL FOOTINGS TO BEAR ON FIRM UNDISTURBED BEARING SEC ryo 9�►e I ftewto J ;1 � � �I.IIl%l& J� MATERIAL. SOILS ENGINEER SHALL VERIFY ACTUAL C' 1J"� EXISTING CONDITIONS AT TIME OF VAULT -EXCAVATION Iti1' ¢ 4�►►LI1FlLl•i T I�IC�I. , I AND IF DIFFERENT FROM ASSUMED CONDITIONS, NOTIFY $' it'&` rI�STh�ED r�� aof-E P O&Lg ' 34- � ¢�o'' = I�''o'' gR I. °° ENGINEER . VAULT IS NOT DESIGNED FOR HYDROSTATIC ---- P PRESSURE. s •p. Iy2rGi.f;• To Pow e-t, il1E4 • � F PLACE BACKFILL EVENLY TO EACH WALL ALL AROUND VAULT. BACKFILL SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN THE ��Py I I D I`I�I Fer- Gh* ' i �� -t;e100" emv of - SOILS REPORT BY AGRA EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. GO Hoj- L I, I, ti Ho4E 'O .t rj rNof 'O s 95 fI ''F5 Ire BACKFILL UNTIL TOP SLAB IS IN PLACE AND ATTAINS v u T� t~L rOlJr+ • �1r log.A. f ' c - 3000 psi . - -- a UT L If? OT eIJ. �IEt. T�l d j t ICJ.-1Yr be . of ICE P' E v• Ci • C7 M u T 1^ c lr - o �E�' v t� �� VEf'f• N�7� 7H,� /�fS/C:,�� ��iw�� r,v�c, (� nr'�%ii- �. •%f/ y - ce Ftt*I t`•(I.�P t� �• opK ci� c���, IV L./G%/� >9 7L�� i/c�/�4 L 7,v 4 4 �T• o b� ELP-V �to.a tT' �C7 V l� g i �� 41 o °.• . r��� ✓,�� � tcjC� j/crV �Jr�j^ 77f4dv �� L(.�9rr� N h _ 51 8 v z a °U.. r as 4 E n of JL PElLF ti � 13 — F 11•� t t, cI.F• _ --- — — — — — — — — -- — — — — —— — — — — — — — — — — — n t t hE0t7EC1 1� ref GfL • ;,�11 �,.4cl�a ROOF SLAB PLAN �ToF �, ►"r� �L E ��" IL o 0 �oFT� Utz Solt, �&�Zep- SECTION y �EGoMN1 Tl o �/ u'I`011 A I ,I cal b Gu11Eh -SEE PI�e1, sHT. b�10 �W"z 11 w -- ¢-° $ P 1 i tiro J• . o feolr6 LEP'o�,4 joa� oft ICs s��•h 1 11`I� At �t''Ic �, �04 TO • 2'-d' I,Ed I'VeL4.. rt +�J A 0 ° •, OD EL. �j. '.' �fEE q( Fo�R td I.L a �N e• e b° • '• o.% 'yj I (V I . Tu. Cal 4 ofclr lo& F°F c II Iy' Eo _o v? Q -� z ,� if ti e 1� 1-I u!�►LL N 1/� �L• sa'I n. r E�► ci:I,l- 2 :• r���� vw4j Tor to . �LL SInES I,Ao G LE t� ,o -.` .e �" ## 5�12 SN`�1ri FI�JIStI Cv # 3 �Ci'I a �1 •� /J G ` for t IbT. 00 AL -- ,. ��,v,l vi SECTION SECTION c 4A=TI� © - qeh F 60 1I I' GLE To OOWC-I' CoL. 12'��I le 4 M�. O,C�YIO�I I o -- pou)Etfi To M�1o� �i 14i1 fl2i' GoL. UIrRT. p,E,eJF Lp►r01 I $ N S 40 4 401 (t.o,J� � c � 4&iy F.T. o Y -or FAllT�s. �, 3 SLAB PLAN AT CB � 3 It ` EL• 4e0-t+ 1/,Ip= 1 OF z SECTION _ SECTION 3 4�sll,p Ba:1 0 E y (1 •. N to It 00 Flo. csjL r2e �4-fI�i I, I� 3''cl,�.. • P � o t:L• 4ts.ocoi FIfJ. Cif Ot: t:L• t1.3G T � im4 r riT 1, .. . _ b 1°' I E • 4� •�'- 4su SECT ION � ' w IIEV #f 4 vE f.Tg ° . 4$1 tielh"o•o• /�- = */4"lr1L011 0000 00000000 00 O ( 000 0000 0000 0000 ° t t.. I t'/t'' ST f 1 .� 84 oPe-o �PL� ,PvnE�_" lb rjjq I I It orErll • 'r r, v"mJAN / 29 / E L. 4t0.'b4 vy CITY OF RENTON I'hon,lk DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SECTION 2 I� i1 s ILG a ., PI�►,� T�o� STRATFORD HEIGHTS •r( tip co w P�eIr�F JOHN D. GRIFFIN ENGINEERS, INC. I'l.14 l41 �cTI 009 4 v�TIA I LS CIVIL✓STRUCTURAL CONSULTING ENGINEER 11690 SLATER AVENUE NE KtRIC.AND,WASHINGTON 99034 o>4s�o " OC9 rn�►Tc- 00'"t1091' I'M FiL-t r1.. 14 '0 .0 (206)823-9%3 FAX(206)921-%N DETAIL FIE p cNfCKEO ��E � LD lyapK /�G$_ 11' Imo � -- tJo. Mrs Te Pn"vEO _ 1,EETS I of ai a uc .r