HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272195(1) RiICT ' >: : ` :....:
....
� ....... .1
V/
OUR JOB NO. 5197
FEBRUARY 13, 1995
rEE
ENroN
IVED
7Prepared By: t,IVIS1 ry
�,
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. T,�, ._
18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH
KENT, WASHINGTON 98032
(206) 251 -6222 I
F 28146 O ��•
GIST ��� `•.
SS�ONAL ENG
mV, S�Z
CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
�s� `V4A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction/General Information
A. General Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. TIR Worksheet
2. Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II. Preliminary Condition Summary
III. Off-Site Analysis
A. Upstream Drainage Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Downstream Drainage Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IV. Retention/Detention Analysis and Design
A. Existing Site Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Developed Site Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. Hydraulic Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D. Retention/Detention System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V. Conveyance System Design and Analysis
VI. Special Report and Study
VII. Basin and Community Plan Areas
VIII. Other Permits
IX. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design
X. Additional Documents
A. Bond Quantity Worksheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Retention/Detention Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. Declaration of Covenant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XI. Maintenance and Operation Manual
5197.003 [BS/krl
• I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION
I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION
The r p oposed project lies within the southwest quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range
5 East, W.M., City of Renton, King County, Washington. The site is fronted by S.W. 27th Street
along the southern property line. Commercial zoning surrounds the property on the west, north,
and east side. Class 2 wetlands exist along the north corridor of the site and discharge into
Springbrook Creek which flows along the east property line. The proposed 7.85-acre parcel will
consist of one commercial building on the southwest half and parking surrounding.
The topography of the predeveloped site indicates a relative high point along the west property line.
The northwest quarter below the Class 2 wetlands drains north into the wetland area then continues
into Springbrook Creek. The remaining drainage area flows east directly into Springbrook Creek.
Following development of the plat, proposed runoff will be conveyed by a closed tightline system
to a water quality swale and an open detention pond in the northwest corner of the site. The
detention pond and water quality swale will be designed in accordance with the 1990 King County
Surface Water Design Manual. There is no upstream flow onto the site.
Please refer to the drainage area map in Section IV of this report for additional information and
drainage flow locations.
5197.003 [MSH/krl
CORE REQmEMENTS
1. All surface drainage will continue to discharge into its natural location (Springbrook Creek) following
development.
2. No downstream drainage analysis is required for this project since flows discharge directly into
Springbrook Creek and other core requirements have been met.
3. Runoff control and water quality improvements have been designed per KCSWDM (see Section IV,
this report).
4. Conveyance system has been designed per KCSWDM (see Section V, this report).
5. TESC plans and details are included in the plan set. The TESC report is included in Section IX of this
report.
5197.003 [MSH/kr]
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Proposed project does not lie within a critical drainage area.
2. Project does not require a master drainage plan.
3. Same as Note 2.
4. Project does not lie within an adopted basin or community plan as designated by KCDDES.
5. Water quality has been provided on site by water quality swale and wet pond to meet special
requirements and core requirements.
6. Oil/water separator not required.
7. Project will not discharge to a closed depression.
8. Project will not use lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions for peak rate runoff control.
9. The 100-year floodplain compensation plan provided in plan set designates 100-year floodplain as
required.
10. Same as Note 9.
11. Geotechnical report provided in special report section of this TIR. (See Section VI).
12. King County soils survey information provided in Section Il of this report. Geotech report provided
in Section VI.
5197.003 [MSH/kr]
Page 1 of 2
1
King County Building and Land Development Division 1
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
PROJECTPART 1 OWNER AND PART 2 PROJECT • •
PROJECTAND DESCRIPTION
I
i
i
ProjectOwner ALLPAK DEVELOPMENT, INC. Project Name ALLPAK CONTAINER BUILDING
Address S.W. 27TH STREET Location
Phone Township 23N
DANIEL K. BALMELLI Range 5E
Project Engineer Section 17
Company BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS Project Size 7.85 AC
Address Phone 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH Upstream Drainage Basin Size 0 AC
KENT WA 98032Z (206)-251-6222
PART 3 TYPE OF • OTHER
0 Subdivision F-1 DOF/G HPA Shoreline Management
Short Subdivision 0 COE 404 Rockery
ED Grading E::1 DOE Dam Safety 0 Structural Vaults
aX Commercial F-1 FEMA Floodplain 0 Other
E:] Other COE Wetlands HPA
PART 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN
Community GREEN RIVER
Drainage Basin BLACKRIVER / SPRINGBROOK CREEK
PART't SITE CHARACTERISTICS
F� River EX Floodplain
[M Stream SPRINGBROOK CREEK M Wetlands
E] Critical Stream Reach F-1 Seeps/Springs
Depress io ns/Swales E:] High Groundwater Table
Lake 0 Groundwater Recharge
Steep Slopes 0 Other
EJ Lakeside/Erosion Hazard
Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities
WOODINVILLE LOW
I� Additional Sheets Attatched
1/9O
Page 2 of 2
King County Building and Land Development Division
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
DEVELOPMENTPARTS •
REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT
0 Ch.4-Downstream Analysis
a
0
a
0
a
Additional Sheets Attatched
PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS
DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION
OX Sedimentation Facilities Stabilize Exposed Surface
® Stabilized Construction Entrance Ell Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities
® Perimeter Runoff Control EX] Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris
0 Clearing and Grading Restrictions Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities
0 Cover Practices Flag Limits of NGPES
*j
Construction Sequence Other
! Other
PART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM
® Grass Lined Channel 0 Tank 0 Infiltration Method of Analysis
EXI Pipe System E] Vault F-1 Depression
® Open Channel 0 Energy Dissapator 0 Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation
0 Dry Pond Wetland 0 Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage
® Wet Pond 0 Stream 0 Regional Detention
Brief Description of System Operation STORM WATER CONTAINED IN 3 CELL WET/ DETENTION
POND FOLLOWING BIOFILTRATION SWALE.
Facility Related Site Limitations 0 Additional Sheets Attatched
Reference Facility Limitation
PART 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS
PART 11.-STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
iequire special structural review) � Drainage Easement
0 Cast in Place Vault 0 Other 0 Access Easement
0 Retaining Wall 0 Native Growth Protection Easement
0 Rockery>4'High Tract
E:J Structural on Steep Slope 70 Other
SIGNATURtOF PROFESSIONAL
� 7 -
1 or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site. Actual
site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the
attatchments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided
here is accurate. Sig—&D.r.
1 K)r)
ANDOVER
^� PARK W.
L
rn 1S3M
BNRR
D CCI) ��9Q / C
4?
Cn
.�+
I CD
_ LIND AVE. S.W.
� 1 s
E. VALLEY RD.
�g l
TALBOT R� o
515
II. PRELIMINARY CONDITION SUMMARY
08/22/04 14:42 FAX 206 763 0871 TRAMMELL CROW . . . I3A�R,CHAUSEN Ia 002/012
June 14, 1993
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
REPORT AND DECISION
APPLICANT. O'KEEFE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
O'Keefe Manufacturing/Warehouse Facility
File No- SA;SM-92-067
LOCATION: North side of SW 27th Street, west of SPringbrook Creek
SUMMARY OF REQUEST.- The applicant seeps approval to construct a 191,350 sf
speculative manufacturing/warehouse facility on a 13 acre
site. The Spiingbiook Creek ivas along the east side of
the project site and the:rear 2.4 acres of;the project is a
Category-ll wetland The applicant intends to provide a
fifty (50) foot wide buffer area adjacent to the wetland
area
SUMMARY OF ACTION. Development Services Recomweadation; App,oval with
Conditions
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES The Development Services Report was received by the
REPORT: Examiner on May 2S, 1993
PUBLIC IM-ARINC: After reviewing the Development Seivices Report,
examining available information on file with the
application, and field checking the Property and
surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing
on the subject as follows:
MINUTES
The hearing was opened on June 1. 1993. at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton
Muaieipal-Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner noted
that there would be a recommendation to the Department of Ecology regarding the Shoreline
Management Permit.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Exhibit 91 - Yellow File containing application; proof of posting
and publication and other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit ;;.2 - Vlciniry.Map and Site Plan
Exhibit g3 - Landscape Flan
`- Exhibit 4M - Drainage Plan
03, 2,104 14:42 FAX206 763 0871 TRAMMELL CROW . . . BA�CHAUSEN f�003/012
AdW
1
' O'Keefe DevelnprnP.nr ,..hrnoratI0n
SA;SM-92-067
June 14, 1993
Page 2
v Exhibit #5 - Elevations
Exhibit .=5 - Conceptual Wetlands Plan
Exhibit T7 - Site Plan Showing Contours and Parking
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by MARK PYWELL, Senior Planer, who
stated that the 19I,000 sf facility would be. constricted on 13 acres located on SW 27th Street in the
lower southeast Quarter of Renton, west of Lind Avenue. The site was zoned MP, Manufacturing Park
and designated MP on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Surrounding land uses included petroleum
storage, Allpak (former Tong Acres track) and vacant Isnd to the north and south- The Environmental
Review Committee (ERC) had issued a Determination of Non-significance, Iviltigated on December 30,
1992. The Manufacturing Park designation on the Comprehensive PIan was intended for light
inditsrrial uses anrd included requirements for adequate setbacks and landscaping, which were met by
this proposal. The zoning for this properry required a 50-foot setback with landscaping Drovided along
27th, and with landscaping within the parking lot interior. He reviewed the site's compliance. with the
criteria for cite npproval, noting that to mitigate the impact to the surrounding properties and uses to
the east and west of this proposed facility, the applicant would provide a landscaping border on the
west, which would match up with the Allpak facility, and a 50-foot green belt area would be provided
and lanlcrnpe d to be. used for s recreational easement. Springbrook Creek was Iocated to the east of
this easement, and the petroleum faciliry was further to the east. The location of SDringbrook Creek
within 200 feet of the development of a portion of the sitc,brought'in the Shoreline. IVM&ster grogram
consideration for this site. Approximately 10 acres of this 13 acre site had previously had fill placed
upon it.
Mr Powell said the rear 2.5 acres of the site consisted of 21CLus H wetland, which required a 50-foot
buffer along the edge, which the aDplicant would be providing and lanciscaDing, as part of the ERC-
requircd mitigation. The applicant would also be doing some work to ealsance tLe exisdug wctIaud
area which was constructed at the time Allpak was put in, but due to lack of water in the pit had not
fared too well. It was hoped that this project might provide the run off to make the system work- The
drainage from this facility would pass through a series of b1oflItratloa swales and wctpoudbi bcfvrc
procee.ding out into the Wetland area. Staff recommended that the applicant provide a three year.bond
equivalent to 10% of the value of the landscaping for maizleaance of the landscaping and covenants to
ran with.the Iand for the life of the building to ensure that future owners understood U at the
landscaping was part of the site plan approval and must be maintained for the future. This
development would improve area-wide property values. The applicant had done a good job of
providing safety and efficiency of vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site. There would be two
access points onto SW 27th which would connect to a driveway system which would provide fire
vehicle access to all corners of the building. There would also be sidewalks provided from the building
front out to the street Since the driveway for the building would cross the pedesuian walkway, it was
recommended that the applicant paint or change the surface material of the pedestrian crossing for
bcLtar identification.
Mr- Powell noted thsr there were 201 parking spaces shown of the plan while 128 - 191 spaces should
be plovidtd for a facility of this size. Staff recommended a 191-space limit with 15% of those set
aside a: a reserve area that would be landscaped until the applicant,-petitioning the
Planning/Bailding/Public Works Department ronlyd show that the facility required additional parking,
acre would lac uv dcpriveduu of light and air as the setbacks, avenging between 50.and 100 feet,
would provide adequate spacing for air to flow. Staff felt there would be no significant problems with
noise. odors, or unhealthy conditions hp..nA11se of the setbacks, type of lighting to be used, znd the
03!22!04 14:43 FAX 306 763 0371 TRA-V-f LL CROW BAgCHAUSEN f�004!012
f
` O'Keefe Development corporation
SA;SM-92-067
June 14, 1993
Page 3
construction management plan that had been submitted. Public utilities weTe sufficient to support the
facility. Staff felt that the design of the building would not cause blight in the area.'
On the Federal Emergency Management Agency (PIMA) map, FEMA indicated that elevation 16 was
indicated to be the height of the flood elevation for this area, however for the most part, this property
had not been designated on the map as being within the flood plain_ It did indicate that the portion
within the green belt was within the flood plain. The applicant had provided both the capacity storage
for a 100 year flood and had designed the building in order to comply with the standards.
The Examiner asked how most of the site could be below elevation 16 and yet not designated as part of
the flood plain and whether there was an error in mapping. Mr. Py-ell said he believed that most of
the area was designated ort of the flood plain on the map because when the creek was dredged, the
spoils were built up as a berm along the sides of the creek_ FEMA acknowledged that berm and did
not indicate that the area behind the berm would be in the flood plain due to the extra protection the
berm offer-A the site,.
The Examiner asked about compensatory storage and whether this project would displace storm water
onto someone else's property- Mr. Powell noted that the applicant was providing storm water
compensation storage on this site in the form of a cistern which would be Iocated beneath the building.
The Fire Marshal had indicated that adequate ventilation would be needed for rile clstei a. Allowing
for some minor flooding of the parking area during an excess of a 100 year storm, staff felt that
compensatory Storage had been provided. Also under the Shoreline Master Program, development along
the 3horcline was required not to interfere with access to the creek. Tile applicaut's plau sliuwcd the
?xisting greenbelt and recreation easement which run down the side of the stream, they would
landscape that area, and had no development plans that could interfere with use of that area_ Parks
and Recreation had easements down both sides of Springbrook Creek and eventually, wuuld ve pulling
a trail through on one side of the creek, east or west. The Examiner asked why they hadn't made up
their minds on this. Mr- Pvweli replied that it depended on easements and where the trail could
L logically be built_ Staff recommended support of the site approval according to the conditions included
in the staff report. -
Spealang for the applicant, BOB OLSCTTT NV$K'Y. Lance Mueller & Associates, 130 Lakeside, Suite 250,
Seattle, WA 9912.2, said the easement along the east property line was only 40 feet wide. He was
concerned about a requirement to review the existing plant materials along SDringbrook Creek and
replace with native matcriaL;. This appeared to him to be an open requirement with no definition of
Quantity. MT-Powell stated that this referred to ERC Nfitigation measure number three, which
indicated that the applicant needed to submit a final wetland mitigation plan and the area along
Springbrook Creels would be required tct be included. IIe said he would review that plan himself.
The Examiner stated that it sounded like the applicant was concerned about the open-ended
requirement and that some wetland plants were fairly exotic. Mr. 41schcwskv agreed, and said the
steeD bank was also of come concern- The Examiner noted that he would consider those concerns in
making his deciaion. Mr- Powell stated that along the shoreline awl for any of the wetland plants, staff
generally would try to have the applicant work with the Audubon Society, or their own wetland
specialist to utilize more of the native plant materials instead of exotic plants, and would try to be cost
conscious. The Examiner replied that perhaps that aspect should have been looked at earlier.
The Examiner caaea for further testimony-rPgprding this project- There was no one else wishing to
speak, and no fui dLer coiulueuts £rum staff. The hearing closed at 9:28 a.m.
08;22;04 14:44 FAX 206 763 0871 TI2AMbIELL CROW BARCILAUSEN C�j 000%012
< � Aw
O'Keefe Development c;orporadon
f ;A;SM-92-067
✓ .Vine ld, 1993
Page 4
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION:
Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Lxamiuer now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
1. The applicant, O'Keefe Development Corporation, filed a request for approval of a Site Plan for
as approximately 19I,350 square foot building.
2_ The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
documenration and other perdnenr mareriais was entered into the record as Exhiblt ;;1.
3_ The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official, issued a
Declaration of Non-Significance (DNS) for the Subject proposal.
4- ThP ciibj,rt proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located on the north side of SW 27th Street, immediately west of Springbrook
Creek. Lind Avenge SW is located a block east of Springbrook Creek.
6. The subject site was anncxcd to the City with the adoption of Ordinance #1745 enacted in
ApriT, 1959.
7. The subject site was reclassified M-P (Manufacturing Park) with the adoption of Ordinance
3983 enacted in April, 1986_
3. The map clement of the Comprehensive Flan designates the area !a wliicL die subjcC[ si[c is
located as suitable for the'development of manufacturing type uses, but does not mandate such
develoomear without consideration of other policies of the Plan_ "
9. The subject site is 13 acres. The site is generally rectangular. The south property line is
approximately 540 feet, the north property line is approximately 550 feet, the east prnnerty line
is 1,038 feet, and the west property lice is approximately 1,024 fcc[.
10. The north Quarter of the site, approximately 2.4 acres, is comprised of a Category IT wetland_
The applicant proposes preserving the wetlands aad also piovidiug a 50 Nut wide buffer
adjacent to the wetland to prevent encroachment.
11. In addition to the northern wetland acreage, (here arc also wc[laacl; areas located along the west
margin of Springbrook Creek. A greenbelt will be maintained along the creek. The applicant
will also provide an easement that would permit a trail to be located along the wPct hank of
Springbrook Crock. At this time, the Parks Dcpar[u tat has not determined whether the trail is
to be Iocated east or west of the creek_ A bridge which crosses the creek about midway along
the east property Iine will be maintained,
12. "The proposed building is almost square. It is approximately 425 feet wide (east-west) by
appruximately 425 feet deep. The front and rear facades both have an extension that steps out
from the facade. The building will contain approximately 191,350 square feet in a 28-foot tall
building.
08/22/04 14:44 FAX 206 763 0871 TRAMMELL CROW B/�RCHALSEN Q�006;012
763 L
��_
7i O'Keefe Development orporation
SA:SM-92-067
June I4, 1993
Page 5
13. The erte.rinr treatment will consist of tilt-np concre,re wall panek. The applicant proposed
reflective glass in aluminum frames but due to the proximity of both the wetlands and the
creek, reflective glass is inappropriate. Reflective glass attracts wildlife and bird collisions
»sually occur. The southeast corner of the building would provide the entrance area_ Roll-up
bay doors will be Iocated along the west approximately 150 feet. A canopy will be located
above the bay doors. The cast and wc3t facades will be plain. Additional roll-up doors will be
locnteri ninng the. north facade.
14. The site is located in the 100-year flood plain. Construction of the building will displace
approximately 167,700 riib;r feet of water. The. applicant will be. providing compensating
swrdge in both a lowered parking lot (101,130 cf) and in a vault under the building (85;240 cf).
Is- The applicant does not have any current tenant in mind and proposes establishing a mixed-use
warehouse and manufacturing building. The parking requirements vary by use. The applicant
has proposed 201 stalls, whereas staff has determined that the maximum number of staIs under
a worst race parking scenario would require no more than 191 stalls. Staff has therefore
recommended that the applicant reduce the parking complement to 162, with 29 stalls kept in
reserve and developed aslandscapcd areas until needed.
16. Staff has recommended that the applicant post a bond to Provide for landscape replacement
during the first three years if the landscaping Should dic. A monitoring plan for the wetland
and buffer is also required.
17. The review of the Shoreline Permit is an administrative process and will not be further
reviewed herein_
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Site plan ordivaltc a provides a number of specific criteria for reviewing a site plan. Those
criteria are generally represented, in part, by the following enumeration:
a. Conformance with the Cutnprehaasive Plan
b. Conformance with the Building and Znning C:n&s;
C. Mitigation of impacts on surrounding proportics and uses;
d. Mitigation of the impacu of the proposal on the subject site itself,
e. . Conservation of nrnlferty vamps;
f. Provision for safe and efficient vehicle and pedestrian circulation;
g. Provision of adequato light and air,
h. Adequacy of public services to accommodate the proposed use;
The proposed use satisfies these and other particulais of the ordinance.
08;2:!04 14:44 FAX .OB 783 0871 TR�,IHMELL CROW B,RCHAUSEN 007/012
O'Keefe DeveIX)Ment corporation
SA;SM-92-067
June 14, 1993
Page 6
2. The propuscd manufacturiug cud warcho=c building is compatible With both the
Comprehensive plan which designates the site as suitable for manufacturing park type uses, as
well as the Gong Code which classifies the site as M-P.
3. Fu11 compliance with the Building Code or Fire Code will occur with detailed review of
compliance at the submission of a building permit application.
d. The proposal should not have any untoward impacts on surrounding uses or properties. The
uses will maintain at least a 50-foot setback from adjacent uses and. at noroximately 28 feet
tall, there should not be any adverse shadow impacts on surrounding property.
5. The proposed perimeter landscaping, particularly the landscaping Droposed for the frontage, will
help integrate the site into surrounding development.
6. The preservation of the wetland, the wetland buffer, the creek-side landscaping, and the
caseincnt for a possible trail, will all a3si3t in TninimlSing the impacts of this development on the
site itself. While the building will be quite large, the articulation at the southeast corner and
the entry design as well as the low-rise 28 foot tall facade should help diminish the apparent
bulls of the structure. In addition, the setback and frontage landscaping will soften the
aDPeAranre of the building_ The front bay doors will obviously detract from the overall front
aesthetics.
7_ The applicant will rp.PA to modify some of its landscape plans for the greenbelts both adjacent
to the wetland and adjacent w Springbrook Creek as a result of conditions imposed by the ERC.
Staffs recommendation that the applicant post a bond equal to 10 percent of the landscape
value for np to three years should be increased to S (five years) since wetlands are involved and
they are more sensitive and susceptible to damage.
8- VJhi1P the development will add more traffic to an area with substantial traffic levels already,
- there should not be any other adverse impacts on the area and property values should not be
affected.
9. The site layout is fairly simple and pedestrian and vehicular circulation is straightforward- The
applicant should provide a defined pathway across the aisleways for pedcsLriais iu urdcr to link
the building to the public sidewalks.
10. The site is adequately served by public services including sewer and water scrvic;c. Thu
complex will be constructed in an area subject to flooding and the ERC required the applicant
TO acknowledge the potential and hold the City harmless in the event flooding dnes damage the
improvements.
11. III conclusion, the proposed use aDDears to serve the public use and inteme,% although'
infringement into the flood plain is always a iisky ptoposWOLI.
DECISION-.
The Cite Plan is approved subject to the following condition
1. The applicant shaU comply with the conditions imposed by this ERC. (Nu appeal of
those conditions were filed and they are determinative_)
/ 03/._/04 14:46 FAX 206 76J 0371 TRAMMELL CROW B CHAUSEN!J /fig f�j 003, 01_
3 '` O'Keefe Development %;orporarion
SA;SM-92-067
:Tnne I4, 1993
Page 7
2. The applicant shall create a clearly defined pathway acruss the vehicle aislcways for
pedestrians in order to link the building to the public sidewalks, subject to approval of
the City.
3. The applicant shall past a bond or other security instrument equal to 10 percent of the
landscape value for a period of 5 (five) years. The security shall be renewed as it is
drawn upuu:
4. The applicant shall reduce the allotment of parking stalls to not more than 191 Parking
stalls aucl 29 of thuse skill; shalt nut be devclupcd until the applicant demonstrates a
need for those additional parking stall;. The area in parking reserve shall be landscaped
in the same fashion-as the remainder of the site.
S. All exterior &I=— treatment shall be subject to review and approval of the City but in no
event shall reflective glass he used which wnnlcl cause bird strikes-
ORDERED = 14th day of June, 1993.
FRED J. KfICVFMAN
HEAR ING
TRANSMUTED THIS 14th day of June, 1993, to the parties of record
Mark Pywell
Seniur Planner
Bob Ukchewsky
Lanes Mucllcr & As5ociates
130 Lakeside, Suite 250
Seattle, WA 98I22
O'Keefe Development,Corp.
790U Se 28th St, Suite:400
Metcer Isliud, WA 98040
TRANSMITTED THIS 14Ih day of June, 1993, to the following:
Mayor Earl Clymer Councilman Richard M. Stredicke
Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator Lynn A. CTuttmann, Administrator
Members, Denton Planning Coaalissiuu Tun Hansua, Development Services Manager
Gary Gotti, Fire Marshal James Chandler, Building Official
Lawrence J. Warren. City Attorney ' Jay.Covington, Mayor's Executive Assistant
Transportation Sy5tcro5 Division valley Daily News
Utilities System Division
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 15 or the cLy'zi Cude, request for reconsideration must be filed
in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. June 28, 1993. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errnm of law or fact, error in judgment, or
'•nls�c. - -- -"_-- '_'" "" "� lt(Ad1DltLL k,JKU" > > , B,,WGHAUSEN 14000/012
O'Keefe Developmenr ,-Or-poradon
rY Sn;SM-92 067 _
' J une 14, 1993:
Page 8
the discovery of new evidence wlriclr could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a
written request for a review by the Ex2miner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the
Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the sDeciflc ambiguities or errors discovered by such
appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as lie deems proper,
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title 1Y, Chapter 8. Section 16, which reQuires that such
appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of 575.00 and meeting otlrei specified
requirements_ Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance
Department, first floor of City Hail-
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement
for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants Will be reQuired Drior to aDDroval by City Council or
final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information ou forurartiug �urcuau�i.
The ADDearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex Darte (private one-on-one) communications
may occur concerning pending land use decisions. Tlris means drat patties to a laud use dec:isivu urey
not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the
Iand use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council_
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication
Dermits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to
openly rebut the evidence. Any violatioa of this doct.,Lt wuuld rmult iu the invalidation of the
request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies nor only to the initial public Leaning but to all RequnLs fur Reconsideration as
Well as Appeals to the City Council.
OCT 19 '94 13:48 LANCE MUE, .ER 206 32E-0554 P,2
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED
MITIGATION MEASURES
PROJECT- O'Keefe Manufacturing Facility
APPLICANT: O'Keefe Development Corporation
APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA-92-067,ECF,SA,SM
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant seeks approval to construct a 191,350 sf
speculative manufacturing/warehouse facility on a 13 acre site. The proposed building would be 28
feet tall and constructed from pre-cast concrete and glass. The Springbrook Creek runs along the
east side of the project site and the rear 2.4 acres of the project site is a Category 11 wetland. The
applicant intends to provide a fifty (50) foot wide buffer area along the wetland area.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: North side of SW,27th Street, west of the Springbrook Creek
CONDITIONS: The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination
of Non-Significance - Mitigated with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate the potential impacts to the wetlands, submit a final
Wetlands Mitigation Plan, to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division, prior to
the issuance of any site preparation/building permits. This plan shall include, but not be
limited to: a planting plan, planting schedule, a goals and objective statement, and a
monitoring plan in accordance with Weiland Management Ordinance.
2. The applicant shall, in order to ensure that the proposed development does not have any
significant adverse impacts on the proposed buffer plantings or on the existing wetland area,
hire a wetlands specialist to monitor these areas for the first five (5) years after the
development is completed. Annual reports shall be provided to the satisfaction of the
Development Services Division. If, at any time during this monitoring period the wetlands
specialist notes any major degradation of the wetland or die-off of new plant materials, the
annual report shall describe any appropriate additional mitigation measures. The applicant or
future landowner shall be responsible to implement the correction measures within six
months of the report being accepted by the City.
3. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate the potential impacts of development on the
Springbrook Creek, wetland area, include an enhancement plan for Chic wetland in the
Wetlands Mitigation Plan.
4. The applicant shall, in order to eliminate any potential adverse impacts to birds, amend the
proposed building design to eliminate any reflective coated exterior glazing. This change
shall be reflected in the building elevations and building material Gst submitted for the
building permit.
$. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate light and glare impacts both within the site and from
the project on abutting areas, a) provide revised landscaping plans to improve plant
buffering along the east boundary of the project site and b) ensure that all lighting is
directed away from the wetlands or shielded to prevent light and glare from reaching the
wetlands. These plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Department of
PlanningfBuilding/Public Works prior to the issuance of site preparation/building permits_
mitrheas - 1 - 12131/92
'OCT 19 '94 13:49 LANCE MUEI ER 206 9213-0554 P.3
6. The applicant shall, in order to reduce the potential for impacts from temporary construction
activity, prepare and submit a Construction Mitigation Plan to the satisfaction of the
Development Services Division prior to the issuance of site preparationibuilding permits.
This plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following elements:
a.` a provision for wheel-washing vehicles prior to leaving the site;
b. a provision for periodic watering of the site to control dust; and
C. an element for the protection of existing vegetation (trees and shrubs) that have
been designated for retention.
7. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate adverse impacts to the flood plain, provide a plan
detailing the method of providing compensatory storage capacity equal to the amount of fill
to be placed in the flood plain area, to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division,
prior to the issuance of site preparation/building permits, the compensatory storage area
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division, prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits.
81 The applicant shall provide an agreement which acknowledges that the City has informed
the applicant that the property is subject to flooding, and that the applicant has decided to
proceed at its own volition, thereby waiving the right to hold the City liable for flooding
and/or damages to its property or persons on its property from such flooding. The
document is to be submitted to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and is to be duly
recorded prior to the issuance of any site preparation/construction permit for the subject
property.
mitmeas - 2 - 12/31/92
OCT 19 '94 13:50 LANCE MUD I ER 206 3213-0554 P 4
E�
Advisory Notes to Applicant:
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental
determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the
appeal process for environmental determinations.
A. TKe project is located within the Valley Transportation Benefit Zone. A TBZ fee at the
following rate will be determined at the time Building Permits are requested.
Office Area square footage X S0.46/sf
IndustrialAVarehouse Area square footage X S0.22/sf
B. The project is located within LID's 1 & 2. Covenants for participation will be required at the
time of building permits.
C. The project is located within LID #314. The preliminary assessment fee for this LID is
$92,400.21
D. The applicant will also be responsible for the following Special Utility Connection Charges:
1. Water $72,181,87
2. Sanitary Sewer $36,090.93
3. Surface Water $50,814.48
The fees listed above are preliminary estimates. The fees are calculated and payable at the
time that development permits are issued. The fees will be based upon the ordinances that
are in effect at that time.
E. The applicant will be responsible for the fire mitigation fee of approximately $99,502.00 in
accordance with Council Resolution 2895. The actual fee will be calculated by the Eire
Prevention Bureau at the rate of S0.52/sq ft of building.
F. If a vault under the building is used to provide the compensatory storage for the
construction occurring in the flood plain, then the vault must be constructed in accordance
with the requirements of the Uniform-Fire Code.
mitmeas - 3 - 12/31/92
KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY INFO
RMATION
5197.003 [MSH/kr]
I t .1�-�� \ � 1®•� rat I � , I P .•
"::�' � kIl_�•'� I - AgD rJ E iI -- ( i ��•• ''••.
Bltte,k River j t•I�. a R o
:I :J •.I: J�' , \ � �• is-�1=-- s• �� �,1 �
`SRC ,7;- ;BM
At A'Eieldc I
$ t� I�• 94 I
:. M.. $
If_ + -357J' EvD
T
i
a \\ BeC
;BeD Ufi
( \ ��
• •f1t
asebat} ' III Cem i
- --
BM '_T /� , � •a Park 'cR,
254 /.. �\ .l �f •: Pc • l; —� j, Bt
BeC 'I a� - \ .Rh•
1 BeD Befi•
F .p �• j'--
d i; m
Iz P •�• •(' � o �' v •Q I
F h ...:`I
G OHO �e(� AOF` 7 i
I �ti
q Wo - CD + AkF - I
Wo ! —I `•� •� Ur O K InC j
Pu Ur py 13 i ofL 1 ' i i• . 5P AgC BM137F
.Ng Be Goli-)ourse I + 7 --" st. -�
l AMC °cY _"•��•'--
o f G m I. I I PA
BM -
Sew ge oRj1IE ` , a Ii \ '' �h,
S
o _
u bsta o \
2 Ng Ur Ur :12C •1 - -- AgC
ago 20.`= t \ `} \` 855
ur
Pu
•'� i I Rom.„�� PY i ui ;BeC
eD
Wo •u lV
I S n• u AgD
o FlTrack j� 1 • •U• $� I ,^
B 210 -�- --�� -----
?� I6 ri
a- :\ y
Uri , I Ur I I \ AgC =
1 Ng _= O_R s rvou 0°
Py
W r too.
I Pu Sk I •iI ��
Wo EM
Pu u I I 17• >\
- f II 9
2 i r I� 25 -- -_._- 0 is 403 2
I ry •� 169 I AgC 2 gee ♦
PY
o 451.: Q
' I I C1 Ur Sk t•_ - I �' t 1popIAgC -
�1 i Wo �: t✓- a
I / i!i /•' I 1 r AMC
Tu
Ur
C7 a '��_) .�� AgD• 7 Am6
1 \\ So I •4•'
l I ------ --- --- ----- -- MI 17 -
I Y B II;
Wo A Wo M 194 i :II: f .a.B .iI:•
a\AmC- AmB
i
I �
A I-
�, # N1, B�I go ; 32
{� IBM 36..,- �_ u - r r I " 1 Ag6 1
35 i Yo \ `,I j 'I 1 1 4SC .
KING COUNTY, WAS HINGTON, S URFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL i
(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 3.5.2A 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 B
Buckley D Ragnar B
Coastal Beaches Variable Renton D
Earimont 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 Tukwila
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.
B. (Moderately 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.
C. (Moderately high runoff potentiao. 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 rate of water transmission.
From SCS, TR-55, Second Edition, June 19W, Exhibit A-1. Revisions made from SCS, Sol Interpretation
Record, Form #5, September 1988.
3.5.2
1 1/92
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TABLE 3.S.2B SCS WESTERN IVASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS
SCS WESTERN.WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982)
I{ Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type I
rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration.
CURVE NUMBERS BY
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GR UP
LAND USE DESCRIPTION A B C
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 P5 89
Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 76 81.
Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86
Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94
Open.spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries,
landscaping.
good condition: grass cover on 75%
or more of the area 68 W 86 (5
fair condition: grass cover on 50% o
to 75% of the area 77 85 90 92
Gravel roads and parking lots 76 85 89 91
Dirt roads and parking lots 72 82 87 89
i`
Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. 98 98 93 8
Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 1 0
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
i 7.0 DU/GA 56
Planned unit developments, impervious
condominiums, apartments, must be computed
commercial business and
industrial areas.
(1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use cure numbers refer to National Enc-Bering
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 111192
If drained, this soil is used for row crops. It Ap2--3 to 8 inches, gray (SY 5/1) silty clay loam,
is also used for pasture. Capability unit IIw-3; light brownish gray (2.SY 6/2) dry; many,
no woodland classification. fine, prominent, dark reddish-brown (SYR 3/3
and 3/4) mottles and common, fine, prominent
mottles of strong brown (7.SYR 5/6) and red-
Urban Land dish yellow (7.SYR 6/6) dry; moderate, fine
and very fine, angular blocky structure; hard,
Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified by friable, sticky, plastic; common fine roots;
,.isturbance of the natural layers with additions of medium acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 4 to 6
fill material several feet thick to accommodate large inches thick.
industrial and housing installations. In the Green B21g--8 to 38 inches, gray (SY 5/1) silty clay loam,
River Valley the fill ranges from about 3 to more gray (SY 6/1) dry; common, fine, prominent,
than 12 feet in thickness, and from gravelly sandy brown (7.SYR 4/4) mottles and medium, promi-
loam to gravelly loam in texture. nent mottles of brownish yellow (IOYR 6/6) dry;
The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. No 25 percent of matrix is lenses of very dark
capability or woodland classification. brown (10YR 2/2) and dark yellowish-brown
(10YR 3/4) peaty muck, brown (7.SYR 4/2) dry;
massive; hard, firm, sticky, plastic; few fine
Woodinville Series roots; medium acid; clear, smooth boundary.
30 to 40 inches thick.
The Woodinville series is made up of nearly level B22g--38 to 60 inches, greenish-gray (SBG 5/1) silt
and gently undulating, poorly drained soils that loam, gray (5Y 6/1) dry; few, fine, prominent
formed under grass and sedges, in alluvium, on stream mottles of brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) dry;
bottoms. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent. The annual massive; hard, very friable, slightly sticky,
precipitation ranges from 35 to 55 inches, and the slightly plastic; strongly acid.
mean annual air temperature is about 50° F. The
frost-free season is about 190 days. Elevation The A horizon ranges from dark grayish brown to
ranges from about sea level to about 85 feet. gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam. The B
In a representative profile, gray silt loam, horizon ranges from gray and grayish brown to olive
silty clay loam, and layers of peaty muck extend to gray and greenish gray and from silty clay loam to
a depth of about 38 inches. This is underlain by silt loam. In places there are thin lenses of very
greenish-gray silt loam that extends to a depth of fine sandy loam and loamy fine sand. Peaty lenses
60 inches and more. are common in the B horizon. These lenses are thin,
Woodinville soils are used for row crops, pasture, and their combined thickness, between depths of 10
and urban development. and 40 inches, does not exceed 10 inches.
Soils included with this soil in mapping make up
Woodinville silt loam (Wo) .--This soil is in elon- no more than 25 percent of the total acreage. Some
Oted and blocky shaped areas that range from 5 to areas are up to 15 percent Puget soils; some are up
:arly 300 acres in size. It is nearly level and to 10 percent Snohomish soils; and some areas are up
'gently undulating. Slopes are less than 2 percent. to 10 percent Oridia, Briscot, Puyallup, Newberg,
Representative profile of Woodinville silt loam, and Nooksack soils.
in pasture, 1,700 feet south and 400 feet west of Permeability is moderately slow. There is a sea-
the north quarter corner of sec. 6, T. 25 N., R. 7 sonal high water table at or near the surface. In
E. : drained areas, the effective rooting depth is 60
inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth
Apl--O to 3 inches, gray (5Y 5/1) silt loam, grayish is restricted. The available water capacity is
brown (10YR 5/2) dry; common, fine, prominent, high. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is
dark reddish-brown (SYR 3/4) and reddish-brown slight. Stream overflow is a severe hazard unless
(SYR 5/4) mottles; moderate, medium, crumb flood protection is provided (pl. III, top) .
structure; hard, friable, sticky, plastic; This soil is used for row crops, pasture, and
many fine roots; medium acid; clear, smooth urban development. Capability unit IIw-2; woodland
boundary. 2 to 4 inches thick. group M.
33
III. OFF-SITE ANALYSIS
0
a
n
ii
J
Q
U
CB 4 PROPOSED �B 3 CB Z Q
40' RECREATIONAL 1.3.4C
& GREEN BELT EASEMENT
_r
SNQ Q49'1 W BROOK :Z�
(:REEK
- o
o= 06'51'00" Q
T _ R= 954.99
. . . . . . .
L= 114.17
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . e
. .
/000 lF f :.:. . . .. . . . . .:.:.:.;• LU
Z
SyAL GoW FLOW ! \ o.$V C�
; pa'1166AIC
0 C�
10 LL
�R•
W
;.;.;.;.;.;. • . ;,;, ;.;,;.;.;.
:�ci:ass : \ goo Z)c
MUJILLA
SHEET FG ocJ
3 o I O C/S
o. 9 rb
Y
� 6 �`"^�_ r
ff� �� I Q
ao !.. f I Z I Lo
cn :° /5 6 AC O I I LU
, ddd-
50' PIPELINE .
ILU
Go
OEASEMENT
.014
T—- Q J
I co
' N vow
I Q
------------------ -----------------� 0 cl)
W 8
IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS
AND DESIGN
i
IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
a. Existing Site Hydrology: The existing site contains 7.85 acres with limited development. The
site is predominately flat with small brush and grass vegetation. There are no existing
structures or roads within the lot boundaries. Based on the King County soils survey, on-site
soils have been determined to be approximately 100 percent Woodinville silt loam. Please
refer to the soils survey map in Section II.
b. Developed Site Hydrology: All stormwater runoff generated from the plat will be collected
via a storm drainage system and will be conveyed to the detention pond with grass lined swale
prior to discharge into Springbrook Creek. The storm drainage detention system has been
designed to provide detention in accordance with the King County Surface Water Design
Manual using SBUH analysis.
c. Hydraulic Analysis: The calculations and methods used in sizing the detention pond are based
on the items outlined within the King County Surface Water Drainage Manual. The detention
system has been sized using the Waterworks software program. The detention pond has been
sized to meet the predeveloped release rates of the 2-and 10-year/24-hour design storms. The
design volume is increased by 30 percent without increasing total depth or altering the outlet
control device. Calculations and computer output are provided within this section for more
details of analysis. The on-site conveyance system has been sized to convey the
25-year/24-hour design storm. Calculations for on-site conveyance are contained in Section V
of this report.
d. Retention/Detention System: The detention system for this project will be a three-celled
wet/detention pond with a flow restrictor manhole to control discharge from the system. The
pond will have a minimum of 3 feet dead storage. The control structure releases outflow
directly into Springbrook Creek. Please refer to the grading and storm drainage plan for the
complete details of the detention pond overflow structure and water quality swale.
5197.003 [MSH/kr]
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 1
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
-----------
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: lA NAME: 2YR/24HR PREDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7.85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 7 . 85 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 86. 02 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. 0090
TcReach - Shallow L: 1000. 00 ks: 9 . 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 0. 59 cfs VOL: 0. 56 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min
BASIN ID: 2A NAME: 10YR/24HR PREDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 85 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86 . 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 86. 02 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. 0090
TcReach - Shallow L: 1000. 00 ks:9. 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 1. 22 cfs VOL: 1. 03 Ac-ft TIME: 520 min
BASIN ID: 3A NAME: 100YR/24HR PREDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 85 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86 . 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 86. 02 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. 0090
TcReach - Shallow L: 1000. 00 ks: 9 . 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 2 . 03 cfs VOL: 1. 61 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min
ALL-PAK CONTAINER BUILDING
Summary of Data Used in Calculations:
Soils: "Wo" Woodinville Silt Loam (Type "D")
Existing CN: 86
Post-Developed CN:
Impervious Area: 98
Disturbed Area (Grass, etc.) 90
Precipitation:
P2: 2.0 inches
P10: 2.9 inches
P100: 3.9 inches
5197.003 [MSH/krl
I
PaAr�ACa� c4✓c.4 FlG,vs
7
4
W W W j
W W
V1 to N
000
In O O
^`+ L SdIL
cv a
avo '
n r CIAWo = wood/,�✓iccc� SI L9- LJ4M ��� ✓� � i
I L
�S .t 3 /� Std� C �,$r� Ln✓�L�, fiK emu.- T/L�'�
i
vd�e+PwG o !2J C� F / o°� �e4✓E� (�11 ` 6,O�t
0 a G F P116f ftcLl)
�. o.42 (11S L) _�
4-
z so �o k
I
r o_8
O.4-2L�o-vr�) ( �zo�] boo
2- 34 7. to 9.44
f
i)
f
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 2
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
-----------
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: 4A NAME: 2YR/24HR POST-DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 9 . 44 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 7 . 25 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
TcReach - Sheet L: 120. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 800. 00 kc:42 . 00 s: 0. 0020
PEAK RATE: 2 . 99 cfs VOL: 1. 13 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 5A NAME: 10YR/24HR POST-DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 9 .44 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 7 . 25 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
TcReach - Sheet L: 120. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 800. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0020
PEAK RATE: 4 . 47 cfs VOL: 1. 71 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 6A NAME: 100YR/24HR POST-DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90 . 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 9 . 44 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 7 . 25 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
TcReach - Sheet L: 120 . 00 ns: 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - .Channel L: 800. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0020
PEAK RATE: 6. 12 cfs VOL: 2 . 36 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 3
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
-------------
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
PEAK TIME VOLUME
HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib
NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area
cfs min. cf-AcFt Acres
1 0. 591 540 24193 cf 7 . 85
2 1. 220 520 44941 cf 7 . 85
3 2 . 026 490 69983 cf 7 . 85
4 2 . 985 480 49079 cf 7 . 85
5 4 . 474 480 74355 cf 7 . 85
6 6. 119 480 102615 cf 7 . 85
7 0. 590 790 49143 cf 7 . 85
8 1. 203 620 74355 cf 7 . 85
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 4
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
--------------
STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST
STORAGE LIST ID No. 2
Description: STORAGE POND (WITHOUT 30% ADD)
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 5
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 2
Description: STORAGE POND (WITHOUT 30% ADD)
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --AC-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
---------------
10.00 0.0000 0.0000 10.80 11784 0.2705 11.60 24759 0.5684 12.40 38917 0.8934
10.10 1473 0.0338 10.90 13257 0.3043 11.70 26431 0.6068 12.50 40785 0.9363
10.20 2946 0.0676 11.00 14730 0.3382 11.80 28102 0.6451 12.60 42653 0.9792
10.30 4419 0.1014 11.10 16402 0.3765 11.90 29774 0.6835 12.70 44521 1.0221
10.40 5892 0.1353 11.20 18073 0.4149 12.00 31445 0.7219 12.80 46389 1.0649
10.50 7365 0.1691 11.30 19745 0.4533 12.10 33313 0.7648 12.90 48257 1.1078
10.60 8838 0.2029 11.40 21416 0.4916 12.20 35181 0.8076 13.00 50125 1.1507
10.70 10311 0.2367 11.50 23088 0.5300 12.30 37049 0.8505
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 6
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
--------------
DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1
Description: 2YR ORIFICE DISCHARGE
Outlet Elev: 9 . 70
Elev: 7 . 70 ft Orifice Diameter: 4 . 3359 in.
NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2
Description: 10YR RELEASE WEIR
Weir Length: 0. 6000 ft. Weir height (p) : 1. 3500 ft.
Elevation 11. 05 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. 3
Description: COMBINED RELEASE STRUCTURE
Structure: 1 Structure:
Structure: 2 Structure:
Structure:
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 7
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
-----------------
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1
Description: 2YR ORIFICE DISCHARGE
Outlet Elev: 9.70
Elev: 7. 70 ft Orifice Diameter: 4 . 3359 in.
STAGE --DISCHARGE STAGE -DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfS-- ------
(ft) ---cfs-- -------
-----------------------------------------
9.70 0.0000 10.60 0.4840 11.50 0.6845 12.40 0.8383
9.80 0.1613 10.70 0.5102 11.60 0.7032 12.50 0.8537
9.90 0.2282 10.80 0.5351 11.70 0.7215 12.60 0.8688
10.00 0.2794 10.90 0.5589 11.80 0.7393 12.70 0.8837
10.10 0.3227 11.00 0.5817 11.90 0.7567 12.80 0.8983
10.20 0.3608 11.10 0.6037 12.00 0.7737 12.90 0.9126
10.30 0.3952 11.20 0.6248 12.10 0.7904 13.00 0.9268
10.40 0.4269 11.30 0.6453 12.20 0.8067
10.50 0.4563 11.40 0.6652 12.30 0.8226
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 8
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
--------------
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2
Description: 10YR RELEASE WEIR
Weir Length: 0. 6000 ft. Weir height (p) : 1. 3500 ft.
Elevation 11. 05 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10
STAGE -DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- -------
(ft) ---cfs-- -------
-------------------------
11.05 0.0000 11.60 0.6861 12.20 1.6476 12.80 2.1926
11.10 0.0217 11.70 0.8528 12.30 1.7807 12.90 2.2097
11.20 0.1098 11.80 1.0207 12.40 1.8997 13.00 2.2003
11.30 0.2299 11.90 1.1868 12.50 2.0025
11.40 0.3702 12.00 1.3483 12.60 2.0870
11.50 0.5240 12.10 1.5027 12.70 2.1510
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 9
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE DISCHARGE DISCHARGE TABLE
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. 3
Description: COMBINED RELEASE STRUCTURE
Structure: 1 Structure:
Structure: 2 Structure:
Structure:
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- -------
(ft) ---cfs-- -------
----------------------------
9.70 0.0000 10.60 0.4840 11.50 1.2084 12.40 2.7380
9.80 0.1613 10.70 0.5102 11.60 1.3894 12.50 2.8562
9.90 0.2282 10.80 0.5351 11.70 1.5744 12.60 2.9558
10.00 0.2794 10.90 0.5589 11.80 1.7600 12.70 3.0347
10.10 0.3227 11.00 0.5817 11.90 1.9435 12.80 3.0909
10.20 0.3608 11.10 0.6253 12.00 2.1220 12.90 3.1224
10.30 0.3952 11.20 0.7346 12.10 2.2931 13.00 3.1271
10.40 0.4269 11.30 0.8752 12.20 2.4542
10.50 0.4563 11.40 1.0354 12.30 2.6033
2/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 10
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
--------------------
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- -PEAK- STORAGE
<--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf)
2YR/24HR ROUTING ............. 0.59 2.99 2 1 11.04 7 15380.97
10yr/24hr ROUTING ............ 1.22 4.47 2 3 11.50 8 23037.34
DE TEN T/ON POND CALCULATIONS WITH 30
VOLUME ADDIT/ON
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 1
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: lA NAME: 2YR/24HR PREDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7. 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 7 . 85 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 86. 02 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. 0090
TcReach - Shallow L: 1000. 00 ks: 9 . 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 0. 59 cfs VOL: 0. 56 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min
BASIN ID: 2A NAME: 10YR/24HR PREDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 .85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 85 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 86. 02 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. 0090
TcReach - Shallow L: 1000. 00 ks:9 . 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 1. 22 cfs VOL: 1. 03 Ac-ft TIME: 520 min
BASIN ID: 3A NAME: 100YR/24HR PREDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 85 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 86. 02 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. 0090
TcReach - Shallow L: 1000. 00 ks: 9 . 00 s: 0. 0050
PEAK RATE: 2 . 03 cfs VOL: 1. 61 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min
s
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 2
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: 4A NAME: 2YR/24HR POST-DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0 . 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 9 . 44 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 7 . 25 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
TcReach - Sheet L: 120. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0 . 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 800. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0020
PEAK RATE: 2 . 99 cfs VOL: 1. 13 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 5A NAME: 10YR/24HR POST-DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . . 9 .44 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 7 . 25 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
TcReach - Sheet L: 120. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 800. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0020
PEAK RATE: 4 . 47 cfs VOL: 1. 71 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 6A NAME: 100YR/24HR POST-DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 7 . 85 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00
TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 9 . 44 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 7 . 25 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
TcReach - Sheet L: 120. 00 ns: 0. 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0100
TcReach - Channel L: 800. 00 kc: 42 . 00 s: 0. 0020
PEAK RATE: 6 . 12 cfs VOL: 2 . 36 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 3
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
------------
HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY
PEAK TIME VOLUME
HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib
NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area
cfs min. cf-AcFt Acres
1 0. 591 540 24193 cf 7 . 85
2 1. 220 520 44941 cf 7 . 85
3 2 . 026 490 69983 cf 7 .85
4 2 . 985 480 49079 cf 7 . 85
5 4 . 474 480 74355 cf 7 . 85
6 6. 119 480 102615 cf 7. 85
7 0. 549 800 49128 cf 7 . 85
8 0. 958 690 74355 cf 7 . 85
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 4
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST
STORAGE LIST ID No. 1
Description: DETENTION POND W/ 30% ADDITION
STORAGE LIST ID No. 2
Description: STORAGE POND (WITHOUT 30% ADD)
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers e 5
ALLPAK page
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 1
Description: DETENTION POND W/ 30% ADDITION
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --AC-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft-
10.00 0.0000 0.0000 10.80 15320 0.3517 11.60 32188 0.7389 12.40 50592 1.1614
10.10 1915 0.0440 10.90 17235 0.3957 11.70 34361 0.7888 12.50 53020 1.2172
10.20 3830 0.0879 11.00 19150 0.4396 11.80 36534 0.8387 12.60 55448 1.2729
10.30 5745 0.1319 11.10 21323 0.4895 11.90 38707 0.8886 12.70 57876 1.3287
10.40 7660 0.1758 11.20 23496 0.5394 12.00 40880 0.9385 12.80 60304 1.3844
10.50 9575 0.2198 11.30 25669 0.5893 12.10 43308 0.9942 12.90 62732 1.4401
10.60 11490 0.2638 11.40 27842 0.6392 12.20 45736 1.0500 13.00 65160 1.4959
10.70 13405 0.3077 11.50 30015 0.6890 12.30 48164 1.1057
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 6
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 2
Description: STORAGE POND (WITHOUT 30% ADD)
STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE---->
(ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --AC-Ft-
10.00 0.0000 0.0000 10.80 11784 0.2705 11.60 24759 0.5684 12.40 38917 0.8934
10.10 1473 0.0338 10.90 13257 0.3043 11.70 26431 0.6068 12.50 40785 0.9363
10.20 2946 0.0676 11.00 14730 0.3382 11.80 28102 0.6451 12.60 42653 0.9792
10.30 4419 0.1014 11.10 16402 0.3765 11.90 29774 0.6835 12.70 44521 1.0221
10.40 5892 0.1353 11.20 18073 0.4149 12.00 31445 0.7219 12.80 46389 1.0649
10.50 7365 0.1691 11.30 19745 0.4533 12.10 33313 0.7648 12.90 48257 1.1078
10.60 8838 0.2029 11.40 21416 0.4916 12.20 35181 0.8076 13.00 50125 1.1507
10.70 10311 0.2367 11.50 23088 0.5300 12.30 37049 0.8505
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 7
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
DISCHARGE STRUCTURE STRUCTURE LIST
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. If
Description: 2YR ORIFICE DISCHARGE
Outlet Elev: 9. 70
Elev: 7 . 70 ft Orifice Diameter: 4 . 3359 in.
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1
Description: 2YR ORIFICE DISCHARGE
Outlet Elev: 9 . 70
Elev: 7 . 70 ft Orifice Diameter: 4 . 3359 in.
NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2
Description: 10YR RELEASE WEIR
Weir Length: 0. 6000 ft. Weir height (p) : 1. 3500 ft.
Elevation 11. 05 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. 3
Description: COMBINED RELEASE STRUCTURE
Structure: 1 Structure:
Structure: 2 Structure:
Structure:
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 8
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. '
Description: 2YR ORIFICE DISCHARGE
Outlet Elev: 9. 70
Elev: 7.70 ft Orifice Diameter: 4 . 3359 in.
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- (ft) ---cfs--
------- (ft) ---cfs-- -------
--------------------
9.70 0.0000 10.60 0.4840 11.50 0.6845 12.40 0.8383
9.80 0.1613 10.70 0.5102 11.60 0.7032 12.50 0.8537
9.90 0.2282 10.80 0.5351 11.70 0.7215 12.60 0.8688
10.00 0.2794 10.90 0.5589 11.80 0.7393 12.70 0.8837
10.10 0.3227 11.00 0.5817 11.90 0.7567 12.80 0.8983
10.20 0.3608 11.10 0.6037 12.00 0.7737 12.90 0.9126
10.30 0.3952 11.20 0.6248 12.10 0.7904 13.00 0.9268
10.40 0.4269 11.30 0.6453 12.20 0.8067
10.50 0.4563 11.40 0.6652 12.30 0.8226
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers 9
ALLPAK page
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
----------
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1
Description: 2YR ORIFICE DISCHARGE
Outlet Elev: 9 . 70
Elev: 7. 70 ft Orifice Diameter: 4 . 3359 in.
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfS-- -------
(ft) ---cfs-- -------
-------------------------
9.70 0.0000 10.60 0.4840 11.50 0.6845 12.40 0.8383
9.80 0.1613 10.70 0.5102 11.60 0.7032 12.50 0.8537
9.90 0.2282 10.80 0.5351 11.70 0.7215 12.60 0.8688
10.00 0.2794 10.90 0.5589 11.80 0.7393 12.70 0.8837
10.10 0.3227 11.00 0.5817 11.90 0.7567 12.80 0.8983
10.20 0.3608 11.10 0.6037 12.00 0.7737 12.90 0.9126
10.30 0.3952 11.20 0.6248 12.10 0.7904 13.00 0.9268
10.40 0.4269 11.30 0.6453 12.20 0.8067
10.50 0.4563 11.40 0.6652 12.30 0.8226
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 10
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2
Description: 10YR RELEASE WEIR
Weir Length: 0. 6000 ft. Weir height (p) : 1. 3500 ft.
Elevation 11. 05 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10
STAGE -DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- -------
--------------
11.05 0.0000 11.60 0.6861 12.20 1.6476 12.80 2.1926
11.10 0.0217 11.70 0.8528 12.30 1.7807 12.90 2.2097
11.20 0.1098 11.80 1.0207 12.40 1.8997 13.00 2.2003
11.30 0.2299 11.90 1.1868 12.50 2.0025
11.40 0.3702 12.00 1.3483 12.60 2.0870
11.50 0.5240 12.10 1.5027 12.70 2.1510
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 11
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE
COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. 3
Description: COMBINED RELEASE STRUCTURE
Structure: 1 Structure:
Structure: 2 Structure:
Structure:
STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE--->
(ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------
(ft) ---cfs-- -------
9.70 0.0000 10.60 0.4840 11.50 1.2084 12.40 2.7380
9.80 0.1613 10.70 0.5102 11.60 1.3894 12.50 2.8562
9.90 0.2282 10.80 0.5351 11.70 1.5744 12.60 2.9558
10.00 0.2794 10.90 0.5589 11.80 1.7600 12.70 3.0347
10.10 0.3227 11.00 0.5817 11.90 1.9435 12.80 3.0909
10.20 0.3608 11.10 0.6253 12.00 2.1220 12.90 3.1224
10.30 0.3952 11.20 0.7346 12.10 2.2931 13.00 3.1271
10.40 0.4269 11.30 0.8752 12.20 2.4542
10.50 0.4563 11.40 1.0354 12.30 2.6033
2/27/95 Barghausen Engineers page 12
ALLPAK
DETENTION POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BCE FILE 5197ALPK
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE
<--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf)
2YR/24HR ROUTING ............. 0.59 2.99 1 1 10.86 7 16440.18
10yr/24hr ROUTING ............ 1.22 4.47 1 3 11.35 8 26795.08
i
i
W W W
N V1 to �
000 /I O.O.?S' �G.v PrFc�77) i
�N
vva YS `.� ri�Ys i
C1+NN
i
i
a _ �
n
I
1
i
i
S
i
i
I '
SO
1 Se�r,�►;�: �� . ��� �. �► 'N;N
qb
• . gen
rt.�rw
iM
- .. Rif, ,.�
� .
�� itFirm
rs ,
Ike klillm-Itellf—l-
I
• � a�w►�r 7�f1.
Now
UL
ko
MA
WE
'IMRIM
VI
IN
0
S
��� ;�, � �•� �,`► ,� - Ate' � �,��,_
-� �iii���w��t�`'�'�''`, ����. •�•�• •,.fit
�"*'E� Ewa ► �� �►. �• � `•ww� �
lclaw
�• III
V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
"C" Values
The allowable runoff coefficients to be used in this method are shown in Table 4.3.3A by type of land
cover. These values were selected following a review of the values previously acceptable for use in the
Rational Method in King County and as described in several engineering handbooks. The values for single
family residential areas were computed as composite values (as illustrated below) based on the estimated
percentage of coverage by roads, roofs, yards and unimproved areas for each density. For drainage
basins containing several land cover types, the following formula may be used to compute a composite
runoff coefficient "Cr".
C. = ((C, x A) + (C2xA2)+... + (Cnw4n))/A,
where:
A, = total area (acres)
A,,2,n = areas of land cover types (acres)
C,,2,,, = runoff coefficients for each area land cover type
TABLE 4.3.3A RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS - "C" VALUES FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD
GENERAL LAND COVERS
LAND COVER ' C LAND COVER C
Dense forest 0.10 ! Playgrounds 0.30
Light forest 0.15 I Gravel areas 0.80
Pasture 0.20 Pavement and roofs 0.90 act---
Lawns 0.25 Open water (pond, 1.00
lakes, wetlands)
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS
(Density is in dwelling units per gross acreage (DU/GA))
LAND COVER LAND COVER
DENSITY C DENSITY C
i
0.20 DU/GA (1 unit per 5 ac.) 0.17 3.00 DU/GA 0.42
0.40 DU/GA (1 unit per 2.5 ac.) 0.20 3.50 DU/GA 0.45
0.80 DU/GA (1 unit per 1.25 ac.) 0.27 4.00 DU/GA 0.48
1.00 DU/GA 0.30 4.50 DU/GA 0.51
1.50 DU/GA 0.33 5.00 DU/GA 0.54
2.00 DU/GA 0.36 5.50 DU/GA 0.57
2.50 DU/GA 0.39 6.00 DU/GA 0.60
For land covers not listed above, an area-weighted "C x At" sum should be computed based on the following
equation: C x A, = (C,xA,) + (C2xA2) + ...+(C,xA,), where A, = (A, + A2 + ...+A,), the total drainage basin area.
(For use only in determining peak design flow for analyzing and sizing pipes, culverts or channels)
4.3.3-2 1/90
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS - PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR A = Contributing Area <Ac) Qd = Design Floe Ceps>
using the Rational Method 8: Manning Formula C = Runo4NF Coefficient. QF = Full Capacity_ Flo-:! Ccfsi
SEATTLE-RENTON 25 YEAR STORM Tc = Time of Concent.r-.a+.ion :min? Vd = Velo,-ity a+. Design Flea 0fpsi
I = Intensity at Tc Cin!hrl VF = velocity at Full Flow (fps)
DEFAULT C= 0.10 n= 0.012 d= 12 Tc= 10.0 d = Diameter ofi Pipe (in) s = Slope eF pipe <%;
Note: Set default values beFcre entering data. L = Length of Pipe i+'t> n = Manning Roughness Coei4+icient
D = Water Depth at Qd (in) Tt. = Travel Time at Vd imin)
JOB a 5197 JOB NAME: RLLPAK
FROM TO A s L d Tc n C SUM A R*C SUM A*C I Qd QF QdiQF X Did D VP vd VF' Vd Tt
----- ---- ----- ------- ----- ------- --- ---- ----- ----- -----
CS 1 CB 2 0.61 0.20 105.0 12 10.0 0.012 0.10 0.51 0.06 0.06 2.00 0.12 1.73 0.071 0.180 0.181 2.17 2.20 0.571 1.26 1.39
CB 2 CB 3 0.73 0.15 275.0 18 11.4 0.012 0.10 1.34 0.01 0.13 1.88 0.25 4.41 0.057 0.160 0.163 2.94 2.50 0.536 1.34 3.43
CB 3 CS 4 1.30 0.25 253.0 18 14.8 0.012 0.10 2.64 0.13 0.26 1.63 0.43 5.69 0.076 0.180 0.186 3.34 3.22 0.580 1.87 2.35
CB 4 CB S 0.00 0.20 241.0 18 17.2 0.012 0.10 2.64 0.00 0.26 1.49 0.39 5.09 0.077 0.130 0.187 3.37 2.88 0.583 1.58 2.39
CS 5 CB 9 0.00 0.20 231.0 18 19.6 0.012 0.10 2.64 0.00 0.26 1.37 0.36 5.09 0.071 0.180 0.181 3.26 2.88 0.572 1.65 2.34
CB 6 CB 7 1.06 0.15 215.0 12 10.0 0.012 0.10 1.06 0.11 0.11 2.00 0.21 1.49 0.142 0.240 0.253 3.04 1.90 0.702 1.34 2.68
CS 7 CB 8 0.64 0.15 205.0 15 12.7 0.012 0.10 1.70 0.06 0.17 1.79 0.30 2.71 0.112 0.220 0.227 3.41 2.21 0.656 1.45 2.36
CB 8 CS 9 3.14 0.15 117.0 18 15.0 0.012 0.10 4.84 0.31 0.48 1.62 0.78 4.41 0.178 0.280 0.282 5.08 2.50 0.753 1.88 1.04
CB 9 POND 0.00 0.15 22.0 24 21.9 0.012 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.74 1.27 0.94 9.49 0.099 0.200 0.212 5.09 3.02 0.630 1.90 0.19
R
f
5
R
i
Y
Rectangular Channel BTialysis G Designs
Opera Charmel - Uratorm flow
Uorksheet Haiie: 319, - RLLPBK
Cotiment: TRENCH ORHIH CONUPY'HHCE CBLCULBTIONS
SuIUe f o-r Discharge
GIVET1 ITiput Data:. _
Bottoh uldth..... 1.00 ft
Manning's 6...... 0.012
Channel Slope.... 0.0020 ft/ft
Depth............ O.Su f t
Computed Results.
Discharge........ 1.10 cfs
Monty......... 2.20 fps
now Brea........ 0.50 sf
flow Top Uidth... i.u0 it
Metted Perimeter. 2.uG it
Critical Depth... 0.33 tt
Critical Slope... BMW ft/ft
froude Number.... O.SS (11w is Subuiticai)
Gpeii Ciaiiiiel flow nodule, Ue-rsiori 3.91 (c) 1991
Haestad Methods, Iric. * 37 Brookside Rd * Uaterbury, Ct 00708
Rectarigular Charmel flralysis n "uesign
Opera Channel - Oriiforh flu+
Uurksheet Name: 5191 - RLLFRK
Cariiient: IRCNCh ORflI11 COffUErfWCE CRUMB,IONS
Solue for Discharge
61oea Input Oata:
Bottom Uidth..... 1.00 ft
Ianning's ri...... 0.012
Channel Slope.... 0.0020 ft4t
Depth............ 1.00 ft
Conputed Results:
Discharge........ 2.66 cfs
velocity......... 2.66 fps
flaw Rrea........ 1.00 sf
Flow lop Uldth... 1.00 ft
netted Perimeter. 3.00 It
Critical Depth... 0.60 ft
Critical Slope... 0.0011 ft/ft
froude Number.... 0.47 (flaw is Suberitical)
Cper, Clarmel flaw nodule, Uersion 3.41 tc) 1991
&-estad Methods, inc. * 37 Brookside Rd :Uaterbury, Ct 0670D
VI. SPECIAL REPORT AND STUDY
PREPARED FOR
TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY
Douglas S. Lynne
Staff Engineerw,s�i��Lc C<
AT
Kyle R. Campbell, P.E.
Manager of Geotechnical 'c 87 gl��(kti
" AL
EXPIKS 111tolk4
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
- PROPOSED WAREHOUSE
SOUTHWEST 27TH STREET
RENTON, WASHINGTON
E-3453-4
August 19, 1994
Earth Consultants, Inc.
1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 101
Bellevue, Washington 98005
(206) 643-3780
Earth Consultants Inc.
Geotechnical Engineers,Geologists&Environmental Scientists
August 19, 1994 E-3453-4
Trammell Crow Company
5601 Sixth Avenue South
P. 0. Box 80326
Seattle, Washington 98108
Attention: Mr. Todd Timberlake
Dear Mr. Timberlake:
We are pleased to submit our report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed
Warehouse, Southwest 27th Street, Renton, Washington." This report presents the
results of our field exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analysis, as
well as geotechnically related recommendations for the proposed site development.
The purpose and scope of our study was outlined in our proposal dated July 25,
1994.
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the project site, it is our opinion
that the proposed warehouse may be supported by shallow spread footings bearing
on a minimum of two feet of structural fill, provided that the recommendations
contained in this report are incorporated into the construction specifications. Due to
the potential for large settlements, the use of a surcharge program is recommended
to pre-consolidate the soft soils beneath the building.
If you or your consultants have any questions about the content of this report, or if
we can be of further assistance, please call.
Respectfully submitted,
EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Kyle R. Campbell, P.E.
Manager of Geotechnical Services
DSL/KRC/kml
1805- 136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, Washington 98005
Bellevue(206)643-3780 Seattle(206)464-1584 FAX(206)746.0860 Tacoma (206)272-6608
TABLE OF CONTENTS
E-3453-4
PAGE
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . 2
Subsurface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Laboratory Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Site Preparation and Grading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Surcharge Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Seismic Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Lateral Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Slab-on-Grade Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Excavations and Slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Site Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Utility Support and Backfill 12
Pavement Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Additional Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
APPENDICES
Appendix A Field Exploration
Appendix B Laboratory Testing
ILLUSTRATIONS
Plate 1 Vicinity Map
Plate 2 Test Pit Location Plan
Plate 3 Settlement Plate Detail
Plate 4 Utility Trench Fill
Plate 5 Typical Footing Subdrain Detail
Plate Al Legend
Plates A2 through A14 Test Pit Logs
Plate 131 l Grain Size Analysis
Plate B2 Atterberg Limits
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED WAREHOUSE
SOUTHWEST 27TH STREET
RENTON, WASHINGTON
E-3453-4
INTRODUCTION
General
This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study for the proposed
warehouse located on Southwest 27th Street 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 provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site
development.
Project Description
At the time our study was performed, the site, the proposed structure, and
exploratory locations were approximately as shown on the Test Pit Location Plan,
Plate 2.
Based on information provided by Trammell Crow Company, it is proposed to develop
the parcel of land with a concrete tilt-up office/warehouse. We understand that fills
up to about six feet in depth will be necessary in order to provide the desired floor
elevation for the building. Based on our experience with similar structures, we
anticipate structural loading to be in the following ranges:
• Wall footings - 4 to 6 kips per lineal foot
• Maximum column load - 50 - 100 kips
• Slab loads - 200 - 250 pounds per square foot (psf)
If the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be notified and allowed
to review our recommendations in light of actual design information. In any case, it
is recommended that Earth Consultants, Inc. be retained to perform a general review
of the final construction design.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 2
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface
The site of the proposed facility is located on Southwest 27th Street in Renton,
Washington (see Plate 1, Vicinity Map). The rectangular parcel covers about eleven
and three-quarter acres; however, the proposed development is located in the
southern seven and two-thirds acres. The site is bounded by Southwest 27th Street
on the south, by an existing tilt-up warehouse on the west, by vacant property on the
north, and by Spring Brook Creek on the east.
At present, the site is vacant with grasses and minor amounts of brush covering the
existing surface. The site is generally level with a small drainage swale in the central
portion of the proposed construction area. This swale drains to Spring Brook Creek
on the east side of the site. Three piles of topsoil and miscellaneous debris were
observed on the site during our field exploration. The piles were in the southern and
east central portions of the site.
Subsurface
The site was explored by excavating thirteen test pits at the approximate locations
shown on Plate 2. Detailed descriptions of the conditions encountered at each
location explored are presented on the Test Pit Logs, Plates A2 through A14. A
description of the field exploration methods is included in Appendix A. Below is a
generalized description of the subsurface conditions encountered.
During our subsurface exploration, a five and one-half (5.5) to ten 0 0) foot thick layer
of fill was observed immediately underlying the surface. The fill generally consisted
of a thin veneer of loose silty.sand (Unified Soil Classification SM) overlying loose to
medium dense, brown poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM). Beneath the fill, soft to
medium stiff, dark brown fibrous peat interbedded with organic silt (PT and OL) was
observed to depths ranging from ten 0 0) to thirteen 0 3) feet. The thickness of the
peat was observed to range from two and one-half (2.5) to four (4) feet. Laboratory
testing indicates peat moisture contents ranging from 83.0 to 216.2 percent, with
only one sample exhibiting a moisture content above 120.3 percent.
Underlying the peat and organic silt, a soft to medium stiff layer of gray silt with
varying plasticity (ML and MH) was observed to depths of fourteen (14) to fifteen
and one-half (15.5) feet beneath the existing grades. Test Pits TP-3 and TP-11
encountered a loose to medium dense, black silty sand beneath the silts. The
maximum exploration depth was fifteen and one-half (15.5) feet beneath the existing
grades. _
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 3
Based on review of the subsurface information contained in our study for the adjacent
warehouse, and our experience in the area, the encountered soils are expected to be
underlain by interbedded silts and sands.
Groundwater
Groundwater seepage was observed in all of the test pits except TP-5, TP-7, TP-8,
TP-11 and TP-12 at depths ranging from five and one-half (5.5) to eight and
one-half (8.5) feet below the existing ground surface. It is important to note that
groundwater seepage is not constant; thus, one may expect fluctuations in the
volume and location depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water
runoff, and other factors. Generally, groundwater seepage is greater during the
wetter winter months (typically October through May). Groundwater seepage is not
expected to have a significant impact on construction, except in deeper utility
trenches, or other deep excavations, unless the site is developed during periods of
heavy precipitation or during the winter months.
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 analysis and Atterberg
Limits, and moisture content tests on representative samples. The results of laboratory
tests performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample
depth on the individual test pit 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.
The soil samples for this project will be discarded after a period of fifteen (15) days
following completion of this report, unless we are otherwise directed in writing.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion that the site can be developed
generally as planned provided the recommendations contained in this report are
incorporated into the final design. In our opinion, total settlement of the existing peat
and underlying alluvial soils resulting from placement of new fill and building loads is
anticipated to be on the order of four to six inches. In order to minimize post
construction settlement, a surcharge program should be used.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 4
0
The purpose of the surcharge program is to pre-induce settlements estimated to result
from new fill and building loads. The surcharge should be a minimum of two feet
above finished floor elevations. We anticipate completion of the surcharge program
in four to six weeks. -
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 Trammell Crow Company and their representatives. No warranty
is expressed or implied. It is recommended that this report, in its entirety, be included
in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor.
Site Preparation and Grading
Construction areas should be stripped and cleared of all existing vegetation, topsoil,
organic debris, and any other deleterious materials. The previously mentioned topsoil
and debris piles should be removed from the site or used in non-structural areas.
Stripped organic materials should not be mixed with any soils to be used as structural
fill. Following the stripping and clearing procedures, the earthwork operations can
commence to provide the design grades. The ground surface where structural fill is
to be placed should be proofrolled. All proofrolling should be performed under the
observation of a representative of ECI.
Soil in any loose or soft areas, if recompacted and still excessively yielding, should be
overexcavated and replaced with structural fill to a depth that will provide a stable
base beneath the general structural fill or suitable support for slabs.
Portions of the near-surface soils exposed in our test pits (silty sand and poorly graded
sand with silt, SM and SP-SM) -are moisture sensitive due to their fines content.
Generally, soils with more than 5 percent fines are considered moisture sensitive. As
such, in an exposed condition they will become disturbed from normal construction
activity, especially when in a wet or saturated condition. Once disturbed, in a wet
condition,they will be unsuitable for support of foundations or pavements. Therefore,
during construction where these soils are exposed and will support new structures,
care must be exercised not to disturb their condition. If disturbed conditions develop,
the affected soils must be removed and replaced with a structural fill. The depth of
removal will be dependent on the level of disturbance developed during construction.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 5
Structural fill is defined as any compacted fill placed under foundations, roadways,
slabs, pavements, or any other load-bearing areas. Structural fill under foundations
should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve 0 2) inches in loose thickness
and compacted to a minimum 90 percent of its maximum dry density 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.
Soils expected to be exposed in the footing and utility excavations range from poorly
graded sand with silt to peat. In our opinion, the sands are usable as structural fill,
provided they are moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content. In order
to moisture condition the sand, it may be necessary to either add water or aerate the
soil. However, the peat, which may be exposed in the utility trenches, is not suitable
for use as structural fill. Excavated peat should be removed from the site or used in
landscape areas.
Structural fill which is to be placed in wet weather should consist of a granular
material with a maximum size of three inches and no more than 5 percent fines
passing the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction. During dry weather,
most compactible non-organic soil can be used as structural fill. It is recommended
that any structural fill planned for on site use be submitted for approval prior to
import.
Surcharge Program
The surcharge program is designed to pre-consolidate the compressible fills and soil
underlying the site, such that the surcharge would apply loads near to or greater than
anticipated building loads. The surcharge fill should be a minimum of two feet in
height, measured from the finish floor elevation. The estimated time frame for the
surcharge to remain in place is four to six weeks. The actual time period will be
dependent upon the measured settlement obtained in the field. If a shorter time frame
is necessary, a thicker surcharge would be needed. The surcharge should extend at
least five feet beyond the perimeter of the buildings. The side slopes of the fill should
be inclined at a gradient of 1 H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) or flatter. If a wet weather
construction schedule is planned, and the surcharge fill is to be used as structural fill,
the surcharge fill should meet the requirements of structural fill to be placed in wet
weather as discussed in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this study.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 6
If future expansion of any building is anticipated, the surcharge 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.
Surcharge fill does not have to meet any specific requirements except that the
material should have an in-place unit weight of one hundred twenty (120) pounds per
cubic foot (pcf). Depending on the type of material used as surcharge material, it may
be necessary to apply compactive effort to achieve the 120 pcf unit weight criteria.
Alternatively, if a light material is used as surcharge material, a thicker surcharge
could be used in lieu of applying compactive effort. If the surcharge fill material is to
be used for structural fill in other areas after completion of the surcharge program, it
should meet the requirements for structural fill discussed previously.
The settlement induced by the surcharge fill is anticipated to be about four to six
inches. A smaller settlement than estimated would indicate that the soil conditions
with respect to consolidation are better than anticipated. Conversely, a larger
settlement than estimated would indicate the soil conditions are worse than
anticipated, and that additional time and measurements should be taken to obtain
r satisfactory results.
lie
Because the purpose of the surcharge fill is to induce settlement, it is necessary to
monitor both the magnitude and rate of such settlement. To accomplish this, we
recommend installation of settlement markers within the surcharged area. The
number of settlement markers placed will depend on the actual size of the building.
As a general rule, one settlement marker should be placed for every ten thousand to
t fifteen thousand (10,000 to 15,000) square feet (sf) of floor area. More specific
details of the settlement monitoring program are presented below.
{ • Settlement markers should be placed on the existing subgrade of the building
pad before any fill is placed. ECI can supply and install these markers. (A
typical detail is provided on Plate 3).
• A baseline reading is obtained on each marker and is referenced to a
temporary benchmark located on a feature that will not be affected by the fill-
induced settlements.
• The fills are.then placed. Settlement readings are taken at relatively short
intervals (daily) during this process, since this phase generates relatively large
and rapid settlement.
0
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 7
1101
• Once the fill operation is complete, readings are obtained on a periodic basis,
typically weekly, until the settlement ceases or the anticipated future
settlements -.are judged by the geotechnical engineer to be less than
approximately one inch. -
• Each set of settlement readings are plotted graphically against time to
determine the magnitude and rate of settlement, and are matched against the
predicted magnitudes and rates to verify the accuracy of earlier estimates and
to make any appropriate modifications.
ECI should be retained to acquire the settlement readings. If you prefer to use another
organization to collect these readings, measurements should be provided to us as
quickly after their acquisition as possible for plotting and interpretation. This will help
avoid any misinterpretation or misunderstanding regarding the success of the
surcharge program.
The settlement markers must be kept intact during earthwork operations. In our
experience, earthwork equipment (dozers, rollers,trucks, etc.) often demolish markers
at a very high rate. This adds to the project costs in that they need to be replaced
and it makes the information obtained less reliable. To avoid this scenario, it is
suggested that the project specifications include a requirement that the earthwork
contractor is required to immediately replace any damaged settlement marker and
have the settlement readings reobtained at his own cost. This requirement makes the
earthwork contractor more conscious of the importance of the 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 surcharge should be extended to five feet beyond the planned landscape
fill, or a lightweight fill, such as "hog fuel" be used.
Foundations
Based on the encountered subsurface soil conditions, preliminary design criteria, and
assuming compliance with the preceding Site Preparation and Grading section, the
proposed structures may be supported by a minimum of two feet of structural fill.
Based on our understanding of the project, some of the foundations may bear in the
existing fill. The existing fill is considered suitable for support of foundations;
however, the fill within two feet of the bottom of footings must be compacted to the
requirements of structural fill.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 8
The foundation may be designed for an allowable soil bearing capacity of two
thousand five hundred (2500) pounds per square foot (psf) when bearing on at least
two feet of structural fill. Footings should be at least twelve (12) inches in width and
extend to a depth of at least eighteen (18) inches below the lowest adjacent grade.
The above allowable soil bearing value is for dead-plus-live loads and may be
increased one-third for combined dead, live, wind, and seismic forces. It is
recommended that all footing excavations be observed by a representative of ECI,
prior to placing forms or rebar, to verify that exposed soil conditions are as anticipated
in this report, and/or provide suitable modifications in the design, as required.
Without completion of the surcharge program, we estimate there is a potential for four
to six inches of total settlement with two to three inches of differential settlement.
Following successful completion of the surcharge program, total settlements are
expected to be less than one inch for foundations bearing on structural fill.
Differential settlement is anticipated to be about three-quarters of an inch.
Seismic Design Considerations
The Puget Sound region is classified as Seismic Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code
(UBC). The largest earthquakes in the Puget Sound region have been subcrustal
events, ranging in depth from 50 to 70 kilometers. Such deep events have exhibited
no surface faulting.
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, it is our opinion that a site coefficient of 1 .5 should be used for the static
force procedure, as outlined in Section 2334 of the 1991 UBC. For the dynamic force
procedure outline in Section 2335 of the 1991 UBC, the curve for Soft to Medium
Clays and Sands (Soil Type 3) should be used on Figure 23-3, Normalized Response
Spectra Shapes.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 9
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 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. Based on the subsurface
information obtained during our field exploration, it is our opinion that the liquefaction
potential at the site is low due to the relative density of the soils encountered and
cohesive nature of the encountered silts.
Lateral Resistance
An allowable passive pressure value against the sides of foundation slabs or other
subsurface foundation elements of three hundred (300) psf per foot of depth may be
used for design. In order to fully mobilize the passive pressure, the foundations must
be poured "neat" against the adjacent soil or the foundation excavation must be
backfilled with structural fill. Friction between the base of foundations and the
underlying soil may be assumed to be 40 percent of the dead load. The friction and
passive pressure design values include a factor of safety of 1 .5.
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls and foundation walls that will act as retaining 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 pressure imposed by an
equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The
equivalent fluid weight should be increased to fifty (50) pcf for walls that are
restrained at the top from free movement. 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 walls. If such surcharges are
to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressures. Calculation of
lateral resistance should be done using the passive pressure and coefficient of friction
values contained in the previous section.
For earthquake loading, a rectangular pressure distribution equal to six times the wall
height should be added to the above lateral earth pressure values.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 10
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 a minimum of eighteen 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 located in the free-draining
backfill soil should be perforated with holes less than one-half inch in diameter. The
drain pipe should be surrounded by a minimum of one cubic foot per lineal foot
with 3/4 rock or should be wrapped with a filter fabric.
Slab-on-Grade Floors
Slab-on-grade floors should be supported on a minimum of one foot of new structural
fill or recompacted existing fill. Should loose soil be present at the slab subgrade
elevation, it should be compacted to the requirements of structural fill. Any disturbed
subgrade soil must either be re-compacted or replaced with structural fill. Slab-on-
grade floors should be designed by the structural engineer based on the anticipated
loading and the subgrade support characteristics. A modulus of vertical subgrade
reaction of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for
design.
The slab should be provided with a minimum of four inches of free-draining sand or
gravel. In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, a vapor barrier such as a 6-mil
plastic membrane may be placed beneath the slab. Two inches of damp sand may be
placed over the membrane for protection during construction and to aid in curing of
the concrete.
Excavations and Slopes
Excavation slopes should in no case be greater than the limits specified in local, state
and federal safety regulations. As described in the current Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, soils anticipated to be encountered in
excavations (fill and peat) would classify as Type "C." Therefore, temporary cuts
greater than four feet in height should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than
1 .5H:1 V in the Type "C" soils. If slopes of this inclination, or flatter, cannot be
constructed, or if excavations greater than twenty (20) feet in depth are required,
temporary shoring may be necessary. This shoring would help protect against slope
or excavation collapse, and would provide protection to workmen in the excavation.
If temporary shoring is required, we will be available to provide shoring design criteria,
if requested.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 11
All permanent slopes should be inclined no greater than 2H:1 V. If this inclination
cannot be maintained, this office should be contacted to review the design and
construction criteria. We also recommend that all cut slopes be examined by Earth
Consultants, Inc. during excavation to verify that conditions are as anticipated.
Supplementary recommendations can then be developed, if needed, to improve the
stability, including flattening of slopes or installation of drainage. In any case, water
should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slopes.
The above information has been provided solely as a service to our client. Under no
circumstances should the above information be interpreted to mean that this office is
assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such
responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred.
Site Drainage
Groundwater seepage was observed in all of the test pits except TP-5, TP-7, TP-8,
TP-11 and TP-12 at depths ranging from five and one-half (5.5) to eight and
y one-half (8.5) feet below the existing ground surface. It is possible that groundwater
levels will present construction related problems while excavating the foundations or
utility trenches. Should groundwater seepage be encountered in excavations during
construction, the bottom of the excavations 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. It is recommended that the appropriate locations of subsurface
drains, if needed, be established during grading operations by this office, at which
time the seepage areas, if present, may be more clearly defined.
The site should be graded such that surface water is directed off the site. Water
should not be allowed to stand in any area where structures, slabs or driveways 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 should allow for drainage away from the structure foundations. The
ground should be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent for a distance of at least ten feet
away from the building, except in areas that are to be paved, which can be sloped at
a gradient of 1 percent.
Foundation drains should be installed in non-dock-high areas where landscaped areas
are immediately adjacent to the building. In our opinion, foundation 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 5.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 12
Utility Support and Backfill
Based on the soil conditions encountered, the majority of soils expected to be exposed
by utility excavations should provide adequate support for utilities; however, deeper
utility trenches may encounter the peat that is beneath the existing fills. Should the
peat, or soft soils, be exposed near pipe grades, the peat should be removed to a
depth that will provide adequate support for the utility.
Utility trench backfill is a major 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 (12) inches above the crown of the
pipe before any heavy compaction equipment is brought into use. The remainder of
the trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than
twelve 0 2) inches. A typical trench backfill section and compaction requirements for
load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on Plate 4.
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, we recommend
the subgrade be treated and prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading
section of this report. This means at least the top twelve (12) inches of the
subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density (per ASTM
1557-78). 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.
• We recommend the following pavement section 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, you may consider for truck-trafficked
areas the following sections:
• Three inches of AC over six inches of CRB, or
L
• Three inches of AC over four and one-half inches of ATB.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Trammell Crow E-3453-4
August 19, 1994 Page 13
Asphalt Concrete (AC), Asphalt Treated Base (ATB), and Crushed Rock Base (CRB)
materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. All rock base should be
compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard.
It should be noted that parking stall pavement sections assume no truck traffic.
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.
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 re-evaluate the recommendations of this report and to modify or verify
them in writing prior to proceeding with the construction.
Additional Services
This office will be available to provide consultation services relating to review of the
final design and specifications to verify that our recommendations have been properly
interpreted and implemented in the approved construction plans and specifications.
In addition, it is suggested that this office be retained to provide geotechnical services
during construction to observe compliance with the design concepts and project
specifications, and to facilitate design changes in the event subsurface conditions
differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. It should be noted that
it is generally in the best interests of the owner/client to maintain the same Soils
Engineer during construction in order to obtain the project objective, with optimum
quality control.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
14 RD
PIt!::`:.:Fir%:.. :.•::: / I ,
'1Sr 1 COURSE:' 1---- SW 7TH ST 2 S 7TH S7
•;�/ I wy c" 16 PARK
.t �.. i 1 .fin �„ w> �< b RIDE■I
J I < N I S GRA
y fT 10fNT:c P1 W 515
YPARK:::. I �1. o S RENTON VILLAGE PL
IL
cT`N NORTHER
05 o N ~Uc(ST> S
SW y: <' 16TH T Y ; A 15TH
li—a:`—,n—_ u _ ��_ 3 S 16TH S?
UKWILA O w
PK ._... ¢..� .I; LL' O N I Lon A u' N S 1TTH ST co
¢y PL
s z Longac es; a N < S 18TH
�. m h uI I 9W 19 H ST ST <
w�I i, t S TH
r•
�I Race I . '; , _..-.. sr <
UKWILA s - .
PKWY I ism H ST I' I �Q S 2DTH
r z I I SW 21 T ST a to a PL
EVAN CC p y �' I to
LACK I> Ylw Track
DR < w D UIv I
IKER 8LVD 12 z r AIL SW 23RD Sr �S 23RD N ST
m I= -- s a f'TAIBT:
w yBIC NTENNIA { w PARK;}t� ¢ ,
Y PARR R.:.. 7 1 40
0� -. .... ..: a
- — —i ;S26 t'• — \ rT �a
c� H t 3
aS BLV ¢ GL�. W t t "F— 0 1 t,
SW 77TI ST ,to\
REc=nR ° ITE L�CATION'I o�J, `F 2 2 Q I s2nJ, PL ;�° 1C, 10
t PJ .p0 C I I SW 29TH T Zi s''',➢fy 2tH ,qV 31
G
d 9L PL
`
CHRIST- 251 W 3QTH Sr I 57
S I I \
L 1 EN EL ti SW 315T O --�
I GREENBELT I I I }
1 ? SW 33RD
I '� Q IST < 1 I Q
I
I i 3 I 34TH sr vL 1
INKLER B Vp; 0 I I 167 < S 112ND ST
_ ZI
I ICC \S 367H ST Z � T
f y I j - 37TH Sr.S 174TH ST
y SW ¢< 39TH ST I S CTH 7,
SAX +DR Ln I p I LL / \� ST —�
Oi4 I ti
1 = W > LD I SW 41ST ST VALLEY S 177TH •ST
/�
( 1 S
I A T I I I CENTER 0 S"gZN
I L.
~ ( I E-r �� 179THj S
Reference:
King County/ Map 41
By Thomas Brothers Maps
Dated 1990
Earth Consultants Inc. Vicinity Map
S.W.W 7th Street Warehouse
GeaedvNt`al FsBlrtcrrs.Geologists a FSNIDrvDental Sclrnllsts S
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3453-4 Drwn. GLS Date Aug. '94 Checked DSL Date 8/10/94 Plate 1
DTP-8 TP-6 TP-5
TP-9 TP-10 2
�- -�- • o
' TP-4 '
Existing I a
'Tilt Up Warehouses J/ "�
LDTP-12 �TP-11
TP-3
-------! TP-2
DTP-1 4
TP-13
nn
S.W. 27th STREET
LEGEND
TP-1 -i- Approximate Location of
ECI Test Pit, Proj. No.
E-3453-4, Aug. 1994
Existing Building Approximate Scale
❑ Proposed Building 0 100 200 400ft.
Earth Consultants Inc. Test Pit Location Plan
S.W. 27th Street Warehouse
Cw aeclriKal FngkleYrs,Gedogtsts a FiiNrorviK.ntal ScirntLsts
Renton, Washington
fProj. No. 3453-4 Drwn. GLS Date Aug. '94 Checked DSL Date 8/10194 Plate 2
SCHEMATIC ONLY- NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
Surcharge
or Preload
I oadSurcharge or Preload
Fill
Fill
::<:>:: I
=FiI `>
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.
Earth Consultants Inc
-- TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL
.GeZady"Fsg4xrm Gtobgk &FXWIM IM Sck"Isfs S.W. 27th Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
Plate 3
Pro). No. 3453-4 1 Drwn. S Date Aug. '94 Checked DSL Date 8/10/94
GL
Non-Load Supporting Floor Slab or
Areas Roadway Areas
.r Y c :str
- C•. 1�yt, tea' y"-;✓?.5;
° °° ° 0 Varies
° 0 0
0
00
0
9 5
0
- - o
o 0 IF
_ 0
85 -
95
1 Foot Minimum
Back ill
80 90
Varies
0 Uj 0 °;: PIPE o o• � o'
O°�o0°Oo o p:o0'OpQp°o0
o °, o, -! .
OoQo.O.' 0oO 0'
Bedding °'o.o.•. °a.. °o. 00:
°�oo�. Po o'�oo o'vo:. Varies
°'•Q Oo,0.0 o•,o�QO�.o.,O,o.'Q•o,O
0.0 OOoo0a a0 08.°.:O.O, 0••0�••QOe O'.
Q• Oo.• O'o O. .00Q. .' 0 eo.
Q• 0 O.O OO °.Oo�•'O. .0.0.po -
LEGEND:
Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab
O
o ° ° ° • Base Material or Base Rock
Backfill; Compacted On-Site Soil or 'Imported Select Fill
Material as Described in the Site Preparation of the General
Earthwork Section of the Attached Report Text.
95 Minimum Percentage of Maximum Laboratory Dry Density as
Determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557-78 (Modified Proctor),
Unless Otherwise Specified in the Attached Report Text.
Bedding Material; Material Type Depends on Type of Pipe and
°0.Qoo0 p. Laying Conditions. Bedding Should Conform to the Manufacturers
Recommendations for the Type of Pipe Selected,
Earth Consultants Inc. TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL
Ceaec hnkal Fsgkx•rrt,GtobgLsts&fiivlmnrtx•ncil Sc-�ttsts S.W. 27th Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3453-4 Drwn. GLS Date Aug. '94 Checked DSL Date 8/10/94 Plate 4
0
o
Slope To Drain e
t
6 inch min. °
V.��°�a�,:�%•'�; •o.'s' � 18 inch min.
4 inch min.
Diameter
Perforated Pipe
Wrapped in Drainage •- - -" o _ o ° °°°
Fabric 'a• ° •° O. °. .o ° ° ° e
2 inch min. / 4 inch max.
12 inch 2 inch min.
min.
SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
LEGEND
Surface seal; native soil or other low permeability material.
Fine aggregate for Portland Cement Concrete; Section 9-03.1(2) of the
WSDOT Specifications.
ODrain pipe; perforated or slotted rigid PVC pipe laid with perforations or
slots facing down;tight jointed;with a positive gradient. Do not use flexible
corrugated plastic pipe. Do not tie building downspout drains into footing
lines. Wrap with Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric or equivalent.
Earth Consultants Inc. TYPICAL FOOTING SUBDRAIN DETAIL
�,a,,,,,�, +E,vVDmVrUW� S.W. 27th Street Warehouse
isft
Renton, Washington
Proi. No. 3453-4 Drwn. GLS Date Aug. '94 Checked DSL Date 8/10/94 Plate 5
APPENDIX A
E-3453-4
FIELD EXPLORATION
Our test pit exploration was performed on August 3, 1994. The subsurface
conditions at the site were explored by excavating thirteen test pits to a maximum
depth of fifteen and one-half (15.5) feet below the existing ground surface. The test
pits were excavated by Evans Brothers Construction, using a rubber-tire backhoe.
The approximate test pit locations were determined by pacing from existing on site
landmarks. The locations of the test pits should be considered accurate only to the
degree implied by the method used. These approximate locations are shown on the
Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. The field exploration was continuously monitored by
an engineer from our firm, who classified the soils encountered and maintained a log
of each test pit, obtained representative samples, 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 test pits are presented
on Plates A2 through A14. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field
logs and the results of the laboratory tests on 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.
MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
SYMBOL SYMBOL
Gravel o e o GW Well-Graded Gravels,Gravel-Sand
And Clean Gravels 0gW Mixtures, Little Or No Fines
Gravelly (little or no fines) M M
Coarse Soils , . a GP Poorly-Graded Gravels,Gravel-
Grained gp Sand Mixtures, Little Or No Fines
Soils More Than
50% Coarse GM Silty Gravels,Gravel Sand
Gravels With Fraction Fines(appreciable gm Silt Mixtures
Retained On amount of fines) GC Clayey Gravels,Gravel-Sand-
No. 4 Sieve
gC Clay Mixtures
Sand •o o� ,o SW Well-Graded Sands, Gravelly
And Clean Sand o c�� o o SW Sands, Little Or No Fines
Sandy (little or no fines)
More Than o:-::;>:;i>:<:; SP Poorl
Soils y;; ;.;::.:.p;:;;:;:s:; y Graded Sands, Gravelly
50% Material Q:::>;A':::::.a;;:: Sp Sands, Little Or No Fines
Larger Than More Than
No.200 Sieve 50% Coarse SM SRl Silty Sands, Sand- Silt Mixtures
Size Sands With
Fraction Fines(appreciable
Passing No.4 amount of fines)
Sieve SC SC Clayey Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures
ML Inorganic Silts&Very Fine Sands,Rock Flour,Silty-
rpl Clayey Fine Sands;Clayey Silts w/Slight Plasticity
Fine Silts Liquid Limit C� Inorganic Clays Of Low To Medium Plasticity,
Grained And Less Than 50
Soils Clays CI Gravelly Clays, Sandy Clays, Silty Clays, Lean
Organic Silts And Organic
I I I I OI Silty Clays Of Low Plasticity
MH Inorganic Silts,Micaceous Or Diatomaceous Fire
More Than 50% Material Silts y mh Sand Or Silt Soils
Smaller Than Liquid Limit
And CH Inorganic Clays Of High
No.200 Sieve Clays Greater Than 50 Ch Plasticity, Fat Clays
Size
OH Organic Clays Of Medium To High
Oh Plasticity, Organic Silts
Highly Organic Soils
`„' `—'' PT Peat, Humus, Swamp Soils
��i pt With High Organic Contents
Topsoil 'y y 4-J Humus And Duff Layer
Fillnff Highly Variable Constituents
The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature
of the material presented in the attached logs.
DUAL SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderline soil classification.
C TORVANE READING,tsf I 2"O.D. SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER
qu PENETROMETER READING,tsf
W MOISTURE, %dry weight 24'I.D. RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER
P SAMPLER PUSHED
SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED WATER OBSERVATION WELL
pcf DRY DENSITY, lbs. per cubic ft.
LL LIQUID LIMIT, % Q DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER
PI PLASTIC INDEX DURING EXCAVATION
1 SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER LEVEL W/DATE
Earth Consultants Inc. LEGEND
(k",.Wk.;il 1]��I,rx:rs.(:t1*19(SIS S"WinMM1k111al StluiiWs
Proj, No.3453-4 Date Aug'94 Plate Al
Test Pit Log
Project Name: :7777Sheet of
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-1
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
W .0 o t o Surface Conditions: Grass
%) ro M 0.
vLL ro T
LD v7 LO U)
SM FILL- Brown silty fine to coarse SAND with gravel,medium dense,moist
1
2 SP-SM F1LL• Brown poorly graded medium to coarse SAND with silt and gravel,medium dense
4.4
3
4 FILL• Gray poorly graded medium to coarse SAND with silt
15.6
5
6
-slight caving
8 -very minor seepage
PEAT Dark brown fibrous PEAT interbedded with organic silt,soft to medium stiff,wet to
'—' saturated
91.1 u u 9
—\ + 10
L
11 ML Gray SILT,soft to medium stiff,saturated
46.1
12
13
14 Test pit terminated at 14 feet below existing grade. Very minor groundwater seepage
encountered at 8 feet during excavation.
v
o.
o.
ou
Test Pit Log
Earth Consultants Inc. S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
i� Proj.No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date AUg'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A2
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Test Pit Log
Project Name: Sheet of
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-2
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
U _
W o } o Surface Conditions: Grass
i%) cL cn T
SP-SM FILL•Brown poorly graded medium to coarse SAND with silt and gravel,medium dense,
moist
1
4.7 2
3
4
13.6 5
6
7
-minor seepage
8 PEAT Dark brown fibrous PEAT interbedded with organic silt,soft to medium
108.2 ' `—' stiff,wet to saturated
u u 9
—\t+ 10
11
0
12 ML Gray SILT,soft to medium stiff,saturated
51.2 13
14
15
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. Minor groundwater seepage
encountered at 7.5 feet during excavation.
o1
a
co
Earth Consultants Inc. Test Pit Log
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
oeweam"aor**&Owioo�&e 'a acw Renton, Washington
J
a bsu No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A3
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Test Pit Log
Project Name: Sheet of
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 1 DSL 8 3 94 TP-3
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction f
Notes:
U _
W L o } U) o Surface Conditions: Grass
c� U U) U)
SP-SM FILL- Brown poorly graded medium to coarse SAND with silt and gravel,medium
dense,damp
1
4.1 2
3
4
10.4
5 -becomes wet to saturated
6 FILL- Gray poorly graded medium to coarse SAND with silt
-very minor seepage
PEAT Dark brown fibrous PEAT interbedded with organic silt,8 saturated soft to medium stiff,wet to
—`
100.3 u u
i, 9
10
11
12 MH Gray elastic SILT,soft to medium stiff,wet to saturated
qu=1.0tsf 13
qu=o.25tsf 56.4
14
31.9 SP-SM Black poorly graded fine SAND with silt,loose to medium dense,water bearing
15
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. Very minor groundwater seepage
encountered at 7.5 feet during excavation
CN
a
Cl) Test Pit Log
Ln Earth Consultants Inc.
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
J
,a- Proj.No. 3453-4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 1 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A4
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
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL g 3 94 TP-4
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
U _
W = o } (n o Surface Conditions: Grass
a� a+ a. U -0
) O N U)
SP-SM FILL: Gray poorly graded medium to coarse SAND with silt and gravel,damp
1
4.5 2
F
3
4
5
-becomes wet to saturated
Sz
7.2 6 -moderate seepage
FILL- Gray poorly graded GRAVEL with sand
7 -severe caving
PEAT 120.3 '• Brown fibrous PEAT,soft to medium stiff,saturated
•��,
8 Test pit terminated at 8 feet below existing grade due to caving. Moderate groundwater
seepage encountered at 6 feet during excavation.
v
a
a
m
CI, Test Pit Log
lift Earth Consultants Inc. S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
09 ceo�eaa �eas aeao¢�wae.> 'aac�tw Renton,Washington
J
Proj.No. 3453-4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 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.
Test Pit Log
Project Name: Sheet of
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-5
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction f
Notes:
W -C o -1 07 o Surface Conditions: Grass and Scot's Broom
�o�j b E 41 LL E (n E
L T 0 N T
C7
SP-SM FILL:- Brown poorly grade fine to medium SAND with silt and gravel,loose to medium
dense,damp to moist
1
2.0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9.1
9
10 PEAT Brown fibrous PEAT interbedded with organic silt,soft to medium stiff,wet to saturated
71.8
\ i 11
0 . .
12
13
43.6 MH Gray elastic SILT,very soft to soft,wet to saturated.
14
qu=.25tsf
15
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage
encountered during excavation.
a
o.
Co
(1) Test Pit Log
Ln Earth Consultants Inc. S.W. 27rH Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
J
Proj.No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/117/94 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.
Test Pit Log
Project Name: Sheet of
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: �Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL �94 TP-6
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
U _
W t o } (n o Surface Conditions: Grass
N M T N rtl T
U
SP-SM RILL- Brown poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel,loose,damp
1
2.5
2 -becomes medium dense
3
4
5
FILL Gray poorly graded SAND with silt
6
8.9 7
8
9 PEAT -minorseepage
L „ Brown fibrous PEAT with interbedded organic silt,soft to medium stiff,wet to saturated
\, 10
216.2 '
11
MH Gray elastic SILT,medium stiff to stiff,saturated
qu=1.25tsf 12
78.4
13
14
15
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. Minor groundwater seepage
encountered at 8.5 feet during excavation.
o.
\
ON
Co
Test Pit Log
v Earth Consultants inC• S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
s.
case«*rc�$Vrba a eaa�w
Renton, Washington
J
u (L Proj.No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 1 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A7
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.
r
Test Pit Log
Project Name: Sheet of
S.W. 27fH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL g .'A 94 Tp_7
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction f
Notes:
U _
W o -C o Surface Conditions: Grass
%� L T °' m T
D O
SP-SM FILL.• Brown poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel,loose to medium dense,damp to
moist
1
7.3 2
3
RLL• Gray poorly graded SAND with silt
4
5
6
7
8 PEAT Dark brown fibrous/woody PEAT with interbedded organic silt,soft to medium stiff,wet
to saturated
117.1 LA u 9
10
11
12 MH Dark gray elastic SILT,medium stiff,wet to saturated
qu=.5-1.25tsf 58.6
13 -peat stringers
14
15
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage
encountered during excavation.
It
o1
o.
CO
Cl) Test Pit Log
m Earth Consultants Inc. S.W. 27rH Street Warehouse
ceaoc:�+wa 'o� asaarw Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug' Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A8
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: =Shof
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse1
Job No. I Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL g 3 94 TP_g
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction f
Notes:
U _
W L o C o Surface Conditions: Grass
o -0 Q.+= a U .n
M ro T v � E LO T
0 (n U) to
SM FILL* Brown silty SAND with gravel,loose to medium dense,damp to moist
1
2
SP-SM FILL: Gray poorly graded SAND with silt,wet
—[-
6.7
3
4
5
= 6 PEAT Brown fibrous/woody PEAT interbedded with organic silt,soft to medium stiff,wet to
saturated
�.,.. 113.8 .v t,, 7
/ \ ! 8
10
I I I OL Gray organic SILT,very soft to soft,saturated
qu<.5tsf I I I I
I I
78.6 I I 11
IIII
1 I I I 12
IIII
1111
IIII
I I I 13
Illl
IIII
14
IIII
I 115
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage
encountered during excavation.
o
a
00
Earth Consultants inc. Test Pit Log
GOOftaS.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
��� �� Renton,Washington
J
n Pro].No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A9
~-
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
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-9
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
U
W o + o Surface Conditions: Grass
%) LT0 m T
ce
SM fill: Brown silty SANd with gravel,dense,moist
1
SP-SM FILL- Gray poorly graded SAND with silt,medium dense,moist
5.5 2
3
4
11.0 5
-becomes wet
6
7
8
-minor seepage
9 Gray elastic SILT,soft to medium stiff,wet to saturated
qu=.75tsf -peat interbeds
54.4 10
qu<.5tsf 11
12
13
grades to gray sandy silt
37.9 14
qu=.75tsf
qu=1.Qtsf 46.4 15
Test pit terminated at 15.5 feet below existing grade. Minor groundwater seepage
encountered at 8.5 feet during excavation.
v
o,
01
CO
"' Earth Consultants Inc. Test Pit Log
$I . aas S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
J
Pro j.No. 3453-4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL I Date 8/17./94 Plate A10
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
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-10
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
U _
W = o + v U) o Surface Conditions: Grass
i%> `�° To � m DT
SM ALL- Brown silty SAND with gravel,medium dense,damp
1
2.0 2 SP-SM FILL- Brown poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel,medium dense,damp
3
FILL- Gray poorly graded SAND with silt
4
13.8 5
17= PEAT -becomes loose,severe caving,minor seepage
6 Brown fibrous peat interbedded with organic silt,very soft to soft,saturated
7 Test pit terminated at 7 feet below existing grade due to caving. Minor groundwater
seepage encountered at 5.5 feet during excavation.
o1
a
cc
`O Earth Consultants Inc. Test Pit Log
v
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
ceaea■rc,t av�,e«..aeo�opaq a snwoRrw�eckrrw
Renton, Washington
J
F-
Prcj.No. 3453 4 Own. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate All
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
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. —T'Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453 4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-11
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction t
Notes:
W O + o Surface Conditions: Grass
L T o LL ro T
SM FILL- Brown silty SAND with gravel,medium dense,damp
1
SP-SM FILL- Gray poorly graded SAND with silt,medium dense,damp
2.9 2
3
4
5
6
PEAT Brown fibrous PEAT,very soft to soft,wet to saturated
83.0 u u 8
!. 0 r, -interbedded with organic silt
10 ML Gray SILT,soft to medium stiff
qu=1.Otsf 42.9 11
12
13
qu<.5tsf
33.6 14 SM Black silty fine SAND,loose to medium dense,water bearing
15
Test pit terminated at 15 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage
encountered during excavation.
o,
o
CO
Earth Consultants Inc. Test Pit Log
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
c oftch-"a10-aeaoa+as&MUVbO=nMW WWAW
Renton, Washington
J
P No. 3453 4 Dwn. GLS Date AUg'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate Al2
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
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: :::���731�94
Test Pit No.:
3453 4 DSL TP-12
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction
Notes:
U _
W p + o Surface Conditions: Alder and Grass
(%) L cn O to = cn
SM FILL- Brown silty SAND with gravel,loose,damp
1
SP-SM FILL- Brown poorly graded SAND with silt,gravel,loose,damp
3.0 2
3
4 -becomes wet
5
FILL Gray poorly graded SAND with silt
11.2 6
7
8
I _ PEAT Interbedded brown fibrous PEAT and organic silt,very soft to soft,wet to saturated
58.3 ', ,�, 9
10
106.3 , ,, 11
45.2 12 ML Gray SILT,medium stiff to stiff,saturated
q u=1.0tsf
13
14
Test pit terminated at 14 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage
encountered during excavation.
v
o.
a
--4
(0 Test Pit Log
Earth Consultants Inc. S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
ceaeawJw$non s.aeoro�aenvb�aoea4w Renton, Washington
J
(L Proj.No. 3453-4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A13
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
S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse 1 1
Job No. Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
3453-4 DSL 8 3 94 TP-13
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Elevation:
Evans Brothers Construction f
Notes:
W U o + o Surface Conditions: Grass
(%) r° T a) L ro M T
CD N
SM FILL- Brown silty SAND with gravel,medium dense,damp
1 SP-SM FILL- Brown poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel,medium dense,damp
3.9 2
3
4 -becomes wet
5 FILL- Gray poorly graded SAND with silt
10.1
6
7
8
45.8 `' PEAT minor seepage
r, 11 9 Brown fibrous/woody PEAT interbedded with organic silt,very soft to soft,saturated
102.3 ,+ 10
11 MH Gray elastic SILT,soft to medium stiff,saturated
43.3
qu=1.25-1.5tsf 12
48.5 13
qu<.5tsf
14 Test it terminated at 14 feet below existing
g grade.Minor groundwater seepage
encountered at 8.5 feet during excavation.
v
o.
+ m
Test Pit Log
Earth Consultants inc- S.W. 27TH Street Warehouse
Renton, Washington
J
Proj.No. 3453-4 Dwn. GLS Date Aug'94 Checked DSL Date 8/17/94 Plate A14
~-
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.
s..
APPENDIX B
E-3453-4
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Earth Consultants, Inc.
• SIEVE ANALYSIS � � •
Gem OR WOMEN
�111111111111111♦ ■ 1. = m ■010■ am��■■■■■�i��
Ism ME
0 ME IS
11111111 OEM! MMEM MINE
LMM� mmo�m= ME MOM
mm� OEM a MINE in
a WO MEN!
MEMO
am a MEMO I'm a
MINNINKEEM ONE mom I IN OEM!!
WON NEWSMEN ME
OEM Nmm=
■m wadi ■ 111111ME ME SEEN==�� •
•• �����■��■�i�i�■\�i�it l�■gym/mi��■■■■■mm��
WE ME
WKWIN WIN
am mom IN
WOMEN w� NINE a MR ON ME mmmmmmm==
am am= NOW
ME lftumm MEMO on
1111001
MW am
MINE 0 ME ME am MEMO
mom
• — — — —
.. •
DESCRIPTION
�SP-S gray poorly graded SAND with silt 15.6
cmn
SP-S brown poorly graded SAND with silt 2.0
..
100
80
w 60
0
Z
E- H
U
N 40 ``—A-Line
a
a
c A
20
a
CL-ML OL
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT
Boring/ Depth Natural
Key p Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. PI, Water
Test Pit (ft.) Content
TP-1 11.5 gray SILT ML 40 31 9 46.1
A TP-9 10.0 gray elastic SILT MH 68 43 25 54.4
with organics
Atterberg Limits Test Data
Earth Consultants Inc. SOUTHWEST 27TH STREET WAREHOUSE
Gmedink�wF911 rs Geologists6Fnvr«muialScientists RENTON, WASHINGTON
Proj. No3453- Date 8/17/94 Plate a2
DISTRIBUTION
E-3453-4
4 Copies Trammell Crow Company
5601 Sixth Avenue South
P. O. Box 80326
Seattle, Washington 98108
Attention: Mr. Todd Timberlake
1 Copy Foushee and Associates
3260 - 118th Avenue Southeast, Suite 1000
P. O. Box 3767 (98009)
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Attention: Mr. Loch Anderson
1 Copy Lance Mueller and Associates
130 Lakeside Avenue, Suite F
Seattle, Washington 98122
Attention: Mr. Lance Mueller
Earth Consultants, Inc.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
ABOUT YOUR
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
More construction problems are caused by site subsur- technical engineers who then render an opinion about
face conditions than any other factor As troublesome as overall subsurface conditions, their likely reaction to
subsurface problems can be, their frequency and extent proposed construction activity, and appropriate founda-
have been lessened considerably in recent years,due in tion design. Even under optimal circumstances actual
large measure to programs and publications of ASFE/ conditions may differ from those inferred to exist,
The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how
the Geosciences. qualified, and no subsurface exploration program, no
The following suggestions and observations are offered matter how comprehensive,can reveal what is hidden by
earth, rock and time. The actual interface between mate-
to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays, rials 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
A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur-
encountered on site.
face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
set of project-specific factors. These typically include:
the general nature of the structure involved, its size and CAN CHANGE
configuration; the location of the structure on the site
and its orientation; physical concomitants such as Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly-
access roads, parking lots. and underground utilities, changing natural forces. Because a geotechnical engi-
and the level of additional risk which the client assumed neering report is based on conditions which existed at
by virtue of limitations imposed upon the exploratory the time of subsurface exploration,construction decisions
program. To help avoid costly problems, consult the should not be based on a-geotechnical engineering report whose
geotechnical engineer to determine how any factors adequacy may have been affected by time. Speak with the geo-
which change subsequent to the date of the report may technical consultant to learn if additional tests are
affect its recommendations. advisable before construction starts.
Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and
otherwise, your geotechnical engineering report should not natural events such as floods,earthquakes or ground-
be used: water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions
• When the nature of the proposed structure is and, thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical
changed. for example, if an office building will be report. The geotechnical engineer should be kept
erected instead of a parking garage,or if a refriger- apprised of any such events,and should be consulted to
ated warehouse will be built instead of an unre- determine if additional tests are necessary
frigerated one;
• when the size or configuration of the proposed GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ARE
structure is altered; PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES
• when the location or orientation of the proposed AND PERSONS
structure is modified:
• when there is a change of ownership, or Geotechnical engineers' reports are prepared to meet
• for application to an adjacent site. the specific needs of specific individuals. A report pre-
Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility for problems pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade-
which may develop if they are not consulted after factors consi;i- quate for a construction contractor, or even some other
erect 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.
RECEIVED
APR 2 3 1992
tyjcrE WEAR
WETLANDS ASSESSMENT AND DELINEATION
for
O'REEFE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
7900 S. E. 28th Street
Mercer Island, Washington
for property located at
S .W. 27th Street
City of Renton
Ring County, Washington
Prepared by
TALASAEA CONSULTANTS
118 162nd Avenue S.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98008
November 21, 1991
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
METHODOLOGY
Review of Existing Data
Field Investigation
INVESTIGATION FINDINGS
Vegetation
Soils
Hydrology
Wildlife
Wetlands
Wetland Determination
Wetland Function and Value
Regulatory Issues
PROJECT IMPACTS
IMPACT MITIGATION
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Wetland Data Forms
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2 . Vegetative Cover of Wetlands and Adjacent Areas
Figure 3 . Wetland Boundary
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Partial List of Plant Species
Table 2 . Partial List of Wildlife Species
EXHIBIT A
Site Survey Drawing
INTRODUCTION
Talasaea Consultants has completed a wetland survey on a 13 . 15-
acre parcel for O'Keefe Development Company of Mercer Island,
Washington. The property is located in Township 23, Range 4 ,
Section 25, on S.W. 27th Street in Renton, King County,
Washington (Figure 1) . The property is bordered to the east by
Spring Brook Creek, to the west by a warehouse property, and to
the north by open land. The south side of the property borders
S.W. 27th Street.
The overall topography of the site generally slopes north from
27th Street. Vegetation in the northern one-third of the site
(and adjacent properties to the northwest) is almost exclusively
Reed Canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) with two small stands of
Willow (Salix lasiandra and Salix scouleriana) . The southern
two-thirds of the site has been previously filled and
hydroseeded. The transition zone between these two areas, as
well as the banks of Spring Brook Creek, are vegetated primarily
with a mixture of Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus discolor) , Scot ' s
Broom (Cytisus scoparius) , and Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica) ,
as well as with grasses and other herbaceous plants. Dredge
spoils resulting from past cleaning of the drainageway have been
deposited on the west bank, providing a berm between the creek
and any future development that may occur on this site.
A large detention pond, primarily serving the property to the
west, extends into the subject property and forms part of the
boundary between the wetland to the north and the filled area to
the south. Outflow from this detention facility enters the
wetland north of the pond.
A petroleum pipeline easement extends along the northern property
line. Maintenance of this easement appears to involve periodic
clearing of vegetation within the right of way. A high tension
power line also crosses the property in this area.
PURPOSE
Development plans for this parcel involve construction of a
warehouse similar to that on the adjoining property to the west.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether and to what
extent wetlands occur on the subject property, and to determine
their functions and values. Measures that could be taken to
mitigate site development impacts are also discussed.
METHODOLOGY
Wetland analyses generally involve a two-part effort. The first
involves a preliminary assessment of the parcel and the immediate
surrounding area. This may involve review of aerial photographs ,
wetland maps prepared by resource agencies, relevant studies
1
completed or on-going in the vicinity of the project, and
contacts with resource agency personnel with expertise and/or
jurisdiction in wetlands that are familiar with the project area.
The second part involves a field survey in which direct
measurements are made of vegetation, soils, and hydrology to
determine the type of wetlands present and their boundaries .
Wetland functions and values are also determined in the field.
Review of Existing Data
Review of background information was made prior to field
investigations and included the following:
o Aerial photographs
o National Wetlands Inventory Map, U. S. Department of
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1987
o Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,
U. S.D.A. , Soil Conservation Service, 1973
o King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio, 1990
Field Investigation
Initially, a general site reconnaissance was conducted to
gain overall impression of the existing environment and to determine
an
whether any wetlands were present on or in the immediate vicinity
of the site. General observations were made of the general plant
communities, wildlife habitats, and the locations of obvious and
probable wetland areas. Present and past land use practices were
also noted, as were significant geological and hydrological
features.
Once wetland areas were located, wetland delineation procedures
were implemented. These procedures are outlined in the Federal
Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands
developed by the Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland
Delineation (FICWD, 1989) .
Plant species were identified according to the taxonomy of
Hitchcock and Cronquist (1973) , and the wetland status of plant
species was assigned according to the list of plant species that
occur in wetlands, published by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Reed, 1989) . Wetlands were classified according to the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification system (Cowardin,
et-al . , 1979) .
Vegetation was considered hydrophytic if at least 500 of the
dominant plant species had a wetland indicator status of
facultative or wetter (i . e. , facultative, facultative wetland, or
2
obligate wetland) . Generally, soil was considered hydric if one
or more of the following characteristics were present:
o organic soils or soils with organic surface layer,
o matrix chroma just below the A-horizon of 1 or less
in unmottled soils, or 2 or less if mottles were present,
or
o gleying immediately below the A-horizon.
The hydrology criterion for wetland determination is considered
to be met when any one of the following is found during the
growing season: a) standing water is observed, b) soil is
saturated, or c) groundwater is within 18 inches of the surface.
The growing season in this region occurs between March and
October. Field work was completed in mid-September, a relatively
dry period of the growing season and a particularly dry period
this year. Direct measurements and other indicators of hydrology
were used to determine whether wetland hydrology was present
(i . e. , the presence of rhizospheres associated with living roots
and the presence of water marks on vegetation) . For the most
part, however, inferences of hydrological conditions were made in
the wetlands determination.
Evaluation of the three wetland parameters was made at various
locations along the interface between wetland and upland areas.
Wetland boundary points were determined from this information,
and a wetland boundary was either extrapolated from these points
or interpolated between the points. Wetland boundaries were
marked with flagging and a field sketch was prepared showing test
pit and boundary marker locations. Field surveying will be done
following agency review.
INVESTIGATION FINDINGS
The southern approximately three-quarters of the site has been
previously filled and hydroseeded. The fill material is
generally silty sands and gravel. Typical disturbed soil
indicators (e.g. , erratics and discontinuities) and construction
debris (e .g. , asphalt, concrete, crushed rock/gravel, metal and
plastic) were found throughout this portion of the site. Some
household and yard wastes were also noted. Vegetative cover in
the filled area is predominantly grasses such as ryegrass and
fescue.
Vegetation in the northern one-quarter of the site is
predominantly Reed Canarygrass. Soils there are primarily
Woodinville silt loam with Puyallup fine sandy loam occurring in
the northeastern corner of the site.
Soils, vegetational and hydrological conditions were observed and
documented at six locations on the site (Appendix A) . Soil
samples at these locations were taken from test pits .
Vegetation
Vegetation on the northern one-third of the site is predominantly
grasses, primarily Reed Canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) .
Pacific Willow (Salix lasiandra) is found in the less disturbed
areas (Figure 2) . A distinct scrub/shrub vegetative community
occurs along the edge of the fill dominated by Blackberries
(Rubus sp. ) , Scot ' s Broom (Cytisus scoparius) and Willows (Salix
sp. ) . The southern two-thirds has been recently graded and
hydroseeded is presently open ground. Other herbaceous species
include Cirsium arvense, Urtica dioica, Tanacetum vulgare,
Trifolium repens, and Anaphalis margaritacea. Tree species
include Salix lasiandra and Salix scouleriana, Tree species
occurring on adjacent property, along Spring Brook Creek, include
PODUlus trichocarpa, Fraxinus latifolia and Salix sp. The common
shrub species are Cytisus scoparius, and Sambucus racemosa . Both
introduced blackberries (Rubus discolor and R. laciniatus) occur
at several locations on the site. A partial list of plant
species observed on the site is presented in Table 1.
Soils
Soils in the previously filled areas of the site range from silt
to very compacted sand and gravel, with numerous large erratics,
discontinuities and debris consistent with the disturbed
conditions that often accompany filling. Soils in the northern
approximately one-quarter of the site are undisturbed.
The King County Soil Survey (SCS, 1973) has classified the soils
in the vicinity as predominantly Woodinville silt loam, although
a small area of Puyallup fine sandy loam occurs in the
northeastern corner of the site. According to Hydric Soils of
the United States (1991) , the Woodinville soil series is listed
as a hydric soil.
Soils in the undisturbed areas of the site were found to be
almost entirely a uniform silt, corresponding to the
characteristics of the Woodinville soil series. These soils
range in color from dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) to very dark
grayish brown (10YR 3/2) and are generally damp. Faint mottling
is evident, ranging from dark red (5YR 4/6) to yellowish red . (5
YR 4/6)
Soil associated with the berm along Spring Brook Creek, which is
composed almost entirely of dredge spoils, is drier and shows no
evidence of mottling. The soil color is brown (10YR 3 . 5/3) . The
west bank of Spring Brook Creek, south of the bridge, exhibits
some signs of bank failure, with movement of soil occurring
toward the creek. These areas will probably heal themselves,
since the vegetation is very dense and contains plant species
possessing well developed root systems.
Hydrology
Drainage at the site is generally from the southwest to the
northeast. There appears to be no runoff entering the site from
off the property. outflow from the detention pond located on the
adjacent property to the west is directed northward into the
wetland area that is contiguous with the wetland on the northern
one-quarter of the subject property. The, detention pond extends
, onto the subject property inside the area .previously filled, and
appears to have been constructed with the' idea that the one pond
;would eventuaIlly' serve both properties.
The main drainage feature in the area is Spring Brook Creek which
flows from south to north along the eastern border of the
property. There are two minor drainage features in the filled
area . One flows in an easterly direction into Spring Brook Creek
immediately downstream of the abandoned road crossing. The
other, smaller drainage feature extends northward across the
filled portion of the site to the wetland east of the detention
pond (Figure 3) .
The wetland area is relatively flat and exhibits no obvious
drainage pattern. All field work was performed in the dry time
of the year and no standing water was observed at any location on
the site during any of the site visits. In areas where the most
disturbance has occurred, the soil remains generally permeable
due to the sandy content of the matrix material .
Wildlife
Wildlife use of the site is minimal based on observations made
during wetland field investigations . Species observed on the
site are presented in Table 2 . Red-tailed Hawks were seen flying
over the site on two separate site visits, and a coyote was
observed in the wetland area in the northern portion of the
property. The presence of these species suggests that the site
may support a population of prey species such as small rodents .
Ducks were observed swimming in Spring Brook Creek and a Ring-
necked Pheasant was flushed from the shrubby vegetation along the
east side of the creek. The forested area along the east bank of
the creek probably provides habitat for additional species that
utilize the aquatic, riparian, and wetland areas of the site.
Spring Brook Creek is one of the main tributaries to the lower
Green River. Prior to channelization, it supported runs of
anadromous fish species. Subsequent to channelization and
construction of a pumping station at the mouth of the Black
River, these fish runs have been significantly reduced.
Installation of a Denali fish ladder has allowed fish to re-enter
Spring Brook Creek. The section of the creek which flows through
the property is not considered to be spawning habitat due to the
lack of suitable spawning substrate, and most likely provides
only limited juvenile rearing habitat due to poor water quality.
It appears that this section of the creek serves mainly as
passage to upstream spawning areas (Renton, 1991) .
Wetlands
The National Wetland Inventory map identifies wetlands on the
subject property only in association with Spring Brook Creek.
The map symbol for this wetland area indicates that the wetlands
are the result of excavation, probably in reference to the fact
that channel of Spring Brook Creek has been relocated to ' its
present position. The primary wetland on the property is located
in the northern one-quarter of the site (Figure 3) .
Historically, the two on-site wetlands were hydrologically
connected. However, due to placement of dredge spoils, the two
wetlands on-site currently exist as separate features.
The major wetland delineated on the property is located on the
northern 1/4 of the site, occupying approximately 3 . 2 acres .
This wetland lies between the north property line and the filled
area to the south, and is contiguous with wetland areas on the
property to the west. The dominant plant species in this wetland
is Reed Canarygrass. Other species include Pacific and Scouler ' s
Willow, and Himalayan Blackberry (around the fringes) .
Functions of this wetland include: flood storage, water quality
enhancement (due to biofiltration from Reed Canarygrass) , and
wildlife habitat (primarily for birds and small mammals) .
Presence of permanent water on-site (i. e. , Spring Brook Creek)
adds habitat value for wildlife in the surrounding area.
Common predators, such as coyote and red-tailed hawk, were
observed at the site in the wetland area, suggesting the
occurrence of prey species, such as rodents. Foraging would be
limited to the wetland along the northern portion of the site and
along the creek. The creek, as well as the adjacent lands during
winter, probably provides habitat for waterfowl. Songbirds
Utilize the riparian areas along the Creek and transition area
between the on-site wetlands and the filled portions of the site.
Wildlife cover is afforded both in the groves of willows in the
on-site wetlands, but particularly in the forested area along the
east side of the Creek (off-property) . The on-site wetland, in
conjunction with surrounding wetlands, provides storage of
stormwater runoff during peak rainfall periods.
Water purification occurs in the wetland as runoff passes through
the relatively large, flat areas in the northern portion of the
site (and in adjacent similar areas) containing dense herbaceous
vegetation. Removal of sediments and other pollutants from the
runoff passing through these areas is probably very effective.
Regulatory Issues
The City of Renton has not formally adopted its Draft Sensitive
Areas Ordinance (SAO) ; however, the State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA) confers power to invoke regulations within the draft
ordinance prior to formal adoption (R. Straka, pers. comm. ,
September, 1991) .
The City of Renton Wetlands Management Ordinance dated June,
1991 , establishes buffer widths based on wetland category. Both
wetlands are rated Category 2 wetlands based on size (greater
than 1 ' acre) . The standard buffer width for Category 2 wetlands'
in urban settings is 50 feet from the wetland edge. This buffer "
will affect both the larger wetland to the north and the wetland
along Spring Brook Creek. In some instances, the 40-foot _
.greenbelt along the east. property- line '(Restrictive Covenant
Title Order 113755) may extend a greater distance west of the
creek-"than the 50-foot wetland buffer.
IMPACTS
A specific project description has not been defined. However,
based on existing zoning for the site, probable development will
be warehousing. Impacts of warehousing on the subject property
are listed below, with impact mitigation measures listed in the
following section.
o No wetlands will be filled; any development will be set
back from the stream and wetlands in accordance with the
City of Renton development requirements. The required 50 '
buffer places all construction beyond the berm west of the
stream.
o Minimal development impacts are anticipated because
warehousing and associated staging areas would occur in
areas previously filled and away fro;, the stream corridor.
o Possible impacts to wildlife may occur at the eastern
property boundary along Spring Brook Creek, especially if
buildings and other structures are located close to the
Creek. If adequate setbacks and buffers are not
established, wildlife impacts could also occur on the
north side of the developed portion of the property at the
wetland/upland edge.
o Increased noise, light, and glare may have some adverse
impacts on wildlife use of the site. However, these
disturbances would be limited to normal business hours
during the day.
o A slight reduction of water quality
ff
from impervious surfaces andlandscaped areas enters thewetland.
MITIGATING MEASURES
The site supports well developed natural vegetation along the
creek and in wetland area in the northern portion of the
property. Primary mitigation would involve creation and
enhancement of buffers around developed areas, and maintenance of
these areas to ensure their effectiveness for visual screening
and wildlife habitat. Another primary mitigation would be
enhancement of the detention pond. Measures that may be taken to
mitigate the impacts that were listed in the preceeding section
are presented below.
o Enhance berm around north side of detention pond
with wet-adapted plants (e. g. , Pacific Willow, Red-osier
Dogwood, and rushes) , and along south side with dry-
adapted species (e.g. , Vine Maple, Elderberry, and
Snowberry) to provide cover and forage for wildlife.
o Transition zone vegetation between the wetland and filled
(developed) area should be retained. This zone contains a
variety of trees and shrubs which provide habitat for
some birds and small mammals . Protect and enhance these
areas.
o Plant west bank of creek along developed area with trees
and shrubs to enhance riparian habitat, to provide shade
over creek, and to enhance visual screening between the
creek and the warehouse.
o Pass all site runoff through grass-lined, maintained
biofiltration swales prior to entry into the detention
pond.
o Convert the present detention pond to a wetpond to
optimize water quality treatment.
o Incorporate woody vegetation in biofiltration swales to
enhance habitat for passerines .
o Locate warehouse to the west side of the property to
provide more open space along the creek.
o Retain and enhance existing abandoned road crossing of
creek for wildlife observation platform.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Approximately 3 . 5 acres of the subject 13 . 15-acre site contains
wetlands. These wetlands are located north of the upland and
also along the west bank of Spring Brook Creek. The most
significant functions of these wetlands is flood storage and
biofiltration. Important wildlife habitat is also associated
with these wetlands. Development of the property for warehousing
is not expected to have a significant impact wetlands or other
natural systems on the property or in adjacent areas.
yam• �' 1 I \' �y-�( CCL..111 ,�- 1'.__ ---
. •t � q a. .. N A��I '.
cli
WW-
zir
aw
cry,....
HWY
`� •�w� ��`� d —mil _�y 1/\�_
IV
cv
/♦ Ir. f'•1•a I •
•ter- � -fr• �. L - L-fU�.��.
Table 1. Partial List of Plant species Which Occur on O'Keefe
Development Property, Renton
TREES
Scientific Name Common Name Wetland
Status
Arbutus menziesii Madrona NL
Populus trichocarpa Black Cottonwood FAC
Salix scouleriana Scouler ' s Willow FAC
Salix lasiandra Pacific Willow FACW+
SHRUBS/VINES
Scientific Name Common Name Wetland
Status
Cytisus scoparius Scot ' s Broom NL
Rubus discolor Himalayan Blackberry FACU
Rubus laciniatus Evergreen Blackberry FACU
Rubus ursinus Trailing Blackberry NL
Sambucus racemosa Red Elderberry FACU
HERBS
Scientific Name Common Name Wetland
Status
Ana
phalis margaritacea Pearly Everlasting NL
Cirsium arvense Canadian Thistle FACU+
Cirsium vulgare Bull Thistle FACU
Plantago Ianceolata Common Plantain FACU
Solanum dulcamara Climbing Nightshade FAC
Tanacetum vulgare Common Tansy NL
Trifolium pratense Red Clover FACU
Urtica dioica Stinging Nettle FAC+
Vicia sativa Common Vetch UPL
GRAMINOIDS
scientific Name Common Name Wetland
Status
Avena fatua Wild Oat NL
Phalaris arundinacea Reed Canarygrass FACW
Triticum aestivum Cultivated Wheat NL
Setaria viridis Green Bristlegrass NL
Table 2 . Partial List of Animals Which Occur on O'Keefe
Development Property, Renton
MAMMALS
Scientific Name Common Name
Canis latrans Coyote
Ondatra zibethica Muskrat
BIRDS
Scientific Name Common Name
Anas platyrhynchos Mallard
Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron
Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed Hawk
Parus sp. (heard) Chickadee
Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah Sparrow
Phasianus colchicus Ring-necked Pheasant
Sturnus vulgaris European Starling
REPTILES/AMPHIBIANS
Scientific Name Common Name
Hyl a Regilla Pacific Tree Frog
'i .%. &AR V sm
0�W
Rp .,"iAQlI
Hpa r
SWV
Mi'M
MR; • ., 5i I'wrl
7. (47flips
14
-al
q
f.r
10jrw• n- • N
-V.4i -.3,1V
fit x:11. yi.-7. '1,
R"N" ......
q- n qi%�. t-
I ON,
1 tin
7, , �1-4�-
llp
Kr
11 t-A
VIle 'Ail IS k_�ZVAZ'V OT
�L .4
P-N.,
i"t Z4.-J,
Ad; r.
jo
-S,
ane T.-W,
_�y
OF
z A
;Pf
iS617.
P,2
rl 1- R170 'k
pq•12 1A
MI,
t�;'M -31
t9l
1�fllm,4. 4
IM171
VWw
.-ZU
iqt
%r RJA
AS
�0_4 147pw
10
w4a
....... ....
in
RKNO i h tQ,
ki
JAR
L'M�y'da,f.�('r ft. •�e.ir,�� '!1. 1t•►f 'f t�• .Y. �• ,'`rk.�r' t�-i�'�^ria� t t�}f'�'' ., .���`r � .�t5.5:J�r�,.,�t.eke,�`•=1, M'�.•J,.r �"+. .� dry. ..I�� ,� 7j �'
Sa. :�r .�>i. �' •. �' .a C; �;" •r, "`�•• .. ' k, � lid •xl"< ' .� �' S, � :. t'�t,e�1�`°�•'' .r�+ ':i 1 '�
•�,i �J. h ,,ee 4 K�'',•f;� I a. �y I`�+,," f J `.V q urw�tjy�t
n:-�. )�ts y.°,^` •.;;y.��,K ! �11,r ir �yi)} :r�t�«Tfl � 1J 'a, "A`:; E r R =!'• ,'�'••Ir 7rp�Fr�j�,Rri' t •r4s�+��fu . ••{,,a�I'�! t7 •6�j _• 4j r�i .c,f.�;+f"' C-. ,.• ` .rF .� x., .1 aA.' 'Y i �} 1 lir. !'.l y,ueit, 1`� �. '^7� tOY •:. ]rp•�'1� ?s °• ` •• .�
•p:LV�irF.c�N.!'i'• •.'1 t••rF, } ,t r;•G " E`. .P r. '�'-'ia°'rF -r A' trl 7)'w'il ..�'yb:Ja + ,•,.:w e N.$•�:r! 4.A+ht'S'f7 IF R,(i'• /"l.•S /•r t�
,,�•�.� If•at,1�{$��j,,��,t�r1�., t �,:yr'r �`r`=tl. �r ]�'�� si `q Ji'•K { :Y�'vk-
k�' ^:yi�J::M✓5i) k, lL�"Iq ;+::! Y :7:�t�.:.i`';i' /T!••i.,�^i?•;.',o art` .i. N..+•� . �• '/lj•rl•t i!°-' 1,'T�'Qw ��+,,�:5.;1�r,,•, ` nS. fir' r 1{' '�t•�.it r[;
Ri" txt ;�t r r:: ""'�;•1 ''i� � .,4N •i f ,. .. 4 �. ^ k ' •` t ra f
�?l:�t,�LY'Nes-`'�t.���:+ •;:T}i .E•'�1{Yt:a 5f'si tf�'r', 1•A7•�:y,.�d,., b" t ;n,' :+ •�.i7E�2{G �•y� ,1,•F�`q,(:rti}' -�+: rs;-' .%�:�' •,•g,�.�7F'/; C �'rl •Ya��e, �t': ;i �. •dJr �a .(i'•
Y.5 .}: !rYP:1•i'C'° '�"< i! n✓ Y �• "�t', ..*��i.tP...?4'!'�y,�/� '+ ql �(�,yril'r:r!' dE''i "i't' t'!{AIY�.`yF�r�}, .,� ..t .sis'+, •!r�•.1+c4 ) `��4' •.Y• ]qL ::)v '�'�•
r,# u,�l,..a,i+ll. r .�iS��f �t+d;AN+. Y"is .S w1„, 5, lit ;,•�j S'" � Ji UI:�t{'u 't'r.g' F. s='`S!•F,rab 'i+>X .f•":•"`i' VI+I :'i;. j! r .( ;tf t 'f,.�
i. :':1. .w•x'i• 'S.' .vt.^' ��f ..??•r' s:.2•z �-, n• •ETl tM' r :t ) !b. X. Ya 1rb'• t' .t �r ¢a ;»• ,E '�.'1. r
'r♦ /• '9i `F-i ! {. } J.tr f:sj r�' fMAI,IT. rA.�r � i � +:� ��+'J+ ir,� �'�, y'� ,+�ryS�tl �•i. '•it. s y. .ory:•j }`
r�•t.,,fr:rvSC::vraiia+iir a��.•it`ro .i ,J.;r „t• 'J1' ,-t:{;Y .S'+,. '�•Inr tJfi;� f �'9>� n v±• rt Y :.,f. '? ,p, i.tr.+lt.�;' .4r rtN 'S t 'lr`1
.�,t�N F.�t' -Yr.,�C ti rd5 •..� �t+P >:•: .ri7',, .5V- '�'R"' t f'.. 'h•i�. ih ! t v;{,•
n.."a^A lr�,• U7:r:• yo�g •• -,a., t^Yt: ' 'f,:r ra y• t r 7n: rye.,.Y$ R ,< .,j w4c>=S[[j .y{ iFr,'r:;F•. ..J .,5:t{ �''
n f•i ":a+' �'. .,'`�•r1.� � '*� �, i'K+'i=f. �ji �.,Y. �� � r a'S�:o/y"7�R ti:i'� K.a f,�I�at', nf..�'ta• i.i. �: .7 .;i,.,yt' `� ,t :5fy, 1
'v?���'�`. :r.•'�+ P 'Yt- �1,t fr '�s, ,,:.;)}., s,•a..;;.€`.r,,•,Sj-. =.f. b+; .N•'Y..t.; +;• 1r�r",•��!• •m•.ga�ruA.j,c!;..E.�t ��:ra?IJ.". °l+' ',,.Ill. r�•.• ti.j ,t �1+.�' Gt� 'rt".t
:l`'.�.;g4b1,��t}�; t�l ,•+' •Jjt:k,,�,,�i P ; �'�-. •t ": t4�k,E�, •f; F:t..� IY..,r t ,�s-,�.•�fJLi y.4.�.�i �;:t ,Frl• d, ',,�^- S
°� J s• 7.y; <.• �.> w• �r,,}�,t, ,i �,iy i. 76%" •+4! +��ay.�r +;y'� � t'h�, •fs/ Yyr• ,�;r , h1S''t-�. ,bra •1. ��r. 1.' � •! o•� �} .a
s <Fd�:;i` {�+,' rsy7• ., p}6�,� fi �{'d ru °' ""'?a -'l,`,J'r�€ 3,?�STn, •.5^,-'-�' MAN* >."IS'.k' �t,,*'�'.w.�,F} i�J..Y'ni:Fa:';P•},�'•'• •'�F`. �.47'+'' (¢�%i t,{;�,,��; •n''�[ .w .Y � �,.
a"�.r.r, '•i-4»�"'1�'lira lulls_n`i t r ?F i'.s: iq 1 Y- >, .i .'f `1'i. .,F51M:d: .
.r ?r+i,-,1:s�sj.���_.,�•:ia '„�r7r i r) a'�I t. j t Jet Alq •(.rlt -r•, ' { 4 �� !a,•a.�S••C,;,!i v,'.;Z•+
tl��l i/q•7':ri':�" �* A t: •. 1 %T �• rt;wr'`.3(,f u r,pjj{rij'�-�`, 1f�'' ? yPAgir i;•%�',��!,•: i5 ri.rtyartv� �M�" �„�' :•�T+'• 'P, •�F�I� �� ..tt'� i' �Y •�F
f+:k'i=`i:+•'�'• •� °� "' :i f •eyEr`•�'tyy!t'+t• I• ^f y` {»E,,,'� 7`7 � .(ir• .<,f.,l.sp!¢.. ri rti. :v ,'9 ,.•y +f'•!:� 1' G.• ry'� i
.,:•i��•na >^r;#1 ' ^•dr: <j�', •its r• ;t ec' t,A. ,tJJ ° `.f ''S:• ':tG1,' .t. � 4 r ,' .w. .s < ''• ;.FJ,s .J It► „ ,,ds•. ' �:�:•� .'1
Tr.; .•.-.,�a � h•`t'' 4. +"4l,.diF�•1 l a •a E- 3;. ''t 9rt/F .�?�.' Sa ti E'�l;r t. ( �" •`ter, 3 1 � •'7
•4 r:+s i , ? �t, ?il I M !i+t;4 Si} ' {I},, J1!'( lfre �'t1'ZrYF 1. :r:pf .7 :}� ) �� • .i l 6 !: '
�� *••, rE vpa s�� �• f+� t�+• .41�' •ti<+, ��tal.M1?c<Ix,st•T
,,, ,3�� yZ �'Y '�• t. fa, ,y1' {,�11•'' j t! 'Jv' r`I y,f 1�. }';..
.{:L•,-•,•. '.-'r nfi�1�.'., '�+`%:7. y,.:;r� .; ,k,'l;t tl, ]•,S�/'.��^e?•su.ya3'(�•tX L•,�,Ti' !i v�L..� •4 y;.�tfi-`�,t•, �'�rt�<� r•.,, , t�y
'��, ���•irt}•r' d 4*a J k,,:�„Jr/4.tt,'. .��.Ji :wa�i.. r�. �`. w�:?F��, t♦i d'1. y.
. � ',:+'� ''l•'• UfS7(v• /t ti 74�. Ny�av
• :r , tr. 5. ���jj .€. . +i 4 .. ,•,ti' : 7: It�,E.r�. ,+d'; a t.l,W .,^'-dF..:,tiu.•" Y= ).{a j... i C l Fri:1,. c y. 'f .Iti+'� `i •� }{ ' � [, 4;'�7 „•�lry,,? ff �. ,,r :t 71+ • yy
b. .! +. Y ; ��j � . a1K •isfy.y�v:• ; av t"3 S ryxt,:- 1•r yk"t+vrxi;' ;,si '.1,.,kj ``a ,2.rPy'y14 •t•4'. �$' •' t, • ' `a e 'J1t -'.►�• ,# . � 'F ..4v r a , ' r ,...ti?(( �i... ri. .rl . e Y k.S �+r���� , ,Ivit. . ;✓,".�`E.(E..r F ,.� ' 'i F r a:9u-, ura ry. ..t.nfr;?.! , .aau �17VS"J!•.^�„r:v=:s, �k
!.�«.�'F r 7 1 a y'•,pz D •X ,.ia"� ° �i '!• t�•, `tJ
..l.�.•1 � i. '7 + � �:j �;`M� ���,�V� ���� • • � � ,�ati ••t �"�ta .'R''Y�•�4[i ,�Q.� �{�4 ® ,� '•�.; a6 a
.:t:p t ( � < rlil•t• 1 • �E:?.a'p' r,.. .n. �}�.' ��� {' .�• �' p 1r. 1�e, �
rl�'y,'rA;' C• d+1 )•r_.ey'i/!. b (,14''�,•3,5!...: ♦i"• r •F ,:•�.1 Y ^4 (y '1",i :n
is :S. .J•, ! •ry tLrA;y'; :?S < hh ,fi:. {5"' RE ,iE1�•nJ• r 1 ,,;w•'Y h '•- w•. i„ �.•:a
..ra• ';..i,Y•v+i• a �y.:f i3:i ,t�1r S.d. ,,r�+. .'Mr t1�5:E'.t��+b y,tyr'• c 1..,'. �,�� {,•�.,' t�y� '�'�\��,
4-.. �._ :',s2•t, x_ a•: rlil�!!►r { +•• r, Lit: Y..7a 'fP' ;.�tL �..'R7s.C,d'4+it:++:`'y+?# :1N:AS'r\1S �f3,t1,1,ttti•M '�tt \' y `,'eL uS e+q:
, i�,r••� E{]i+' ti�� .?l�Ha< t� •dr, 7-•• !� Ilj ,� :}• k �• !' �.t .r7. ••�.,4 � �: ,TJ••�•7` :f S }?,..,rr.)i5 trR i
Xy � ) ; t 'Mr.V�}. 'h:Ois-, ' !.y. ', M'ERN,�`�i M7"` l l;%3#i C .'E%t1`i�! ►, �• i y.,E 4a w � s t r�'aj) I• �t
�i".C•:*_+{�,,�iit.`:'i.�`ir•�� ='f•,r � '•1 '•"+�'fY."V�r,J .y'. '�, tdi. Gre,•:7i."�Yx' �' v�l<ia' '�Tr�Sj"'� :v} .(ir'7'.)`•rtlt; :�ti'"'. alrl� �`,"'f!:"74�i.• �'.�,�;-"y�y�d.;.�,`:•�A�fh�9,5� ��x:lr.. �I ` Il
�,yb,,,,f"F?�,,•r,'�r� !,'."' •d iP Y'• A� i�A'r ..t �r,. �` • (.�. � �4 r•} i 1 t'Y r S� .•n.ryr„r, • �Y t r Y Z ..,,t t�:r ,+.♦,.l..,P'.�:+T•�i �'iiyt ?♦' �' � r
dt:�r+.�•.SS Aetstrj� :t�`e1.�,` '.�' L+;6 `' ,•� •„ 7 '•1C•; L Ny 1.p�jt�hti•1Y`j+�d{tlrP.y�14t,4,StsA Ti%tt ;r:fa..
1ya,:t'yS.;,Ju1j.,N �•� r� M� u.'J, r a. +IJrI}% Y•'._;1;r1• .,++',r..�',
r K[{ apt• V� J ' „dam• +•'f►( 1 .�lF!'ky'd .�,�lr'.tlt_.. 't cr:..y( ,1�3+1!,� �`S•.{�` ,ELT ',.>�y ' ..••� , l t,..L c,,.I, It. -y+af"'••C1�1
:" Fi� 11 c"' �.,n, f^`,tSF 3`�•:�:'7" r•.ttnt�;-.:", f rYr.+r .tS� }j•€i;iEt yr •'%1 �r;l:t;'r•'. '�t'•aT'=a7"1,}rJ ,e +t..;;•, a .
�y •J \ P. i,t' i .1.,•••a ti ,.� T ,qt•• ?�
't,•••'r+•'-%i'i^>,•?:,r+�.tj(��yf:('<'"'��.1.i �t'l• i 1.�,�• � �`i. '+:t�.. �� .'S±'t!(:i•• S` y yLr'f,:,l+li,)i t. �. t �q '� t•� ,,��ai� t 'i^
�!.. ,t,•,.as IYI 1• Y' `•+ Iri�.a•'.,', �'N(+,t :�. •• .5.t�.. " tE. �}�f.�Ft+b'..rl,."t 7 y�.1/• r.0¢!,•LgL., •T`'ri2rW, �.• .s•.f. +}Ji
?.�•,;.E..;�I ':��y.r ,IS% i !. 1%?'r� • t � .t..� 1 :¢. J� tR S •V '•1•i -•i:. ,1' S. ,'tt,Cs'Ff 9kari{A + r� 4'ltrtn •.:1 Y'T'":. at )5i5 ? -,. �. 1 i
+, .lrr %r. �+N { . 1� 1 1 :$'t-1{.• •'� .,•.• 5+, ,`e av,^I'., ..5..9.>f .. I++ :. ,r. .ir iy JC. ..t`•: �-l;�r� afl7 ,.;'
<.Ji,.. ,s 111I ,t� �. , i � ,t -� �•�� �E. ','.It"'-!+dd'•r• 'y ;,t�i. ,• 'Y:..;p AI � 7.e. !�. q .@�t .r...A"dr ,,;{,,,.,,..,r •3 •,.,.
te?;• i. i�F� S •li �l'}. '' r s't .A' t: £rw;tY.••1. t, !,1 ,•. .i �,A (g.
.7•_1Fn:3'�si: r ��ti))�'kN �1 7`� a^�« � �� � ;,%� u `''{: f� �'�� �•' . r rsrS ,iX p�;L••: ;,5„ij�'t ,� iw rq'°•:{...,y.r:.e'Y' :n'�' .�y'`IF�:I!• )ti• At1 fY�tgi {L ,?Sti;r.
:s j•'v:•!'., r( +Z' _.ha;'Y j .tl�jyyJ(/'3r. ..i •. N. .iti�J y' (�T < nK1. t�,J � G.4`- r� r r;1 1 '�?.t r;�ES'�.F�•a �.. .`�, 'Fr ( Pt• fR��� -•;{... E.... b
F r,••: Y } Ft.: Y i.1 A' .1 91 M f f M MI• jb 7, �"
•�+- �•1 '2,. ,+ €. 7 "�:1'�, .���«ar,�".t�-.t�'d: t 'p •'r!�:Yt�. ,.�1 ` .` v 1,a••• l+. •.} >S,;S >�
.�i'+l'+'. F` ,1V r• 6,f r /t'��a. •''�! ��. r '� �;� �v L s.,.r�� �' r r Pa 1. �• i r7�.��� •:�'
-..t. ..Af. •N�l�!'. • ` /� r t�f .b� ]'S• .i •;r•. ',Zy '�,. r 7 ..( t. «; !1 ixf:., r..�r"'tii..-•r,:, �,h;. �j.;a.• "ii�1�tr,` '''L„ � i� �t. Y 1.-�• k i
:r.!.{L t.l „•. F,•ta. •.'h•.•a,'t.Qit F• �3d;a?�y)t5.�inat�s..�., y�9 �' E _E .�• •.i d. �. � i�-.,ra•�w� -r'- :3a;^;. �EtE-T..f ,=�r�:.�'a<:.a .i� ;...ae�,'•j'SF,:b'%° i,T�.:�a:�; tFr M_w'M s,,�-y,.
:,Fi••�+'`r" ::i• `5fi FJky d it:F�.�Ao 'I, b. �5 zu '`'�^� _'Y ti. ,ti~i.0'' 'f°�'�� ,tr,A,t.,,dS�T�i� �:s�:.Y.e!ti�.,`.�,s.--..'�ltt•: «.. +• )f�r4`:.• ,. '� � +.. +3-•
M.f:�••i�,�' .0 �' 'i. �' tf+�ln'�"'i -t:;�,'�`� ,.a.�::.. -.f•, •-�••"` ,r� }e s^��li.�T, :'IH J:li•+'.^ •Gnw.�;,r. ��}y to `Yi r. 't!'�'':•f,,t
'hS S� ��A ;;ir t I.a"•ry r M1 'N• yyt l : ., F , 1,i ,I' ..X.,,., .tif+.r,•..^-3'y, .>.i •(�'S,;�.L1'Jpr.�•r. ,t1• k t.iM1-•;. h .j sy;•j�•.; ' :. t1
� �' • ,�, ,rq,5 rre, �' �: +� ��.Y .��+h ,/ s. ��fw' ,!•,,. A..R';,•�f^P, v.��•. i�ter'/ ••r^F'. �:; �I''�
�.r'i 1';•.�.j•tr .f! ,[!a'7i,i,�'/ � � . aV+r .�'. 1 1!}:�1�+ }i)r� �1� r 4< •y,�'��,•t<1J.� ��t'1•� rip�.in7 �'=.P .r.� lYY .'4 Jr r � �•
.i•f t f � 'a,,�, 114� s.� � � � Poo ,. y n•�'r� ',..�.�i., .yrt;r�•ii'rf1l�; .,1•.,,�.E'�;:�,t4=r )�. 1 t. qq� S s 3
S`H ! ,a �' 'a• `Y O ^. !} e�`i5r RY n+ ."J........ !.� a c% Y�iliy' 3J6v,! .+ '• ;:�'. L _ r,','Pt:�t F•.r.. ttM ar•; r �, ' y'. r , r r t'` :.: ,'R't 1'r_ et�.+z.J T' e.% ,-')R r +,yry�.,J� -„A C)p �� l•',S �j
i.{ f j••1 I �t: p •„ '• I•^T�(y � � j...�}'.^�' �ys/ a ♦, � ,n f r•:b. t� `� a�'bp� AC. ttt�@!•i'C 1, '�rr q.t•"�� `'•5 1'jF� .r•'� 'ts..;i'a./•. .•-^`
"�;JS. t;• i.``,j�i�lA l`it, ,r� �,/'•1 'W����• /i'v!Se�f a�!•.�±�!t '�. �' t., J•�ja.vrT.i!-' i �•� G -�1'.a ,y;fS..t,rt•4��I .t, ..i(�..•�.. r.�l•+r ,,..�yyii,,:�� f ECM.i(i, r n.f tyj'. •• {«f' F�
.r ',+ti y ?�'tr•,�-.� !. 'lLl�•;S.,S, 1. f •k � .. ! f. :7 1. .r ,�,r.N ", )t,!, y k,:3,.f( if.!rt 3! "(', �'e;Y r 71.�:• ,j,t jr;..rr
r:5, ��J,t .K• rr,'J'!�y3 t f^ Y Xt1. y , „,r,, '.� .Err 1. Li,•�•. .y .. f { . 1(,,r •!7 t -1 .W .
..U� .•Vd),, 2 ?1. { �•.q •J•' `�i x! 1• N,C M.,. v. A' 'Y.• r �• 5
1.•tf�ft' ��f� � •� � '1�. llE L• �t It( / h• � ' 11� E•�'Y'M1'1 r �K't'�� {"y�' {�Y� •�KV 1'w i>� �•1 r. f a i �2 .A7�,ld''•1.
�Qt v �•1 +j'�yl. ,I' (: '✓/i _y,' 6'I: � �+� r'{';"� �'s.. i y,a, .�i: .^I •�,,7./
uj ,::%�•}•rt•fv irt.r 1 i'1' •iJ y to INS
it ,J ,:01170
•Z71Q '•' J t'�y ,;t�•`�•'y .d•�T•' a' p lysr�' b � E;Y.IJ tr, .t, ,?: ;« �. 1•
r•'+ i 1 € r t. T `li� ��JJtt 1 j l� i t j�y�!�Y. �R'i 11:�: •< ��,,..•t: •l r.'}..).r: t{' .I,r�{Lr t'' D •L.r:.S j `.�ir{'�{ •'��'j t i tE•S ,§�7�+�r 1 s. � � <.. •♦ r�. �''a'f•1r:,,�jr C.'Q C,•'i'.r{•f � } �j,�! ,,fir +,�7{+ s t•"+ '%F4 r j��ry 'y� s )rr vmIll,
. . • 1t F ir• .� . ,m 5�
r�. 7 •N r Y`,?,r tt t K.�:i Fk k `, . r .kj /�. tt� 'S
�,S°i� i.L►Sa �w!Ef�r � •' 4r 2 ; �y .. t J r �• r�': rst..1.iyR,1•L' :r5 !`ct;ri.i•.�,,..!lA•tf..al2.i +!:: .gt'rj y.kz• :r. J� ,ry.Fr. +1++•P: !r;•
•rt.. r .P, .� r't"�Iw ♦ ��+at,'�... :r t' F {• r�' <3.q,b. S�}1:".r+.lE: �•;''L St.J1 n.Yf4 !,h .il + ' +,i•,{
(l° t... '1; 7�{�'t� p1�� �. �..• ,q ,�` q fie' ':!^ 3 fit•_ .,,......, �..�y1 1 1 .�ai a1 r iyare -1st 3
1 �$r• r ✓. �d', tr"4"�. .� � 1 ��r �d .1;. 'k"S7 1i'1C ' h :t•CJ�''ry �:4 l'. �, ` 'M};. •ri .n.rSr,r4., ;t };t.,i.,7 .7�<r �T;;, :,r � 1 r�' t•I N
� "M p �•rt.), l; } � t, I'1 �, ti �'„ r: ^ �' {'i^,1�';t;�'... 1.::•
�.. IESr�n,n to .i SS� ..1 � !'iL•1•• .�...k::�� r}'E'.. S i. t�!Yi r5'tt it F' � '
..,3 r.r,{�t,f�.1 .;�►,•�,t L��tl��'y? 'r..,,>,�,rj � +� t,� •Jr v`A ${.JJ% f r F �d .�., ;,5;:��;4 ;t xs;EE�i'4".'• •: ;�• 7 v?�!)q9.v t' }� �j�(.
•<!-.4 r 5 ;3.. •: b,t• f j}, 7� '.:!.••' LF•.! i .✓"',::i•' �.n, I•t�;�."y'.. q: :'.L.Jrt' ,.. 5z ;t'' t'af.• .�..t. 9rVi.,• .r (, yNY tw WI'
�•t:+..r. G!•,�) •a: <i• ��. ), A�{ ,�•,, tl 1rlr S +'i. =Jt: u.,:. i.f;» X^r5•t)'rA. M,rNS" ;., ,f '( p.,:..:. 3.
, .C• M L.• r'!,:. tl. •t'A;q•i�?• � .r•1'. Sr �d,r .; f'n�•.{',•.s''+1� ..,,•!'{.;:r:rs :.{ •,(rS r.}'•....,r_�, 5 �'.I .r•r., G' I l 1:.;..J•1i•1.1�E' (� P •J:
.�I.,r.. v't>' 's.i.�•'r<s^�:•r.�.1:E;:t:k♦ .t•a "a:"L`a1 sly 5 ,�''i. (t .rA ��,. A f.,.�}Gi +. �,. .. y �.� .:L:'i t:;t• ' 1+►' +.�l
e•�.Ji.{ +•�!t' .-o,. {... .• r ;P$' f?..' J ! r.. 1 1 in:::+1K «• .s 5tti' l r;•;•, ;... rx f. L t t' :t ,
f. .r:, i���t't*.":' �_'" �'L'` %` .`�',�;�E: sir, +r}•;r. y a i•�i�„r.•:n;: �v.,ve .t.F, �.r•d a
•4 a.,,.t FJ".�,». TSA►"• :} "n...•4" 1w�} °3^n :r. 4 :�k.t f1 7 ,+s is l.-il.x°;K.,pp V• ,,a a ..k:_.=fE 'U, t 3-•.;� r r l t.' .
L `i.::• ..ii. Y ` t•M 1,� w..y T .l Lr• Y-ur.A:RrJ;,t. •e ;y r�. i• r,.. L ,, :+.ri'.Y.,�J1E,/r r
::S•.4._ <i';t1ii,H >f •�J: �'. ,q� •r rF,'' � 2ysRr :1:+�• jJE'C3 a f'.ti�i'rt:1. 1\• 4.a. ��. /�cyti d'ti•S•. ,vtF J':'�if. l^.',3"IF.'atii,p.5tt •:t,"'• a 1: .L.f�. �r-fi1� l
a3..-.)r t, Q!' "Ty' � .r a.1 �ry5'1; .c I,., ,of ,.s, t f;.,a,•`.... J:'+�y+ {T !r! ,l.1.1, •L"i. },�"•i i'.
T'.'E�+:t� Kr't•i}`w�"�v{l•5 t�+ i �fl't'{ �. -:'C '.' r•7� .�• J 'f•li L• I..y� tdL ^ ''�'i ;.F}teF `ti• rs. •i: 1:f} :>.t a. t
Y`#'r J 1►^) n. gr t�{• •'4�'ur �:,'� Ita pp 1: �''',� f:#J.i{!tr..1.a J'n.. .t,;,!a.':,;.•.ki�S i'.�r.:+.;.„•:it,. E...,: 7:;�a•1:. C.,..al:�:. r. 1F i�' t•$_;''';':''i •h'
.•t.r ;...(JA;1�,E•:jM } �,d,•�.. �• � `Vi.'S•,�.. Y. 7": ,�- l�•a•r t tM1" � a .•..�....rr... <N .,t..R..
:� rjM yT, f '• ••' 1 a �} 1r p % .: '�' ``�'�,1.,�6,..,%s.:: .n �i:.v.,.xs},! f S:»��E;� 1.,. Yw..-c. 1{t•a k.•:S.'i:;Y: G`.� ,
.5:,pl!f. .:u+� t1� ;Z' +�,.• `�a i:? �p 5�[•i�ti•tt�!'.t,7 ` .eft,.U. ' •'t,Ylr3'� r. k 5, 3 ..; ''�vi i �},
r✓ s.: f'4sp Y_ {#y ,+'1 A :++ 3•.r:= s.:' .+_ ,�..i s S A t ':a 1� 1, s U'iS• f v ,sx. � r'�tjl•?ia..
..r;+r >;5 ,c ,1 Pr{ j +1 1 • ` T'- Yil tr l?+ H i!{'fk 3 e , rty:i•,.ra.�:t-..: .) .'}`k'•trx"''1'• ": .y. }- .t Z':. u,«:/y �:., :.
:i"•..t. .,t .�• t � 4 „• ( � •1 'v� :+>:.•� � tf,• !'„ :r_;'•'`•',!°.r Qt 77... •,tom" :i, � :i, :�J. :t
,: xb:..f..is r, a`' -'L ,1 ,l�..•.:.•. t.: .Lr,••
,) ,/.tr'w}}•S• .•'1•, iY. 3F ,•" S'r t"'�'Ar:.c ; .•. .t 6- .1r4_. t:'t .r• .cr s• `ra '=g•7n- ''3F s.,•.:Tr.y:..�k:. ,• W�`
,tr5,7.:.,, a. .�,.,,•. E .;.•, r � �,:y.
3:• r , /a%� .a i� . � .t. e tii• ' �l •�l..lE ..�•:r,-,r �, �',r•Z'.'ip; 4''r•' y r.r.!'r=':4.:-_. •''.Y ,,.:�,tY 4"• r.
'•a . ,,�•+ r:r.;:r. a . 1 .' l cy� :s 1 Qt'�!� _i :y. )„j ��i,s, •h.,.,�;' .:, ..,�t:'1; •..s•: :y. iM1..r ''t.<¢tjfi 1 {�� ,r a ,;,.3t;�
��q�'tti�?i.l�.:.7�,i, t � .u>. .;. ..f^::•;,.1" .i :•r. ti�"1)�,s c ,F r ri } } ;�' 1:.' t?.t�,•�j•`R•7J.*.:iC�ry y.,, 1-'
+t ; / .�ff.� sue. t,.! .,t •.M. Wk�,.:.o.:. F;,•� v, f+,F,. i`..,,r': a,.r .,:',r..f'1 i J ( ,�tiE�. • t. 1' V99 .>! 4. + M• <..,_ '%:!':"4 •'rt:�f:. } -t6u p'i'.�7:Ci;lE+,�;i:}G, -3,'wA;: J' ,4. •! at. rlt, A• ;ta{(, ►ZPA .P;.
.�. f., }r• '� n•r'�t�g € .S•`A � 7. :It'�' , .� !.{'� S.rr'• .•i '.(5 vt :YY,r U3.'j,!•.,.1. •. .Y.:r'}!� .ilb.,J" I.i': C �•,- ,r y-' <
t a d''Pl .. t is � 'T ,v.i• •,pr., r� .�:r•h�,. ,,�y, .�t !• :<a"f'�,�':',{:,�:,^.: , 1..�.
••� •:.r '. trr4' I.�. •'1- 'tNr', _�! .n a,T d' ...t' •!IY :i GiA - r,... ;v:.. �i4,. t a"J '1',';':1 '=?YJ::!IC�S a:n:" r;(Si•' f�,
.� / .y+ .Z 1I1n1+. 7, a �� f r � �t• F .11.•.:yf p,i'w.c7 s.J ."Jlra,;,�°� .J�v �4... ;:\ .vim+..fir•°!:`i,. yn,..r:. .:r.•.. .t....r' J 'r ..L( ,}:t-% .r!
f••%!r ati I.r7. ./ti v:•.L f. t t, �, r•z :a'-i t .'i r h t;?`q.;.Y rM Y d••=. ] d'r.•FtFr+ •.. i' r' {
� rY{• r; �.," 4•. ;:a«;,., 'r:_ -\"�;.i. i..1��f.. :•.�.E.tl.`o-:�t:.•• •,T.. ySi
•., i, tt ' •,. k,A• F .N 1 a;:»1 ,•g,.,,ir:u .•:7,•1m1',+=A;.,,
-�J`C• %" �;r;+il t:t,r J.r }•' .t: K 1yt �t�[ � ,i♦ . `it-,. .1„• e�r '.71�•rry r.'�•..,;E.y.'.7.>!;� . .P. .'1'r ..t ,•it L•.r s..n'Ail:'::>1,.; ..;+-i:'•�''r :Ca E' li! "'•< ,�,, t ,.
rd. r�•. 'rT.r/,, .,. / E •t I '7 lVl� ��y} i R t ,t.,rt.•,f..?;+,. +'..i iS r.5 7 w�:•;r, -a J..:.1 ..}i .,s. ,•K tl+ r '• ,,,. siP;.,.
••, Set .r.l,.•5r � i 1 .1 �!'_ "�.!yr �"Sa• •v� J� t t€.Ydr..:,i:..s...,,�, Mai
:I��,r:f..-tzi 1+,.....r,r,.�.,,:;a't•��' r1. f•. .$ ,.+h �{ •_+•:•�•�•
rt. r ,1 iJ,• 4..�,?:1 ':� f�. 1 .� � �. � .�° +:! r .6<,. ;!' �F :••:.! Q...�iti: 1:�' a. f
S s S: < 7 �rt i �1b .1:. 4/ nkbt,,; ' J+.�1,•S,"7',y� Y�Y,y ;T.a •t' `.',a.•+..,e�jF s';•' r.1 '�'d, i.?.tt ', ,,:, f ,ySr. t :_,`�. w•5 .�','Y� ':f j:'.•h t ih '
,fy.s� cr: ,� e N.• ,S� .� � r � 'Ss: �1^�+'u� .vP �.,{ ..'iY ''{;P: x% ,Nw}�•i'r�. .�.','n"►r . rt;a.r x.
7, t?�':r,1��► .71... to Y A.''�' y; 'r' ..Nk.v+.Af.. I i rw5�el�f-c i,. :E. ,,:,..xyrwrE {'r .r:.'$..wNfiaSktt 1^`: +t.t:iX'i. •J a..S.,�� ,)3 T':• '.s fd .f' •ri'i�� ♦ �: f •�
+'P f; .f •{r §!' .fin •, lEf` r 1 i 0 !I'-'F,'rT ,Y t:.� ) a+ +r:.�51.1
tk F. ;1=..I...ai• k1i!•rl:i r'� i., y ,($iv a r i �.J.t�,.�L�
t tlt�r;�. J] �' JjfRQ•'I /i• T} � P,, ��� )� ��'�:M1��•rFr Y ~t �^'"�•'�i r "�.. r:r••.r• �•^•W.�.�i:L.�,7W.G'K'�r�.y,. �>�M
�WtL� �� /;,�i�. F,.%}i•� p,� Y i 73 l "• +'ij••4�tvt ,.E �g; /tom 1: � �!•r4+•. S • A '•;is i'i ii i, , J. J•l• r,0`�' ft�Y1
d ,^r `7 F'�Jl. 71,. � ' !;?' Se�F .s� •1 r• E:y s`1F•S y -ems. ctr' ... � t'q••;xaa�lai {,+,;.�s.yta3'i'':�a.wd?.h„k a � - ••�:�i. *� .'�"�.v_
tr �' J ( 5 ,f {�.� A r•' ( F a, Lrr lF• 1'r �f•/+C U
1 p"r 1,�F✓• i��}}��,, f•,lit .C' ♦ `6' /t• rl. :1'� e' Y ]�1:^L t,. !•YN:A '�.r•,r:•7. S ,:4.nu"i'�US��.r _• 7 �"1P.-.- MnafrZ,gN. .� 1:.. d 1, � a
:t fir 4.i. .i� t,'f•i.. �;•d�= `' x t w` ,2jtr ,r'1. ✓; �tf, s
y'. 11d/' � �.. r�b ' l �1- .� Sir•. ':`.;+:.y 4+ a�' •rty �'.tJr._ _ _ 't.t�wY.•rrlf r..+,Xfsa a•' :1� .f1' 1 ���+'iri:R')"�,�'�j `J''L�,ia{., ��
1.•v{'�rE•I"I: dd f. -.! �� f}i ♦ t d E !J ,�Jl•tP ..�r �w i , r ✓' _ .,.ryY_.J-�?i _ Y •"• �'� / f�1 [d.
:IJCy� '�a'r 5 J �• r tf �t i`` a .y�, �NA��7 r -�J�y�,��l' 'P ..F t'e r�, ...��a�'Ir•jtr 7S t +it '�• ,�y�. • ;,�,�ii+. `ti.
YIJ;k� •Flrlt f. ltt; i.. j :! i. / Y' i• d A'L'f• •'f, •y�Es. ;ItW1it M r. !It !.0 .utE•4=w,'Si:,r,. .1 t :=;:i'1tt� -}�Q '�+;. j�ri'�r t {��
:rQt7R;lff E:�'';�vt% 11.1 -
p
�'i uF �" {•( '. •i{' fr i ),,P a •: .lyt'�'�f f ,D•� ,.I;'"`4.+tit iai FN > g .;�r^f" �::gh} 1 2i(, /'�•'fi•• 't' .i�t!TZ' -E�iig
� • i0l,- � �,!}x _ .,,,... ••�Wy,`4''i.ry' � Y. •Y t.t•?�?'7t �A { . 4' '5 iJ `' iv^v:t•Jt � j�
1�i�1.:. •F_� �� , .• p'� ��• {E;'��ee��,,t "� '�tt��1! k f ,'Y;its'''°i• ► ♦ ' S-r y:/.�..�'G"? t�SI� l .
••r<:r.- 1' �,y • + 'Fk; „! ••''. $b :f.7: ,y 'rl., t fa 7 Else.'. �>S r t F'7 a :;`y } 1' ';�j•.r! .•}.«�•}t Ya W�`�y t� Ti 1"� !'4 'r ',r;'•• ';•i' ,,t F 2:..'ti a f.. i 1 s r t•{ rg; SSI �r SEtrA• J' .�j 15 r�.•
•? e t • "F.�' �)y��, Fy/�,Gc :RJ <•• p
ifs •J••'t 1 i• e7 .! 1�' $' 1ir,•!!•1:.. /�+•t.',sSy,
iC:�iS•yy�lr�1,i a'S1. j' fL+i �;3 t�iJ{�x _yfiP ,Iy ►f xx��v7f"ir S' � i3"' � '}S. •v "Z'l.t'r,.', 4,v .pF•.E5 er1 � 11•ice• vJ'.
1X'� >). � 1 1 �.Y .i�Jk",3d i 4r� a, 'rt� � �, iS?i•.0 ! � 5tS•.thivbCf/ :�' , •ht;,.•n`_'�t�Y eft •area �!* 1
�:RI t�ye» e .r •s' t� 1�;.y ;� � " , u S }• i ''r ,r•-yP'f { � , 1 �'f�: { � :'sue t�:t ��� y'fty"
r���i)• � "� r t �'�'��?►��EC� � � '���,�'� ;�. rr��, .� �` t ""K'`�``Y � � �' wri; �C �� b,°t• sh��('��s�" �ty.� �.
�r•� '{� i�f►.. � L �' �,1`q�,��1.i� 1' •r t''q�r � y ;ty`.�' i� E .'.1�-� rP :�; .Y; )�'`;�••,R,'Y} '. �4C.
r V •r, 1 ,E[ rl+f. '4n .1e; r� N :t ;t y�
..tsa''JI,r4+.�i'' i r �YS ►� �4,j�• ,.Yy.,v ,'�r. µt.3FFA«: �`•' '�yf �'{ a•¢'�l�x 'S �. d'td�; •�,
!ir.•7}•� :ir. 1. r t J �r ♦.
rGr,.b': �•1.. 1yhA..,y�.��, ^► �r 1Ei::�•, ,� , �y4i '� `�} � '!> t' '�Y•}'$�:4id},.. ,r i .}jL. � 't 'r )P,�'�'tt� pa ' ��!It.
`rk'y 1 �' __ 3i a: y , �:J� (' Ste„ �-1 rF r � Vx M. :.:4d• i;: :f' ri ��y;�7j�r� 'n...,•dr J
'A t°' �4T, 1 OJ }�"S � � t 'St �, t[•: � ��t,.� � ,:"zn::r:;^. �, _ fit•, L '� ,r 1 '':•
I "%,� J r, c r..` ..• r a• F /J5,l,!�a�jy },jg ! P rC I;.trNtr i�'•a,,'r�jj� ''�� •.1 r-'rr�ir�.',.s• ,E�'4• "7" i J4 .�• ��•,} .�, '?�i`•j•t: 1 at,�j���/(
�qr a :^ i• +r yr-. E Pl�r d +` P N. �.. , u M• hr.• >r��t�;ia IrK1, <A:�'''e,• r r+i «v. !i 9 1 %+, � ! i""
1:.lyr�r faT tit•+ u r. Ir '� �v�(3:'• y{ r C� ,$NA �{� _ �r, rr Li ^y(� + 1 R:crt,ttu'H�+y 1.a %� � `q�'t�> 4►
rZ'�taSit�, ! 4 'a. � �5�' 1 } rt .,�� l i,• ',��� >n'!•��.;ti�,' •I. �} "ry�if�i'rt gy �.lg7;e4tr...�. �I E.,r•• _.r� ,�i fi J!,•!.?• �,�Yi}.r �' "Y.
I t � r r_A Ai 4• tt��� R. � .f Y.:,�,,.�1 +yy!J� f�,d aP .5� >, r ,�(� tl: ,,•j��• ,I�• 'S
f�t�. ;j v,t- �3 -�S't 1. Y' �+ � .� f•'?.�' +�(iP; E`� lavXS Y-,,Jri J"� :i✓,= 1 ..,i;a n :_.r. r�J•��`r .��.�i.,°Ja )war•': it,': � �:1".J.�•��'+M r
�.'»��3'si_��,{ .f.p •,,. � r �� I ��;+[;yi'•• �.R �:5Pj��1 h. S(`�S•d •I.tr_yJr. r`.�..,oP�� k+.,•. t�tr�,.; ,;(•• •{ � i .r �l ya ,1 d'S%S<t�r:�' �
.�sa lJtuli:":. �r�(7+�rx •� t',• J.�{ •�. �5a^j[ `!' t. �W`, ��. * �• •,t' ',�,'.yryt'',•: ,t'�: /7�} � t'�' �. ��,,rl `�SK.,
�+t':Q{,lliirY pp^,,,:�'t,�/.� L. ' �" r, t � .•,t�1��T �.;% �d 1. �,f 11�i J rt 7S�'rr�� ;*�:� .�r� •i 1 �.�'1 �r}��i br r+ 'a 'f'Pa� �°1 ��•i�,ttl;�j r'ir�.. Ma It
!K++ss)C � 1•.�� '* 1��,• .�{ (••. tiF;r, J}•,.,E�,,.,�d:..�+f.•�r'rlr)'j�••r ,� � •� It+ .'1':...��>T�.r.� f r 1
+f`v ' S:s� � r�'i; ..�y�•r ,{ ,!''!�l�rJ•`LiS'tyj� r i�r ��� , 1R. �'irfalr',,a:y;••1•,€ ••
".�'' t. yi P•{'•• .y: ,'.::.t'.t. .r 1}•r. 6;'',?'�'«iE•:tr'f r"•,`i !' '`�}.� r1,C5•.:. ;:i':• 1
APPENDIX A
WETLAND DATA FORMS
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field Inves6galor(s): Date: p� ? /�
ProfecVSite: —__
ApplicanVOwner:n'/ems Stale: r^/� Count':
Plant Community '/'Name: TP -/
Note_ K a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Do norm environmental conditions exist at the plant communhy?
Yes ✓ No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vagetation, oils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No -(If yes, explain on back)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
VEGETAIION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Slatus Stratum Dominant Plant S cies
�' Status Stra;um
2. 12.
3. 13.
{
6.
15.
7. 16.
17.
8. 18.
g-10. 1 c20.
Percent of dominant s.peccies that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation crGerion met? Yes /No
Rationale:
. SOILS
Series/phase: _d'� �;��< < �f /o Su e:c Flvva �s
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No bgrou p 2
Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Histic epipedon present? Y s No
Is the soil: Mottled? Ye -. No Gleyed? Yes No
Matrix Color: Li
I f` r,
otile Colors: __` _ -�� � .1-•,-• �•�
Other hydric soil indicalors�
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundaled? Yes No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes Now
Depth to free-standing water in pVsoil probe hole: H/",'
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes"- No
Ra:ionale for jurisdiCional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Frocedure and the Plant Community
F Assessment Procedure, y
' 2 Classification according to'Soil Taxonomy.-
B-2
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETEP,M NA T ION METHOD1
Field Inves,;yalor(s): z IDare: � ?
l
Projecvshe: Sta:e: U✓� Da'Coue: � zz
Applicanl/Owner: ^ `le-c^ C^ t7r ./�o�, Plant Corrnmuni.f �117"'arne: 'TP-3
Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the ba-_k of data form or a field notebook.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant communi:y?
Yes ✓ No (H no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soi!s, and/or hydrology been significantly d:sturb-3d?
Yes_v-'� No (If yes, explain on back) se
VEGETATION
Indicator InC cator
Dominant Plant Species Status S,,a,---m Dom.. _. , Plant Species
- Status Slratu;�
r J A1 - F�1-j 1 1.
2. 6r4- c c n r r "G i kZ 12.
3. 1
14.
7. 1/.
10. •-
Fe"""' of dominant sPeces that ara 07-L, F=,C` .' andt'cr F AC
Is the hydrophytic vebe!alion c;Gerion ,;,e:? Yes No
Rationale:
� � SOILS
Series/phase: �U:.: L(:.' .1 _ rl
Su--grcu,:2 t �,�
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes Dnd3;erm:in='4 J
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes N'o Histic ep do present? Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? Yeses• No Gle,:ed? Yes No
}+tat;ix Color. I���-�� l.iccEla Colors:
Otiner hydric soil indicators:
Is the hyd;ic soil criterion mat? Yes NO
Rationale:
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes Now Surface wa!er depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No �
Depth to free-standing water in piYsoil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes v No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL CE T ERM:,N_"",`C,N AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
Rancnale for jurisdictional decision:
t This data form can be used for the Hydr:c Soil Assess-er.t F.-ocadure and the Plant Cornmunhy
Assessment Procedure.
2 Class(;cation according to'Soil Taxono-y.'
B-2
DATA FOPM
ROUTINE ONSI T E DETERMINATION METHODI
Fi9;d Invest,ator(s):
Prcjec'✓Sre: Date:
Applicant/Owner:
State° r,.//f • County:
Plans Conn n„y Xr1�'ame: %P'- S
!v`ote_ ff a more detailed site description is necessary, use the bade of data form or a field notebook.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dc normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes ✓ No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soi!s, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes ✓ No (If yes, explain on back) 5
- - - - - - - - Z
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant S.c--cic-s Status a r e
Str_t�m Dominant Plant Sr�_ i_s Status Shatum
12.
;' 1�.
C.
I O.
7.
17
O 1..
-' 1c
20.
Per�Br,t Gf C^eminent sty-�:'s ;hat are OBL, r"�'"r
Is it?e rlyd nv r r, and/or Flii. /Op
' roph'yi)c YCgetaIi-on criterion net? Yes ✓ fic
Ra!:or,ale:
SOILS
Cnries.rphase: "j-"
Is the soil or, the hydric soiis list? Yes Na : -tIp-
Undeter,;,fined
Is ;he soil a Histosol? Yes No Histic epip;don present? Yes No
Is the soil: MOi,lod? YesZ:�r No Glayed? Yes No
I:at;.x Color: .' •c� C- OF
Montle Colors: �
O=` „y-16c soil in icators: �-
Is ;h,e ;,ydr c s it criterio. me!? Yes No
Raticna;e:
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes
Is the soil saluraled? Yes Surface water depth:
Now
Depth to free-standing wa!er in pr✓soil prob-e hole:
Lis; other field evidence of surface inunda;ion or soil sa!uration.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Ra:icna!e:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERt.!It:AT10N AND RATIONALE
Is ;ha plant community a wetland? Yes No
Ra:icna!e for jurisdictional decision:
1 This da!a :o; n can b-9 used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Commun;;y
Assess-Ma-1-1 Prcced::re.
2 C:ass'cat:cn according to'Scll Taxcnon-.y.'
R-2
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERM;NATION METHOD'
Field Invest ator(s): Dale:
Project/Site: State: �✓4 • Count':
Applicantbwner: cA 'le' - ;(z 1�) ,�l' Plant Comruni:y 9i14ame: -C-
Nole: tf a more detailed site description is necessary, use the bao< of data form or a fief nolebook.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant commun�.y?
Yes " No (It no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly dislu::---d?
Yes—. No (If yes, explain on back)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
VEGETAiION
Indicator Indic-,;or
Dominant Plant Soecies Status Stratum Dominant Plant Svcies Status Stratum
1 nlnr: nnrrr` FgcL-j ly 11.
2. 121 l rG i Q 1 r mac-q r--7, 12.
3. 13.
C. 1
S. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
8. 18.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant sides that are OEL, F"C\"J, and/or F;,C i a,
Is the hydrophy,ic vegetation crterion met? Yes� No
Rationale:
SOILS
Series Lk r _ Su,--;roup:2 r 1, i 37 Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yeses e-glo s Und=_;er,mir.-ad t
Is the soil a Hisloscl? Yes No H1slic epip-do. present?'des No
Is the soil: }Jostled? Yes Now_Gleyed? Yes No�•
}J,a;riz Color. �s �/h ?./% Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indicators.
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes Now Sur'.ace water depth: N/'-'
Is the soil saturated? Yes No\_ r
Depth to free-standing water in piUsoil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil sat ration.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONAL E
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the P!an; G_.-.-,un::y
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classif;cation according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
B-2
• VII. BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS
VIII. OTHER PERMITS
~i
CITY OF RENTON Building Permit
Permit Number B 9 4 0 7 0 7
Permission is hereby given to do the following described work,
according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved
plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance
with the Ordinances of the City of Renton.
Nature.o f Work
PRELOAD FOR 180000 SQ FT WAREHOUSE.
PARTIAL PERMIT-SUBJECT TO 303A(UBC) .
Job;Address>
800 SW 27TH ST ......
..
Owxer ..
TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY
5 6 01 -6 TH AV S
SEATTLE, WA
Tenant
ALLPAK CONTAINER CORP
"ontractor ..
FOUSHEE & ASSOCIATES CO INC Contractor's License FOUSHAC1580D
PO BOX 3767 Contractor's Phone (2 0 6) 74 6-10 0 0
BELLEVUE, WA City License 6152
98009
Cazt.fr.Lender :.:.>:.:...
Outer::hlfornatzon...
Date of Issue 12/0 9/19 9 4 Sprinkler Required
Date of Expiration 0 6/0 7/19 9 5 UBC Type of Construction
Construction Value 65, 000 . 00 Building Height
Parcel Number 2 5 2 3 0 4-9 0 6 4 Story Count
Renton Job No PROJ9 4 0 5 8 7 Building Sq. Ft.
Dwelling Count 000
Zoning Occupancy Group
I hereby certify that no work is to be done except Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the
as described above and in approved plans, and that City of Renton and information filed herewith this
all work is to conform to Renton codes and permit is granted.
ordinances.
pplicant X 622Building Official
BD3201d 10/93 iif
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
A Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) has been applied for with the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife to permit direct discharge into Springbrook Creek.
5197.003 [MSH/kr]
sTere 0.
o �
m�
0
0
y't 1889 a
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
P.O. Box 47600 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7600
(206)407-6000 • TDD Only(Hearing Impaired)(206)407-6006
January 23, 1995
CERTIFIED MAIL
Trammell Crow Corporation
5601 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98108
Dear Sir or Madam:
RE: Coverage Under the Stormwater Baseline General Permit
Permit Number: S03-002174
Facility\Site Name: Allpak Container Corporation
Address: 800 S.W. 27th Street
Renton, WA 98055
The Washington Department of Ecology has reviewed your application for
coverage under the Stormwater Baseline General Permit. We are granting
coverage under the permit as of the date indicated on the cover page of the
enclosed permit.
Please note your Permit Number on this letter and on the cover page of the
enclosed permit. Use this number in any future correspondence (e.g., submitting
a Notice of Termination, or a Notice of Intent because of a change of
information) with Ecology.
This permit covers the site(s) listed in the Facility/Site Name portion of this letter.
You should promptly notify Ecology of any corrections or of any contiguous
construction phases which you want covered under this permit. In such cases, you
should submit an additional application (NOI), noting your permit number and
marking the change of information box on the NOI.
Please read the enclosed permit carefully. As a permittee, you are legally
obligated to comply with its terms and conditions. A document called a Fact
Sheet has been prepared by Ecology which helps to explain the permit. You may
request a copy of the Fact Sheet by calling (360) 407-7156.
The most significant requirement of the permit is the implementation of a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Plan requirements for construction
activities are given in Special Condition S11. The purpose of Stormwater
C.a
January 23, 1995
Page 2
Pollution Prevention Plans is to reduce, eliminate, or prevent the pollution of
stormwater through the application of Best Management Practices. Such plans
are to be implemented within the time frames identified in Special Condition S1.
State law (RCW 90.48.465) requires that all permittees pay an annual permit fee.
You should soon receive a billing notice informing you of your fee obligation. If
you would like more information on the fee process, contact Bev Poston of the
Department of Ecology at (360) 407-6425.
You, or a third party, may appeal this decision to cover your facility/site. An
appeal may be filed with the Pollution Control Hearings Board, P.O. Box 40903,
Olympia, Washington 98504-0903 within thirty days of receipt of this notification.
In addition, a copy of the appeal must be served on the Department of Ecology,
P.O. Box 47696, Olympia, Washington 98504-7696. Enclosed is a copy of RCW
43.21B.310 which lists the procedures and requirements for the appeal process.
After your site has undergone final stabilization and all stormwater discharges
from construction activities are eliminated, you should complete and submit a
Notice of Termination. A blank Notice of Termination is attached to your permit
as Appendix 3.
Please call (360) 407-6437 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Oq
James D. Krull, Manager
Permit Management Section
Water Quality Program
Enclosures
cc: Dan Balmelli
Ron Devitt, NWRO, Ecology
IX. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN
N
...
I11T
:.;::.::.;:.;:.
E� i
::::::........:.........
....
SNI1[ TO11t
OUR JOB NO. 5197
OCTOBER 16, 1994
Prepared By:
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH
KENT, WASHINGTON 98032
(206) 251 -6222
z ? CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
-cz y.
rhQ EN
SETTLING ZONE VOLUME CALCULATION
Pond Surface Area:
A = 9.86 AC
Q70 = CIRA
C = 0.5 (Bare Ground)
IR = PR 'G R
PR = 2.9 IN (KCSWDM 3.5.1 E)
a R = a,Tc-roa
a, = 2.44 (KCSWDM 4.3.3B)
br = 0.64 (KCSWDM 4.3.3B)
Tc = L/60V
L = 1,368 LF
V= KAF
KR = 10.1 (Table 4.3.3C)
So = 0.2%
V= 10.1 0.0020 = 0.45 F77SEC
Tc = 1,368/60(0.45) = 50.7
iR = 2.44(50.7)-0.64 = 0.20
IR = 2.9(0.20) = 0.58
Q10 = CIRA = (0.5)(0.58)(9.86) = 2.86 CFS
POND SURFACE AREA:
SA = 1,250 (Q10) = 1,250 (2.68) = 3,350 SF
Pond Surface Area Provided = 60' x 60' = 3,600 SF
Page 2 of 2 5197.001 [BS/ps]
TESC CALCULATIONS
Basin Area to Be Disturbed = 9.86 AC
PZ = 2.0 IN
K = 0.37 (Soils Type - Woodinville Type "D") (Table 5.4.4A)
p = 0.05 TON/CF
ASED = R*K*LS*CV*PR
L, = 1,490 FT S = 0.2%
Ls = 0.14 (Table 5.4.46)
ASEo = 2.22(2.0)2.2(0.37)(0.14)(1)(1.3) = 0.69 TON/AC
LSE _ (ASEo)(AREA) = 0.69 (9.86) = 6.80 TONS
VsEo = LsEo/P = 6.8/0.05 = 136.0 CF
Use Fig. 5.4.4C W/VsEo = 162 CF
Wb = 0'
Lb = 27'
Provide 2' Depth above Sediment Storage for Settling Zone Volume
i
Page 1 of 2 5197.001 [BS/ps)
•:�l• ,.•II I 9Co� `e•. ' f — f :one
• hull Jtth titic
j. Uti to 7Z 0
`Eleld
BeC
•f1t01i EvC
•.., a ase61F+l ;� + Cem_1 •1
' • }.'. •* ' & w Park Pc "` ,,. �1 GRAVEL P/7
• . •'. . • v••4�'` _,p� •' :}. ' • > .b=a ':,n Ili BM
• ';'t i an •• • �� y ..-IMP :
P P � _ `` • � �. 3 s `�` C � •AkF 1 EvC
OVV RA. ROe�TV Rq�F L ' ..I. `•` o . F h T '• `:� '� �.I ,
PY
� Wo 1 / CO ,
LQC o AkF- I.
B WO 1 - j•
-- �• Y _ _ zi':
Urpy . . PAgC BM37
BeC Gol).u,13
se I i -- sty - AmC• _
..
Ur
c� -Sew ge O HF
� ��. ,• -Alf
40 Disp al WIN `o`
III'' `. - • Subs..
Ur Ur •' �. , AgC
,A •••+ •• M 16 .•: • •�i C 455
LLUJ
w 2:13 Ur :• '�
' Mongacre4 i-i-'- I Pu •�• \Pu 515 O
+:IC+ '
Rom- �all, I --• I
e
u• ••■ I M/ Ur �� Py I Wo D 'ii• .,ti BeC a
.- ;:- 1 •SITE . .r 1 AgDY'
° 1 Track.29
I •ii I
10
Id i u J 1 ➢ I -•�
I Ng I , l R s rvoir Q AgC
too
- -I �(�2 •j So TU z 11
1 2 W Pu
i m Sk 1
Wo LJLJ
EM
l+j Pu
25 1 o —
B 29
U 169 �203 AgC •I AgB
=� Py Sk i 1 •1. ° 451
n Wo Ur __ o IAgC
• ' i e a.••
it Tu
AgB
..
n
v� So << )•p I AgD jrmn
Wo Q� WO 6MA94�' ii•. � .
AgB•
A..I
Ur
•_ , PY 1 •' vA •� Am8
Ur 1
+ Ng B I _z_ 6D
u 32
Wo. AgC
�— 3 . 1 ' --1 _ ;`;l, MO ,. Ag8
J
- .-..-.
•,ti. .. ... AgC
s Br Re r Wad, r♦
Wo c O �i -� p Tank. z..A C
P g •
Ur Y IDS e' i - trill
W
SO ••••
W So
'- — ----- t---- •11. f Ma I' •BW :.HAYEs
� ice' ��►�r � �1�i:
,�i�. ;�1� 2.•�ii4�� m �
OMNIILI
�,�, �t�E Cl��ill�• p� twq �..
11�9 wig'' i^�4��. . -"�' lw ��7►+
�rrn� • � ��r�\I
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
FIGURE 3.5.1E 10-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS
2.1 ------ — o — - — =� — _ - - - — - - - - - —
22
24 ` `• J
2.7
9 '+\i~- r
I — ✓�
f ,nE
3
Irs
0
am
, l
-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION
4 ISOPLUVIALS OF 10-YEAR 24-HOUR
TOTAL PRECIPITATION IN INCHES 3O _
`3'22 .0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Mlles J - -
1:300,000 3.5.1-10 �
35 1/90 4.0
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
o To complete the design of the temporary sediment trap:
a. The "Pond Geometry Equations" section in the "Reference" portion at the
e back of the
Manual may also be useful in designing the sediment trap.
b. A 3:1 aspect ratio between the trap length and width of the trap is desirable. Length is
defined as the average distance from the inlet to the outlet of the trap. This ratio is
included in the computations for Figure 5AAC for the surface area at the interface
between the settling zone and sediment storage volume.
C. Determine the bottom and top surface area of the sediment storage volume to be
provided (see Figure 5.4.4C) while not exceeding 1.5' in depth and 3:1 side slope from
the bottom of the trap. Note the trap bottom should be level.
d. Determine the total trap dimensions by adding an additional 2' of depth above the
surface of the sediment storage volume, while not exceeding 3:1 side slopes, for the
required settling volume. (see Figure 5.4.4C)
TABLE 5AAA HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS IN KING COUNTY
SOIL SOIL
EROD- EROD-
HYDROLOGIC IBILITY HYDROLOGIC IBILITY
SOIL GROUP GROUP* FACTOR,'K' SOIL GROUP GROUP* FACTOR,'K'
Alderwood C 0.15 Orcas Peat D 0.00
Arents, Alderwood C 0.15 Oridia D 0.49
Arents, Everett B 0.17 Ovall C 0.17
Bellingh C 0.15 Puget k C 0.10
Bellingham D . 0.32 Puget D 0.28
Briscot D 0.32 Puyallup B 0.28
Buckley D 0.32 Ragnar B 0.32
Coastal Beaches Variable 0.05 Renton D 0.43
Eadmont Silt Loam D 0.37 Riverwash Variable
Edgewick C 0.32 Salai C 0.37
Everett A 0.17 Sammamish D 0.37
Indianola A 0.15 Seattle D 0.00
Kitsap C 0.32 Shacar D 0.00
Klaus C 0.17 SI Silt C 0.37
Mixed Alluvial Land Variable 0.10 Snohomish D 0.32
Neilton A 0.10 Sultan C 0.37
Newberg B 0.32 Tukwila D 0.00
Nooksack C 0.37 Urban Variable
Norm. Sandy Loam D 0.24 Woodinville D 0.37
.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.
B. (Moderately 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.
C. (Moderately high runoff potential). 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 rate of water transmission.
From SCS, TR-55, Second Edition, June 19M, Exhibit A-1. Revisions made from SCS, Soils Interpretation
Record, Form #5, September 1988.
5.4.4.1-3 1/90
W �
b
r
I.S vnlues for following slope lengths 1,ft(m) z
Slope _ I'S values for following slope lengths 1,ft(m) to
Slnpc gradient 10 20 30 •10 50 GO 70 80 90 IOO -- -- is
ratio (3.0) (fi.l) (9.1) (12.2) (I5.'l) (18.3) (21.1) (24.a) (27.4) (:10.5) (4) (10 250 (9) (109) (122)
450 500 600 700 800 900 1000 A" n
(137) (152) (I83) (213) (244) (274) (305) C7
1 O.OG 0.07 0.07 O.OA O.OA 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.11 O.I1 0.11 O.I4 0.1.1 0.14 0.15 0.15 r O
10(I:I I O.IIA 0,09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.1.1 0.1•I 0.15 (I.IG O.Ifi O.Ifi 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20
2 O.IO 0.12 0.11 O.IS O.Ifi 0.I7 0.18 O.19 (1.19 010 0.2:3 0.25 0.2G 0.28 0.29 0.:10 0.12 0.;13 0.14 0.3G 0.37 0:19 0.40 C z
3 O.11 O.I8 0.20 0.22 0.21 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.32 0.35 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.43 0.•t5 0.46 0.49 0.51 0.54 0.55 0.57 C
- 4 0.16 0.21 0.25 0.28 0.30 0.1:1 0.35 0.17 0.38 0.40 0.47 0.53 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.70 0.73 0,76 0.82 0.87 0.92 0.96 1,00
20:1 5 0.17 0.24 0.29 0.14 0.48 0.41 0.56 0.48 0.51 0.53 0.66 0.76 0.8.5 0.93 1.00 1.07 1.13 1.20 1.31 1.42 1.51 1.60 1.69
s
7 0.21 0.30 0.45 0.52 0.48 0.52 0.69 O.GO 0.6-1 O.G7 0.82 0.95 1_.06 I.IG 1.26 1.14 1.•13 1.50 1.65 1.78 1.90 2.02 2.1.1 A
7 0.'?fi 0.17 OAS 0.5'l 0.58 O.fia O.G9 0.74 0.78 0.82 1.01 1.17 1.10 L43 1.5,1 1.65 1.75 1.8.1 2.02 2'18 2.33 2,47 2.61 I 01)
I'1'4:1 8 0.31 0.44 0.54 0.63 0.70 0.77 0.83 0.89 0.9.1 0.99 1.21 1.40 1.57 1.72 1.85 1.98 2.10 2.22 2.41 2.G2 2.80 2.97 3.13
- 9 0.37 0.52 0.6.1 0.74 0.83 0.91 0.98 1.05 1.11 1.17 1.44 1.66 1.85 2.03 2.19 2.35 2.49 2.62 2.87 3.10 3.32 3.52 3.71
1 O:I 10 0.43 0.61 0.76 0.87 0.97 1.06 1.15 1.22 1.30 1.37 . 1.68 1.94 2.16 2.37 2.56 2.74 2,90 3.06 3.35 3.62 3.87 4.11 4.33 z
11 0.50 0.71 0.86 1,00 1.12 1.22 1.12 1.•11 1.50 i.58 1.93 2.23 2.50 2.74 2.95 3.16 3.35 3.53 3.87 4.18 4.47 4.74 4.99 G)
8:1 12.5 0.61 0.86 1.05 1.22 1.36 1.49 1.61 1.72 1.82 1.92 2.35 2.72 3.04 3.13 3.59 3.84 4.08 4.30 4.71 5.08 5.43 5.76 6.08
15 0.81 1.14 1.40 1.62 1.81 1.98 2.14 2.29 2.43 2.56 3.13 3.62 4.05 4.43 4.79 5.12 5.43 5.72 6.27 6.77 7.24 7.68 8.09 0
6:1 16.7 0.96 1.36 1.67 1.92 2.15 2.36 2.54 2.72 2.88 3.04 3.72 4.30 4.81 5.27 5.69 6.08 6.45 6.80 7.45 8.04 8.60 9.12 9.62
5:1 20 1.29 1.82 2.23 2.58 2.88 3.16 3.41 3.65 3.87 4.08 5.00 5.77 6.45 7.06 7.63 8.16 8.65 9.12 9,99 10.79 11.54 12.24 12.90 Cn
p 4l:1 22 1.51 2.13 2.61 3.02 3.37 3.69 3.99 4.27 4.53 4.77 5.84 6.75 7.54 8.26 8.92 9.54 10.12 10.67 11.68 12.62 13.49 14.31 15.08
4:1 25 1.86 2.63 3.23 3.73 4.16 4.56 •1.93 5.27 5.59 5.89 7.21 8.33 9.31 10.20 11.02 11.78 12.49 13.17 14.43 15.58 16.66 17.67 18.63
10 2.51 3.56 4.36 5.03 5.62 6.16 6.65 7.11 7.54 7.95 9.74 11.25 12.57 13.77 14.88 15.91 16.87 17.78 19.48 21.04 22.49 23.86 25.15
3:1 33.3 2.98 4.22 5.17 5.96 6.67 7.30 7.89 8.43 8.95 9.43 11.55 13.34 14.91 16.33 17.64 18.86 20.00 21.0. 23.10 24.95 26.67 28.29 29.82
15 3.23 4.57 5.G0 6.46 7.23 7.92 8.55 9.14 9.70 10.22 12.52 1.1.4G 16.16 17.70 19.12 20.44 21.G8 22.86 25.04 27.04 28.91 30.67 32.32
2 S:1 4O 4.00 5.66 G.93 8.00 8.95 9.80 10.59 11.32 12.00 12.65 15.50 17.89 20.01 21.91 21.67 25.30 2G.84 28.29 30.99 33.48 35.79 37.96 40.01
45 4.81 6.80 8.33 9.61 10.75 11.77 12.72 1:3.60 14.42 15.20 18.62 21.50 24.03 26.33 28.44
2:1 50 S.r>a 7.97 9.76 11.27 12.60 13.81 14.91 15.9a 16 30.40 32.24 33.99 37.23 40.22 42.99 45.60 48.07
.91 17.82 21.83 25.21 28.18 30.87 33.3.1 35.65 37.81 39.85 43.66 47.16 50.41 53.47 56.36
55 6.48 9.16 11.22 12.96 14.48 15.87 17.14 18.32 19.43 20.48 25.09 28.97 32.39 35.48 38.32 40.97 43.45 45.80 50.18 54.20 57.9.1 61.45 64.78
IY:1 57 6.82 9.64 11.80 13.63 15.24 16.69 18.03 19.28 20.45 21.55 2G.40 30.48 .14.08 37.33 40.32 43.10 45.72 48.19 52.79 57.02 GO.96 64.66 68.15
60 7.32 10.35 12.68 14.64 16.37 17.93 19.37 20.71 21.96 23.15 28.35 32.74 36.60 40.10 43.31 46.30 49.11 51.77 56.71 61.25 65.48 69.45 73.21 �
I 66.7 8.44 11.91 14.61 16.88 18.87 20.67 22.32 23.87 25.31 26-68 32.68 37.74 42.19 46.22 49.92 53.37 56.60 59.66 G5.36 70.60 75.47 80.05 84.38
70 8.98 12.70 15.55 17.96 20.08 21.99 2:3.75 25.39 26.93 28.39 34.77 40.15 44.89 49.17 53.11 56.78 60.23 63.48 69.54 75.12 80.30 85.17 89.78
- ` 75 9.78 13.81 16.94 19.56 21.87 21.95 25.87 27.CC, 29.34 10.92 37,87 4.3.73 48.89 53.56 57.85 61.85 65.60 G9.15 75.75 81.82 87.46 92.77 97.79 �
I Z:1 80 10.55 14.93 18.28 21.11 2:3.60 25.85 27.93 29.85 31.66 33.38
40.88 47.20 52.77 57.81 cn G2.44 G6.75 70.80 74.G1 81.7G 88.31 94.41 100.13 105.55 t�
85 11.30 15.98 19.58 22.61 25.27 27.69 29.90 31.97 33.91 35.74 43.78 50.55 56.51 61.91 66.87 71.48 75.82 79.92 87.55 94.57 101.09 107.23 113.03
90 12.02 17.00 20.82 24.04 26.88 29.4.1 31.80 :34.00 36.06 38.01
4G.55 53.7fi CO.G010 G5.84 7I.11 7ri.02 80.G3 84.99 91.II 100.57 107.51 114.03 120.20
95 12.71 17.97 22.01 25.41 28.41 31.12 3:1.62 15.94 38.12 40.18 49.21 56.82 63.53 69.59 75.17 80.1G 85.23 89.8.1 98.42 106.30 113.ri4 120.5.1 127.06
1:1 100 13.36 18.89 23.14 26.72 29.87 32.72 35.34 37.78 40.08 42.2.1 51.74 59.74 66.79 73.17 79.03 84.49 89.61 94.4G 103.48 111.77 119.48 126.73 133.59 z
'Calculated from 4
66.41 X s� 4.56 X
IS s + 10, +0.065/11 72I IS - topographic factor
s + 10,000 % + 000 .5 1- elope length,ft(m X 0.30•1 8) /ti y
s -slope steepness, C
m - e%ponent dependent upon sh,pe ateepnesa
(0.2 for slope%< I^,i,0.3 for slopes I to 3 ,
�p 0.4 rnr slopes 3.5 lu 4.5%,and r
O 0.5 for alopes>5 )
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
FIGURE 5.4.4C SEDIMENT TRAP SIZE AND DIMENSIONS
.. .
Column Descnptwns; Assum`bons
p
Vsed=Sedment storage volume between the interface and bottom areas
L/W at interface(unitless)= 3
Vlotal=Volume of sediment trap between the top and bottom areas Side slopes along length,H/L(unitless)= 0.33
Ab,At=area of the bottom(b)and top(t)of the trap Side slopes along width,H/W(unitless)= 0.33
Ai=area of the interface n between the settling zone and sediment storage Depth from interface to bottom(h)= 1.5
Lb,Li,Lt=Average length from inlet to outlet at the bottom,interface,and top elevations Depth from top to interface(ft)= 2
fhb,Wi,Wt=Width of the bottom,interface,and top areas Total Depth(fl)= 3.5
0 0
Volumes(ft"3 ., Areas(ft^2) Width and,Lengths(ft) Volumes(R"3 Areas(ft"2) ylridth and'Lengfts(ft)
Vsed 'Vtotal .:Ab AI . A[ VV6 Lb Wl LI:>. >Wt Lt Vsed VtotaiAt W 'Lb;' 'Art :Li VVt Lt
♦162 1.176, 0 243 819: 0 18 9 27 21 39 5.832 16,926; 3.240 4,563 6,579; 30 108 39 117 51 129
221 1,397E 21 300 924 1 21 10 30 22 42 6,161 17,771E 3.441 4,8W 6,864E 31 111 40 120 52 132
288 1,638E 48 363 1,035E 2 24 11 33 23 45 6,498 18,648E 3,648 5,043 7,155E 32 114 41 123 53 135
365 1,901E 81 432 1,152: 3 27 12 36 24 48 6.845 19,541E 3.861 5.292 7,452E 33 IV 42 126 54 138
450 2,184: 120 507 1.275 4 30 13 39 25 51 7.200 20,4S4E 4,080 5.541 7,755E 34 120 43 129 55 141
545 2,489 165 588 1,404: 5 33 14 42 26 54 7.565 21,389: 4.305 5,808 8,064E 35 123 44 132 6 144
648 2,814: 216 675 1,539: 6 36 15 45 27 57 7,938 22,344: 4.536 6,075 8,379E 36 126 45 135 57 147
761 3,161E 273 768 1,680E 7 39 16 48 28 60 8,321 23,321: 4.773 6.348 8,700E 37 129 46 138 58 150
882 3,528E 336 867 1.827: 8 42 17 51 29 63 8,712 24.318: 5.016 6.627 9,027E 38 132 47 141 59 153
1,013 3,917: 405 972 1,980: 9 45 18 54 30 66 9,113 25,337 5,265 6,912 9,360E 39 135 48 144 60 156
1.152 4,326: 480 1,093 2,139: 10 48 19 57 31 69 9,522 26,376E 5,520 7.203 9,699E 40 138 49 147 6t 159
1,301 4,757E 561 1,200 2,304E 11 51 20 60 32 72 10.368 28,518E . 6.048 7,803 10,395E 42 144 51 153 63 165
1.458 5,208: 648 1.323 2,475: 12 54 21 63 33 75 11,250 30,744E 6,60o 8.427 11,115E 44 150 53 159 65 171
1,625 5,681: 741 1.452 2,652E 13 57 22 66 34 78 12,168 33,054: 7.176 9.075 11.8591 46 156 55 165 67 171 1.8C0 6,174? 840 1.587 2,835 14 60 23 69 35 81 13.122 35,448: 7.776 9.747 12,627E 48 162 57 171 69 193
1,965 6,689E 945 1.728 3,024E 15 63 24 72 36 84 14.112 37,926E 8.400 10,413 13,419E 50 168 59 177 71 189
2,178 7,224: 1.056 1,875 3,219: 16 66 25 75 37 87 15.138 40,488E 9,048 11.163 14,235E 52 174 61 183 73 195
2,381 7,781: 1,173 2,028 3,420: 17 69 26 78 38 90 16,200 43,134E 9.720 11.907 15,075E 54 180 63 189 75 201
2592 8,358E 1,296 2,187 3.627: 18 72 27 81 39 93 17.298 45,864E 10,416 12,675 15,939E 56 186 65 195 77 207
Z813 8,957E 1,425 Z352 3,840E 19 75 28 84 4o 96 18,432 48,678E UA36 13,467 16,827E 58 192 67 201 79 213
3.042 9,576: 1,560 2,523 4,059E 20 78 29 87 41 99 19,602 51,576E 1100 14,283 17,739E 60 198 69 207 81 219
3,281 10,217: 1.701 2,700 4,284: 21 81 30 90 42 102 20.808 54,558: 12,648 15,123 18,675E 62 204 71 213 83 225
3.528 10,878: 1,848 2.883 4,515E 22 84 31 93 43 105 22,050 57,624E 13,440 15.987 19,635E 64 210 73 219 85 231
3.7a5 11,561E 2,00t 3,072 4,752E 23 87 32 96 44 108 23.328 60,774E 14,256 16.875 20,619E 66 216 75 225 87 237
4,C50 12,264E 2,160 3.267 4,995E 24 90 33 99 45 111 24,642 64,008E 15.096 17,787 21,627E 68 222 77 231 4,325 12,989E 2,325 3,468 5,244E 25 93 34 102 46 11/ 89 243
25.992 67,326 15.960 18,723 22,659: 70 228 79 237 91 24S
/.61,8 13,734: 2.496 3,675 5,499E 26 96 35 105 47 117 27.378 70,728E 16,848 19,6V 23,715E 72 234 81 243 93 2S5
4,901 14,501E 2,673 3,888 5,760E 27 99 36 108 48 120 28,800 74,214E 17.760 20,667 24,795E 74 240 V 249 95 261
5.2C2 15,288E 2.856 4,107 6,027E 28 102 37 ill 49 123 30,258 77,784E 18,696 21,675 25,899 76 246 85 255 97 267
5.513 16,097E 3,045 4,332 6,300E 29 105 38 114 50 126 31.752 81,438: 19,656 22.707 27,027E 78 252 87 261 99 273
5.--2 16,926E 3.240 4.563 6,579E 30 108 39 117 51 129 33,282 85,176E 20.640 23.763 28,119E 80 258 89 267 101 279
5.4.4.2 SEDIMENT POND
Purpose
To collect and store sediment from sites cleared and/or graded during construction prior to
establishment of permanent vegetation and/or construction of permanent drainage facilities. It
is usually a temporary measure with a design life less than 1 year; however, it may be a. more
permanent facility, especially if required to provide runoff quality control until the site area is
permanently stabilized.
Conditions Where Practice Applies
Where the tributary drainage area is 10 acres or less.
5.4.4.2-1 1I/92
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
FIGURE 5.4.41) SEDIMENT POND
Poac/ .Cehyf/i � 3 X F�ac/ ll/o��
��"gCit c y
A
C--
- C �s
fu-�e'ra�d D.-ai-c prj�e '" G�f/ef I
gra✓e/-/Ned b-194c/ Ppe
Se�i�,e�f aBuJq�rri�y /xa�y 6Le�,'a"cto/a.�e�s/ie� �iif/c �ser Pf�e Gv/!vc%yy�fed.BAs�
uric,{ q �er�arafed rrfer fire- corer
>`g6ric qrc/grrve/ "cone". A confrv/ sfJ-x�ctiire
'wqy 'G, �n�foxs
fi/here �•-�r�ti�e /.�PP/yes,
fvpVI:de- /,f CG(�t'�Yt�Gt VAGk o� v/9eY
I' fi'P��rzl � �Mint•
pe��2zfed D�ui� Pi/.� Anti-�,•�� Co�1ar^5
ln C7trAVel -t^i/ 7rench
fjr• Silt
7(ncli G�p�ed,�JI M
�i/tee �a��G {vlI Ge•�t�. �I�fiah
5.4.4.2-3 1/90
X. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
W W W •v V;/W W W •Y •Y W v W W W W W V, W y W V
1100 ,y, ,y .y JJ w J• W W W •Y 'L' V' V• W t20�y LY;�r 1 Z LSD
0 V.20%�' W W W W W W W W
1 W W W v. y W W W W W W W W W v •y •Y W W J V- W
W y'. y L W W W V _. V• •Y V- ,Y V+ V. •4 L J- Y •4 _1
M1 0� - _ - W � W W Wt `., •{, Y W W W W W W v W W w V' L W `Y W W W ..
1°,.`1 ^�� V, W .y 1 V, W W W W `Y W W V' W W W •Y W V' V" W' W
EDO OF EXISTINJ(
2°9ry WETLANDS � W W W�0 W W �• W W W y- ��t W W °3v W au y w 6 FLOW bL MAKIHOLt
. .V••"'_.,.._.,,r.,....� `�`94� W ,L •4 W TYPE I1-547
I-5`�" `:. •�." u" W .y
„ - — L .V _ W W W W'/SOLID LOOKING 4JD W W W
RIM=��3.OW IE493 e�6
\ 6 ` SEE DMIL EEF�C4 W w W
o. 1ry6 W� 61v, V W10•� v W •Y W W
.Ne
\` 3:1
20 61`6 t-SD O 0.253.
,," 5.10
I 6.O �•�- ( '��'��,� ( ` W W W W W W v
••y1 � } 00�1\l 1..,,-' 1�°,\ OZ `� ��1 '.~_..<.i':y. e`ry� { O1 V, •Y v V• W W i'
1 W W W v —
r
' 0
B
/1`,.._-.i // 1 3'��•__ --r,.� r.:� --7?..-... - �+ z,`�<` 0y1? Brij
w .4 .Y w •4 W w � \ /
.. 1
t •�
W
CELL 2 ELL 3 v W
/
C
1S WIDTH DETENTION
6^ �6 3:1 SO/CCkJA I `',A% �1 i W Pt�Ni1.4CCESS"ROAd r rn ri
If
3 CELL WET/DETENTION POND �.° p o 6-0 6.0 �;'•,'^�z; 1 w W W O rn Z
WET POND SURFACE ELEV.=10.0 / >' W TYPE I "' W R1 Z rn
MAX. N{S. ELEV.=11.6 4 ^":'�~ ' W !✓ W W m
TOP PO D=13.0 s ;�;+;,, W/S®LID LOCKING LID
,�.1 ,.a� ,4 I .1w? .Y:4`Y ..� R!M=1440 v W W
B0�7C/y Po^/p: 6.a W//1/�D/✓ /0.6 3:1 0 5 "an- \� IE=10.63 O/3•� 12 LF SD O 0.15% �° J y" 14 LF 247YSO O 0 15% C
13.0
0.0
\ — CEL„_L— _"..._ _......
L ..
L i
=r,
,
3
Ir
s'* IE=11.15 BIOSiJ LE 10
22 LF 247 SO O
11
6 •
1 / 3:1
.�: -i:},
MATCH` --
GRADE
23 ;LF 1 e" D 0
� d p
• '. �� ��� �3 � 1 D� £ �, � �� H'�3Y a "f� � ` .fir
BI INA & HOLMBERG INC.
^ �
e.
DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
O'Keefe Manufacturing/Warehouse Facility
LUA-92-067 , ECF, SA
7/27/92
Baima & Holmberg Job No. 75-014
G & M Investments
510 Rainier Avenue South pf b.;,^` �31.' .'
1ti-s' � z
Seattle , WA 98144
'v �� •co
11332.`� (/
SIUNALG
EXPIRES O Z
f .
EXISTING ALLPAK BUILDING
WEST OF PROPOSED PROJECT
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH • ISSAQUAH WASHINGTQN 9 98027-3817 206/392-0250
BA.MA & HOLMBERG INC.
Table of Contents
Analysis of Core Requirements
Analysis of Special Requirements
References
Site Map
Site Description
Level 1 Offsite Analysis
Hydrograph Results
Proposed Detention Facilities
Bio-swale Design
Time of Concentration Calculations
Hydrograph
Basin Summaries/Routing Tables
Drainage Map
Streams and 100 yr. Floodplains Map
FEMA Map
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH ISSAQUAH • WASHINGTON 98027-3817 206/392-0250
BA.MA & HOLMBERG INC.
Analysis of Core Requirements
Core Requirement #1 : Discharge is analyzed in this report .
#2 : The Level 1 Analysis is attached .
#3 : Runoff Control is addressed in this
report and will be addressed with
final engineering drawings .
#4 : Conveyance will be addressed w/final
engineering drawings .
#5: Erosion Control will be addressed with
the final engineering drawings .
#6 : Applicant will comply.
#7 : Applicant will comply.
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH ISSAQUAH WASHINGTON 98027-3817 206/392-0250
BAvMA A HOLMBERG INC.
Analysis of Special Requirements
Special Requirement #1 : Not applicable .
#2 : Not applicable .
#3 : Not applicable .
#4 : Not applicable.
#5: Applicable . A wetpond will be
provided since more than 1 acre of
impervious area is being proposed
and a type 2 stream is within 1
mile of the projects discharge
point .
#6 : Not applicable.
#7 : Not applicable.
#8 : Not applicable.
#9 : Applicant will comply.
#10 : Not applicable.
#11 : If required , a geotechnical
analysis will be provided.
#12 : Should not be required.
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH ISSAQUAH • WASHINGTON 98027-3817 • 206/392-0250
BA.AA & HOLMBERG INC.
References Used
Adopted Basin Plan - None
This project is in the lower Green River , Black River basin
which is not an adopted plan.
Critical Drainage Maps
None applicable
Floodplain/Floodwav Maps
FEMA map 53033C0328D.
Sensitive Area Folio
Wetlands - none applicable
Stream & 100 yr floodplain - Class 2 (w/salmonids)
(Springbrook Creek is
adjacent to site. )
Erosion Hazard areas - none applicable
Landslide hazard areas - none applicable
Seismic hazard area - none applicable
Coal mine hazard areas- none applicable
Wetlands Inventory Map
None applicable
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH • ISSAQUAH WASHINGTON • 98027-3817 206/392-0250
Lj
B. N. t ... ��CFAOM -AVE SW �7— n•
N
oL Longocr s
d1� r�- " �� Roce Tck r
3 �o / .
�
C _.- w bw`
1 — rowcu AVE s
r \
NZfjl � \ t
u
y AA• A4! TN MAS AVE SW � O x
U�ICn � \S 1NOMAI AVE sW A, 41
�. y
y V 14
ONO SI
z UAUY4TOM � /
C z sarec AVE. S ra AVE. SAc r
AN
N C i z CNE �e 4
1
v OWN pp A41,
STEVENS rC w [iy0
E , ,►r
V y
d
� AAA vE. Sw. U w
_
BAST VALLEY RD. ---j 1 ;
All
n, IN NA uc
TALBOT- s ,
IT Ty ( /�_ ie,MYIT11•p ITN AVE. S
BA.,AA & HOLMBERG INC.
Site Description
Existinq
The site is located on the floor of the Green River Valley
in Renton adjacent to the Long Acres race track. The total
lot area is 13 . 15 acres . The North 2 . 4 acres is wetlands
with an additional "created wetlands" area of approximately
0 . 28 acres . The additional area is part of a wetlands
mitigation requirement of the adjacent building to the west .
The rest of the site is relatively flat , covered by grass
with a few trees . These wetlands are part of a much larger
offsite wetland extending to the north. The site borders
Springbrook Creek to the east . There is a 40 ' greenbelt
strip adjacent to the creek along the east property line.
Approximately 1/2 of the site drains north into the
wetlands . The other half drains directly to the creek. There
is no drainage entering the site from offsite. This site has
been graded on the north and northeast areas adjacent to the
wetlands . Based on this , the general flatness of the site ,
and the presence of the wetlands to the north , it is assumed
that the "existing conditions" as defined by King County
storm water manual are : grassy meadow on southern 9. 57 acres
gently sloping towards the north to the wetlands .
Proposed
The proposed development consists of a warehouse, associated
parking lot , and drainage structures . The proposed warehouse
will cover 4 . 55 acres . There will be 3 . 44 acres of parking
lot , 0 . 46 acres of landscaping and 1 . 12 acres used for water
quality and wetlands enhancement . The water quality
facilities and wetland enhancement area will be located
adjacent to the existing wetlands . The wetlands and
greenbelt areas will not be changed, except for possible
greenbelt enhancement .
The 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual was used
for stormwater management design . The proposed stormwater
facilities will consist of : 1 ) 1586 ' of 5 ' diameter
detention pipe located under the parking lot , 2) a' 200 '
biofiltration Swale located adjacent to the wetlands, and
3) a water quality pond also located adjacent to the
wetlands . These facilities will release storm water into the
wetlands .
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH • ISSAQUAH • WASHINGTON • 98027-3817 • 206/392-0250
BAiMA & HOLMBERG INC.
Level 1 offsite Anal sis
Upstream
Under ordinary conditions no stormwater enters the site . Per
FEMA map, approximately 1/2 of the site becomes covered
during the 100 yr. storm event . The FEMA 100 vr. storm
elevation is approximately 16 feet . Except for the wetlands
area , the site will be raised above this elevation.
Downstream
Drainage from the site leaves at two locations .
Approximately 1/2 of the site drains into a large wetland
area to the north. During 100 yr . floods , Springbrook Creek
overflows into this wetland (and vice-versa) . Springbrook
Creek is a constructed drainage ditch with steep banks ,
constant grade, and straight alignment . Adjacent to the
site , the channel is approximately 15 ' wide and 2 ' -3 ' deep.
The ordinary water surface is about 5 ' from the top of the
bank. From the site , the creek flows north with no known
drainage problems` or significant changes . At 1/4 mile
downstream , -the creek is essentially the same as it is
adjacent to the site .
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH • ISSAQUAH • WASHINGTON • 98027-3817 • 206/392-0250
JOB
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, .NC. SHEET NO. OF
100 Front Street South CALCULATED BY
ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3817 DATE
(206) 392-0250 CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
:. .. �. . ._._..
..... ......
........
_ ....................
�. ..:. �....._ ._ ..
: .. .... ... __ .... .... .... ..... .......
....i.. ...i... .�...
..
...........r...... .. ....
GK D wC-7�hu»
.
........
...... _
..... ... ....:.
- ........ _ ._...
..... -
N
.. ...... ...:...
...
t1 Dpf{Q31 :
. IJ
�-
_ . ....... .... _
_ .. .. _.
N
... ...
a�
-. .. .... .. .. ... .... ... .. -. ...
' ,� l ►l5 A�
477
........
I .
PRODUCT 2DI I rS gk 5nensJ 2051 p,&4 a bc..GmW.Vm 01471.TO ONn PHONE TOU FREE 14%225-M
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, 4C. SHEET No. of
100 Front Street South CALCULATED BY
ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3817 DATE
(206) 392-0250 CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
_.__ __.
L ,
..._ ........._ ........ llj r ..2
.. .. �.1
O
q
.....
_ ..
i/
? �1
r�vT ru
. ..:.... ..
n - 1
PRODUCT 204-1(S>pk SAem)2O5-1 odito®®Yee_Grob.WA 01471.To Ord.MOO TOLL FFEt I-W225-M .
JUB
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, .,4C. SHEET NO. OF
100 Front Street South CA j� tiro
LCULATED BY � / 1 DATE �-
ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3817
(206) 392-0250 CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
.
Tv L
- t !'2 ►y(cF
...... ............
,: _ -
foAl
owl , ,
- s �pl: : _
1� 1r 1 G s�Lr'Kr��i t IPJGL' rI'�ce
`lc
T.
Lq' tR Zb Ord srw�c F
VOLD M TZ
D: vE'L L 1�1 ��� ��- Gr- "L 6 35 .`� <
FT oom IM.i r^*SftF m l(?+A1^01®a M¢..Graron.W.01471.To OrEn TOU FREE 1-8*275.67EU
jV
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, AC. SHEET NO. OF 7 !�00 1 Front Street South CALCULATED BY 1 /` DATE _ 7 —z z l
ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3817
(206) 392-0250 CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
_...
WF7 E .r� __ . ........ _
.S
y
V.
�IpJWLG
?TPA/ RE
Crn 7k _
_ . 7
_.. ..
_ . .
rF FLOW i!vTD
. ;
w'-7 1'ckl�.. .
T LVT tvN._. TA N fC_.... C O��x S'Ts ._COF:'....._.._.
_ _
11
I�136►, �6 X si ._..-.ARctfp�P� wc,�
b. F 36.EE.P>r:.-.
Vol,UKiT:-- 3 7.r Lass 'oF Go'rP/
CTRkt�s Our ro sjv?AcJ�) LAN` CB R
�3� 2 1.586 e.. 13 3. 1 Z.SY i ...
- k :��
�Z�( 9.5� t. Cg4� i►s �9
.......
_ ...
2TS 15 4 15i.� + ►0 � 3
2�i D 35 G F iD yt Doh
FAG 1�2�D vflLLf4 oM i h.r4V�L _
CR00M 201-f(S"k Sfkeh(2051 01471.b 0rl*"MU FREE 1 MV5,M
wo
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, .NC. SHEET NO. OF
100 Front Street South CALCULATED BY DATE
ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3817
(206) 392-0250 CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
...........
tTv' p ,
y .
r
lCI f2A If c'
H _ ...
----� 3 : v V
. :... --
:..... ............
............ ...
v
;V.
. ... .......
...........
-_ 0 fiJ L I� Ire Loci _w. . . dl
J
...........
.
r z
:
PRODUCT 204 1 1Skro4 9wt31205-1 TDM4®®k,Grow,A6n.01471.To Orrin KK MU FREE 1200225 M .
JOB
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, INC. SHEET NO. OF
100 Front Street South CALCULATED BY T��
ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3817 DATE - `l "Z
(206) 392-0250 CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
C t,kJ
j
�a
i
`l7 �
n
b;
i
r ZLl'2
0
} • ,
_ .► ��iS IL1t
�O
C rr� c c�v F D�J r1E ;5
f
550
cl
- r
L
r� r N
PNDDULT za.1(S;ro&*un)toss(NW®a wK..&Mn.y.oun.ro 0c*"mu FRa i lmn$63 o
0
IKEND
Hyd No. i_
Hyd No. 2
Hyd No. 10___
Hyd No. 11
c
V
y
C
je
c
0 � '� t° '
. ....
�—
6 12 18 24 30 36
Time in Fours
Hyd No _ = 1
Rate : 0 .94 cfs Time: 9 .00 hr
Vol : 0 .82 Ac-ft Int : 10 .00 min
Hyd No . : 2
Rate : 1 .80 cfs Time : 8 .50 hr l0 Y�
Vol : 1 .44 Ac-ft I_nt : 10 .00 min
Hyd No . : 10
Rate : 0 .87 cfs Time: 11 .33 hr ZYR _�v•
Vol 1 .32 Ac-ft Int : 10 .00 min
Hyd No . : 11 -
Rate : 1 .25 cfs Time : 11 .33 hr
Vol 2 .02 Ac ft Int - 10 .00 min Y V.
l 58` 5 DTI tk►1,
BASIN SUMMARY
BASIN ID: 100D NAME: 100YR DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 57 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 1 . 58 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 89 . 00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 9 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 7 .99 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
PEAK RATE: 7 . 29 cfs VOL: 2 . 80 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN- ID: 10OU NAME: 100YR UNDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 57 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA - PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 9 . 57 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 89 . 00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 87 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres
C_N. . . . . 98 . 00
PEAK RATE: 2 . 86 cfs VOL: 2 . 18 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min
BASIN ID: 10D NAME: 10YR DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9. 57 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 1 . 58 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 89 . 00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 9 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 7 . 99 Acres
CN . . . . . 98 . 00
PEAK RATE: 5. 28 cfs VOL : 2 . 02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
BASIN ID: 10U NAME: 10YR UNDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 57 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 9. 57 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 89 . 00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 87 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 .00 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
PEAK RATE: 1 . 80 cfs VOL: 1 . 44 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min
BASIN ID: 2D NAME: 2YR DEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 57 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 1 . 58 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min - CN. . . . : 89 . 00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 9 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 7 . 99 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 . 00
PEAK RATE: 3 . 47 cfs VOL: 1 . 32 Ac-ft TIME: - 480 min
BASIN ID: 2U NAME: 2YR UNDEVELOPED
SBUH METHODOLOGY
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 9 . 57 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 .00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 9 . 57 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 89 . 00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 87 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres
CN . . . . . 98 . 00
PEAK RATE: 0 . 94 cfs VOL: 0 . 82 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min
BASIN ID: 1D NAME: 1YR DEVELOPED
TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . 9. 57 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0. 00 cfs
RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA
PRECIPITATION. . . . : 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 1 . 58 Acres
TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN. . . . : 89 .00
TIME OF CONC . . . . . : 9 . 40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA
ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 7 . 99 Acres
CN. . . . . 98 .00
PEAK RATE: 0 . 86 cfs VOL: 0 . 33 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min
----------
STORAGE STRUCTURE
UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. P2
Description : DETENTION PIPE
Diameter: 5. 00 ft . Length: 1220 . 00 ft .
Slope . . . : 0 . 0000 ft/ft
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE
<-------DESCRIPTION-----> (cfs) (cfs ) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf )
------------------------------------------
2YR DEVELOPED STORM . . . . 0 . 94 3 . 47 P2 C1 12 .73 10 13353 . 26
10YR DEVELOPED STORM . . . 1 . 80 5. 28 P2 Cl. 14 . 39 11 22275 . 20
** * ********* INCREASE TANK VOLUME 30% ******* ***** *
STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST
UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. P2
Description: DETENTION PIPE
Diameter: 5 . 00 ft . Length: 1586 . 00 ft .
Slope . . . : 0 . 0000 ft/ft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY WITH INCREASED TANK VOLUME
MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE
<-------DESCRIPTION-----> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2YR DEVELOPED STORM . . . . 0 . 94 3 . 47 P2 Cl 12 . 36 10 14498 . 32
10YR DEVELOPED STORM . . . 1 . 80 5 . 28 P2 Cl 14 . 04 11 26935 .73
ROUTING CURVE FOR 30% OVERSIZED TANK
STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW STAGE STORAGE OUTFLO'
0+25
( ft) (cf) (cfs) ( ft) (cf ) (cfs ) (ft ) (cf ) (cfs
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
10 . 00 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 11 . 70 9336 0 . 7367 13 . 40 22550 1 . 041t
10 . 10 148 . 62 0 . 1787 11 . 80 10093 0 . 7581 13 . 50 23284 1 . 057-
10 . 20 417 . 83 0 . 2527 11 . 90 10859 0 . 7788 13 . 60 24003 1 . 072(
10 . 30 762 . 80 0 . 3095 12 . 00 11633 0 . 7991 13 . 70 24707 1 . 086!
10 . 40 1167 0 . 3573 12 . 10 12412 0 . 8188 13 . 80 25394 1 . 101.
10 . 50 1621 0 . 3995 12 . 20 13198 0 . 8381 13 . 90 26061 1 . 115:
10 . 60 2117 0 . 4377 12 . 30 13985 .4.00 26707 1 . 13�°
10 . 70 2650 0 . 4727 (12 . 40 14780 1=- 0 . 8753JJ e,4 . 10--
27329QI_o 1 . 453(
_
10 . 80 3216 0 . 5054 12.50---35571 0 . 8934 14 . 20 27925 1 . 594:
10 . 90 3812 0 . 5360 12 . 60 16361 0 . 9111 14 . 30 28491 1 . 706'
11 . 00 4434 0 . 5650 12 . 70 17156 0 . 9284 14 . 40 29024 1 . 803:
06
11 . 10 5080 0 . 5926 12 . 80 17943 0 . 9455 14 . 50 29520 1 . 889
11 . 20 5747 0. 6189 12 . 90 18729 0 . 9622 14 . 60 29974 1 . 968;
11 . 30 6434 0. 6442 13 . 00 19508 0 . 9786 14 .70 30378 2 . 042
11 . 40 7138 0 . 6685 13 . 10 20282 0 . 9948 14 . 80 30723 2 . 111'
11 . 50 7857 0 . 6920 13 . 20 21048 1 . 0107 14 . 90 30992 2 . 177
1.1 . 60 8591 0 .7147 13 . 30 21805 1 . 0264
Golf roWel. oil
I HMS L"�l � NO�rNER � � �II �11 _►i�,�• - , � � -- U
{ �0-" ��• $rwag! •' �LI►•1 s :J'• � .�-— 'Y n• U �1` --•- - �• it �13
su
lb
_ •1 Pit , - •� t� r .� j �-1r\f1 n "�.
1 L •'�''i. ' I : Ralf-�!� r .:1 i '� I 1t
�,,,,II• r Track :°
i j11, • Reservoir
•_1 25 � .30 ;r. . -_,%M`` IB•� 2' `x• �.{
it
451
M �
t 1 n j •i - — ( - i O.
B 7 � ..v. _..
----- L_c ----------- J — - 17 L1 I •-��j •, ,
r hY 1•�1 f�l r•• :,i: ;,;
IP
` r i BMI '=1` - n ,32�. Btit
PM , ; 36 a 1� ( t • s
3� I 1 7 ` 1
N -
I
- :►�_
of
M n B
ir
It
it
• �_ ' ::� 11`na lPr- � f /r - r. l: .�I ) F::' ,'4 .• ` ••I
Qr
77,
jd
74
IT
(� i 1 t• \` Ili• "tl r �.,� ' � y r�
r �_ N � 1.f a.• 7� .--• ,ru-11 _ -� •�•+� �• , r
rI
uz
4.
T;. .. \ / • .t,+ ghat ,Jim
\Ili
t r vim•-T• t � - � �' 1 1 i � w r !' � �. '_^�`"1, \•
undred•year ftoodplalns extend be- `��(Wulmonids)
= ! r
hose shown"
Rate W+apt.
S do not a, load the Streams and 100- """-' c'
aln to the headwaters L of streams. �UW8fTi1Sf1
Year Floodplains Class2al; al 4
(perennial;salmonid -2-7
--
use undetermined)
1MYear Roodplair» 0 0 0 0 0Class 3 ri-14
XI. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION MANUAL
° TA LASA EA RECEIVEv
CONSULTANTS DEC - 2 1994
IANCF MUELLLh t-Al si
WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN:
(Wetland A)
Maintenance, Monitoring and Contingency
Allpak Container Building
Trammell Crow Company
Renton, Washington
Prepared by:
Talasaea Consultants
Woodinville, Washington
Prepared for:
Trammell Crow Company
Seattle, Washington
December 1, 1994
Maintenance, Monitoring And Contingency Plan
A. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this maintenance, monitoring, and contingency plan is to summarize
goal and objectives of the buffer enhancement plan, and to outline the monitoring,
maintenance and contingency measures for the plan. This plan only pertains to the
northern wetland (Wetland A) (see Figure 1). The majority of the buffer adjacent to
Springbrook Creek (Wetland B) is part of a 40' open space easement regulated by
the City of Renton Parks Department. The Parks Department has not defined where
a pedestrian walkway will be located; therefore, this portion of the mitigation plan will
be added once a final decision is made by the City.
B. GOAL
The purpose of the plan is to enhance the buffer between the proposed
development and the existing wetland to the north (Wetland A). The goal is to
increase the wildlife habitat function of the existing buffer and protect the water
quality of the wetland.
C. OBJECTIVES
• Increase the number of plant species and the structural diversity within the buffer
to raise the value of the wildlife habitat that exists within the wetland and stream.
• Protect water quality in the wetland through installation of plantings within and
around the wetponds.
• Stabilize soil by planting and hydroseeding all bare areas within the existing
buffer.
• Visually and physically buffer the proposed building and associated parking from
the wetland and stream by planting a variety of tree and shrub species.
D. DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
The proposed development requires that the stormwater facilities be located within a
portion of the 50-foot wetland buffer. As compensation for this encroachment, the
existing, relatively low value, disturbed buffer will be significantly enhanced through
tree and shrub plantings within the wetland buffer and within the stormwater facilities,
hydroseeding with selected grasses and wildflowers beneficial to wildlife, and
removal of invasive and exotic species.
E. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
All plantings will be installed during the spring of 1995. The stormwater facilities will
be graded and seeded prior to installation of buffer plantings.
F. MONITORING PROGRAM
All monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist from Talasaea Consultants.
A pre-construction assessment will be made prior to site development to document
pre-development conditions. A post-construction inspection will be made upon
completion and acceptance of the landscape installation. Subsequent monitoring will
1
�- woo A
AI.IQ� MtTtClaitot�{ ----� ND
LANE,
1
1
� I
1
1
� i
1
� 1
I
I N
��/J�-�{�y�� /'�- t''�� /���y DESIGN DRn)tir
�UU1 ii Lc(A Ic -1 Vr Nail{ & 14/`� -(BTALASAEA SChlk HCURF./D%VGNO
CONSULTANl5 tl -rc_--__-_-
-DA1T 1
Re urcc k FJ vironmrnlal Ph—mg
118-Ifi3�A Avenue&xrtheast _ ______ _
RrIIenK,WashinRlon g4U08 RFVI,%L)
Rus(:CM)64I-17I0 Fax Q(M)(.41-471X1
occur quarterly for the first year, and on a yearly basis for the remaining four years of
the five-year monitoring program. Monitoring will employ standardized techniques
and procedures described below to measure the survival and growth of plant
material and the success of the mitigation plan overall. Reports will be submitted
annually to the City of Renton. The monitoring strategy will include the following
elements:
1. Vegetation
a. Sampling Methodology
Permanent vegetation sampling plots will be established at selected locations
throughout the representative plant communities following implementation of
the planting plan. The same plots will be monitored during each monitoring
event. Vegetation will be recorded in the order of dominance based on the
relative percent cover of the dominant species within the vegetative strata. A
20-foot radius sampling plot will be used for tree and shrub species while a 5-
1 0-foot radius sampling plot will be used for herbaceous species.
b. Success Criteria
Success of plant establishment within the buffer enhancement area will be
evaluated on the basis of both percent survival and percent cover. For
woody planted species, success will be based on a survival rate of 90% for
each monitoring event. Success for herbaceous species will be based on an
80% cover of desirable plant species.
Exotic and invasive plant species will be maintained at levels below 20% total
cover. These species include Scot's broom, Himalayan and evergreen
blackberry, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, morning glory, Japanese
knotweed, and creeping nightshade. Removal of these species will occur
immediately following the monitoring event in which they surpass the above
maximum coverage. Removal will occur by hand whenever possible. No
chemical treatment will be employed without prior written approval of the City.
2. Photo Stations
Permanent stations will be established from which photographs will be taken
throughout the monitoring period. These photographs will document
appearance, progress and changes in the landscape. In addition, the existing
vegetation prior to construction will be photographed to provide historical
documentation, and will be included in the first report. Review of the photos over
time will reflect important changes in plant survival and growth.
3. Water Quality
Surface and sub-surface water sampling of pH, nutrients, and heavy metals will
occur annually at the wetpond outlet to determine the pollutant loading and
variability from the pre-construction conditions. During the pre-construction
assessment, water will be sampled in the wetland to determine baseline water
quality conditions.
2
Water quality will also be assessed qualitatively during each monitoring
q Y g event.
Observations will focus on such evidence as oil sheen or other surface films,
abnormal color or odor of water and turbidity.
4. Sedimentation Rates
Sedimentation rates will be determined by measuring accumulation of sediments
at the outlet of the wetpond. Any accumulation will be documented and
contingency measures will be implemented, if necessary.
5. Wildlife
Birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates which are readily
observable (either by direct or indirect means) will be identified and recorded in
the wetland and buffer area. The kinds and locations of the habitats with greatest
use by each species will be noted, as will any breeding or nesting activity. The
functional value of the wildlife habitat in the enhancement area is expected to be
greater than the existing wetland buffer. Success will be determined by a
measurable increase, after the fifth year of monitoring, in both the plant species
and structural diversity as compared to pre-construction site conditions .
G. MAINTENANCE (M) AND CONTINGENCY (C)
Established performance standards for the project will be compared to the
monitoring results in order to judge the success of the mitigation project.
Contingency will include many of the items listed below and would be implemented if
the above performance standards are not met. Maintenance and remedial action on
the site will be implemented immediately upon completion of the monitoring event
(unless specifically indicated below).
• replace dead plants with the same species or a substitute species that
meets the goal and objectives of the enhancement plan (C)
• replant areas after reason for failure has been identified (e.g., moisture
regime, poor planting stock, disease, shade/sun conditions, wildlife damage,
vandalism, etc.) (C)
• irrigate for a minimum of one full growing season, and for additional time, as
needed following plant installation (C)
• remove/control undesirable plant species (e.g. Scot's broom, reed
canarygrass, purple loosestrife) by manual means or by chemical means
approved by the City of Renton and the WA Department of Ecology. A
maximum of 20% or less of all undesirable plant species will be allowable
after a monitoring event. Use of herbicides or pesticides within the
enhancement area would only be implemented if other measures fail, and
would require prior agency approval (C & M)
• clean-up trash and other debris on a yearly basis (M)
• selectively prune woody plants to meet the enhancement plan's goals and
objectives (e.g. thinning, removal of dead, diseased portions of
trees/shrubs) (M)
3
H. AS-BUILT PLAN & POST CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENTS
Following the completion of construction activities, a revised set of plans for the
enhancement area will be provided to the City of Renton with a post-construction
report. These "as-built" plans will reflect any modifications made to the original
design in terms of plant species, sizes, numbers, and locations. The plans will also
show the locations of all photopoints and vegetation sampling points.
I. PERFORMANCE SURETY DEVICE
A performance bond of 150% of the cost to install the buffer enhancement plan will
be posted with the City of Renton by the property owner to ensure completion of the
plan implementation. This bond will be released upon approval of the installation
and upon posting of the maintenance surety device.
J. MAINTENANCE SURETY DEVICE
A maintenance surety device of the cost of the 5-year maintenance and monitoring
of the buffer enhancement area will be posted with the City of Renton by the property
owner to ensure the success of the enhancement plan. This device will be released
upon final City approval of the buffer enhancement area.
4