Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SWP272220(3)
T cHNICA �N FOR M.ATR �EP�R1r Ff� 3 �Ei3 ftbANP,4ftkt tS 1NQUSTR1 L F Eh#©USE �iE�1tT�li1� 1N�#�HING`fgN OUR JOB NO. 5198 APRIL 17, 1995 Prepared By: BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA�SHINGTON 98032 (206) 251 -6222 A FQ 28146 O2�Q .e ASS/ONAL0' i HA , mQ4G y `S'�2 EXPIRES CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 9' n y H O � '+7 • . TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION: A. General Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. TIR Work sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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 3313.010 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW r • 4� I. INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION • The proposed project lies within section 30,township 23 north, range 5 east Willamette Meridian, City of Renton, King County, Washington. The site is fronted by Southwest 34th Street along the southern property line, the East Valley Highway along the eastern property line, railroad tracks along the western property line, and industrial zoned property along the northern property line. The site is approximately 7.1 acres in total area of which 6.6 will be disturbed. A Class II wetlands exists on the site existing of about 0.5 acres which will remain intact in existing conditions. The proposed site will contain two buildings, one of which will be 94,500 square feet, the other 22,150 square feet. The remaining portion of the property will be used for parking surfaces, truck dock loading facilities, and truck maneuvering areas. A portion of the northern section of the site will be used for detention and biofiltration as required by the City of Renton. The topography of the site is very flat with slopes generally under 0.5 percent. The slopes generally go from south to north and water leaves the site near the northeast corner of the property. The site is currently grassed and the detention pond will be located near the northeast corner so discharge will remain in the existing natural location. Please refer to the drainage area map in section 4 of this report for additional information and drainage flow locations. t•F [KL/ca] 5198.003 II. CORPS REQUIREMENTS: • 1. Discharge at the Natural Location: This project proposes to not change any of the discharge locations. All of the catch basins designed for the project will drain to the northeast corner of the site where they will be conveyed into the existing storm drain running along the east property boundary of East Valley Highway. 2. Off-Site Analysis: The Level I Drainage Study contained within this report satisfies Corps requirement No. 2. 3. Runoff Control: A 3-cell combined wet detention pond and biofiltration swale will be utilized for the subject project. 4. Conveyance System: The conveyance system designed for this project will be required to convey the peak 25-year design storm as requested by the City of Renton. 5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan: (• There will be an erosion and sedimentation plan prepared for this project and is contained in the submitted drawings. 6. Maintenance and Operations: The on-site conveyance and detention systems are private. However, they will fall under the jurisdiction of the City of Renton and will be subject to the City of Renton's requirements for maintenance and operation. 7. Bonds and Liability: This requirement will be complied with. [KL/ca] 5198.003 III. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Critical Drainage Area: This project does not lie within a critical drainage area. 2. Compliance Within an Existing Master Drainage Plan: A master drainage plan does not exist for this area. 3. Conditions for Repuiring a Master Drainage Plan: These conditions are not exceeded by this project. Therefore, a Master Drainage Plan is not required. 4. Adopted Basin or Community Plan: This project does not lie within an adopted basin or community plan. 5. Special Water Ouality Controls: The thresholds for this requirements are exceeded. Therefore, a water quality wet pond will be a part of the design. 6. Coalescing Plate OiUWater Separators: The threshold of this requirement is not exceeded. 7. Closed Depressions: There are not closed depressions on this site that are discharged into. 8. Use of Lakes. Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak-Rate Runoff: The thresholds of this requirement are not exceeded. 9. Delineation of 100-year Flood Plain: The threshold of this requirement is not exceeded. 10. Flood Protection Facility for Type I and Type II Streams: The thresholds of this requirement are not exceeded. 11. Geo-Technical Analysis and Report: The threshold of this requirement is not exceeded. 12. Soils Analysis and Report: A soils analysis and report are prepared for this project and will be submitted with the drawings. [KL/ca] 5198.003 Page 1 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division • TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PROJECT ENGINEER DESCRIPTION ProjectOwner TEUTSCH PARTNERS Project Name EAST VALLEY 34 Address EAST VALLEY HIGHWAY Location Phone Township 23N Project Engineer DANIEL K. BALMEILI Range 5E Company BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS Section 36.6 Address Phone 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH Project Size AC KENT, WA 98032 206 —251-622 Upstream Drainage Basin Size 0 AC • • PART 4 OTHERQ Subdivision Q DOF/G HPA Q Shoreline Management Q Short Subdivision Q COE404 Q Rockery Q Grading Q DOE Dam Safety Q Structural Vaults ® Commercial Q FEMAFloodplain Q Other Q Other Q COE Wetlands Q HPA COMMUNITYPART 5 SITE . DRAINAGE • Community GREEN RIVER Drainage Basin GREEN RIVER BASIN PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS Q River ® Floodplain Q Stream ® Wetlands Q Critical Stream Reach Q Seeps/Springs Q Depressions/Swales Q High Groundwater Table Q Lake Q Groundwater Recharge Q Steep Slopes Q Other Q Lakeside/Erosion Hazard SOILSPART 7 Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities TUKWILA MUCK —0.4% LOW Q Additional Sheets Attatched 1/90 Page 2 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET �RT 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT 0 Ch.4-Downstream Analysis 0 0 0 0 Additional Sheets Attatched PART 9 ESC REOUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION ® Sedimentation Facilities © Stabilize Exposed Surface XD Stabilized Construction Entrance © Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities (] Perimeter Runoff Control © Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris 0 Clearing and Grading Restrictions © Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Cover Practices Flag Limits of NGPES (] Construction Sequence 0 Other (] Other RT10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM © Grass Lined Channel O Tank 0 Infiltration Method of Analysis ® Pipe System (] Vault Depression © Open Channel Energy Dissapator (] Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation (� Dry Pond Welland (] Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage © Wet Pond Stream Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation STORM WATER CONTAINED IN 3 CELL COMBINED WET/ DENTENTION POND FOLOWING BIOFILTERATION SWALE. Facility Related Site Limitations 0 Additional Sheets Attatched Reference Facility Limitation (May require special structural review) [E:D Drainage Easement 0 Cast in Place Vault Other )] Access Easement 0 Retaining Wall 0 Native Growth Protection Easement 0 Rockery a 4'High 0 Tract Structural on Steep Slope 0 Other • • • 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. symene. 1/90 pY WP 50UZN 1-405 Li a J Z J H L�] SW vt ST SIT SW 34th ST VICINITY MAP H ra O z N • • H. PRELMUNARY CONDMON SUMMARY KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY INFORMATION KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL (2) CN values can be area weighted when they apply to pervious areas of similar CN's (within 20 CN points). However, high CN areas should not be combined with low CN areas (unless the low CN areas are less than 15% of the subbasin). In this case, separate hydrographs should be • generated and summed to form one hydrograph. FIGURE 3.5.2A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS INKING COUNTY HYDROLOGIC HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP GROUP" SOIL GROUP GROUP` Alderwood C Orcas Peat D Arens, Alderwood Material C Oridia D Arents, Everett Material B Ovaf C Beausite C Pilchuck C Bellingham D Puget D Briscot D Puyallup B Buckley D Ragnar B Coastal Beaches Variable Renton D Earlmont Silt Loam D Riverwash Variable Edgewick C Sala[ 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 03 Nooksack C Urban Variable Normal Sandy Loam D Woodinville D f • 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 sols 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, Sol Interpretation Record, Form #5, September ISM. C• r 3.5.2-2 11/92 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TABLE 3.5.2B SCS WESTERN WASFIINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS • SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type 1A rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP LAND USE DESCRIPTION A B C G Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush and grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 68 80 86 fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of the area - 77 85 90 92 Gravel roads and parking lots 76 65 89 91 Dirt roads and parking lots 72 82 87 89 ( • Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. 98 98 98 lu- Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 100 Single Family Residential (2) Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre % Impervious (3) 1.0 DU/GA 15 Separate curve number 1.5 DU/GA 20 shall be selected 2.0 DU/GA 25 for pervious and 2.5 DU/GA 30 impervious portion 3.0 DU/GA 34 of the site or basin 3.5 DU/GA 38 4.0 DU/GA 42 4.5 DU/GA 46 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DUJGA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 Planned unit developments, % impervious condominiums, apartments, must be computed commercial business and industrial areas. (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff Is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas Qawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. 3.5.2-3 11/92 hard, friable, sticky, and plastic; many roots; free season is 150 to 200 days. Elevation ranges slightly acid; clear, wavy boundary. 10 to from 25 to 750 feet. 14 inches thick. In a representative profile, dominantly black to B22g--21 to 24 inches, light olive-brown (2.5Y 5/4) very dark brown muck extends to a depth of 60 inches silt loam, pale yellow (2.5Y 7/4) dry; many, or more. • medium, prominent, yellowish-brown (IOYR S/8) If drained, Tukwila soils are used for row crops. mottles, brownish yellow (IOYR 6/8) dry; mod- 'Ihey are also used for pasture. erate, medium, subangular blocky structure; Tukwila muck (Tu) .--This nearly level soil is in hard, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly nearly circular and elongated areas that range from plastic; common roots; neutral; clear, wavy 1 to about 60 acres in size. Slopes are less than 1 boundary. 2 to S inches thick. percent. B23g--24 to 48 inches, grayish-brown (2.5Y 5/2) Representative profile of Tukwila muck, in pas- silty clay loam, white (2.5Y 8/2) dry; many, ture, 320 feet west and 1,140 feet south of the medium, prominent, yellowish-brown (10YR 5/S) center of sec. 4, T. 21 N., R. 5 E. : mottles, yellow (IOYR 7/8) dry; moderate, median, prismatic structure; slightly hard, Oal--O to 10 inches, black (10YR 2/1) muck, dark very friable, sticky, plastic; few roots; gray (IOYR 4/1) dry; moderate, coarse, granu- neutral ; clear, wavy boundary. 20 to 30 inches lar structure; slightly hard, very friable, thick. slightly sticky, slightly plastic; many roots; B31--48 to 66 inches, olive-gray (SY 5/2) very fine extremely acid; abrupt, smooth boundary. 8 to sandy loam stratified with medium sand, light 12 inches thick. gray (2.SY 7/2) dry; many, coarse, prominent, Oa2--10 to 16 inches, black (10YR 2/1) muck, brown yellowish-red and strong-brown (SYR 5/8 and (10YR 5/3) dry; ped exterior is dark gray SYR 5/6) mottles, strong brown (7.SYR 5/8) (10YR 4/1) dry; moderate, very coarse, pris- dry; massive; slightly hard, very friable, matic structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky, and nonplastic; few roots; neutral; slightly sticky, slightly plastic; many roots; clear, wavy boundary. 12 to 20 inches thick. very strongly acid; clear, smooth boundary. 6 B32--66 to 72 inches, olive-gray (SY 5/2) very fine to 9 inches thick. sandy loam, light olive gray (SY 6/2) dry; Oa3--16 to 19 inches, black (IOYR 2/1) muck, dark common, fine, prominent, yellowish-red (SYR brown (IOYR 3/3) dry grading to pale brown 4/6) mottles, strong brown (7.SYR 5/8) dry; (10YR 6/3) in lower part; dark reddish-brown massive; slightly hard, very friable, non- (SYR 3/3) ped interior; moderate, very coarse, sticky, nonplastic; very few roots; very prismatic structure; slightly hard, friable, strongly acid. slightly sticky, slightly plastic; many roots; very strongly acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 2 • The A horizon ranges from very dark grayish brown to 4 inches thick. to dark grayish brown. The B horizon ranges from Ldi--19 to 21 inches, strong-brown (7.SYR 5/6) and dark grayish brown to olive gray and has brownish very pale brown (IOYR 7/3) silt loam (dia- mottles. It is mostly silt loam and silty clay loam tomite), light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) dry; but in places contains a thin stratum of sand, loamy massive; slightly hard, very friable, non- sand, or very fine sandy loam. sticky, nonplastic; many roots; very strongly Some areas of this soil are up to 40 or 50 per- acid; abrupt, smooth boundary. 1 to 3 inches cent inclusions of Puget, Sammamish, and Oridia thick. soils. Also included are small areas of Sultan Oa4--21 to 60 inches, very dark brown (10YR 2/2) silty clay loam. muck that is 5 to 10 percent woody stems, dark Permeability is moderate. The effective rooting brown (IOYR 2/2) dry; massive; slightly hard, depth is 60 inches or more. A seasonal high water very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plas- table is at a depth of 2 to 3 feet. Available water tic; common roots to a depth of 30 inches, few capacity is high. Runoff is slow, and the erosion roots below; very strongly acid. Several feet hazard is slight. Stream overflow is a severe hazard thick. in some areas. This soil is used for row crops and pasture. Capa- The underlying organic layers are strong-brown to bility unit IIw-1; woodland group 3wl. very dark brown muck, peaty muck, and in places layers of diatomite 1 to 10 inches thick. Some areas of this soil are up to 30 or 40 per- Tukwila Series cent Seattle soils; and some are up to 5 percent the Poorly drained Bellingham and Norma soils. The Tukwila series is made up of very poorly Permeability is moderate. There is a seasonal drained organic soils that formed in decomposing high water table at or near the surface. I£ the sedges, rushes, grasses, and shrubs. T'nese soils are water table is controlled, the effective rooting in wet basins of upland depressions and on stream depth is 60 inches or more. In undrained areas, bottoms. Slopes are 0 to I percent. The annual rooting depth is restricted. Available water capac- precipitation ranges from 35 to 80 inches, and the ity is high. Runoff is ponded, and the erosion mean annual temperature is about 50' F. The frost- hazard is slight. �• 32 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; disturbance of the natural layers with additions of medium acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 4 to 6 fill material several feet thick to accommodate large inches thick. industrial and housing installations. In the Green B21g--8 to 38 inches, gray (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 (10YR 6/6) dry; The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. No 2S percent of matrix is lenses of very dark capability or woodland classification. brown (IOYR 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 (SY 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 ed and blocky shaped areas that range f_-_ - tc area- arc up to 1S percent "_beL :.._ ..p nearly 300 acres in size. It is nearly level and to 10 percent Snohomish soils; and some areas are up gently undulating. Slopes are less than 2 percent. to 10 percent Oridia, Briscot, Puyallup, Newberg, Representative profile of Woodinville silt loam, and Nooksack soils. in pasture, 1,700 feet south and 400 feet west of Permeability is moderately slow. There is a sea- the north quarter corner of sec. 6, T. 25 N., R. 7 sonal high water table at or near the surface. In E. : drained areas, the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth Apl--O to 3 inches, gray (SY 5/1) silt loam, grayish is restricted. The available water capacity is brown (IOYR 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 3w2. 33 y M n • H O x w • M. OFF SITE ANALYSIS EAST (/ALLEY y' ANU::S.W. 34TH . PTO- tY JACDe OUR JOB NO. 5198 WAS& APRIL 5, 1995 ExvinEs u/10/c/b Prepared By: BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (206) 251 -6222 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 44ALOW • 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL INFORMATION The project site is currently undeveloped and covered with grass with a small ditch or wetland along the north property boundary. The proposed project is to add two warehouse buildings, one being approximately 94,500 square feet and the other building being 22,150 square feet with the remainder of the property to be developed as parking lot, driveways and detention for stormwater facilities. The site area is approximately 6.8 acres and is zoned IH, Heavy Industrial. The site is very flat. There are no steep slopes on the site, however, there is a Class]R wetland along the northern property line which will remain intact as it now exists. The following is a review of the core and special requirements dictated in the King County Surface Water Management manual: CORE REQUIREMENTS: Core Requirement No. I Discharge at the Natural Location: This project proposes to not change any of the discharge locations. All the catch basins designed for the project will drain to the northeast corner of the site where they will be conveyed into the existing storm drain running along the east property boundary with East Valley Highway. Core Requirement No. 27 Offsite Analysis: This report satisfies Core Requirement No. 2, the Level I analysis. • Core Requirement No. 3� Runoff Control: A three-celled combined wet detention pond and biofiltration will be utilized for the subject project. Core Requirement No 4 Conveyance System: The conveyance system designed for this project will be required to convey the peak year storm as requested by the City of Renton. Core Requirement No 57 Erosion and Sedimentation Plan: There will be an erosion and sedimentation plan prepared for this project. Core Requirement No. 67 Maintenance and Ooerafions: The on-site conveyance and detention systems are private; however, they will fall under the jurisdiction of the City of Renton and will be subject to the City of Renton's requirements for maintenance and operation. Core Requirement No 77 Bonds and Liabilhy This requirement will be complied with. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Special Requirement No 1: Critical Drainage Area: This project does not lie within a critical drainage area. Special Requirement No. 2• Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan: A Master Drainage Plan does not exist for this area. Special Requirement No 3• Conditions Requiring a Master Drainage Plan: These conditions are not exceeded by this project. Therefore, a Master Drainage Plan is not required. Page 1 of 4 5198.001 [JJ/ca/krl • Special Requirement No 47 Adopted Basin or Community Plan: This project does not lie within an adopted basin or community plan. Special Requirement No 5• Special Water Quality Controls: The thresholds of this requirement are exceeded. Therefore, a water quality wet pond will be a part of the design. Special Requirement No 6- Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators: The threshold of this requirement is not exceeded. Special Requirement No 7• Closed Depressions: There are no closed depressions on this site that we discharge to. Special Requirement No 87 Use of Lakes Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak Rate Runoff: The thresholds of this requirement are not exceeded. Special Requirement No 97 Delineation of 100-Year Flood Ip ain The thresholds of this requirement are not exceeded. Special Requirement No 107 Flood Protection Facilities for Type I and Type II Streams: The threshold of this requirement is not exceeded. Special Requirement No ll� Geo-Technical Analysis and Report: The threshold of this requirements is not exceeded. Special Requirement No 12• Soils Analysis and Report: A soils analysis and report are prepared P for this project. 2.0 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE BASIN ANALYSIS The subject site slopes to the north/northeast and to a Class 11 wetland along the north property line of the site. The subject property is also very flat and there are two railroad lines running north/south on the west side of the property which is slightly higher than the subject property. The surrounding ground tends to drain in a northerly direction towards SR-405. However, there are no areas contributing to runoff to our site. 3.0 ON-SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Almost the entire site will be considered impervious when it is developed, except for a strip running along Fast Valley Road and some miscellaneous landscaping. Runoff from impervious areas will be conveyed by sheet flow to catch basins and conveyed toward the north property line where it will be detained. Runoff will then pass through a control structure and into an existing 24-inch storm drain, 15 feet inside the right-of-way of East Valley Road. 4.0 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM SCREENING • The downstream system along this project is more clearly defined on the attached downstream drainage map and offsite analysis drainage system table. Please refer to these documents for a detailed description of the downstream system. Page 2 of 4 5198.001 [JJ/ca/kr] Currently the site drains to a wetland along its north property line and is then conveyed by pipe • to the existing 24-inch storm drain in the right-of-way of East Valley Road (see Exhibit "A"). The 24-inch storm drain conveys flow for 325 feet in a northerly direction until increasing in size to 30-inch diameter. The 30-inch storm drain conveys flow also northerly in the western portion of the right-of-way of East Valley Road for 899 feet. The storm drain size then increases to 36-inch diameter and continues north in East Valley Road for an additional 1,224 feet. The storm drain is on a very flat slope and is half submerged in sediment and water. It needs cleaning. 5.0 RESOURCE REVIEW The following is a description of each of the resources that was reviewed for the preparation of this Level I drainage study: A. Basin and Reconnaissance Summary Report: The site and downstream basin are located in the Black River Basin and these documents are included in this report. B. Critical Drainage Area Maps: The site is not located within a critical drainage area. C. Floodplain/Floodway FEMA Maps: This project is not located within a floodplain of a stream as determined by the FEMA maps. D. Other Off-Site Analysis Reports: No other off-site analysis reports were • conducted for this project. E. Sensitive Areas Folio: Each of the sensitive areas folios associated with this area was reviewed. This project does not impact and is not directly impacted by a sensitive area. 6.0 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL SURVEY The soil survey shows the soils in this area to be Tukwila muck. 7.0 WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP The wetlands inventory map does not indicate wetlands on this site. However, there has been a Class II wetland identified along the north property line. l• Page 3 of 4 5198.001 [JJ/ca/krl • APPENDIX Exhibit "A" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Downstream Basin Map Exhibit "B.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Offsite Analysis Drainage System Table Exhibit V.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assessor's Map Exhibit "D" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basin Reconnaissance Summary Exhibit "E.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FEMA Floodway Map Exhibit "F.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensitive Areas Folio Exhibit "G° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Soils Map t� Page 4 of 4 5198.001 PJ/ca/krl EXHIBIT "A" a a Ict l- w 0 � 0 ir" y9 h` d r. a s.r .ae rn Iq0 -.i sw 27TH r','ST• W 11 Z ,.F yxe3. 1M Nae-" .�eN e q* IN' I 10 x j q PCL. B hci _ I ... J0��ss7•I qyt o°f. f x aer a �3o09 N 96p2a690p2 o , V. �\ A' ^I. PCL.A S go-b° Ai°o !p�. � sr j s reva ,+•.a+ a Fn"y•t1f N.i yf'a � Y W ' PCL. A a }y� I Q PCL A N PCL e _ o ecw99 REN SP379-79- h n �. N9B-rl-oew - i = ]909249002 e+ y S q J I ra so :, Terms S °aaa0le' I I ° 9 2 PCL. B e °o• REN.9P379-19-1909249002 ° Pn° a° °a toN , \E s�92 I. I ie I� I IBM .` IV% „ N 0 `O O 0 � \ a \ � O ¢ = yQ r °p4° � °°°0 �G/ oe•° eOSo 5 4 3 u° xss I S eLeP03! BW 34TH ST r I i —� • .r• �. ,. ..e r ..,a, i I , EXHIBIT " B" OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Basin: Subbasin Name: Subbasin Number: Symbol Drainage Drainage Component 51op9 Dfstsnc9' xi9nng Potanttal gbsarvatlo'ns of field inspector' Component TYPex De5Cri GOf �r " rr1 f'rCbtems I Name and Slze„ ; p x3 �Qrn site: l'rnhie 5 p$sCurCa rev,ewar, 4r rasFdent: is isx 5CI18r s E < E :53 , ss: , TYPE shelf l,ICw,SWd19 , ,x a i ,�., ° y F yx�s < s s s CnnBI+ICdW19 tlfSdCr t.`SpdCi�i pctldlnp� 'F see map „SPon�d�Ska diame sr d o 4fna9l St......... @t19r(,sari 96 I#,1J �F32 n , 4lettnpptn9,f oodlnp,hAbltel asnrp8ntsm IpbutatY area,I KM hood�t probre n, eP h tYpa 9trilnealhre aie$,Volume; i tlgatNotion,acoll.ln�sbapk plot gt ln�, ovetllow pathwpys,potehtial lmpacfs. . 'suriece are I..:; Iv , . lz DFR- a r P "'s 50.e /VQdPt� l8 �iP1�i %d'tPP� � za O. � PpI ., r ✓.IMF.. v�a.� aP� "F T �Dip , Pi PE 3qo Cx ! Y + L1Table.doc 112/92 EXHIBIT " C" cr ll1 8 n PCL. A , { ,G � 4m v Q I� Pc�. A N T�°, foy; Io O A/da•t4.c� w N � GBl.2s V) wQ`v' N M w „, In N 1 &am o a o q 0090 M y PCL B 50° „ V Co' y3A I to ,' 0 2° Iti 7ii y• N88-11-0gw RErJ. SP379- 79 - o �2• AA- AreN. LLA A' /8- 85 7909249002 I I 0 t0.. PC{: B N k iM 0 y M rii ,a \gyp 00 y {000 =� 2 Pv¢-cot LO { 1 20 8 I 2 2 PCL. B P°"' Qo" REN. SP379-79- 7909249002 I0 OOaC O10 • o N Id 87 • 51 09 W 281.25 REN LL.4 rY /3. 85 g2 I� iN s N N 3 p N p _ h O N tU tp - EO h N N — m m r 3 ; N J �O 0 3 Q 0 w IT I y p O 3{Z 2 ? a0 • V ov o ° F � 4 3 R. 45 ° 265 20 86.695 265 L. 587-51 -09E `1316.45 S W 34TH ST �c qoo � 221.Ss I d 9 tn 5yp9 u o n e' h o N I N I 0 o , EXHIBIT "D" BLACK RIVER BASIN -- \\ Rem ,��'' �] Basin Boundary A` Subcatchment Boundary 9O Collection Point i ,_.�' 3 } °°"-l- �• Stream / ° 000s Tributary Number - �1 f11 4 °n I_ Tukwila G �/ *0301 Proposed Project °° y ! r� N .� o osa � 1 ill - � ,, 1 ° JVIY. 1987 � — -- - r 10 30 0301 03 1 1 N 0 - -__ ? 14 ooza;- — 0012 . .... - 030 16 1 ° D N - - 1 °° 0 5 °o ' ?9 I O� l O Ar 9�0 07 �.. -- - CD I, 6 APPENDIX A ESTIMATED COST: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS BLACK RIVER BASIN Indicates Projcct was identified by Surface Water Management office prior to reconnaissance. NOTE: All projects are located on map included in this rc ort. Project Collect. Number Point Proicet Description Estimated Costs Problem Addressed and Comments 0301' 10 Increase R/D capacity of Panther Lake by constructing earthen Reduce erosion and Clooding $345,000 d downstream in Panther (Panther Lake is #1 berms and outlet control. Creek. structure. Trib. 0006, RM 3.40. Wetland and will require agreement to use as R/D site. Further biological study also needed at lime of basin planning.) 0302' 22 Provide regional R/D facility by Prevent erosion m sensitive $208000 constructing earthen dam across drainage swale. Provide control slopes downstream of (Project costs should structure,ind overflowspillway on proposed site by be shared with City Trib. 0021 at RM .40 (Springbrook reducing peak flows. of Renton.) Creek). 0303' 29 Construct instream R/D facilityat Reduce erosion and flooding of point where Benson Rd. crosses $125 000 of Garrison Creek by reducing Garrison Creek. Reinforce peak flows. (Project should be Benson Rd. Construct outlet-control constructed in conjunction structure around existing cross with proposed Projects culvert R.M. 1.40. 0304 and 0305.) �.APA/mlm • APPENDIX B . CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RANKING BLACK RIVER BASIN Prior to the Black River Basin field reconnaissance, seven projects had been identified and rated using the CIP selection criteria developed by the Surface Water Management (SWM) and Natural Resources and Parks Divisions. Following the reconnaissance, seven projects remain proposed for this area. They include one new, previously unidentified and unrated project. This displaces one previously selected project, which was eliminated based on the consensus of the reconnaissance team because no problem was apparent in the field. The previous SWM capital improvement project list for the Black River Basin had an estimated cost of $1,250,000, while the revised list increases to an estimated cost of S1,230,000. This 2.4 percent increase in estimated capital costs is due mainly to upward revised cost figures for securing or acquiring easements over wetlands and costs associated with a new project to solve a previously uni- dentified problem. The following table summarizes the scores and costs for the CIPs proposed for the Black River Basin. These projects were rated according to previously established SWM Program Citizen Advisory Committee criteria. The projects ranked below are those for which the first rating question, ELEMENT 1: "GO/NO GO," could be answered affirmatively. These projects can be considered now for merging into the "live" CIP list. RANK PROJECT NO. SCORE COST i� 1 0302` 125 S 208,000 0303` 110 125.000 3 0309 100 26.000 4 0301' 95 345,000 5 0305' 90 6 0307' I1 ,000 60 309,000 7 0304` 55 151.000 TOTAL S1,230.000 ` Indicates project was identified by the Surface Water Management Division prior to reconnaissance. l•. P:BR.APB. B_I i CkJ1Y` APPENDIX C DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BLACK RIVER BASIN All items listed here are located on final display maps in the offices of Surface water Management, Buildin2. and Land Developmenl, and Basin planning hrlb. & Collect. Item^ River hlilu Point Existing (:;ne Anticipated 0005 3 Habitat Conditions prop. I'roi. Conditions and Problems Conditions and Problems Recommendations 1 RM .30 fish ladder through pump Based on the condition of plant. Automatic counter the basin habitatR Black R and future Develop and implement a green hcnsiv records all returning de River basin plan in agreement development, these numbers with all local jurisdictions. anadromous species � will probably decrease. (apx. 34 in 193O. Habitat improvement would be one goal of this plan. 2 0005 12, 6 Habitat RM 1.30- Drainage district has of will continue. removed all stream cover Contact drainage district about 4.45 the feasibility of select plant- along drainage channel. Watcr quality looks very ings along the ditch levees. poor. Sonic oil and suds on - Develop a plan to address point surface, also very turbid and nonpoint water quality water. problems originating from the thousands of acres of commercial 0009 Ilahitat and industrial land in the hasin. I,4 RM .9.30- Lnrgc amounts of sediment More erosion, sedimentation, Increase size and number of R/D 8.70 moving down the stream and loss of fish habitat. system has filled in facilities upstream to reduce all the pools. Kcnl removes flow volume and rates to non. 1,100 cubic vards of sedi- erosive levels, ment from Mill Crock at Canyon Park annually. 1':BR.APC/m' CI . Trih. ,C Collect. 11_ cnt River Mile Point (; Existing Anticipated — 11e'O�' 1 ion. I'rol ('ondiiions and Problems ems and Problems RecommendationsR 0005 17 Ilahital RM 10,05 fish blockage due to con- bris Condition will continua crete and asphalt de Encourage State Fisheries person- Piled in stream. nel to organize a citizen-action Project to construct a stepped pool or other solution to allow fish passage. 0005 19 ff3d,it:l1 Native vegetation Livestock will erode stream- - pence to provide a stream corri- RM 10.10- 10.30 removed down to stream edge bank and defecate in stream and replaced by paslurc. channel. This will result dor. - Plant native plants or allow in erosion, sedimentation, natural rcvcgeiation along and water quality problems. strcambanks. 10 OOOSA PJ Hydrology 0307 RM 00 Tributary contributes to This area will continue to Mill Creek, which cxpericn- develop and will contribute Obtain required easements and ces erosion and sediment great construct a regional R/U facility transport. Wetland 0303 greater runoff [o the in Welland area. in conveyance system. - Construct berms along the western now provides some R/U and The wetland area may be and northern sides of the existing has much more potential damaged by development wetland. capacity' around the perimeter and this of Increase the storage capacity may decrease the ability of the wetland by excavation. the surface water to infiltrate. Runoff will continue to increase and erosion and sedimentation will likewise continue. If 0006 7 Habitat RM .SO- Stream flows throuth wet- land. No visible channel. Condition will continue. If anadromous fish were rein- 1 40 troduced to, Panther Creek, Fish transit through This cattail welland looks wetland passage would need to be difficult. assured. A biological assessment by fisheries and welland biolo- gists would be needed to formulate a viable solution. I':13R.APC/mlm C•3 s � � Trih. fi Collcct. Existing Item River Mile Point Cale Anticipated _ory Pron. Proi. Conditions and Problems Conditions and Problems Recommendations I 0006 5 Geology Largc landslide (Iransla- Slide will continue to RM 2.15 Direct surface runoff away from (ional and rotational contribute to sedimentation top of slope to gravel Pit failure), with raw slope downstream. ((o west). remaining; gullying of Slope, Apparently caused by combination of under- culling by stream and rouling of road drainage over slope from above. 19 000E 10 habitat Stream in good condition. RM 2.55. Possible erosion and loss of Setbacks and protective - Maintain stream flows at non- 3.00 P habitat if future develop- erosive levels vegetation needed at points ment increases volume and along the stream. Some rate of flow. Maintain a natural stream corgi- dog from Panther Lakc down into good pools and spawning and along Panther Creek. gravel in a few places. 20 000E 10 Ilydrology 0301 Panihcr I eke is a #1-C RM 3.J0 Future development in this The sensitive nature of the wetland that provides a area will triple the amount wetland would require precise large amount of natural of impervious area. The boundary surveys and control over storage; the downstream available area for regional the amount or water artificially System is in fair R/D facilities may soon be retained by the proposed control. condition with some exausted and the system Use Panther Cake as an R/D facili- erosion. The contributing will continue unchecked drainage area is not downstream. Erosive on by constructing earthen berms on the north and west sides of the currently dcnxly dcvel- soils throughout the area wetland area; construct a control opcd are further threatened outlet, enhance and increase the as higher amounts of runoff capacity of the downstream channel will increase the rate at (stabilize with vegetation), and which the existing stream obtain easements. erodes. P:I3R.MC/m C 5 0- ' 9 'Prih• Collect. item River Mile Point Ctltcgo Existing Anticipated ry Prop. 1 roj Conditions and Problems Conditions and Problems Recommendations 25 oporc s Habitat Rolling Hills Creek exhib- Little change due to riprap None. its oil sheen on water in along stream to protect upper portion of the creek. sewer line that parallels Little or no fish habitat stream. (or pOtcnllal) exists. 26 0009 9 Geology IZM 00- Bank and lower-slope erosion Flows in tributary will in- - R/D in upper basin. is in small tributary channel, crease; erosion will continue especially behind construe- - Remove fill along stream. causing sedimentation down- lion equ mipment lot. strea and perhaps threaten stability of building. 27 T M 9 HabitatLots of lifter; stream has Worsening of water quality, I2M .1S_,20 - Reduce the volume and rate of water extensive downcutting, bank sedimentation, and erosion. erosion, and bedload to non-erosive levels by new R/D. movement. - Consider restricting future develop. ment (down-zone). - Community action projects could 0020 12 Ilahitat remove litter. '-'`t IZM .20 Sediment has destroyed fish Possible flooding and sedi- Remove sedimentation source (.see also habitat. City of Kent mentation along S .192nd St. Trib. 0023, RM.95). removes sediment each year. 29 0020 21 Geology RM .S0- Bank erosion, landsliding Problems will continue. 70 in canyon due to oulfalls Control storm flows. Increase R/D at cnd of SG 1961h St. and above RM .40 in 0021; reroute or from R/D on 200th plus control flows from vicinity of SE. natural sensitivity 200th (tightline west on 200th). (landslides). Heavy damage Provide energy dissipation at R/D in Jan. 86 storm. Sedi- outfall (RM .40). mentation above old road, Restrict development on north side and in trout [arm below of 0021 (runoff to be tigh(lined or Talbot Rd., as well as ero. routed around ravine). sion in the ravine. a EXHIBIT " E" v 0 ¢ RM338 ¢ W 30 p -- - ZONE X A, F y H W 3 5 ZONE X u tn� V ' I67 ZONE AE o ' z ned Railroad t j Refer to the FLOOD shown structureeon ss in INSURANCE RATE MAP EFFECTIVE data s map to determine when actuarial rates apply to fished. Ihithe zones where elevations or depths have been eslab LEGENDTo determine if flood insurance is available,contact an Insuranu agent or call the National Flood Insurance Pro SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS INUNDATED 638-6620. gram at {g00) • BY 100-YEAR FLOOD ZONE Base base flood aU.neleva,detonsermined. determined. ZONE AE Base flood elevations determined. ZONE AH Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet(usually areas of ponding);base food elevations determined. ZONE AO Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet(usually sheet APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET flow on sloping terrain); average depths 500 0 500 determined. For ueas of alluvial fan flood Ing,velocities also determined. -- ZONE A99 To be protected from 100yeu flood by 1 Federal flood protection system under construction;no base elevations determined, ZONE V Coastal flood with velocity hoard (wave mined. no 61Se flood elevations d°ter. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM ZONE VIE Coastal flood with velocity hazard (wave y action); base flood elevations determined. FLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AE OTHER FLOOD AREAS FIRM ZONE x Areas of 500-year flood; areas of I year flood with average depths FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP off less than 1 (cot or with drainage � areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 100- year flood. KING COUNTY, OTHERAREAS WASHINGTON AND ZONE x Areas yearf determined to be outside soo- INCORPORATED AREAS year flood plain. i ZONE D Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, PANEL 328 OF 650 --`� Flood Boundary Floodway Boundary Zone D Boundary Boundary Dividing Special Flood Hazard Zones, and Boundary Dividing Areas of Different Coastal Base Flood Elevations Within Special Flood Hazard Zones. 513 Base Flood Elevation Line; Ele- vation in Feet' , PANEL LOCATION Cross Section Line CONTAINS: (EL 987) Base Flood Elevation in Feet I COMMUNITY Where Uniform Within Zone* NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX RM7x Elevation Reference Mark TUKWIIA.CITY OF 530091 0378 0 BENTON.CITY OF *Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 UNINLOBP08ATE0 ABEAS 53DO71 53 037 037 9 0 071 8 p NOTES i MAP NUMBER This map is for use in administering the National Flood Insurance Program; it does not necessarily identify all areas subject to flooding, particularly 53033CO328 D from local drainage sources of small size.or all plammetric features outside ! Special Flood Hazard Areas. Areas of special flood hazard 100yearflood)incl I EFFECTIVE DATE: AH,AO,A99,V.V1-30 AND VE. include Zones A,A130,AE, 3tn areas not in Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by flood SEPTE MB ER 29, 1989 31 structures. t a Boundaries of the floodways were computed It cross sections and interpo. I lated between cross sections. The floodways were based on hydraulic I considerations with regard to requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Floodway widths in some areas mashcy Federat Emergency Management Agency v Floodway widths are provided in the Flood Insurancen Study Report.scale. Coastal base flood elevations anm—..i. ' 1 EXHIBIT " F" WIN Jim i•Y Ai��,j1\ 1�.• 1 1 ` II� �Mon 'ay a.. 11ppJ .�I "�afhfUS v ftV� �y.�n'Ya2"r/ay N;lfL�<C�.�a e m••� ��R,ppis�y I 5�fill 4 m j,•ie��.m > � r■� kS'_ i � Ht ) /�, Ge}✓ � iraa�� �R +rauw tn .III ILIIa g r�l� �Innik9 1 "NO! i; 'k �111111nkk_91i �.PM13911 WX sr[r16 Ism ra... * +eP .r WIM i k ARM "'�` .,���'.�r�/'�a.�3l�JB`P..10'� t�� { ,• � By. �`+E+M�' ►.H�c��P�17�y"fYCgk� n�1��a':~i��Fc�-s gill a1lIA r' E �raaE All gLa..a•.a�sE��'1ll1Ea� i WNUM a ;<•�IG�1�� N'l � I c ltsl i 1�, gRV9�.�ON LAI IS 1 , II 21 l aeti � {11 il(eIBL.dA��l`2tl9� e a::.m 1 y i MyliSlsR tFse ,( �pi�`{"� sgl5a�a 4@C®�liE tR 1 ,�11�ijd1 p�� 1�( Qki►4�1111 � WIMP l%mSO [wE WMIt1�, 8, klBII}L[ a�_� ►�-_� 1,� Iea E�116Ysr j YR ow al u� IC4 ,.� �bRrA1�jY hyAlWaMNwal Ron MAIMMI WoFori ��15 �'j�l �� .-" �1\i * .��6 s i1�31I>j�«j'�g}dp�s„�g - r.� a'•. + ,el��'�g,._�e�i � 41V'��� � :i ■ dYu�en A � r �x9a MAP /tYln'kalbl� � I,u::= ��►.t , 411ww� _ i 1'71t1�34�r f� �yi{i{ Yl�i`�vpY„ n m YI � axlfbi�lb%1��w,�l'M$ 1'"�i�llgl�i�l6� '■■■�e6 !`_�-1�® it � �_h��r�,� �- _ ... uu� �Ci L� r � • 1 ��T�IDm'�I1■i�'�� i f � , to MOM IM Y 1 W tOWW"�44'-If'fl .tyy■yFy��pp�-��aaIC�C � N rf :i�a ' �G _ —'Fi1fAl1lIAf6 h eY Y �y NOW Wral +sl7:- +�j� 3,' PON WAIN > IIF�'9�tE R 111t4�S., A. 6rg��V.V.M� 21 rS. +� k`MTv® IL M24. r w � � 01 ...� ■ d a 1[5n 11 lip tyy, �ve■1�+ Im• � �,},rn.bsY+'�",�••b`'�'�"'S�y�,i�'r13i ti . , �t ',��11, E1KY�� n. �a r7(L�� ►�_ <: ram.:: i. ionY v r �a � ¢most 90 kid �*MileALI INK l �,Fjq arrsSE ��s ! 11 IS a l y A �.H V �a..�LC�.b.•��>�1 ������i�".3a��`� �� ,d+a��ii� nil LA }� Tl+,_. �. J NPI Mal �� fal�l►4\; j��� �t' pi aimi • + 111` / ,��,��.' a�*� +ram�yy��, a��;�•� �`� �4i�l1, l f��111! � =�i'�" �' 1114 im— * ����#1�S r, i V� �$P" n ! } .,� ,,, _ �i� :�po Nil ar IMOW I 11*5 MR Y a..�G.l[� R®31�b��AyyA71-11—LMMF, \� _ i •�j.T,I�������Y�d�f�p� '" �r►.M �,E � _ ?i, Idlli�lf tFl t �� • a 4 _ �lit�.�«�., Irtw �� �i►1 �,i �er4 .RM em tenr �w ' '��7 (� 0 r y �= ��pp,E, tamed! m. zwa ac3. 9 IlK' � �a�• `�@ISM\ A r �,�V�'cAa @s �t� tee=��� � �� ��� {i� �.� �ae'1 •. a� �� .a '' � �. Ise« "''7J C`Y'AP.w�1S T 44 �`aW :•• +1 1 e�:1 �cv8 i �J d c INS II11431, 11v '"' ---i is IslipM. • . �a I . wr� jl QE err: � aloll 11i1, in � � �1 IS E i �maar_,awwlR ■ Fe�lF! I�NIN - ' ,m M„ r it y. ilE SC ' •' ■ pi' A ft s61M mg \IUD t1 dG]�SA" AMI; aill. aW {Gl � � ,`* SRI RIM rim EST,��5/. F + +L Ul�l�z� � v �; � fesilYlE�i!a� /`w,s�".,.-. _ "`+. 1=� s• S[ A�1 j77, a/V'Von"F,�1i '/ 111Y� �,'�I�d4IM" i� R i' Feldl�iJ��.,�QI II•� F '� i r11 YI��'w -r� � l=� 1 �1� � ■l '6 � EXHIBIT "G " r� p •'� e v // I 1f r � ;;, t4 '.r•m a 'I ,.d 3. :I I� oN I n OeH ° _ '• 7� � v �¢` n a�a'�t i - 1'OQ ea a8 nM �� I -I • I � ' a JBVn "i�fs�tr N r' i ."ylr�-�s` µd la 1 ,h',a`5 A. I ,b9CbWB d.. r t q6•, l v� � t..�' vW r I .. Hai :+t {,� I, )r a " I } , 1 �wdlia Skv� ° � I �"�•ti I \ �n I '.` � II aN v � n I '. ' ' 8S I , . P ewb E 4 �N� �' �• Iti�° \ I' Asol +- � - � gyp' t t .et ♦ rail r r t 96[ Wi0 � I Ilr IIIf 1�'. �I mllji l•.x N91ri{/a •sv r `� yp Yw C {1 /y � - - � I AIli F � `^d"�-' �' i f I \ I ti '� n �. � �I � � I��� ,�. Is9 o,e0">z�• e� � - yya"�.+ I es ' "' � I �®` >, I .n it Ij I II V` • 2 ry �yipi r :I "^' �u `\!I l a Ir 6Z k.+ :. 'WBI'y. • .•` 31�5 II ���� ea9 I j �Wfle ..' . r QQ1' L y ,� -..Ia� n ' r 5Z. // �f ■ • �.5. � oM 41 III. n yes d = 2 2)I RV IIZ ,y\ p3noe r¢ .1 IDae1 oM I -� ,n ,� a oA � n I s�ryv SI9 P O �r '- �a � ��;�• n I jav' ;n d n - fa,oe9vo, ,v v' SS9 s a• 11 r I R �!� m IA 0.i• rd2 I OZ aY ` dHb _Y I -, j3b � O� _ r •: EL[: I . r � �il$v' �� \i �'� di rlll! _fi !ca__ r .yf t I as.no to t Jae EI "d I n \'• GUIDE TO MAPPING UNITS For a full description of a mapping unit, read both the description of the mapping unit and that of the soil series to which the mapping unit belongs. See table 6, page 70, for descriptions of woodland groups. . information is given in tables as follows: Other Acreage and extent, table 1, page 9. Town and country planning, table 4, page 57 Engineering uses of the soils, tables 2 and 3, Recreational uses, table 5, page 64. pages 36 through SS. Estimated yields, table 7, page 79. Woodland Map Described Capability unit group symbol M on Mapping unit page Symbol7763di AgB Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes---------- 10 IVe-2 AgC Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 A D Alderwood percent slopes--------- 8 IVe-2 8 gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes-------- 10 VIe-2AkF Alder ccld and Kitsap soils, very steep________________________ 10 VIIe-1 AmB Arents, Alderwoed material, 0 to 6 percent slopes I AmC Arents, Alderwood material 6 to 15 ercent slo es1/-----__-_ 10 IVe-2An Arents, Everett material 1 P P — 10 IVe-2 ___________________________________ 11 IVs-1 BeC Beaus ite gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes---------- 11 IVe-2 es-------- BeD Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 ercent slopes 76 3d2 BeF Beausite P P - 12 VII 78 3d1 gravelly sandy loam, 40 to 75 percent slopes--------- 12 VIIe-e-1 Bh Bellingham silt loam________________ 7g 12 IIIw_2 3d1 am By Brzscot silt lo ------_______________________________________ 13, IIw-2 76 3w2 Bu Buckley silt loam---------------------- 75 3wl 13 IIIw_2 76 4wl Cb Coastal beaches____________________ 14 VII Iw-1 - 78 Ea Earlmont silt loam----- --- __________________ Ed Edgewi ck fine sandy low-------------------------------------- 14 IIw-2 75 3w2 15 EvB Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes------------ IS IvsWll 75 201 EvC Everett gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes----------- 77 3f3 EvD Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes---------- 16 VIe-1 78 I 3f3 EwC 'Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy looms, 6 to 15 percent 77 3f2 slopes------------------------------------------- InA Indianola loamy ---------- 16 VIs-1 78 3f3 fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes-------------- 17 IVs-2 nC Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to IS percent slopes------------- 16 77 4s3 41InD Indianola to IVs-2 77 4s3 amy fine sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes------------ 17 VIe-1 KpB Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes_______________________ 76 4s2 KpC Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 17 IIIe-1 75 2d2 P opes______________________ 18 IVe-1 76 2d2 KpD Kitsap silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes--------- ------------ 18 VIe-2 78 2d1 Klaus gravelly loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes------------- Ma 18 VIs-1 Ma Mixed alluvial land__________________ 18 VIw-2 78 2ol 78 3f1 NeC Neilton very gravelly loamy sand, 2 to 15 percent slopes------ 19 VIs-1 Ng Newberg silt loam________________ 78 3f3 19 IIw-1 74 2ol allooksack silt loam_____ 20 IIw-1 74 2ol No Norma sandy loam------_______ ____ Or Orcas peat--------------- -'-'--- ----'- 20 IIIw-3 76 3w2 am_ ___________________________ _______ VIIIW-1 78 Os Oridia silt lo ________ ________ 21 --- OvC Ovall gravelly loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes 21 IIw-2 75 awl P P -------- 22 IVe-2 76 3d1 0vD Ovall percent slopes------------------ 23 VIe-2 78 3d1 OvF Ovall gravelly loam, 15 to 25 gravelly loam, 40 to 75 percent slopes__________________ 23 VIIe-1 78 3dl Pc Pilchuck loamy fine sand-------------- 23 VIw-1 78 2s1 Pk Pi lchuck fine sandy loam_______________ Pu Puget silty clay loam----------------------------------------- 23 IVw-1 76 2sl Py Puyallup fine sandy loam______________ 24 IIIw-2 76 3w2 24 IIw-I RaC Ragnar fine sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 74 201 P lops----------_ 25 IVe-3 77 4sl RaD Ragnar fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes--------------- 26 VIe-2 RdC Ragnar-Indianola association, sloping: 1 78 4sl _____P_ -- /______________________ 26 -------- Ragnar ar soil-----------_ -- _ Indianola soil___________________ IVe-3 77 4sl IVs-2 77 4s3 RdE Ragnar-Indianola association, moderately steep: 1/-----_______ 26 Ragnar soil-------_ — --_____ _ Indianola soil------------—_____________________________ VIe-2 78 4sl VIe-1 77 4s2 U. 5, WVERNMCKT PNWTRIG OFFICE:1911 0-I.-M6 GUIDE To MAPPING UNITS--Continued Woodland Map Described Capability unit group on ymbol Mapping unit page Symbol T742 Re Renton silt loam___________________________________ 26 II[w-1 Rh Riven+ash________________________________________ 27 VI[Iw-I a al al silt loam_____________________________________________ 27 [Iw-1 Sh Sammamish silt loam_________________________________________ 27 lIw-2 Sk Seattle muck------------------------------------------------ 28 IIw-3 Sm Shalcar muck___________________________ ______-_____ 29 IN-3 n Si silt loam____________________________________ 29 IIw-1 So Snohomish silt loam________________________________________ 30 IIw-2 75 3w2 Sr Snohomish silt loam, thick surface variant------------------ 31 IIw-2 7S 3w2 Su Sultan silt loam_______________________________ ____ 31 IIw-I 74 3w1 Tu Tukwila muck_______________________________ ___________ 32 IIw-3 75 --- UT Urban land____ __________ 33 Wo Woodinville silt loam_______________________________________ 33 IIw-2 75 3w2 1/ The composition of these wits is more variable than that of the others in the Area, but it has been controlled well enough to interpret for the expected use of the soils. � � H H O x r • IV. RETENTIONMETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN E.• i � IV. RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PART A - EXISTING SITE HYDROLOGY: The existing site contains approximately 7.1 acres with no current development. This site is predominately flat with mostly grass vegetation and small brush. There are no existing structures or roads within the boundaries. Based on the King County soils survey, on-site soils have been determined to be approximately 100 percent Tukwila Muk. Tukwila Muk is a class D soil and the detention calculations have been prepared to incorporate the parameters of this soil. Please refer to the soils survey map in section 2. PART B - DEVELOP SITE HYDROLOGY: All storm water runoff generated from the site will be collected via a storm drainage system and conveyed to a grassline Swale located near the northwest corner of the site. The water will continue through the swale to a 3-cell combined wet/detention pond prior to being released from the site. A control structure will limit the release to the requirements of the City of Renton for runoff from the site. The storm drainage detention system has been designed to provide detention in accordance with the King County Surface Water Design Manual using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph Analysis method. PART 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 designed 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 5 of this report. PART D - RETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEM: The detention system for this project will be a 3-celled wet/detention pond with a flow restrictor manhole to control discharge from the site. The pond will have a minimum of 3-feet dead storage. The control structure releases outflow directly from the site. A biofiltration swale precedes the detention pond. Please refer to the grading and storm drainage plans for the complete details of the detention pond overflow structure and water quality swale. s,,• [KL/cal 5198.003 I y7s. rs�r '.azrvs/�s "Si96 • 4,1 v er 94�v' p� _ user ec. spy err Ns cow c rrniS W W W x x x JL Y6' (IR,P•fniS C�t�'NE3jLqu,7 ri20M �aU'rW Fd NaR.a-r"� . Szv� /S N a a'a nrr $VG Sto pe - q /000 0.¢l lo F55�sa� 3oa L� S P s -700 Lr SM4,4 'c.J �i,uG Gd Salt SU,eVb"1 < SOIL %`fPv 7",� 71D6K4/ILA '"U64 7YPt3 Gti e 06 6�xl -W6 YO"Nlr Z, f rr2 w I&A J54,) gel oD ezwDtT70 d G2A4S lfl� ge 7-0 7f L a�BZgPr3 D �aa��' ' 6.� R�• �ee cwnaT w�rr 4 vm 4e a�l� G�IVY/a�.e R�'�,✓ sa.,e_€�e� w�a�cz • PIV/S/DA/, w D slJ.QFi9C� �C. S2¢�BLL B�- S67- 5P tN68P-a0✓e- CK 2-Y2 ,�4v w5 f IN if VoLLj*lf A24V/DeO �r Ilve -5MeA6tr 38T � 9.61 . N N N - `---��- Np0 �101 (oI72,ZS o aa'a (,14lo 0.3`j 2S OC7 nH« /4 �i648.S ZsOO ® -73I(,,S' 1 731(o S 9488 1 3498 rZ g99/,a )83a¢ t3 6o24r,6 27172--2 /oga4- �- its�3_a 3sg� P&614 � 4i vb re4L 3e Cass 9-G r — a 70. o - rq z3 ZIF/ .s rs 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 1 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) BCE FILE 5198TUSH BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: 1A NAME: 2YR/24HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 6. 60 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 103 . 25 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 5: 0. 0040 TcReach - Shallow L: 700. 00 ks:9. 00 s: 0. 0040 PEAK RATE: 0. 46 cfs VOL: 0. 47 Ac-ft TIME: 550 min BASIN ID: 2A NAME: 10YR/24HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6 . 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 .90 inches AREA. . : 6. 60 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 103 .25 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. 0040 TcReach - Shallow L: 700. 00 ks: 9 . 00 s: 0. 0040 PEAK RATE: 0.96 cfs VOL: 0 . 87 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min BASIN ID: 3A NAME: 2YR/24HR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 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. . . . . : 10 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 6. 00 Acres CN. . . . 98. 00 PEAK RATE: 2 . 48 cfs VOL: 0. 94 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 2 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) • BCE FILE 5198TUSH BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: 4A NAME: 10YR/24HR DEEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 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. . . . . : 10. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 6 . 00 Acres CN. . . . : 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 3 . 72 cfs VOL: 1. 43 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: 5A NAME: 100YR/24HR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00 TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 10. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 6 . 00 Acres • CN. . . . : 98. 00 PEAK RATE: 5. 10 cfs VOL: 1. 97 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 3 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) BCE FILE 5198TUSH ---------------------------------------------------------- HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY PEAK TIME VOLUME HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area cfs min. cf-AcFt Acres --------------------------------------------- 1 0. 459 550 20340 cf 6. 60 2 0. 955 540 37785 cf 6. 60 3 2 . 479 480 41028 cf 6. 60 4 3 . 723 480 62246 cf 6. 60 5 5. 099 480 85983 cf 6. 60 6 0. 459 800 41043 cf 6 . 60 7 0. 882 680 62258 cf 6 . 60 8/23/95 Barg-hausen Engineers page 4 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) BCE_FILE_5198TUSH____________________________________________________ STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 1 Description: 3-CELL DETENTION POND STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 9.61 0.0000 0.0000 11.00 7551 0.1733 12.40 17039 0.3912 13.80 28189 0.6471 9.70 443.77 0.0102 11.10 8204 0.1883 12.50 17779 0.4082 13.90 29027 0.6664 9.80 936.85 0.0215 11.20 8857 0.2033 12.60 18519 0.4251 14.00 29866 0.6856 9.90 1430 0.0328 11.30 9510 0.2183 12.70 19259 0.4421 14.10 30879 0.7089 10.00 1923 0.0441 11.40 10163 0.2333 12.80 19999 0.4591 14.20 31893 0.7322 10.10 2486 0.0571 11.50 10816 0.2483 12.90 20739 0.4761 14.30 32906 0.7554 10.20 3049 0.0700 11.60 11468 0.2633 13.00 21479 0.4931 14.40 33920 0.7787 10.30 3611 0.0829 11.70 12121 0.2783 13.10 22317 0.5123 14.50 34933 0.8020 10.40 4174 0.0958 11.80 12774 0.2933 13.20 23156 0.5316 14.60 35946 0.8252 10.50 4737 0.1087 11.90 13427 0.3082 13.30 23995 0.5508 14.70 36960 0.8485 10.60 5300 0.1217 12.00 14080 0.3232 13.40 24834 0.5701 14.80 37973 0.8717 10.70 5863 0.1346 12.10 14820 0.3402 13.50 25672 0.5894 14.90 38987 0.8950 10.80 6425 0.1475 12.20 15560 0.3572 13.60 26511 0.6086 15.00 40000 0.9183 10.90 6988 0.1604 12.30 16300 0.3742 13.70 27350 0.6279 • i'• 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 5 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) • BCE FILE 5198TUSH - -----_____ STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1 Description: 2YR RELEASE ORIFICE Outlet Elev: 9 . 50 Elev: 7 . 50 ft Orifice Diameter: 3 . 2432 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---efs-- ------- (ft) ---cfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---CIS-- ------- 9.50 0.0000 10.70 0.3127 11.90 0.4422 13.10 0.5416 9.60 0.0903 10.80 0.3254 12.00 0.4513 13.20 0.5490 9.70 0.1276 10.90 0.3377 12.10 0.4602 13.30 0.5564 9.80 0.1563 11.00 0.3496 12.20 0.4690 13.40 0.5637 9.90 0.1805 11.10 0.3610 12.30 0.4776 13.50 0.5709 10.00 0.2018 11.20 0.3722 12.40 0.4861 13.60 0.5780 10.10 0.2211 11.30 0.3829 12.50 0.4944 13.70 0.5850 10.20 0.2388 11.40 0.3934 12.60 0.5026 13.80 0.5919 10.30 0.2553 11.50 0.4037 12.70 0.5106 13.90 0.5987 10.40 0.2708 11.60 0.4136 12.80 0.5185 14.00 0.6055 10.50 0.2854 11.70 0.4234 12.90 0.5263 10.60 0.2994 11.80 0.4329 13.00 0.5340 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 6 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) • BCE FILE 5198TUSH STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2 Description: 10 YR NOTCH WEIR Weir Length: 0 . 3000 ft. Weir height (p) : 2 . 4900 ft. Elevation 12 . 10 ft. Weir Increm: 0 . 10 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs-• ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) •••cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- ________________________ 12.10 0.0000 12.60 0.2369 13.10 0.3431 13.60 0.0000 12.20 0.0291 12.70 0.2816 13.20 0.3181 13.70 0.0000 12.30 0.0768 12.80 0.3170 13.30 0.2731 13.80 0.0000 12.40 0.1309 12.90 0.3404 13.40 0.2063 13.90 0.0000 12.50 0.1856 13.00 0.3499 13.50 0.1158 14.00 0.0000 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 7 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) • BCE FILE 5198TUSH 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) ---Cf8-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-• ------- (ft) ---CfS•• ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- 9.50 0.0000 10.70 0.3127 11.90 0.4422 13.10 0.8846 9.60 0.0903 10.80 0.3254 12.00 0.4513 13.20 0.8672 9.70 0.1276 10.90 0.3377 12.10 0.4602 13.30 0.8295 9.80 0.1563 11.00 0.3496 12.20 0.4981 13.40 0.7699 9.90 0.1805 11.10 0.3610 12.30 0.5544 13.50 0.6866 10.00 0.2018 11.20 0.3722 12.40 0.6169 13.60 0.5780 10.10 0.2211 11.30 0.3829 12.50 0.6800 13.70 0.5850 10.20 0.2388 11.40 0.3934 12.60 0.7395 13.80 0.5919 10.30 0.2553 11.50 0.4037 12.70 0.7922 13.90 0.5987 10.40 0.2708 11.60 0.4136 12.80 0.8355 14.00 0.6055 10.50 0.2854 11.70 0.4234 12.90 0.8668 10.60 0.2994 11.80 0.4329 13.00 0.8838 • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 8 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (PRELIMINARY CALCULATION) • BCE-FILE_5198TUSH____________________________________________________ LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE <--------DESCRIPTION.........> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) 2YR/24HR ROUT ................ 0.46 2.48 1 1 12.09 6 14743.31 10YR/2HR ROUT ................ 0.96 3.72 1 3 12.99 7 21389.31 • • DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS WITH 30 VOLUME ADDITION 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 1 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (309. VOLUME ADDED) • BCE-FILE_5198TSH2____________________________________________________ BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: lA NAME: 2YR/24HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6 . 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 6 . 60 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 103 . 25 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 . 0040 TcReach - Shallow L: 700. 00 ks:9 . 00 s: 0. 0040 PEAK RATE: 0.46 cfs VOL: 0.47 Ac-ft TIME: 550 min BASIN ID: 2A NAME: 10YR/24HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPEIA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION. . . . : 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 6. 60 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 86. 00 TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 103 . 25 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 0. 00 Acres • CN. . . . : 98 . 0 TcReach - Sheet L: 300. 00 ns: 0. 2400 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0. 0040 TcReach - Shallow L: 700. 00 ks: 9. 00 s: 0. 0040 PEAK RATE: 0. 96 cfs VOL: 0. 87 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min BASIN ID: 3A NAME: 2YR/24HR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6 . 60 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. . . . . : 10. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 6 . 00 Acres CN. . 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 2 . 48 cfs VOL: 0. 94 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 2 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON • FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) BCE FILE 5198TSH2 ---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: 4A NAME: 10YR/24HR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 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. . . . . : 10. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 6. 00 Acres CN. . . . : 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 3 . 72 cfs VOL: 1 . 43 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: 5A NAME: 100YR/24HR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA. . . . . . . : 6. 60 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0. 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . : TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION. . . . : 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0. 60 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10. 00 min CN. . . . : 90. 00 TIME OF CONC. . . . . : 10. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0. 20 AREA. . : 6. 00 Acres • CN. . . . : 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 5. 10 cfs VOL: 1. 97 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 3 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON • FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) BCE FILE 5198TSH2 -------------------- ------------------------------------ HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY PEAK TIME VOLUME HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area cfs min. cf-AcFt Acres --------------------------------------------- 1 0.459 550 20340 cf 6. 60 2 0. 955 540 37785 cf 6. 60 3 2 .479 480 41028 cf 6. 60 4 3..723 480 62246 cf 6. 60 5 5. 099 480 85983 cf 6. 60 6 0 .424 970 41037 cf 6. 60 7 0 .751 790 62254 cf 6. 60 8 1. 724 560 86010 cf 6. 60 • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 4 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON . FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) BCE FILE 5198TSH2 -------- ----------------------------------------- STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 1 Description: 3-CELL DETENTION POND STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <....STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --AC-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --AC-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --AC-Ft- 9.61 0.0000 0.0000 11.00 9817 0.2254 12.40 22151 0.5085 13.80 36645 0.8413 9.70 576.92 0.0132 11.10 10665 0.2448 12.50 23113 D.5306 13.90 37736 0.8663 9.80 1218 0.0280 11.20 11514 0.2643 12.60 24075 0.5527 14.00 38826 0.8913 9.90 1859 0.0427 11.30 12363 0.2838 12.70 25037 0.5748 14.10 39943 0.9170 10.00 2500 0.0574 11.40 13212 0.3033 12.80 25998 0.5968 14.20 41061 0.9426 10.10 3232 0.0742 11.50 14060 0.3228 12.90 26960 0.6189 14.30 42178 0.9683 10.20 3963 0.0910 11.60 14909 0.3423 13.00 27922 0.6410 14.40 43296 0.9939 10.30 4695 0.1078 11.70 15758 0.3617 13.10 29012 0.6660 14.50 44413 1.0196 10.40 5427 0.1246 11.80 16607 0.3812 13.20 30103 0.6911 14.60 45530 1.0452 10.50 6158 0.1414 11.90 17455 0.4007 13.30 31193 0.7161 14.70 46648 1.0709 10.60 6890 0.1582 12.00 18304 0.4202 13.40 32284 0.7411 14.80 47765 1.0965 10.70 7622 0.1750, 12.10 19266 0.4423 13.50 33374 0.7662 14.90 48883 1.1222 10.80 8353 0.1918 12.20 20228 0.4644 13.60 34464 0.7912 15.00 50000 1.1478 10.90 9085 0.2086 12.30 21189 0.4864 13.70 35555 0.8162 • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 5 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON • FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) BCE FILE 5198TSH2 --------------------------------------- STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1 Description: 2YR RELEASE ORIFICE Outlet Elev: 9 . 50 Elev: 7 . 50 ft Orifice Diameter: 3 . 2432 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- 9.50 0.0000 10.70 0.3127 11.90 0.4422 13.10 0.5416 9.60 0.0903 10.80 0.3254 12.00 0.4513 13.20 0.5490 9.70 0.1276 10.90 0.3377 12.10 0.4602 13.30 0.5564 9.80 0.1563 11.00 0.3496 12.20 0.4690 13.40 0.5637 9.90 0.1805 11.10 0.3610 12.30 0.4776 13.50 0.5709 10.00 0.2018 11.20 0.3722 12.40 0.4861 13.60 0.5780 10.10 0.2211 11.30 0.3829 12.50 0.4944 13.70 0.5850 10.20 0.2388 11.40 0.3934 12.60 0.5026 13.80 0.5919 10.30 0.2553 11.50 0.4037 12.70 0.5106 13.90 0.5987 10.40 0.2708 11.60 0.4136 12.80 0.5185 14.00 0.6055 10.50 0.2854 11.70 0.4234 12.90 0.5263 10.60 0.2994 11.80 0.4329 13.00 0.5340 • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON • FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) BCE FILE 5198TSH2 ----------------------------------------- STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE NOTCH WEIR ID No. 2 Description: 10 YR NOTCH WEIR Weir Length: 0. 3000 ft. Weir height (p) : 2 . 4900 ft. Elevation 12 . 10 ft. Weir Increm: 0. 10 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE...> (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfS-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- 12.10 0.0000 12.60 0.2369 13.10 0.3431 13.60 0.0000 12.20 0.0291 12.70 0.2816 13.20 0.3181 13.70 0.0000 12.30 0.0768 12.80 0.3170 13.30 0.2731 13.80 0.0000 12.40 0.1309 12.90 0.3404 13.40 0.2063 13.90 0.0000 12.50 0.1856 13.00 0.3499 13.50 0.1158 14.00 0.0000 • • 8/23/95 _ Barghausen Engineers page 7 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30o VOLUME ADDED) BCE-FILE-5198TSH2____________________________________________________ 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) ---CIS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- -..---- (ft) ••-cfs-- ----••- (ft) ---cfs•- 9.50 0.0000 10.70 0.3127 11.90 0.4422 13.10 0.8846 9.60 0.0903 10.80 0.3254 12.00 0.4513 13.20 0.8672 9.70 0.1276 10.90 0.3377 12.10 0.4602 13.30 0.8295 9.80 0.1563 11.00 0.3496 12.20 0.4981 13.40 0.7699 9.90 0.1805 11.10 0.3610 12.30 0.5544 13.50 0.6866 10.00 0.2018 11.20 0.3722 12.40 0.6169 13.60 0.5780 10.10 0.2211 11.30 0.3829 12.50 0.6800 13.70 0.5850 10.20 0.2388 11.40 0.3934 12.60 0.7395 13.80 0.5919 10.30 0.2553 11.50 0.4037 12.70 0.7922 13.90 0.5987 10.40 0.2708 11.60 0.4136 12.80 0.8355 14.00 0.6055 10.50 0.2854 11.70 0.4234 12.90 0.8668 10.60 0.2994 11.80 0.4329 13.00 0.8838 • r 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 8 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) • BCE FILE 5198TSH2 ------------------------------------------ STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE RISER DISCHARGE ID No. 4 Description: 100YR OVERFLOW Riser Diameter (in) : 12 . 00 elev: 13 . 00 ft Weir Coefficient. . . : 3 . 782 height: 14 . 00 ft Orif Coefficient. . . : 9 . 739 increm: 0. 10 ft STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-- ------- (ft) ---cfs-' ------- 13.00 0.0000 13.20 0.8711 13.50 2.6743 13.80 3.3827 13.00 0.0000 13.3D 1.6003 13.60 2.9295 13.90 3.5879 13.10 0.3080 13.40 2.3919 13.70 3.1642 14.00 3.7820 • 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 9 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) • BCE FILE 5198TSH2 STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. 5 Description: RELEASE CONTROL STRUCTURE Structure: 1 Structure: Structure: 3 Structure: Structure: 4 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- (ft) ---CfS-- ------- 9.50 0.0000----_-----��10.70===0.3127 11.90===0.4422 13.10 0.8495=====__���_ 9.60 0.0903 10.80 0.3254 12.00 0.4513 13.20 1.4201 9.70 0.1276 10.90 0.3377 12.10 0.4602 13.30 2.1567 9.80 0.1563 11.00 0.3496 12.20 0.4690 13.40 2.9556 9.90 0.1805 11.10 0.3610 12.30 0.4776 13.50 3.2451 10.00 0.2018 11.20 0.3722 12.40 0.4861 13.60 3.5075 10.10 0.2211 11.30 0.3829 12.50 0.4944 13.70 3.7492 10.20 0.2388 11.40 0.3934 12.60 0.5026 13.80 3.9746 10.30 0.2553 11.50 0.4037 12.70 0.5106 13.90 4.1866 10.40 0.2708 11.60 0.4136 12.80 0.5185 14.00 4.3875 10.50 0.2854 11.70 0.4234 12.90 0.5263 10.60 0.2994 11.80 0.4329 13.00 0.5340 • f •4 8/23/95 Barghausen Engineers page 10 TEUTSCH PARTNERS - RENTON FINAL DETENTION SYSTEM DESIGN (30% VOLUME ADDED) • BCE FILE 5198TSH2 ----------------------------------------- LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE <--------DESCRIPTION---------> (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) 2YR/24HR ROUT ................ 0.46 2.48 1 1 11.71 6 15834.34 10YR/24HR ROUT ............... 0.96 3.72 1 3 12.62 7 24287.03 100YR/24HR ROUT .............. 0.00 5.10 1 5 13.24 8 30552.34 • C. CRY R M Linpill 'ia3y i:CI�Ij� RR� ,) MR 20 sit rX Ij Awl - • • • ' pigs Will 04 .;•=�� ram.a ��w,� ,,,�,�� .��G{'. ��■ I� �, `'` bad 'w"������ � ';`� •may .'�! �, I Msr� Ewa � �►� �+• a ---� r�,�carrr,w�1'11��1 - •ice ��� �����'� • w � � � H z � • � I � SS t� 3 Blab«9'/1RyllJ AIGIALL, P5�; LcuG47-1 OA S: pLrS/bv 63�1 KO<WDM , SL,--T(00 4 .64 Luis N > 0.35 xri2 B fart c Ta s-rra/j P�.✓e c-co,) rr/pr F4.. sxs Qz 2 .� GGS N N N NOO aaa° h�SU.+9� w� ��s 58Lr0�nfG Mrilrv/Ce` = Dg5/� rcaw De3Pt2� d L B" A CIA aner SEc' GD+-(�Wtnllr �oyPdieTZ dtJ7�vr' ti�L DC�"f� (��G -' l*f, 20o Lr s'wr9CJ? Sa7-0" 4z/19rrf 728 AV- FLD� u/rOTZf : ll.30 1:T- 4&uj¢L6 LES5 76E4A� ?s>o r-7- L.z //0 nr ( P Urn! ,a, :w.4LS) SU/�4CLs A2�A pzi36 D =� 200 �, �l r.3o e r� � 2260 sr= ZZbo s� EGOUtV. rP WIPrkYL6ap lea yr ra 44? C 19LG B07 MI-7 A)l a 7V Q�62'D z /B, l �LSlJR } &Iiyem w'vru P20 vlD D z 2a Fr- /pK. Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design • Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: TEUTSCH PARTNERS Comment : BIOFILTRATION FUUNCTION CALCULATION Solve For Bottom Width Given Input Data: Left Side Slope. . 3.00: 1 (H:V ) Right Side Slope. 3.00: 1 (H:V ) Manning' s n. . . . . . 0.350 Channel Slope. . . . 0.0200 ft/ft Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . 0.67 ft Discharge. . . . . . . . 2.48 cfs Computed Results : Bottom Width. . . . 7.28 ft Velocity. . . . . . . . . 0.40 fps -- ------- ([ I.�F05, Flow Area. . . . . . . . 6.23 sf Flow Top Width. . . 11 .30 ft Wetted Perimeter. 11 .52 ft Critical Depth. . . 0. 15 ft • Critical Slope. . . 3.4525 ft/ft Froude Number. . . . 0.09 ( flow is Subcritical ) Open Channel Flow Module , Version 3.41 (c ) 1991 Haestad Methods , Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury , Ct 06708 Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design • Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: TEUTSCH PARTNERS Comment : BIOFILTRATION FUUNCTION CALCULATION Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Bottom Width. . . . . 18. 11 ft Left Side Slope. . 3.00: 1 (H:V ) Right Side Slope. 3.00: 1 (H:V ) Manning' s n. . . . . . 0.350 Channel Slope. . . . 0.0200 ft/ft Discharge. . . . . . . . 2.48 ofs Computed Results : Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . 0.41 ft Velocity. . . . . . . . . 0.32 fps Flow Area. . . . . . . . 7.87 sf -Flow Top Width. . . 20.55 ft ._ Wetted Perimeter 20.68 ft Critical Depth. . . 0.08 ft • Critical Slope. . . 4. 1194 ft/ft Froude Number. . . . 0.09 ( flow is Subcritical ) Open Channel Flow Module , Version 3.41 (c ) 1991 Haestad Methods , Inc . • 37 Brookside Rd • Waterbury , Ct 06708 V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN AND ANALYSIS SgRGHRUSEN COM5ULTIHG ENGINEERS - PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR R = Contributing Fire' <Rc> Od = Design Flow (cfs) using the Rational Method & Manning Formula C = Rungff Cxfficient Of = Full Capacity Flow (cfs? SERTTLE-RENTON 25 YEAR STORM T. = Time cf Concentration <.in> 'Vd = Velocity a±. Design Flew (fps) I = Intensity at Tc <in/hr> Vf = Velocity at Full Flow (fps) DEFAULT C= 0.90 n= 0.012 d= 12 Tc= 10.0 d = Diameter of Pipe (in> s = 51ope of P'pc < Note: Set default w3ues before entering data. L = Length of Pipe <ft> n = Manning Rgu9hncss Cacfficient ' O = Water Depth at Qd <in> Tt = Tra,el Time at Vd (min> JOB s 5196 JOB NAME: TEUTSCH - RENTON FROM TO q s L d T. n C SUM R RtC SUM R*C I Od Of Qd/Qf X 0.'d D Vf Vd/VF Vd Tt TRENCH CS 2 0.75 0.20 52.0 12 11.0 0.012 0.90 0.75 0.68 0.58 1.92 1.30 1.73 0.751 0.640 0.646 7.76 2.20 1.098 2.41 0.3E CB 2 CB 3 0.14 0.20 170.0 12 11.4 0.012 0.90 0.89 0.13 0.80 1.89 1.51 1.73 0.876 0.720 0.724 8.68 2.20 1.126 2.48 1.1� CS 3 CB 4 0.73 0.20 170.0 15 12.5 0.012 0.90 1.62 0.65 1.46 1.80 2.62 3.13 0.839 0.680 0.699 10.49 2.55 1.120 2.66 0.9' CB 4 CB 7 0.47 0.20 220.0 L4 13.5 0.012 0.90 2.09 0.42 1.88 1.73 3.25 3.13 1.037 O.aEO 0.862 12.94 2.55 1.134 2.39 1.2i CB 5 CB 7 0.24 0.73 150.0 8 10.0 0.012 0.90 0.24 0.22 0.22 2.00 0.43 1.12 0.386 0.420 0.431 3.45 3.21 0.936 3.00 CB 6 CB 7 0.05 0.30 70.0 6 10.0 0.012 0.90 0.05 0.05 0.05 2.00 0.09 0.33 0.270 0.340 0,356 2.14 1.70 0.350 1.44 0.81 CB 7 CS 10 0.26 0.20 170.0 18 14.8 0.012 0.90 0.28 0.25 2.43 1.63 3.97 5.09 0.780 0.660 0.653 11.93 2.88 1.106 3.19 0.81 CS 8 CB 9 0.49 0.30 65.0 8 15.0 0.012 0.90 0.49 0.44 0.44 1.62 0.71 0.72 0.997 0.800 0.813 6.51 2.06 1.140 2.34 0.4E CB 9 ce 10 1.38 0.45 70.0 12 15.5 0.012 0.90 1.07 1.24 1.68 1.59 2.67 2.59 1.032 0.840 0.856 10.28 3.30 1.136 3.75 0.31 CS 10 CB 11 0.00 0.20 92.0 21 15.5 0.012 0.90 0.00 0.00 4.11 1.56 6.43 7.67 0.838 0.660 0.699 14.67 3.19 1.119 3.57 0.4.'. CB 11 CB 12 0.26 0.20 - 110.0 21 16.2 0.012 0.90 0.26 0.23 4.34 1.54 6.68 7.67 0.871 0.720 0.721 15.13 3.19 1.125 3.59 0.51 CS 12 SWALE 0.28 0.20 85.0 21 16.7 0.012 0.90 0.54 0.25 4.60 1.51 6.95 7.67 0.905 0.740 0.74. 15.56 3.19 1.130 3.61 0.35 STORM DRAINAGE CONVEYANCE SYSTEM BACKWATER ANALYSIS I 3 4L 6G� S15� • me-gdw-:y KC JqY�) S u/ 4'rJ4rc.Y u S -eaO;All Crf LFT Zs' '/G,q(k pes/bnl 67oR-A4 • T/J/twip�?,, P- �L = /3.a (��4u �/ s � air (�yivt� „�� IGaNGWSto�J -s coo /V l% �VGi"YCQW B� Jl�l�7 j/ic..X'k�� CO/UV � J��GYG.FCJf 000 W,lreo� �-Om weeP77---v cue r— cAA;- a a a Tyg- ntlelr- 1.0/8VN6 PdCdf-- 42Sif, 3! L Y d r n n �5 AzB�Y OS UdV'fyBSs ¢ G1r J$ELO-,j l U�aZa� ,p gian�,¢C ?gnJD.NG !s NI >rV/?L7-A Yo Q /yr0 pc/ILAW'— OA t'/L;S_ V� I KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Surface Water Management Division • BACKWATER ANALYSIS PROGRAM Version 4.22 1 - INFO ON THIS PROGRAM 2 - BWCHAN 3 - BWPIPE 4 - BWCULV 5 - BWBOX 6 - DATA-FILE ROUTINES 7 - RETURN TO DOS ENTER OPTION • R REVISION OPTIONS: 1 - PIPE/JUNC DATA 2 - OUTLET CONDITIONS 3 - INLET CONDITIONS 4 - PRINT-OUT ENTER OPTION NUMBER: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OUTFLOW CONDITIONS PIPE NO. ! - TAILWATER DATA: 1 ) SPECIFY TYPE OF TAILWATER DATA INPUT: S - SINGLE TW-ELEV. F - TW/HW ❑ATA FILE S 2 ) ENTER: TW-ELEV 13 PIPE NO. 1 : 85 LF - 21 "CP @ .20% OUTLET: 11 .00 INLET: 11 . 17 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1 : OVERFLOW-EL: 16.25 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: .04 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. k N-FAC DC ON TW DO OE HWO HWI • 6.95 2.05 13.22 .012 .98 1 .31 2.00 2.00 1 .97 2.09 1 .34 PIPE NO. 2: 110 LF - 21 "CP @ .20% OUTLET: 11 . 17 INLET: 11 .39 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW-EL: 16.25 BEND: 15 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: .04 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. # N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI NNNNN**#NN#*%N*NNN#*%NN#kk%k%%%##**NNNNN***NN*NN#Nk#%%#NNfNNf N*NN*NkNk#%%%N*f NN 6.68 2 .08 13.47 k .012 .96 1 .27 2.05 2.05 2.00 2.08 1 .32 PIPE NO. 3: 92 LF - 21 "CP @ .20% OUTLET: 11 .39 INLET: 11 .57 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3: OVERFLOW-EL: 15.80 BEND: 75 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: .62 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI 6.43 2.23 13.80 .012 .94 1 .24 2.08 2.08 2.04 2 .23 1 .41 PIPE NO. 4: 170 LF - 18"CP @ .20% OUTLET: 11 .57 INLET: 11 .91 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 4: OVERFLOW-EL: 15.30 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 5.0 Q-RATIO: .22 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. k N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI kN*##k%NNNNNR**NN**#k%%N*%f Nf iNiNNiN******NNk#N#%#N#*NNNN*NNNN*#NNNN%#%*%NN*f Nf 3.97 2.28 14. 19 % .012 .77 1 .00 2.23 2.23 2. 11 2.28 1 . 16 PIPE NO. 5: 220 LF - 15"CP @ .20% OUTLET: 11 .91 INLET: 12.35 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 5: OVERFLOW-EL: 15.50 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: .24 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI 3.25 2.42 14.77 * .012 .73 1 .08 2.28 2 .2R 2.32 2 .42 1 .014 PIPE NO. 6: 170 LF - 15"CP @ .20% OUTLET: 12.35 INLET: 12.69 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 6: OUERFLOW-EL: 15.50 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: .74 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. ■ N-FAC DC ON TW DO OE HWO NWT }#Nt}NNt%*N}NN%%}NNNtN}NNNN%%%N%%}}KNt%NN%*N}NNNNNtNN%}%%#NNNttN#N}}%**}}N%N#%t • 2.62 2.41 15. 10 N .012 .65 .88 2 .42 2.42 2.33 2.41 .92 PIPE NO. 7: 170 LF - 12"CP @ .20% OUTLET: 12 .69 INLET: 13.03 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 7: OVERFLOW-EL: 16.00 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: . 16 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. } N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI N##%%%%t#NN*NNNNtNtNNtt#%N%N}}%*%NNN}NN}tN}NN#NNNNN%N%#}%##*NkNt#tN*%%%#%NNNNNN 1 .51 2.43 15.46 N .012 .53 .73 2 .41 2.41 2.33 2.43 .78 PIPE NO. 8: 52 LF - 12"CP @ .21% OUTLET: 13.03 INLET: 13. 14 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS ) HW(FT ) HW ELEV. % N-FAC OC ❑N TW DO DE HWO HWI 1 .30 2.45 15.59 t .012 .49 .64 2.43 2.43 2.39 2.45 .69 *#*%■}#%#*%N}ttN OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 1 .30 CFS DISCHARGE *t%*■}#%*#NNNNt#N NNNt%%N}%N%%Nk ACTUAL OVERFLOW MAY OCCUR AT LESS THAN 1 .30 CFS t•%%%%}%**N%}N SPECIFY: R - REVISE , N - NEWJOB , F - FILE, S - STOP SA 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 "C.". C. = ((C, x A,) + (CzxA,)+... + (C xA�))/, where: A, = total area (acres) A,,z,,, = areas of land cover types (acres) 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 I C LAND COVER C • Dense forest 0.10 Playgrounds 0.30 Light forest 0.15 Gravel areas 0.80 Pasture 0.20 Pavement and roofs 0.90 - 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 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,) + (CZxA2) + ...+(CnxAJ, 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) Now 4.3.3-2 1/so y Ctl H H O z rn • VI. SPECIAL REPORT AND STUDY i GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED EAST VALLEY 34 EAST VALLEY ROAD AND SOUTHWEST 34TH STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON E-6662 December 14, 1994 PREPARED FOR TEUTSCH PARTNERS 1 Jason Black Staff Engineer vtnsy Ro ert S. Levinson, P Principalo. Evins 03107tp�o Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 ;• (206) 643-3780 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT More construction problems are caused by site subsur- technical engineers who then render an opinion about face conditions than any other factor. As troublesome as overall subsurface conditions. their likely reaction to subsurface problems can be. their frequency and extent proposed construction activity,and appropriate founda- have been lessened considerably in recent years,due in tion design. Even under optimal circumstances actual large measure to programs and publications of ASFE/ conditions may differ from those inferred to exist. The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how the Geosciences. qualified,and no subsurface exploration program, no The following suggestions and observations are offered matter how comprehensive, can reveal what is hidden by to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays, earth, rock and time. The actual interface between mate- cost-overruns and other costly headaches that can rials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report occur during a construction project. indicates.Actual conditions in areas not sampled may 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 set of project-specific factors. These typically include: SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 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,rieen 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 structure is modified; AND PERSONS •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 forproblems pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade- which may develop if they are not consulted after factors consid- quate for a construction contractor, or even some other ered in their report's development have changed. consulting civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise. this report was prepared expressly for the client involved and expressly for purposes indicated by the client. Use MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS" by any other persons for any purpose, or by the client ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES for a different purpose, may result in problems. No indi- vidual other than the client should apply this report for its Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions intended purpose without first conferring with the geotechnical only at those points where samples are taken,when engineer. No person should apply this report for any purpose they are taken. Data derived through sampling and sub- other than that originally contemplated without first conferring sequent laboratory testing are extrapolated by geo- with the geotechnical engineer. Earth Consultants Inc. • Ge technical Fngineers,Ge0109115&EM'Onrnenlal ScienI sts December 14, 1994 E-6662 Teutsch Partners 2001 Western Avenue, Suite 330 Seattle, Washington 98112 Attention: John Walker Gentlemen: We are pleased to submit our report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed East Valley 34, East Valley Road and Southwest 34th Street, Renton, Washington." This report presents the results of our field exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analyses. The purpose and scope of our study was outlined in our proposal dated September 9, 1994. In general, our study indicates that the site is underlain by loose to medium dense alluvial soils. The alluvial soils consist of silty sand and silt. A compressible layer of organic soil was also encountered five to eight and one-half feet below the existing ground surface. Based on the encountered conditions, and the results of our analyses, it is our opinion that the site can be developed generally as planned. The proposed building(s) can be supported by conventional spread footings bearing on at least two feet of structural fill provided that a successful preload program has been completed Slab-on-grade floors may be supported directly on the proposed dock-high fill. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service to you during this initial phase of project development, and we look forward to working with you in future phases. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please call. Respectfully submitted, EA ONSULTANTS, INC. ob S. Levinson, P.E. • Principal JB/RSUluN 1805 1361h Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, Washington 98005 Bellevue (206)643 3780 Seattle(206)4641584 FAX (206) 746 0860 Tacoma(206) 272 6608 TABLE OF CONTENTS E-6662 • PAGE INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 roiect Description . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subsurface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Laboratory Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 General 3 Site Preparation and General Earthwork . . . . , . . . . 4 Preload Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foundations . . . . . 57 Dock-High Retaining Walls 8 Slab-on-Grade Floors g Seismic Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Excavations and Slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Site Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . • Utility Support and Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Pavement Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additional Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 APPENDICES Appendix A Field Exploration Appendix B Laboratory Test Results ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Boring Location Plan Plate 3 Settlement Monitor Detail Plate 4 Typical Footing Subdrain Detail Plate 5 Utility Trench Backfill Plate Al Legend Plates A2 through A7 Boring Logs 4 • Plate B1 Grain Size Analyses Plate B2 Atterberg Limits Test Data Ee h Conaultanta, Inc. . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED EAST VALLEY 34 EAST VALLEY ROAD AND SOUTHWEST 34TH STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON E-6662 INTRODUCTION General This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study completed by Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) for the proposed dock-high building(s) to be located at East Valley Road and Southwest 34th 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 develop geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site development. Project Description At the time our study was performed, the site, building locations, and our exploratory locations were approximately as shown on the Boring Location Plan, Plate 2. We understand that there are currently two options for site development. Option "A" proposes a 143,000 square foot dock-high warehouse building. Option "B" proposes two dock-high warehouse buildings. The southern building (Building 'A') is to contain 60,770 square feet and the northern building (Building 'B') is contain 45,400 square feet. In either option, three and one-half to four feet of fill will be required to achieve dock-high building grades. We anticipate that the building(s) will be of concrete tilt-up panel construction. Structural loading is anticipated to fall within the following ranges, including maximum dead plus live loads: • Wall loads - 3 to 4 kips per linear foot • Column loads 75 to 125 kips • Slab loads 250 pounds per square foot (psf) If any of the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulted to review the recommendations contained in this report. In any case, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design. Earth Consulwts, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 2 SITE CONDITIONS Surface The subject site is located in the northwest corner of the intersection of East Valley Road and Southwest 34th Street in Renton, Washington (see Plate 1, Vicinity Map). At the time of our exploration, the site was bordered by warehouse buildings to the north and west, Southwest 34th Street to the south, and East Valley Road to the east. The site is approximately rectangular in shape and vegetated with grasses. The topography of the site is generally flat. The mean elevation of the site is approximately Elevation 15.0. Subsurface The site was explored by drilling two borings at the approximate locations shown on Plate 2. Please refer to the Boring Logs, Plates A2 through A7, for a more detailed description of the conditions encountered at each location explored. A description of the field exploration . methods is included in Appendix A. The following is a generalized description of the subsurface conditions encountered. Our borings encountered five to six feet of fill consisting of poorly graded sand with silt and gravel (Unified Classification SP-SM). At approximately five feet below the existing ground surface, Boring B-1 encountered two feet of organic silt (OH) overlying one and one-half feet of peat (PT). At approximately six feet below the existing ground surface, Boring B-2 encountered one foot of organic silt overlying six inches of peat. The peats had a moisture content in the range of 155.8 to 207.4 percent. The organic soils were found to overlie silty sand (SM) with occasional layers of silt and clay (ML and CL) to the maximum depth explored of forty-one and one-half (41 .5) feet. Groundwater Groundwater was encountered approximately five feet below the existing ground surface in both borings. Groundwater conditions are not static; thus, one may expect fluctuations in the water level and magnitude of seepage depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other factors. Generally, the water level is higher and the seepage rate is greater in the wetter winter months (typically October through May), Earth Canaukarrca, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 3 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on several representative soil samples to verify or modify the field soil classification and to evaluate the general physical properties and engineering characteristics of the soil encountered. Visual field classifications were supplemented by grain size analyses and Atterberg Limits tests on representative soil samples. Moisture content tests were performed on all samples. The results of laboratory tests performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample depth on the individual boring logs or on a separate data sheet contained in Appendix B. It is important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test results and their use in guiding our engineering judgement. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. In accordance with our Standard Fee Schedule and General Conditions, the soil samples for this project will be discarded after a period of fifteen 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 proposed buildings for Option "A" or Option "B" may be supported by conventional spread footings bearing on at least two feet of structural fill provided that a successful preload program has been completed. We anticipate that overexcavations may not be necessary at perimeter footing locations, if at least two feet of competent existing fill exists below the footings. The floor slab can be supported directly on the dock-high fill. Structural fills in the building areas should be placed as early in the construction schedule as possible to induce anticipated settlements prior to building construction. The preload should be brought to finished floor elevation to compensate for anticipated settlements. Settlement markers must be placed prior to fill placement to allow for monitoring of settlements during fill placement and during the pre-loading period. We estimate that settlements should be realized approximately four to six weeks after placement of the fills. • Earth Coneuhente, Inc. GEQTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 4 The purpose of the preload program is to reduce the amount of estimated post-construction settlement from the weight of the fills and static building loads. Settlements on the order of two to four inches due to the weight of the fills and buildings loads are anticipated. Buildings constructed after the primary settlements induced by the preload fills have stabilized may experience total post-construction settlements of one to one and one-half inches. Differential settlements may be in the range of one inch; if this amount of settlement cannot be tolerated, a two foot high surcharge fill should be used. 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 the Teutsch Partners and their representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report, in its entirety, should be included in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor. Site Preparation and General Earthwork • Construction areas should be stripped and cleared of all organic matter and any other deleterious material. Stripped organic materials should not be mixed with any soils to be used as structural fill. Following the clearing procedures the earthwork operations can commence to provide the design grades. Surfaces where fill, foundations or pavements are to be placed should be firm and stable, or compacted to a competent non-yielding condition. These areas should be observed by a representative of ECI to ensure adequate bearing conditions are available. 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. It is our current understanding that there are no abandoned utilities on-site; however, if utility pipes are encountered during construction, they should be plugged or removed so that they do not provide a conduit for water and cause soil saturation and stability problems. • Earth Consultants, Ine. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 5 Structural fill is defined as any compacted fill placed under buildings, slabs, pavements, or any other load-bearing areas. Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its laboratory maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D- 1557-78 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near the optimum moisture content. Fill under slabs-on-grade, 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. Structural fill to be placed in wet weather should consist of granular material with a maximum size of three inches and no more than five percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve, based on the 3/4-inch fraction. During dry weather, most compactible non-organic soil can be used as structural fill. It is recommended that a sample of any structural fill planned for on site use be submitted to us for approval prior to import. Laboratory tests of the existing fill soils indicate moisture contents in the range of seven to nine percent. In our opinion most of these soils should be useable as structural fill provided that the moisture content does not increase from present levels. Preload Program We estimate that settlements induced by the dock-high fill and building loads will be on the order of two to four inches. As indicated earlier in this report, it is our opinion that this settlement cannot be tolerated; therefore, we recommend the building area be subjected to a preload program. The purpose of the preload program is to reduce the amount of estimated post-construction settlement from the weight of the fills and the static building loads. The dock-high fill should be brought to finished floor elevation to compensate for the expected settlement. Settlements should be realized approximately four to six weeks after placement of the fills. If settlements are less than expected, minor grading to remove the excess will be required. Conversely, if settlements are larger than expected, additional fill can be added at that time. Also, if settlements are larger than expected, soil conditions may be worse than anticipated, and additional measures may be required. Earth Coneuhmte, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 6 The preload fill should extend a minimum of five feet beyond the building footprint. The preload fill should be extended a minimum of twenty (20) feet outside the building footprint in areas where additions may be planned. This extended preload would be necessary to reduce the possibility of settlement of the then-existing buildings from future buildings or surcharge loads. The side slopes of the fill should not be inclined any steeper than 1 :1 (Horizontal:Vertical). Fill for landscaping purposes should not be placed near the buildings. Additional fill could induce further settlements after the buildings are constructed. If such fill is planned, the preload should be extended to five feet beyond the planned landscape fill, or a lightweight fill, such as "hog fuel" should be used. As mentioned earlier,after preloading, post-construction differential settlements are estimated to be approximately one inch. If these building settlements are not acceptable, additional fill should be placed on the preload fill as a surcharge to induce this settlement prior to construction. Specific recommendations for a surcharge program will be provided upon request. As the purpose of the preload program is to induce settlement, it is necessary to monitor the magnitude and rate of induced settlement. The settlement monitoring program includes installing settlement monitors on the existing site subgrade before any fill is placed, monitoring them through completion of fill placement, and continuing the monitoring until settlements cease or the remaining anticipated settlements are considered within the tolerable limits of the buildings. More specific details of this program are presented below: • Settlement markers should be placed on the native subgrade of each building pad before fill is placed. If Option "A" is pursued, at least eight settlement markers should be installed within the building footprint. If Option "B" is pursued, at least five settlement markers should be installed within each building footprint. 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 be unaffected by the fill-induced settlements. • The fills are then placed. Settlement readings are taken at relatively short intervals during this process, since this phase generates relatively large and rapid settlement. Enh Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 2 • Once the fill operation is complete, readings are obtained on a periodic basis, typically weekly, until the settlement ceases or the remaining anticipated settlements are judged by the geotechnical engineer to be within the tolerable limits of the structures. • 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 the settlement readings are obtained by another organization, the 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 preload program. Foundations Based on the results of our study, preliminary design criteria, and assuming compliance with the preceding Site Preparation and Grading section, it is our opinion that the proposed buildings for Option "A" or Option "B" may be supported by conventional spread footings bearing on at least two feet of structural fill provided that a successful preload program has been completed. We anticipate that overexcavations may not be necessary at perimeter footing locations, if at least two feet of existing competent granular fill exists below the perimeter footings. Depending upon the condition of the foundation soils, recompaction or overexcavation may be required. Structural fill, if placed under footings, should extend outward from the edge of the footings a minimum distance equal to one half the depth of the structural fill. Foundations may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of three thousand (3,000) pounds per square foot (psf). Loading of this magnitude would have a theoretical factor of safety in excess of three against an actual shear (bearing capacity) failure. A one-third increase in the above allowable soil-bearing values can be used when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. ,• Ee h Coneultx , Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 8 Exterior foundation elements should be placed a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches below final exterior grade. Interior spread foundations can be placed at a minimum depth of twelve 0 2) inches below the top of slab, except in unheated areas, where interior foundation elements should be founded at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches. Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (24) inches, respectively. Lateral loads may be resisted by friction between the foundations and the supporting native or compacted fill subgrade and by passive earth pressure on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be poured "neat" against the adjacent soil or the foundation excavation must be backfilled with structural fill. The following passive pressure and friction values include a factor of safety of 1 .5: • Passive pressure = 350 pcf equivalent fluid weight • Coefficient of friction = 0.40 Footing excavations should 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. Dock-Hi h Retaining Walls Dock-high retaining walls will be constructed along portions of the perimeter of the building. They should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pcf if they are allowed to rotate 0.002 times the height of the wall. If walls art prevented from rotating, we recommend that they be designed to resist lateral loads of fifty (50) pcf. These values are based on horizontal backfill and that surcharges due to hydrostatic pressures, traffic, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressure. Slab-on-Grade Floors Slab-on-grade floors may be supported on the dock-high structural fill. Any disturbed subgrade soil must either be recompacted to a non-yielding condition 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 (300) pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for design. Earth Conaukenta, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 9 The floor slab should be structurally separated from columns or walls so that possible future differential settlement will not be reflected in the form of warped or cracked floor slabs. A capillary break, if used, should consist of 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 should be placed beneath the slab. Two inches of damp sand should be placed over the membrane for protection during construction and to aid in curing of the concrete. Seismic Design Considerations The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The largest earthquakes in the Puget Lowland are widespread and have been subcrustal events, ranging in depth from thirty (30) to fifty-five (55) miles. Such deep events have exhibited no surface faulting. 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 site coefficient of S = 1 .5 should be used for the static force procedure as outlined in Section 2334 of the 1991 UBC. For the dynamic force procedure outlined in section 2335 of the 1991 UBC, the curve for Medium Stiff Clays and Sands (Soil Type 3) should be used for Figure 23-3, Normalized Response Spectra Shapes. Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which soils lose all shear strength for short periods of time during an earthquake. 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. To have a potential for liquefaction, a soil must be cohesionless with a grain size distribution of a specified range (generally sands and silt); it must be loose to medium dense; it must be below the groundwater table; and it must be subject to sufficient magnitude and duration of groundshaking. The effects of liquefaction may be large total settlement and/or differential settlement for structures founded in the liquefying soils. It is our opinion the potential for widespread liquefaction over the site during a seismic event is low to moderate. Isolated areas may be subject to liquefaction; however, the effect on the planned buildings are anticipated to be minimal provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed. We estimate liquefaction induced settlement would be in the range of the post-construction settlements discussed earlier. Earth Consultants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 10 Excavations and Slopes Excavation slopes should, in no case, be greater than the limits specified in local, state and federal safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from our field exploration and laboratory testing, the site soils expected to be encountered in excavations would be classified as Type C by OSHA, and as such, temporary cuts greater than four feet in height should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1 .51-1:1 V. If slopes of this inclination, or flatter, cannot be constructed, temporary shoring may be necessary. This shoring will help protect against slope or excavation collapse, and will provide protection to workmen in the excavation. If temporary shoring is required, we will be available to provide shoring design criteria, if requested. All permanent slopes should be inclined no steeper 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 this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the Contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. Site Drainage Groundwater was encountered in our borings approximately five feet below the existing ground surface. It does not appear that groundwater levels will present construction related problems during foundation excavations. However, if groundwater seepage is encountered in foundation excavations during construction, the bottom of the excavation should be sloped to one or more shallow sump pits. The collected water can then be pumped from these pits to a positive an 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. • Earth C....ft nta. Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 11 The construction area should be graded such that surface water is directed off the site. Water must not be allowed to stand in any area where buildings, slabs or pavements are to be constructed. During construction, loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Final site grades must allow for drainage away from foundations. The ground should be sloped at a gradient of three percent for a distance of at least ten feet away from the structures in landscape areas. The gradient can be reduced to two percent in paved areas. Footing drains should be installed around the building perimeter where the slab is at or below outside grade. Footing drains are not required for the dock-high portion of the building. The drains should be installed just below the invert of the footings, with a gradient sufficient to initiate flow. A typical detail is provided on Plate 4. Under no circumstances should roof downspout drain lines be connected to the footing drain system. All roof downspouts must be separately tightlined to discharge. Sufficient cleanouts should be installed at strategic locations to allow for periodic maintenance of the footing drain and downspout tightline systems. Utility Support and Backfill The site soils should provide adequate support for utilities located above the groundwater table. As previously discussed, groundwater water was encountered in our borings five feet below the existing site grades. The soils below the groundwater table may not provide suitable utility support due to the loose or organic condition of the soil and the effect of the groundwater de-stabilizing the trench bottom as the trench is excavated. If utilities are located below the groundwater table, remedial measures such as dewatering, using steel sheets to create a groundwater barrier, and or placement of quarry spalls may be necessary. Earth Consuhenb, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 12 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 0 2) inches above the crown of the pipe before any heavy compaction equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than twelve 0 2) inches. A typical trench backfill section and compaction requirements for load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on Plate 5. As indicated earlier, existing fill soils expected to be encountered in relatively shallow utility excavations should be useable for structural fill in their present condition. Pavement Areas • The adequacy of site pavements is related in part to the condition of the underlying subgrade. To provide a properly prepared subgrade for pavements, the subgrade should be treated and prepared as described in the Site Preparation 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 D-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. The following pavement sections are recommended for lightly-loaded areas, such as parking and driveway 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. 1'• Earth Cansukanta, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 13 Heavier truck-traffic areas will require thicker sections depending upon site usage, pavement life and site traffic. Specific truck traffic volumes were not provided. A specific pavement section can be provided based on actual traffic volumes. However, for heavy traffic areas, as a general rule, the following pavement sections may be considered: • Three inches of AC over six inches of CRB, or • Three inches of AC over four and one-half inches of ATB. Asphalt Concrete (AC), Asphalt Treated Base (ATB), and Crushed Rock Base (CRB) materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. All rock base should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard. A class "B" mix is suggested for Asphalt Concrete. It should be noted that the pavement sections for lightly loaded areas 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 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 borings. Soil and groundwater conditions between borings may vary from those encountered. The nature and extent of variations between our exploratory locations may not become evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations of this report and to modify or verify them in writing prior to proceeding with the construction. Earth Coneuhants, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY • Teutsch Partners E-6662 December 14, 1994 Page 14 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 an implemented in the approved construction plans and specifications. ECI should also be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts,specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. It should be noted that it is generally in the best interests of the owner/clientto maintain the same Geotechnical Engineerduring construction in orderto obtain the project objective, with optimum quality control. Earth Ccnauhants, Inc. FAD < G 515 W 'u o LOTH ST„ y a VN'j S RENTON VILLAGE PL PARK{::. NOATH9A p Np 1T(Hi >1sT a IT <1LTH St p z SW >: E 84 S 16TH ST mP i• It: < Ml,ru. Pt z Piles LonyaC e$:1: ¢ > ST o y u 4 IN19TTN ST m A R ', H sr N 31 I. ..1 I 1 m s 1 ==I 9 o Race L ,E' I �P S IBTH � /'(/. 158H S�2 h I SW 213T T !C aPL 3 m p0 Trac 19 '�° SW 23RD ST �$__23RD m ST ., N w T 1 �i I •SII , ¢S = :'TALE T.' Lti g.,.. rSIC NiFNNlA {7 f R =. I ; R E Ill T N ; au PARK': <0 S. PARK / !i S XTH ST- Z i 25TH i I 1-t i . , it SW STTH ST IT 577iH`� � r� ♦1. 1 �N �Zy 4. SE `SW MTN ST 1 J'P�H 4pTM <y 7.1TH PL,n" 168 1 CNR/ST- -1 �� W20TN ST ( p JST_ y„ sT _TST < ENSEN I•. I SW 31ST i ¢ } GREENBELT 2 SS7J 33RO 3 515 LL „ 1 i I NT11 i > I 167 i � S 172HD ST I — ITE L�CA ION " w s 1Is Q 7 171TN S7.S I74TH ST E nN SW ilT— <> 39TH—ST I Cr JR rn < 1 1 W1-4 a f W W p5T 5T VALLEYS LATH ST .1 SZ Q�I 1 A < I CEN A Q S S1 ST O GPPP N = I 179TH - a r n:. SW n I • I f� T�gO > pp) I F o< .. RD ST s " tetsr sr �?:��;;5�' I 180TH ST >N :i.�;�:.;N yl ':ix.:,:r. 1 7 S 1 S< 182ND ;'•.`>j'lij I I vi 1 �V. _ ST I c E3G'w �o i I 31 Reference: King County / Map 41 By Thomas Brothers Maps Dated 1990 Barth Consultants Inc. Vicinity Map mEgo- G A� �N 1a sx ,1 East Valley 34 Renton, Washington Proj. No. 6662 Drwn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 12/6/94 Plate 1 i B-2 j B-2 -:- z } Approximate Scale 0 100 200 400ft. m Z C7 _ _ my W W J • o > a LEGEND a W LLJ B-1 4- Approximate Location of a , ECI Boring, Proj. No. i , z E-6662, Nov. 1994 ' D S Proposed Building m -eB-1 B-1 S.W. 34th STREET S.W. 34th STREET PRELIM. SITE PLAN PRELIM. SITE PLAN OPTION "A" OPTION "B" Boring Location Plan "t Earth Consultants Info East Valley 34 am„ r�,.nai�rs.c woass a Fmnme.rrnoi umi� Renton, Washington Pro) No. 6662 Drwn. GLS Dat® Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 12/6/94 Plate 2 �. SCHEMATIC ONLY- NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING • E Surcharge or Preload a „ " "a Surcharge or Preload Fill " Fill � d lil-1n= III> (II.I11=111- STANDARD NOTES 1) Base consists of 3/4 inch thick, 2 foot by 2 foot plywood with center drilled 5/8 Inch diameter hole. 2) Bedding material, if required, should consist of Traction Sand. 3) Marker rod is 1/2 inch diameter steel rod threaded at both ends. 4) Marker rod is attached to base by nut and washer on each side of base. 5) Protective sleeve surrounding marker rod should consist of 2 inch diameter plastic tubing. Sleeve Is NOT attached to rod or base. 6) Additional sections of steel rod can be connected with threaded couplings. 7) Additional sections of plastic sleeve can be connected with press-fit plastic couplings. 8) Steel marker rod should extend at least 6 Inches above top of plastic sleeve. 9) Marker should extend at least 2 feet above top of fill surface. rf. Earth 1 TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL \ 1 u 1 Consultants Inc. East Valley 34 Renton, Washington Pro]. No. 6662 Drwn. GLs Date Dec'94 Checked Ja Date 12/6/94 Plate 3 ° : o Slope To Drain °e 'e ° 6 inch min. = .; - 18 inch min. 4 inch min. Diameter Perforated Pipe t >: '•a'=<: °° ° ° - Wrapped in Drainage ° e,° Fabric - 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 East Valley 34 Renton, Washington Proj. No. 6662 1 Drwn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked Jg Date 12/6/94 Plate 4 Non-Load Supporting- Floor Slab or Areas Roadway Areas 1 �f"ltix���,Yj ?^tYtSi Varies ° 0 0 0 0 gg t Foot Minimum Backfill 80 90 Varies 4 PIPE o 0 0 00.°A Bedding .... P:d.:'.00'oaL�oQo. Varies °s0. O'0�p.Q•<poo0o .O�Off'00 oP�p.�0 a Pe • . '•0 O.� QO 'U"••0O°.Ov'b'••OQO°VO a • LEGEND: sq 7 Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab °.a a • ° • ° • 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. o Bedding Material; Material Type Depends on Type of Pipe and Laying Conditions. Bedding Should Conform to the Manufacturers Recommendations for the Type of Pipe Selected. Ea l�rl Consultants Inc. TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL East Valley 34 G^+�°���RYrnS C.ndoglus6 YnNrtxmrnw�I Jtirtxhl+ Renton, Washington Proj. No. 6662 DrWn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 12/6/94 Plate 5 APPENDIX A • FIELD EXPLORATION E-6662 Our field exploration was performed on November 30, 1994. Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling two borings, each to a depth of forty-one and one-half (41 .5) feet below the existing grade. The borings were advanced with a truck mounted, hollow stem auger drill rig. Approximate boring locations were determined by taping from existing site landmarks. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. These approximate locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Plate 2. The field exploration was continuously monitored by a geotechnical engineer from our firm who classified the soils encountered and maintained a log of each boring, obtained representative samples, measured groundwater levels, and observed pertinent site features. In each boring, Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed at selected intervals in general accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1586. The split spoon samples were driven with a one hundred forty (140) pound hammer freely falling thirty (30) inches. The number of blows required to drive the last twelve (12) inches of penetration are called the "N- • value". This value helps to characterize the site soils and is used in our engineering analyses. Representative soil samples were placed in closed containers and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. All samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System which is presented on Plate All, Legend. The Boring Logs are presented on Plates A2 through A7. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory examination and tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual. t•� Earth Consultants, Inc. MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Gravel O e GW Well-Graded Gravels,Gravel-Sand And Clean Gravels C d Q gw Mixtures, Little Or No Fines Gravelly (little or no fines) •, M Coarse Soils , Poorly-Graded Gravels,Gravel- Grained I I I gp Sand Mixtures.Little Or No Fines Soils More Than GP 50% Coarse Gravels With GM Silty Gravels,Gravel-Sand- Fraction Fines(appreciable grin Silt Mixtures No.4 Retained amount of fines) GC Clayey o. Sievea y Y Gravels,Gravel-Sand- gC Clay Mixtures Sand ,e o� SYd Well-Graded Sands, Gravelly And Clean Sand o e o` o n SW Sands, Little Or No Fines More Than Sandy (little or no fines) Soils e; �. 4 ,; SP Poorly-Graded Sands, Gravelly 50% Material . . a�e 4 r, y Larger Than Sp Sands, Little Or No Fines No.200 Sieve More Than Size 50% Coarse Sands With SM Silty Sands, Sand- Silt Mixtures Passing No.4 Fraction Fines(appreciable SDl amount of fines) >: SC Sieve SC Clayey Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures ML Inorganic Silts&Very Fine Santls,Rock Flour,Silty- fpl Clayey Fine Sands;Clayey Silts w/Slight Plasticity Fine Silts - ituid Li Liqm Grained And CL Inorganic Clays Of low To Medium Plasticity, Soils Clays Less Than S0 Cl Gravelly Clays, Sandy Clays, Silty Clays. Lean l i i i l i OL Organic Silts And Organic I I I OI Silty Clays Of Low Plasticity More Than MH Inorganic Silts, Micaceous Or Diatomaceous FirQ 50% Material Silts mh Sand Or Silly Soils Smaller Than And Liquid Limit No.200 Sieve Cla Greater Than 50 CH Inorganic Clays Of High ys Size Ch Plasticity. Fat Clays OH Organic Clays Of Medium To High • Oh Plasticity, Organic Silts Highly Organic Soils PT Peat. Humus, Swamp Sens r .. .t, �r pt Wilh High Organic Contents Topsoil Humus And Duff Layer Fill Highly Variable Constituents The discussion in the text of this report Is necessary Tor a Proper understanding of the nature Of the material Presented In the attached logs. DUAL SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderline soli classification, C TORVANE READING,tsf I 2'O.D.SPUR SPOON SAMPLER qu PENETROMETER READING,tat W MOISTURE, %dry weight 24'I.D. RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER P SAMPLER PUSHED ` SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED i WATER OBSERVATION WELL P� DRY DENSITY,lbs.per cubic ft. LL LIQUID LIMIT,% PI PLASTIC INDEX 2 DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER DURING EXCAVATION i SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER LEVEL W/DATE Earth consultants inc. LEGEND I [1xwxluW:Yr9,a4va:A.(itaxnalyyf rr„YuulxaN:iSWautsb Proj. No.666z Date Dec'94 Plate Al Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of East Valle 34 1 3 Job No. Logged by. Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: • 6662 JB 11 L30194 11 30 94 B-1 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated Drilling HSA SPT Ground Surface FJevation: Hole Completion: f 15.2 ❑ Monitoing Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite u_ W No. L o } m o Surface Conditions: 2" Grass %j BIOWS N E N LL E U E Ft. L N U7 N SP•SM FILL Gray poorly graded medium SAND with silt and gravel,medium dense,moist 1 2 8.7 13 3 4 5 ' OH Dark brown organic SILT,medium stiff,wet 72.2 7 LL=81 PL=58 /// 6 PI=23 — — 7 PT Dark brown fiberous PEAT,soft,wet 207.4 3 u u 8 • 92•0 ML Gray SILT,loose,wet 9 -contains approximately 10%fiberous organics 10 SM Gray silty fine to medium SAND,medium dense,water bearing 30.8 11 11 12 13 14 15 34.8 16 S. -contains silt and organic layers 16 17 18 ON "t v 19 N iEartr► Consultants Enc. East sting Vaiie Log 344 m oeotama� exa�aaarnaemva.ro+.,eoenm y Renton,Washington -1 ProJ.No. 6662 own. GLS Date DeC. '94 decked JB Date 12/8/94 Plate A2 Subsurface conditions deTicted represent our observations at the time and location of this expploratory hole,modified by engineering tests, analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of East Valle 34 • Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: She2 3 6662 JB 11130, 94 11 30 94 B-1 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated Drilling HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 15.2' ❑ mo toing Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bent mite u _W No. t o N _o Surface Conditions: 2" Grass % Blows t1 E a+ E U) E Ft, CO N oo U. to N 28.9 17 21 22 23 24 25 -becomes dense 24.8 37 26 27 28 • 29 30 50.0 5 31 CL Gray lean CLAY,medium still,wet -trace of shells 32 33 34 SM Gray silty fine to medium SAND,loose,water bearing 35 25.8 5 36 contains fragments of wood and shells 37 38 v a v � r N rr F�Z-W COnadtantS Inc. Boring Log 4.(D ��,rtik East Valley 34 foawaaa +er Renton,Washington m Prol. No. 6662 Dwn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 1218/94 Pate A3 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot am modified by engineering tests, apt responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name:662 Sheet of East Valle 34 3 3 • Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 6 JB 11 30 94 11 30 94 B-1 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated Drilling HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 15.2' u EjMonitolng Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite _ ty No. = O } CO _O Surface Conditions: 20Grass N Blows M E v LL E N E R. 0 vTi o rn m 25.6 8 41 Boring terminated at 41.5 feet below existing grade.Groundwater encountered at 5.0 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings and bentonite. • a o. v .r N ~ Earth Consultants Inc. Boring Log o . �cbaopur<eeaa.ue. East Valley 34 � Renton,Washington m Prol•No. 6662 Dwr GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JS Date 12/8/94 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. Boring Log Project Name: - Sheet of East Valle 34 1 3 • Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 6662 JB 11 30 94 11 30 94 B-2 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated Drillin HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 14.8' ❑U Mo itoing Well ElPiezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite ty No. .c o d m p Surface Conditions: 2"Sod, Grass % Blows r1. E a+' E 13 N E i L (n 0tr• N � N SP-SM FILL,Gray poorly graded medium SAND with silt and gravel,medium dense,moist 1 2 7.0 45 3 4 5 _ 95.9 g 8 OH Dark brown organic SILT,medium stiff,wet -pushed shelby tube at 7.0 feet WD=77.4pcf — — 7 PT Dark brown fiberous PEAT,soft,wet DD=30.3pcf 155 8 ML Gray SILT,loose,wet WD=85.2pcf 8 contains approximately 10%fiberous organics !• DD=39.5pcf 115.4 9 SM Gray silty tine SAND,loose,water bearing 10 50.2 5 11 12 13 14 15 28.3 32 -becomes dense 18 -sand becomes medium,contains silt lenses 17 18 a o. U1 19 Cu ti Earth Consultants Inc. Boring Log East Valley 34 m ti ceaem+wa�pnaa rzaoaraaemwa,uymeaoa.0 Renton,Washington J Proj.No. 6662 Dwn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 12/8/94 Plate A5 m p analysis aand jujudgmons ent The are are icted not neoessaril represent our resentative five o10o other timions at the time and es andon of this ex locations.Wa ccanloratonot accept resfied ponsibilitysponsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: Sheet of East Valle 34 2 3 . Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 6662 JB 11 30 94 11 30 94 B-2 Drilling Contactor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated Drilling HSA SPT Ground Surface Bevation: Hole Completion: t 14.8' ❑ Monitoin-q Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite u _ W No. L o } v to o Surface Conditions: 2"Sod, Grass (%) Blows E W LL E N E Ft LN p (A DN 38.0 7 21 MIL Gray SILT,loose,wet 22 23 24 SM Gray silty line to medium SAND,medium dense,water bearing 25 32.5 22 26 27 28 29 30 CL Gray lean CLAY,very soft,wet 55.8 2 31 LL-49 PL=27 PI=22 32 33 34 SM Gray silty medium SAND,very loose,water bearing 35 28.4 3 -contains fragments of shells 36 37 38 V U tr 39 N .y fU Boring Log �'] Consultants&&TAK.ltS inc.actrAft East Valley 34 "` `°� Renton,Washington m Pro).No. 6662 Dwn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 12/8/94 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.p e cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Boring Log Project Name: East Valle 34 Sheet o3 3f 4 Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No.: 6662 JB 11 30 94 11 30 94 B-2 Drilling Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Associated Drilling HSA SPT Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: f 14.8' ❑ Mo itoing Well ❑ Piezometer ® Abandoned,sealed with bentonite u _ fN C p + d y o Surface Conditions: 2" SOd, Grass o.E a+- E N E � N0 LL N :) 41 Boring terminated at 41.5 feet below existing grade.Groundwater encountered at 5.0 feet during drilling.Boring backfilled with cuttings and bentonite. v a In Cu Cu Earth ConsLdtant5 Inc. Boring Log cemea.�a,�oeoppoy►enrua.mmn+d 9arnaoy East Valley 34 Renton,Washington m Pro).No. 6662 Dwn. GLS Date Dec. '94 Checked JB Date 12/8/94 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. APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS . E-6662 Earth Consultants, Inc. SIEVE ANALYSIS I - I . t�tttlttl�t�tlma_��iitll"-'C���ttlt�tl�tltt�••�t•titttt�Ittttl�ttltttltttt� � G. tttt�tttlttltttlt�tittlt�tl�itttlttl�•ti.���tttl�t�•t�tltttt��tl�ttltttltttt�Ittt•�ttltt�ttt�an= ME,Ian� �m������t1�ttltttltttt�Itt�tl�ttitt�tttt� ����La\��a��\ MEMO! ��� •� tttt�tttlttltttlt�tl��tlt\itt•►.�tlttt•t•ttrimt�tlt�tl��tl��ttttt�ttttltl�t���� tttt�tttlttltttlt�tlttttltl�ttltt�t•► _tlttt�ttlii�t_�tlt�tlt��•�ttltt��Itt�tl��_�_�_ tttt�tttlttltttlttttlt�ttltl ttltttlttl ttttt[t tt1tttl=,antlt�tl��tl�tt1tttltttt�������ttltt�tttt� tttt�tttl��t��t�ttltl�t�tttlttl ■\�ttltttlttlW7tlt�tl��t1�ttltt�tttt�Itt�tl�ttltttltttt� • :� ����t��t�tt��ttltt�t•tttt�titt►S7tttlttltftltlt�tl��ti�t�tttltttt�Ittstl�ttl�tttt� tttttttttit�tttl�tlt��tl�ttl�ttl tttttt�ttt�►�tttlttl V���� ISSUtl�t�tt�tttt� �������������ttttttltlttt�tC�ttltlttlttttltttt���Ottltt�tttt�MENEtl�ttltttltttt� • mmomm ����\�ttl�ttit�tltttt�WNWttltttltttt�smomm�ttltt�tttt� tttt�t�ttltttl���ttltl�ttltttlttl ttt�tlttt�ttlt��ttltlftlt�tltttt�otlmttltttl�Itttltl�ttl�ttt� tttt�tttlttltttlt�tl�ttltl�ttltt�t�ttttttltlttt�ttlttt:7�ttlt�tltttttt���ttltttlttttttlltttltl�ttltttlt� tttt�ttt/ttltttlt�tlontlmttlt =ttttttl■ttt�ttlttt:��tM■t�tltttt� tl t� tttt� on ttltt�• tt�tttlt�tttlt�tlt�ttltl�ttlt�ttl�tlttt�ttltttlt\��ItI�t1��t1��t�tt�MESOtl�t�tttltttt� tttt�tttl�tttlt�attt�tl�ttltt�ttl tt�tlttt�ttltttlttl�•tlt�tltttt��ti�ttlt�ttttttlltttltl�ttitt�tttt� tttt�tttlttltttlt�tltt�tl�ttltttlttl ttttt�tittt��tttlttl\�It1�t1��t1�ttltttltttt�Itttltl�ttltt�tttt� tttt�tttlt�tttlt�������ttt m tttt�tlttt��tttlttl\�It1��tt�tl��ttltttlttt�Mtl'St1���� . tttt�tttlt�tttlt�tlttttltl�ttltt��tttttttlttt�ttltttlttlt111�t�tltttt��t1�ttltt�tttt�Itttlti�ttltttl� tttt�tttlttltttlt�tlttttltl�ttltt�ttl ttttttltlttt�ttltttlttl■titlt�tl��t1�t�tttlttttttlltt�tl�ttltt�tttt� tttt�tttlttltttlt�■ ttl■ ttltttlttl ttttttl■t� tttlt� ■t�mtttttt ■ tttlttttttlI■■■■ ttltt�tttt� t�t�ttltttl�tlttttltlttttltt�ttl ttttttl�ttt�ttltttlttlt\\�t�tltttt��tl�ttltttlttttttltttltl�ttltt�tttt/ � • �tttlt��t�tlttlttltl�ttltt�ttl ttttttltlttt��tttlttlt�l�t�tltttt�t\tl�ttltttlt�Ittn��ttltt�t�� ' tttttttttlt�tttl tlt�ttl ���t�tttlttltt111It�tltttt��tl�ttltttl�Ittmtl�t•tt�t� tttt�tttlttltttl�tl�ttltl�ttlMEN=ttttttltlt�ttltttlttltt\Ilt�tltttt� •�ttltttlttttttllttttl�ttltttlt� �tttl�tttlt�motttttl�ttltt�ttl ttttttltlttt�ttltttlttlt�.11t�tltttttt�t1�ttltttltttttiINOUE��t�tttt� tttt�tttlttltttl�tl=ttltl�ttltt�ttl ttttttltittt�ttltttlttlta:{t�titttt��t1�t�tttl�Itttitlttttltt�tttt� . �tttlttltttlt�tlmttltl�t�tt�ttlt�tlttt�ttltttlttlt�Il7tltttt��tl�ttltttlttttttltt�tl�ttlt tttt�tttlttltttlt�tl=ttltlmttlt�ttl ttttttl�ttt�ttltttlttl atwtltttt����ttltttlttttttltt�tl�ttltt�tttt� tttttttttlttltttl ■ttttl=man�ttl ttttttl��ttltttlttl=tL�tltttttt�■�ttltttlttttttlI■■m•=ttltttlttt� tt�tttlttltttlt�tlttttl�ttttltt�ttl ttttt�tlttt�ttltttlttlt�tl►\�t\tttt��tl�ttlt�ttttttl mom tlmttlt�tt tttt�tttli t�■ttlttltl�ttltt�ttl ttttttl■�t•tttlttlt�■tr1■tttttt ■Mtt1tttlttttttl■NONE mt t tttt�tttlt�tttl�tlttlttltl�ttl��ttttttltlttt�ttltttlttl�tltl\�tttt��tl�ttlt�ttttttltt�tl�t�tttltttt� � tttt�tttlttltttlt�tlt��tl�ttltt��ttttttltlttt�ttltttl�t�tlILILIM ttt����ttltttl�Itt�tl�ttl�tttt� ���������������\�����ttltt�tttt�NONEtl�t�tt�tttt� ME�i•�i�������i�•�\\t•1�•tl�t•tttlttttttltt�tl�ttltt•ttt� t�tttlttltttlt�tlittltl�ttl�ttlttttttltt�����•���.�•���-Itt�tl�ttltt�� .tttt�tttlttltttlMtl=tttl�ttltttlttl ttttttl�ttt�ttltttlttlt�tl�L-:�1t1�ttltttl�Ittttl�ttltt•tttt� .. =am�������a�������0 �t1�ttltttltttt�Itt�tl�ttltt�tttttt �a=�������0�������in �t1�ttltttltttt�Ittntl�ttltttltttt� ��������a�����������t1�ttltttltttt�Itttltl�ttltt�tttt� tt�attt�ttltttlttlt�tlt�tltttt�111t1�ttltttltttt�Ittati�ttltttlttt� ��t•tt•t�tit�t�tl�ttltt�ttl ttttttlttt�ttltttlttlt�tlt�tltttt��t1�ttltttlttttt�IttNtl�ttltt�tttt� tttt�tttlttltttlmtlmttltl�ttltt��ttttttl�ttt�ttlt�ttlt�tit�tltttt��t1�ttltttltttt�IttNo�ttl�tttt� tttt�tttlttltttlt�mtm�tl�ttltt����ttt�ttitt�ttlt�tlt/titttt�tltl�ttlt�ttttt�Ittatl�ttl�tttt� tttt�tttlttltttltilltttttittttltt�ttl�mission l�ttlt�tlmotltttt��t1��tttlttttttllttttl�ttltt�tttt� • �ttltttlllll�tl�ItI1��It1��I1ttII�It1�ttltttt�tlllttl1tt11tt1��I�ttt1lt11�t1�ttltttltttt�Itt�tl�ttltt�ttt� �. ® �® DESCRIPTION �m poorly graded SAND with silt Gray, silty• . 100 so W 60 0 Z r U N 40 a a. o. C 20 • -ML &0 20 40 It60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Boring/ Depth Natural Key Soil Classification USCS L.L. P.L. PI. Water Test Pit (ft) Content B-1 5 Dark brown, organic SILT OH 81 58 23 72.2 B-2 30 Gray, lean CLAY CL 49 27 22 55.8 Atterberg Limits Test Data Earth Consultants Inc. East Valley 34 rmem,ta�W + ssF .'M saautus Renton, Washington Proj. No. 6662 Date Dec,94 Plate B2 DISTRIBUTION • E-6662 4 Copies Teutsch Partners 2001 Western Avenue, Suite 330 Seattle, Washington 98112 Attention: John Walker • Earth Consuhents, Inc. i VH. BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS y and H • M z VM. OTHER PERMITS • )6� I` CA I � I� IX. EROSION/SEDBIENTATION CONTROL DESIGN 4 TEMPQRARY EROSION AN[3 SI DI .E.N7ATION GONTROL PDNb SL ING CA'LCUI.;4TIl"3NS FOR': TEUTSGH Pp,RTNERS IN�USTRIAk 4NARhIOtJS RENTQI1t, W ,SHIN TAN OUR JOB NO. 5198 APRIL 17, 1995 Prepared By: BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (206) 251 -6222 GHgV o - = CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES sv 4• At rY 3 5/98 • St-rTGi.yG BONE I�OLUME C�AGCULRTo ✓5 J�NO SU.P�ACC /'I.PE7� F h F NNN coo <v a vaa N N N dot a� = z. ys/ (, CS `/•3, 35) 6 = a•6 V (,eC51-)Ory V.3,38) T = 4/so Y L = //00 4F • v= ,f�,c So s, = a. y/ d = ye,/ AOOyO = 4. 6� i7�sEc. Tc = //0016o(a 6l/) = 28. 6s 0,6y _ (O,z l�o.ao Su,e�gcC ,9�etA SA = /zso (q,�J = /zro (Zy31 = 3d/z.s SF (eeza�.ernJ Z 2 f 30' = 6 7s0 SF Meo loOCD) fAr> AG t/ 3W • �/lSr.✓ A,PFA 72) fjt- .6 AC G-00 C SOiIJ jYPE - T�/K[JiL A� T'/6C DJ t�711/20 W W_W moo NOO -ra Cv �P.e ava N n N L/ = //Gb FT S IJty FACTnt/✓v ao/r f?sen = /. 99 7a d�c1G E,• Vi f�6. S,5<yc al�Vsrn = 262,6 cF D.QOJ/Gt' Z ' OE'�7rY �O dC SE11/Ne�T S�Rq-6� wok scrrz/A/a ev/✓c volaVC c/fiuG Tr/C K bALUC jag TU,CrJ/GA Jo/G 1-019*417E-J TO <I UUGUNE UR JrA,MCHT Te q�/JFa/CTCO. /.✓ae�cK 91Jv^/� ScrD/NCNr J70 P"e- 7wC K t/5gL C Wig S i'c9C7V,Ce"2O O47- 40 - 771C !r6aCIA770q. lZoA� eJA.f ;j,/ j COAi,-'�W710 71) /3 TO.vf PBX /ice r FOR. .r'A, Ce-7Y F9�7Af. � V � . .,v L'.� �f :i j v� 'G , I {Fil l j A � � �`, l�+ y •- . ! P, ^ `�•1 v r ,Vk,—,/ a 3;3 --_ .� �I a/ Inb r"FJt•"`f.. if _ *'. �i'N•,'�..! �.. m. :c„ I ' g, e4;37 I f/ t Y sjti AmC xr` "1 A 5N .` /� TNE�! I ? ... ', InC �_ '� I \I I ' .. // �•yl _r T i �� ' � ••. I >dl.> i�\ 4 1o,,AA�•`a� ,f��y. / II ���Cr.' M @ C 1( 'sc/ i w A�4� •..' � ' 1 Sobs a Am< c •�, � �r mQ \.AED CC Gm 16 20 21 i �_ i PU / \ „ •.\ ! o .ti.c� ` `.. � I ..� Ia�� s`, I 1 I >xK •iy._II ; u ., .r : 0 / \ 515 Pr I j v:O Bed z. • .• 6BeCj ']� ' .yam- _ --_.�� \ '✓ -r• .ice :;�-._ ____ '..* _ •• ��? 6. 0y- - _ r•an w �li SO Tu- .A yy� �• I -_ /�-� Y1 ABC i. .-::/�'2 5 n n r. . 6. u ,il 9 a ••I 3 : �C��•s ..=-�.. 42B /i .I Il SITE 160 . 1203 AgG' 29 '1 II A68 28Sk 'y�� ' ~Ag X • ' Y M A�B�•,�A' e ? I r���. - �.� 17I I P6�NJV:TAK / I I'r / jj .i:' CMIs ..'. d� / .1 •� .•� C II U�'llh'1 - �� ': �� �• >� I M I : , :,3 . �,: «, a ARC � / - \\ � •- yJ l II: ^�vv �-�� ? \.. 1 ! •.I v .1 4 `� l ., tl� nl; /1 �� ``.. '\ 1 a• .ur •�� t' e a • sArs w? � 'f 1" f. 3� •. I nl/t�� .r ' L 44 h' j`��_'-"-`'I� � %3s -+ _ ^ •P.q v`"��r f ' •} P. �c"y'"M.. `y ASC � x , _ j g Re' ° -.9 _. •� ,p1 ..; J� AgD v No 1v'i °'o "�•.v'' UZ`. Wa[er ,,.+e�}. is 1 'g' ^>: 7-1 Tank. •"i rh ,�. _ J. i Off WE Wt . • - I�'Rrar"spa i; I:� G WAA KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL o To complete the desion of the temporary sediment trap: • a. The "Pond Geometry Equations" section in the "Reference' portion at the 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 5.4.4C 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 5.4.4A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS IN KING COUNTY SOIL SOIL EROD. EROD- HYDROLOGIC IBILITY HYDROLOGIC SILTY SOIL GROUP GROUP` FACTOR;K' SOIL GROUP GROUP' FACTOR.'K' Aldenvood C 0.15 Orcas Peat D 0.00 Arents,Alderwood C 0.15 Oridia D 0.49 Arents, Everett B 0.17 Ovail C 0.17 Beaushe C 0.15 Pilchuck C 0.10 Bellingham 0 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 Salat C 0.37 Everett A 0.17 Sammamish D 0.37 Indianola A 0.15 Seattle 0.00 Kitsap C 0.32 Shacar 0.00 Klaus C 0.17 SI Silt C 0.37 Mixed Alluvial Land Variable 0.10 Snohomish 0 0.32 Neflton 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). Sods having high Infiltration rates,even when thoroughly wetted,and consisting chiefly of deep,well-toexcessively 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 ,f chiefly of Gay sods with a high swelfing potential,soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a • - hardpan or Gay layer at or near the surface,and shallow soils over nearly Impervious material. These sods have a very slow rate of water transmission. ' From SCS,TR-55, Second Edition,June 1986,Exhibit A-1. Revisions made from SCS, Soils Interpretation Record, Form M5,September 1988. - 5.4.4.1-3 1/90 • • .a Ti r I-S values for fa110wing snpc lengths 1,ft(m)Slope __ for z following slope lengths 1,fl(m) H Slo a A I gradient IO 30 90 ,10 50 CO 70 80 90 100 150 200 250 100 360 400 450 500 600 700 800 07 (6, 1000 A C7 rnlin (1,', . I) (9.1) (12.2) (15.2) (18.3) (21.3) (2•t.4) (27.4) (30.5) - (.16) (61) (76) (91) (107) (122) (137) (152) (183) (213) (2.14) (279004) (305) 11.5 O.IIr 0.07 0.07 2 r 08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0,09 0.09 0.10 0,10 0.11 0.11 0,12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.1.1 Q.14 0.15 0.15 y IINI:I I O.41H10 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.11 11.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0'12 0,1•I 0.11 0,15 0.1 r, 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.1E 0.19 0.19 0.20 '2 0.10 O.I'2 t1,IJ (1.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.21) 0.21 025 0.2r, 0.2E 0.29 0.30 0.72 0.33 0.34 OaG 0.37 Oa9 Q.JO Y 11 (1.16 0.18 0.25 0.28 0.21 0.25 0,26 0., 0-28 0,29 nag 0.15 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.43 0.45 0.46 0.49 0.51 0.54 0.55 0.57 C a 4 (),Ifi 0.11 0.25 0.28 0.'I(1 0.13 Oa5 n.17 0.38 0.40 0.47 0.51 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 0,21.) 0a4 0.7B 0.41 OAS OA8 0.51 0.53 0.66 0.76, 0,85 0.9.1 1,00 1.07 1.11 1.20 L91 lA2 I,51 1.60 L69 * G ti 11.21 0,30 U.:17 OA1 11,4N Us2 4L.5fi o.rlO 0.64 O,rr7 0.82 0.95 1.061 1.1 r, 1.2r, 1.34 1.43 1.50 1.65 1.78 1.90 2.02 2.13 a 7 0.26 0.37 0.45 0.52 0.58 arm 0.69 0.74 0.78 0-82 1.01 1.17 1.30 1.43 1.54 I.G.5 1.7.5 1.84 2.02 2.1E 2.33 2.47 2.61 12'1:1 8 OAI 0.44 0.54 O.033 0.70 0.77 0.E3 0.89 0.94 0.99 1.21 1.40 1.57 1.72 1.85 1.98 2.10 2.22 2.43 2.62 2.80 2.97 3.13 _-. 9 (1.37 0.52 O.ra4 0.74 0.8,1 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 x 151:1 10 UAa 0.61 0.75 -0.87 0,97 LOfi 1.15 1.22 1.10 1.37 1.68 1.04 2.16 2.37 2.56 2.74 2.90 3.06 3.35 3.62 3.87 4.11 4.33 z 11 0.60 0.71 0.86 1.00 1.12 1.22 1.32 1.41 1.50 1.58 1.93 2.21 2:50 2.74 2.95 3.16 3.35 3.63 3.87 4.18 4.47 4.74 4.09 8:1 12.5 0.61 0.85 1.05 122 1.16 1.49 I.f>1 1.72 1.82 1.92 2.15 2.72 1,04 3.33 159 3.84 4.0E 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 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 4.81 527 S.G9 608 6.45 6.80 7.45 8.04 8.60 9.12 9.G2 z 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.OG 7.63 6.16 8.65 9.12 9.99 10.79 11.54 12,24 12.90 to a 4X,:1 22 1.51 2.13 2.61 3.02 3.37 3.69 3.99 4.27 4.53 4.77 5.84 6.7.5 7.54 8.26 8.92 9,54 10.12 10.67 11.68 12.62 13.49 14A1 15.08 (~ ? 4:1 25 1.86 2.63 3.20 3.73 4.16 4.56 4.9.1 5.27 5.59 5.89 7.21 8,33 9.31 10.20 11.02 31.78 12.49 13.17 14.43 15.58 16.66 17.67 18.63 30 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 3:1 11.3 2.98 4.22 5.17 5.9fi B.fi7 7.30 7.89 8.41 19.48 21.01 22.49 23.8G 25.15 8.95 9.43 11.55 33.34 14.91 I6.33 17.64 18.86 20.00 21.09 23.10 24.96 26.67 28.29 29.82 15 1.23 4.57 5.GO 0.46 7.23 7.92 8.55 9.14 9.70 10.22- 12.52 I.1.46 16.16 17.70 19.12 20.44 21.G8 22.86 25.04 27.04 28.91 30.67 32.32 () 2%:1 40 4.00 5.66 6.93 B.00 8.05 9.80 10.59 11.32 12.(10 12.65 16.50 17.89 20.01 21,91 23.07 25.10 2G.84 28.29 30.99 33.48 35.79 37.9G -10.01 45 4.81 6.80 8.33 9.61 10.75 11.77 12.72 13.60 14.42 1,520 18.62 21.50 24.01 26.31 28.44 30.40 3224 33.09 37.23 40.22 42.99 45.60 48.07 M 2:1 S0 5.64 7.97 9.76 11,27 12.60 13.81 14.91 16.9.1 16.91 17.82 21,83 25.21 28.18 30.87 33.3.1 35.65 .17.81 39.8,5 41.GG 47,]G 50.41 53.47 SG.35 SS 6.48 9.16 11.22 12.96 14.78 15.87 17.14 IBaY 19.43 20.48 25.09 28.97 12.39 35.48 38.32 40.97 43.45 45.80 50.18 54.20 57.94 61.45 64.78 IN:1 .57 6.82 9.64 11.80 13.63 15.24 1E,69 18.03 19.28 20.45 21.55 26.40 30.48 34.08 37.33 40.32 . 41.10 .15.72 48.19fro . IOa3 12.68 I4.64 Ifia7 IR93 19.:17 20.71 21.96 52.79 57.02 60.91i 64.66 08.15 I X:1 f6.7 8.44 11.91 11.61 1. . . .60 •1010 43.31 4670 49.11 51.77 56.71 61.25 65.48 69.45 73.21 . . . . 5.31 26.68 32.68 37.74 42.19 46.22 49.92 53.37 56.60 59.GG 65.36 70.60 75.47 80.05 84.38 70 8.98 12.70 15.55 17.96 20.08 21.99 23.75 25.39 26,93 28.39 34.77 40.15 44.80 40.17 53.11 56.78 60.23 63.48 69.54 75.12 80.30 85,17 89.7E 75 9.78 17.83 16.94, 19.56 21.87 21.95 25.87 27.riri 29.34 30.92 37.87 4.1.73 48.89 53.5G 57.85 61,85 65.60 69.15 75.75 81.82 87.4G 92.77 97.79 1 X:1 NO IO.55 14,93 18.28 21.11 2:3,60 25.8f. 27.93 29.85 31.116 33.38 40.88 47.20 52.77 57.81 G2.44 66.75 70.80 74.63 81.70 88.31 94.41 100.13 105.55 (n 85 11.10 15.98 19.58 22.61 25.27 27.69 29.90 :11.97 01.91 :15,74 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 of) 12.n2 17.00 20.82 24.04 26.88 29.44 31.80 34.00 Tw3G.OG 38,01 46.55 53.76 CO.10 65.84 71.11.76.02 80.63 84.992 9.111 100.57 107.51 114.03 120.20 n 95 12.71 17.97 22.01 25.41 28.41 31.12 3:3.62 35.94 38.12 40.18 49.21 SG.82 63.53 69.59 75.17 80.36 85.23 89.84 98.42 106.30 113.64 120.54 127.06 1:1 100 13.:16 18.89 2.1.14 26.72 29.87 32.72 35.34 37.78 40.08 42.24 51.74 59.74 66.79 73.17 79.0.1 84.49 89.61 94,46 103.48 111.77 119,48 126.73 133.59 Z .Calculated rram I.ti IIII 65.41 %as + 4.56 X a / I 9 4 10.M0 . + joono +D.O65�(72.5/- 1 1 - tolmeraphic fucwr II I -sla0e Icnslh,0(m x D.704E) z a -atop,elecpnexa, m - upon,et drpe,deal upan dope ateerymsa D(0.2 fill alapu < 14.4s�-4 for rinpcv I (a 7'Y., a4 rnr alap,a 35 w .,nm1 r. 0.5 far alan,a>.5'ffi) KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 5.4.4C SEDIMENT TRAP SIZE AND DIMENSIONS o s between a ; n_r AsdEifiplfnils Vsed=Sediment storage volume between the interlace and bottom areas •�U W at interface(umtlessJ ,,3 Vlotal=Volume of sediment Trap between the top and bottom areas Side slopes along length,H!L(unitless)= D33 Ab,At=area of the bottom(b)and top(1)of the trap Side slopes along width,H/W(uni0ess)= 0.33 Ai=area of the interface(i)between the settling zone and sediment storage Depth from interface to bottom(h)= 1.5 Lb,U.Lt=Average length from inlet to outlet al the bottom,interface,and top elevalions Depth from top to interface(ft)= 2 Wb,Wi,Wt=Width of the bottom,interface,and tap areas Total Depth(0)= 3.5 0 0 Volumes(R^3 Areas(ft"")` Widtft and Leng s'(R) vali7es(ft�3 -€ AreaS'{R"2j tfJ(d(h and L Qt gths(ft) Vsed J.Attcbi Atli" Ai ,i:AL ym Lh:!WI LI VYt Lt Vsed Vlotaf .i At VVb Lb" VJI ,LI 1 Wf L[162 1,176, 0 243 819i 0 18 9 27 21 39 5,832 16,926E 3,210 /,5p 6,579E 30 10B 39 117 51 129 221 1,397J 21 300 924i 1 21 10 30 22 42 6,161 17,777! 3,441 4.WD 6.8641: 31 ill 40 120 52 132 288 1,638i 48 363 935 2 24 11 33 23 45 6.498 18,648i 3,618 5,043 7.155! 32 iib 41 123 53 135 365 1,901i 81 4V 1,15A 3 27 12 36 24 48 6.845 19,5411 3.861 5,292 7.4621 33 117 42 126 54 138 450 2,184i 120 507 1.275: 4 30 13 39 25 51 7,200 20.4541 4,050 5,547 7.750 34 120 43 129 55 l41 545 2,489i 165 SBB 1,1011 5 33 11 42 26 54 7.565 21.389: 4,306 5,8W 8.064£ 35 123 44 132 56 144 648 $814i 216 675 1,639 6 36 15 45 27 57 7.938 22,344E 4,536 6,075 8,379E 36 126 45 135 57 147 761 3,161! 273 768 1,6801 7 39 16 48 28 60 8,321 23,321i 4.7/3 9.348 8,700! 37 129 46 138 58 15C 882 3.628: 336 867 1,827i 8 42 V 51 29 63 8,712 21,318i 5,016 6,627 U27i 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 9,360i 39 135 48 144 60 156 1,152 4,326i 480 1,083 Z139! W 48 19 57 31 69 9.522 26.3761 5.520 7.203 9,699i b 138 49 147 61 159 1,301 4,757! 561 1,200 2,304i 11 51 20 60 32 72 10.368 28,618: . 6,048 7,8W 10,395i 42 144 51 153 63 165 1,625 5,208i 648 1,323 2,475i 12 54 21 63 33 75 11,250 30.744i 6.00 8.427 11,115i 44 .150 53 159 65 171 1,625 5.6811 741 1,452 2,6521 13 57 22 66 34 78 12.168 33,054: 7,176 9,075 71,859r 16 156 55 165 67 177 1,900 6,1741 840 1,587 2,835! 14 63 23 69 35 81 13,122 35,448: 7,7M 9,717 12,627i 48 162 57 171 69 183 1,985 6,689i 946 1.728 3.024i 15 63 24 72 36 84 14,1f2 37,9Ai 8,400 10.443 13,4191 50 168 59 177 71 189 2,178 7,2211 1,056 1,875 3,219i 16 66 25 75 37 87 15,138 40,488: 9,00 11,163 14,2351 52 IN 61 111 73 195 2,381 7,781i 1,173 2,028 3,420: 17 69 26 78 38 90 16,200 43.134: 9,720 11,907 15,075: 54 18o 63 189 75 201 i 2,592 8,3581 7,296 2,187 3,627i 18 72 27 81 39 93 17.298 45,864: 10,416 12,675 15,939i 56 186 65 195 77 207 Z813 8.957: 1,425 Z352 3,840E 19 75 28 8/ 40 96 18,432 18,678! 11,136 13,46/ 16,827! 3,042 9,5761 UM i 68 198 67 207 79 219 2.700 4,059• 20 78 29 87 41 99 19,602 51.576i 11,880 11,283 17,739,`• 60 19B 69 207 B1 219 3,281 10,217i 1,701 2,700 4,281E 21 81 30 90 42 102 20,W8 54,558:: 12,848 15.123 18,6751 62 204 71 213 83 225 3.528 fo,8781 1,848 2,883 4.515! 22 84 31 93 43 105 22.050 57.621i 13.440 15.987 19,635': 6/ 210 TJ 219 85 231 3,750 11,561i 2,001 3,072 4,752i 23 87 32 96 44 108 23.328 60,7741 14.256 16,875 20,6195 66 216 75 225 87 237 /,050 12,261.`• ?,160 3.267 4,995i 24 90 33 St9 45 Ill 24,642 64,0081 15.096 17,797 21.627i 68 222 77 231 89 213 325 ON 12.989: Z325 3,468 5,211 25 93 34 102 46 114 25,992 67.326i 15,96D 18,723 22, 1 70 228 79 237 91 245 1,608 13,734! Z496 3,875 ti,199! 26 96 35 106 47 117 27.378 70.7283 16.80 19,683 23,J 72 234 81 243 93 255 /,901 14,501i 2,673 3,888 5,7601 W 99 36 108 48 720 28.WD 74,214i 17.760 20.667 24,796r 74 240 83 249 95 261 5,202 15,286E 20 4,107 6,o27 28 102 37 111 49 123 30,258 77,78/1 18,696 21,675 25,899! 76 2/6 85 255 97 267 5,513 16,097i 3,015 4,332 6,300i 29 105 38 114 50 126 31,752 81.438: 19,�6 22,707 27,027i 78 252 87 261 99 213 5,832 16,926! 3,2/0 4,563 6,5791 30 108 39 117 51 129 L 33,282 85,1761 20,640 23,763 28,1791 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. `6(Y 5.4.4.2-I 11/92 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 5.4.41) SEDIMENT POND • Ponc/ Genyff 3 3X Fbn</ K/b�i/� 61Au Fabric. Ferrc� I e are A sue./rW, Serfire�f c%w4frbg Moy de ac�Mye/s/rea/ r<.f/c �fer ll�e*r��rvciybled Base �rfo > drain P igrsclt as Sifowr' or Go A7C q /Jerfyryfed riJer �i�e covered uiifh f//vim fahric anc/gyve/ "cone". A C0n75-,1 6fYr�cfu t IWY o/So he r rciired-See /Aem G, (yndrfo7ts t'i/here Orv<fice //PP/ies. fre✓id� q r�lcaY-f3-� vack oy viyer I`--5jp;ffmi / prpeq ,8 Odra, axd gvc�Fer !" A-de xrd ro MrN. C rrnG a irGkty) I �7�p�l�l.�+.} fitG�' I71 4.4 1;4 2'144141 OvfldIL 45 t arc _ `Ji Y/74 Peryr�infnd Diui� Gi/.� Am5-�e/7 Collars it Cyrr✓el Al - yobr�-5i 5A.4.2-3 1/90 n y H 0 x 0 • • X. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS I y C+1 n H H O 7, r r • • XI. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION MANUAL t Fm _- -___-_ -_. .. _-- _-----1.... --------- F. IW --------------- r C/L ; IOL { i , : R' T VALLEY HIGHWAY — 4" � NEW 6 WIDE _. � , ` SD -- - --- -- 15"- - - -- - CONC. SIDEWALK O >S '_.. < O = W � N 01'50'22" E r-- I ' ,4-- - . ^r .•. .,, D C- 1co . -.., ... . NEW 6" EXTRUDE , • t CURB (TYPICAL) - 4 CB 4 TYPE I _ - ,�. ...�_,-. __. L__� R - 55.00 o Q �. RIM-15.50 15 LA14L)SGAF E AND 15 0 I - _ •- -- + x IE=12.58 UTILITY EASEMENT e �E3 TYPE I I I - t r -_.. i. RIM=15.50 < - - - - A " IE=12.92 e 170 LF. 15 S 0 0.2% 17.00 2 I. ---�...�---_.-.rc. �.....R--- �w�l`;_._--- - 4 CB TYPE `\ _I I __�r�l■ic=��ral� -_-:mac ....� F 15 HP:4' , - I RIM=16.00 Aft i IE=13 26 0 Q I �17.U0 — I 0414 A N I .._ I ,.E I (17.3016.80 - � < , < 4_ 16. 0 I ■ 8.00 I N� / 15.8 I LF 12" I i D 0 0.2% 16.20 C7 W Z (� 5 CB #1 TYPE I � ' Z � RIM=16.00 2.0% W _ 11 g BUILDING 1 IE=13.37 - I > Z 1 = 20 ' cry r- R ■ FF=18.00 4 Q `� cU 94 500 BF op V y' N 6" EXTFY _D a I = (� I , EW ,. I ;` CURB (TYPICA 'a U L!J ~ W NEW AC PAVEMENT i �.•. 1tJ 143 I_F IRE H DRAIN ® S=0.207L—� I ' (� 7 1 } I t.. ■ X 16.20 � w 2.0% ,J w lu *F w "9 v �t ` I I = C�U i I �z L CONCRETE LJ CONStRUCT 50` WIDE ' O z ^' CONC. DRIVEWAY PER o -� cn RETAINING WALL 14.00 CITE. OF RENTON SfD5 x o i 0., PER ARCH. PLANS i Q N I I > ,� o �s i Q U C-4 co 18.0 3� ' co 00 � ' 7% Z I I w C'-' x CV ■ Q T Z w > y1 co Ld n Li S 01'50 19" ------ 17.50 ' 1 50 I " ■ -- - co u. CITY OF RENTON bEPAR-TMENT OF 1"' I.JE3l_IC VVOI�F< S e K. Bq� ;:. . :44 o p v z -------- O �'sr .•'�. �+ DESIGNED KL 25672 �d FILE N0. co �`rs� S i E G�� DATE 4-17-95 DRAWN lCS ----- -- � = -z __- w 0NA L �� _-- - — CHECKED DKB._T____ SCALE 1" _ 20' "— FIELD BOOK_. PAGE _ kr v ---- - --- EXPIRE5 C�T- N0. REVISION �� APPH DATE APPR0IIED C2 10 ._ ou+Ec'o'R-c�vui3ic woRKs�---- - - SHEET 0� „x.w-` k if;. - oe;ff-,- 1;=x-„ry i,r.mPng7IRw"P,# .. sad vi ..... L A � CONS `. 30' WID CONC. - - CONST. 50' WIDE CONC. ` ,. MATCH EXISTING WALK DRIVEWAY PER CITY OF / uDRIVEWAY PER > G -- RENTON STDS. EAST VALLEY HIC,.11-1WAY - RENTON STDS. CITY OF .! - 7 O EX. SD MH - ,: - -- --- OS IE=15.$ O __ __ lEa7-:1 a-(2�- -N�)- - \ - -- I - jl W EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT _- - - --- " _ IE=8.60 \ - ,___ - _- _ _ -- - --- SD - -- -- - -- - - -- - - CON 6' WIDE Q Q G C WALK `. -- -- -- -__ I I I! Z _ _ so - ' -- -- _� -< O w r- c� r - -� L-J _ _ _ - 34 LF 12" SAD. ® 0.599� �� u � - - - I - - --- ` JE ' - + 15.7E 1058.8 ' f. cu r� O 15.70 2 tr [L \ EXISTING 15' LANDSCAPE !. j 2:1 _I . AND UTILITY EASEMENT 16. ! �- _ 16. Q _ I _}_ CB #5 TYPE I ` ""`_.�._ - � -.�::_._.._ ' �. RIM=15.45 _ 1 s 20 ..c. . - .,- _ w _. ._� �. ■ 0 O 0 IT 16.60 IE-12.59 1.0?: \ 2:1 6. v_ �n HP C87. lYPI= IL i _ 3 - �q, `r 1$0 LF:t v RIM=1,5.50 �( . 1.1% - ua 2 SD ti O 0.3� d- IE=12.14 CONTROL STRU TURE MA OLE --- 1E=8.90 2:1 CELL 3 ( m OF=13.0 2:1 _ 1.p9� - - �10 LF t' 0.� X• . Z I) 1 l - _- -- 8 -- s. X -ty 1 - i 1$ ,F 1 SDO 56 6.0 6.G ) I 16.5d � I , o Q b cc -4 11.5 U I 0 _ .. I 16.40 -� 6.0 I. 6. OVERFLOW i s d .^1 •.:s.... 9r t As �i111 I _ SPILLWAY x .Y b .� -' ,.. _. i • � ' SSCO 2:1 IE=13.0 © - 16.00 x. • ! r� - ` CELL 2 2:1 . t • _ I v X 6.0 N 3 CELLED COMBINED / 6 OVERFLOW I - 14.00 I DETENTION POND . d}. SPILLWAY TOP OF POND=1 4c0, IF-.. 13.0 DOCK 1 t` p BOT. LIVE STORAG ° d" C< ®U� Q�N� 2 NIGH !� r MAX. WS=13.0 - °o 00 0 2:1 �� ] EXISTING - i 4 --�._ ---. r - LOT LINE F -17.�® CB #6 TYPE i - BOT. WE PO =6.0 14.0 O (� z STORAGE REQ IRED= 00 C 13' 14.0 ' l RIM=13.40 (� STORAGE PRO DEO= 00� C O o - 22150 F IE-,2.30 I o , s w z ! 6' CHAIN LINK x 13.50 Z_ o O 2:1 FENCE ® TOP t 3:.5U/ �SCO �, M I OF SLOPE (TYP) ! -- - -- EXISTING 20 X. X Q Q � ` I 25' BUFFER 2:1 UTILITY EASEMENT ! X OL Q N i tr +' 2:1 6.0 CELL 1 6• I-CB #6 TYPE 1 = a 3: 00 00 RIM=13.70 i I IE-12.24 U w >~ i co f o SD MH TYPE II-4 14.0 u1 I �; 1RIM=14.0 2:1 9.0 2.5% 1.0% q i � Q I i EDGE OF EX�TING ; IE=10.50 14.0 i-' - 32 LF 18" , rn C j � . I - E� 1 T W CLASS II W LANDS SD O 4.69� Sv O ...c.. '. 4 - - 1 l SO O 1.79% 2.1 0 � r� _ _.� - ! 17.50 _ ! IE=10.75 - ( n ! , IE=9.0 17.50 ., 16.00 i 1 NEW AC PAVING 2.5%2-1 r I p o 85 44 7U LFI .. I 1 I --�• 1$, D G • 19 TY E I ~ P 14.0 2:1 :; ? --- 110 LF 18" g7 Lf S _ 1 13.70 ' ! 14.0 q >�� ►--�I„�, 4 U.2 0 , It 12.04 Sp 1.0� _ -- - CB 10 TYPE II=48" 0 u now 0 LE -•-___ �, 1.0% try 16.80 In RIM=15.80 z a 'h' 9 � � 16. 0 X HP IE=11.83 15.00 o . 2:1 - +� _ O z - ---- HP X tri 14.00 rn a \ 3:1 CB #12 TYPE II-48" . CB #11 TYPE II-48" X ; uj W RIM=16.25 RIM=16.25 , X x x z ' Q IE-11.43 (E=11.65 w g APO ,1 I I !!I I ) 18.00 � • Q CD 2:1 CONCRETE RETAINING WALL N 00 00 r IE=11.25 115 LF 310FILTR TION SWALE 0S=0.43x . (3) cD oo j Z- i I ` I 3:1 }- -17.50 W W\ 18.00. N Q I I W Ln In (, Z s h 1 I (n N N Z - \ i W t 7.2 ! QD 17. 1� I _ --- S 01'50'19" W _ 1111.21' Y _ - ------------ ----- X .. K 1. EX. FIRE,HYDRANT b� + GO ��J I CITY OF RENTON �- I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WC3F7KS I Bq Oro o 25672 DESIGNED KL ':'� .'' •-7 _- _- -- - - DATE 4_17-95 _ FILE NO. w.. DRAWN DNA L CHECKED DKB -. SCALE 1" ___20'_. __. v; FIELD BOOK -_PAGE U A �` -- _-, N0. REVISION - ' EXPIRES BY APPR. DATE APPROVED oiaccroR of V66C won✓s . __ SHEET C3 of 10 m File: 198-GM1l!1 Date Time: 06/15/1995 09:50 Scab: 1=20 Travis Suter Y,refs: Z-5198S•Z--5198- 8, -. t 5 I I a - f 1 i i I i