Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SWP272244(1)
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT GOOD CHEVROLET PROPERTY REANTON, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR William Walker & Associates PROJECT NO. G95190A OCTOBER 1995 JMMASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC 911 -5th Avenue,Suite 100 724-Ericksen Ave.NE,Suite 204 Kirkland,Washington 98033 Bainbridge Island,WA 98110 (206)827-7701 (206)780-9370 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT GOOD CHEVROLET PROPERTY RENTON, WASHINGTON October 13, 1995 Project No. G95190A I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering study for the construction of the Good Chevrolet Dealership structure in Renton, Washington. The proposed building location and approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, figure 1. In the event that any changes in the nature, design or location of the structure are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified, as necessary. 1.1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the design and development of the above mentioned project. Our study included drilling test borings and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and shallow ground water conditions. Engineering studies were also conducted to determine the type of suitable foundation, allowable bearing pressures, anticipated settlements, floor support recommendations, drainage considerations, and pavement recommendations. A liquefaction hazard evaluation was also completed. This report summarizes our current field work and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. 1.2 Authorization Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. William Walker of William Walker & Associates in a proposal dated August 3, 1995. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of William Walker & Associates, and their agents, for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. �-2 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on a site plan prepared by William Walker & Associates, dated hl m h 29, 1995. The site was located within a residential and commercial area in Renton, Washington. The property bordered I-405 to the south, Lind Avenue SW to the west, SW Grady Way to the north, and Maple Avenue SW to the east. SW 12th Street and SW 13th Street txrth crossed the central part of the site in an approximate east-west direction. The subject property was a combination of several residential and business parcels and measured about 700 feet north-south by about 350 feet east-west, less a 160 foot by 130 foot parcel in the northeast portion of the property. Existing residential homes, apartments, and off-ice buildings were present in the northern one third of the site, north of SW 12th Street. This portion of the site contained a few residential lawns and paved parking areas that served the apartments and offices. The southern two thirds of the property contained a few abandoned homes to the south of SW 12th and along SW 13th Street. The southern two thirds of the parcel was generally overgrown with domestic tress, shrubs, grasses and blackberries. The overall combined parcel was relatively flat but a steep slope (with a gradient of 68 percent over a vertical height of 24 feet) was present oft'-site but adjacent to the southwest corner of the site. This slope was part of the roadway embankment where Lind Avenue SW went up a fill slope to cross I-405. Present plans indicate that an approximate 28,000 square foot dealership structure will be constructed at the site. It is our understanding that the existing homes, apartments and office structures will be demolished prior to construction, and that SW 13th Street will be abandoned. The apartments on the northwest corner of SW 12th and Maple Avenue were not within the combined properties and apparently will remain. Construction details were not available at the time of this report but we understand that a metal building will be used with a slab-on-grade floor. Finished floor grades are anticipated to be near the existing site grade. The proposed new structure will be located in the south central portion of the combined property. See Figure 1, Site and Exploration Plan. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included drilling a series of exploration borings to gain subsurface information about the site. The exploration borings were completed by advancing a 3-3/8 inch inside- diameter, hollow-stem auger with a truck-mounted drill rig. During the drilling process, samples were obtained at 5 foot depth intervals in the area beneath the proposed structure and at 2-1/2 foot intervals beneath the proposed parking areas. The borings were continuously observed and logged by a field geologist from our firm. The summary exploration logs attached to this report are based on the field logs, drilling action, and inspection of the samples secured. Disturbed but representative samples were obtained from the boreholes by using the Standard Penetration Test procedure in accordance with ASTM:D 1586. This test and sampling method consists of driving a standard 2 inch outside-diameter split barrel sampler a distance of 18 inches 2 0 0 into the soil with a 140 pound hammer (rce•falltng a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows for each 6 inch interval is recorded and the nunttx:r of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance ("N") or blow count. If a total of 50 is recorded within one, 6 irkh internal, the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the number of inches of penetration. The rc,utancc, or N-value, provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils or Elie: rclattvc co iistency of cohesive soils; these values are plotted on the attached boring logs. The samples obtained from the split barrel sampler were classified in the field and representative portions placed in water-tight containers. The samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and laboratory testing, as necessary. The various types of sediments encountered, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent gradational variations between sediment types in the field. If changes occurred between sample intervals in our borings, they were interpreted. Our explorations were located in the field by measuring from known site features shown on the above mentioned site plan by William Walker & Associates. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished for this study and visual reconnaissance of the site. As shown on the summary logs, the exploration borings encountered minor amounts of fill across the site that was underlain by alluvial sand and silt (river deposits). The stratigraphy is described in the following section, followed by our observations about the hydrology of the site. 4.1 Stratigraphy (soils) Minor amounts of fill soils (material not naturally placed) was identified in EB-1, EB-3, EB-4, and EB-5. The fill consisted of soft to stiff, damp, dark gray and brown, gravelly sandy silt with crushed rock, glass fragments, and organics. The fill extended from the surface to depths ranging from 1 foot in EB-1 and EB-3 and 1-1/2 feet in EB-5 to a depth of 3 feet in EB-4. In EB-7 a 3 inch thickness of asphalt was encountered at the surface. The fill encountered in the borings was relatively thin and widely scattered, but we would expect that significant thickness of fill could be present in areas around old utility trenches, septic drain fields, or other disturbed areas. Geotechnical engineering considerations regarding the fill should assume low strength properties and variable permeabilities. 3 �� • • Underlying the fill, and at the surface Al)rc tlx fill was absent, the natural soils consisted of two units. An upper unit encountered to all seven borings consisted of damp, yellow brown to dark brown, mottled, silt, sandy silt, and silty fine sand to fine sand with scattered gravel. Locally, in EB-6, clayey silt was encountered. The upper unit extended from the surface (or beneath the surficial fill) to depths of 3 feet in EB4, 3-1/2 feet in EB-2, 6 feet in EB-3, and 8 feet in EB-1. This unit extended below the 6-1/2 foot termination depths of EB-5, EB-6 and EB-7. In EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, and EB-4, a brown to gray, fine to medium sand to sandy gravel with scattered wood debris and local thin silt lenses was encountered beneath the upper unit. The lower unit extended to below the 34 foot termination depths of both E13-1 and EB-2 and the 6-1/2 foot termination depths of EB-3 and EB-4. Loose sediments were encountered in samples driven at a depth of 7-1/2 to 9 feet in EB-1, 12-1/2 to 14 feet in EB-2, and from 22-1/2 to 24 feet in both EB-1 and EB-2. Both the upper and lower units are interpreted to represent geologically recent alluvial sediments deposited by the ancestral Green/Black Rivers as the valley filled in. The lower unit reflects deposition in a higher energy depositional environment near the stream channel, where the upper unit is a low energy depositional environment typical of overbank deposits. 4.2 HydrolM No surface water was noted at the site during our field investigation. What is interpreted as a regional water table was encountered at a depth of 10-1/2 feet in EB-2 and a depth of 12-1/2 feet in EB-1. The water table is interpreted to lie at the same elevation in both borings and the difference in the depth at which it was encountered is attributed to differences in elevation of the borings. Fluctuations in the elevation of the water table are expected to occur with seasonal variations in rainfall. During the late winter months we would expect the water table to be several feet higher than during the time of our field study. Also, since the uppermost soils are primarily fine grained in nature, we would anticipate areas of standing water to be encountered following periods of rain. 4 IG October 13, 1995 Project No. G95190A II. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.0 INTRODUCTION Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the proposed development provided that the geotechnical recommendations contained herein are properly utilized in the design and construction of this project. As noted on the field logs, our exploration borings encountered loose sediments within the lower fine to medium sand unit in samples at depths of 7-1/2 to 9 feet, 12-1/2 to 14 feet, and from 22-1/2 to 24 feet below the surface. Based on our analysis the lowermost zone is considered susceptible to liquefaction and could cause settlement of a conventional shallow foundation during and after a seismic event. In addition, the zone encountered in EB-1, at a depth of 7-1/2 to 9 feet, is a weak zone that is potentially compressible and not well suited for foundation support. Underlying the loose and liquefiable zones, at a depth of about 26 to 28 feet, both EB-1 and EB- 2 encountered dense, sandy gravel sediments that are considered a suitable foundation bearing stratum. The depth to this bearing stratum will require that a deep foundation system be used to support the proposed structure. We recommend that augercast piles bearing within the dense gravel be used for foundation support. Recommendations for augercast piles are presented in the Foundations section of this report. 6.0 SITE PREPARATION Site preparation of the proposed building and paved areas will require the demolition of the existing structures and removal or relocation of underground utilities, it' they are under a proposed building footprint. The debris from this operation should be taken to an offsite disposal area and the resulting depressions should be replaced with structural fill. In the areas away from existing structures/utilities, site preparation will require the removal of all trees, brush, debris and any other deleterious material. The upper organic topsoil should be removed and the remaining roots grubbed. Existing septic tank(s) or underground storage tanks (if present) should be removed if they occur beneath the proposed new building footprint, and replaced with structural fill. All other areas where loose surficial soils exist should be considered as fill and this material should either be removed and replaced with structural fill or recompacted. Since the density of soils is variable, random soft/loose pockets may exist and the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the field by the field engineer. We have no knowledge of any underground storage tanks (USTs) on the site, and the removal of non-leaking, residential USTs is not currently regulated by the City of Renton. However, if tanks are discovered on the site and leakage is found, cleanup of contaminated soil is regulated, and additional cleanup/disposal costs and time delays can be incurred. To avoid potential construction delays, we would recommend the removal of all known USTs prior to construction. 5 DIC, 0 0 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. can assist N ith detcrTnining if contaminated soil exists at the time of UST removal. The resulting depressions should be backfilled with structural fill as discussed under the Structural Fill section. Pavement subgrade preparation should be completed in accordance with the Pavement Recommendations section of this report. 7.0 STRUCTURAL FILL To reduce the potential for pavement or slab settlement, it is essential that utility trenches and/or other excavations be backfilled with structural till prior to building or pavement construction. All references to structural fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, placement and compaction of materials as discussed in this section. Within utility trenches, the depth of overexcavation will vary depending on location and depth of the utility. After overexcavation/stripping has been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted to 90 percent of the Modified Proctor Maximum Density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. If the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain, and further excavation and drainage installation may be required before structural fill can be placed. After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, a structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8 inch loose, horizontal lifts with each lift being compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the Modified Proctor Maximum Density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 48 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered moisture-sensitive. Use of moisture-sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. In addition, construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a clean, free- draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free-draining fill consists of non-organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction. It should be noted that the upper sediments on the site are generally fine grained and extremely moisture sensitive. As such, they should not be utilized for structural fill. A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in-place 6 IGz density tests. In this way, the adequacy of t1x earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. 8.0 LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION Samples were retrieved at 5 foot depth intervals from EB-1 and EB-2 and returned to Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.'s laboratory for further analysis. Samples below the existing or potential water table depth were examined to determine which were potentially liquefiable, based on their density and gradation characteristics. Those samples that were deemed to be potentially liquefiable were then subjected to sieve analyses to determine their grain size distribution. The results of the sieve analyses are attached. The laboratory and boring data were then used to calculate the potential for soil liquefaction during a strong earthquake. For this analysis, a horizontal seismic acceleration of 0.2g was used as the design earthquake loading. Based on the above analysis, it was determined that at least one zone of soil with a high likelihood of liquefaction exists beneath the subject site at a depth of 21 to 26 feet deep. Although this zone was not of extensive thickness, it is our opinion that there is a potential for relatively large ground deformations if this zone were to liquefy, that could result in extensive damage to the proposed structure, if not mitigated. 9.0 FOUNDATIONS With the above findings, it is our recommendation that the foundation for the dealership structure be constructed on piles that extend through the weak and liquefiable zones into the underlying dense, sandy gravel stratum. Due to the nature of the overlying soils (variable density), it may be difficult to drive timber piles on this site. Therefore, we recommend that auger cast-in-place concrete piles be utilized for foundation support. 9.1 Augercast Piles Auger cast-in-place (augercast) piles should penetrate 5 feet into the dense gravel layer that was encountered at the boring locations at a depth of about 26 feet below the ground surface. The total pile depth below the existing ground surface would be about 30 to 32 feet. Augercast piles should be designed to resist the loads specified in the following table. AUGERCAST PILE ALLOWABLE CAPACITY Augercast Pile Diameter Penetration Depth* Allowable Capacity per Pile (Tons) 14" 5' 10 16" 5 13 18" 5' 15 * Below depth 26 feet 7 ld3 Allowable design loads may be increased by one third for short term wind or seismic loading. Anticipated settlements of pile supported structures will generally be on the order of one-half inch. 9.2 Pile Inspections The actual total length of each pile may tx adjuvcd in the field based on required capacity and conditions encountered during drilling. Since completion of the pile takes place below ground, the judgment and experience of the geotechltical engineer or his field representative must be used as a basis for determining the required penetration and acceptability of each pile. Consequently, use of the presented pile capacities in the design requires that all piles be inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist from our firm who can interpret and collect the installation data and examine the contractors operations. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., acting as the owner's field representative, would determine the required lengths of the piers and keep records of pertinent installation data. A final summary report would then be distributed, following completion of pile installation. 10.0 FLOOR SUPPORT A slab-on-grade floor may be used over structural fill, medium dense natural soils or recompacted natural soils. If placed over recompacted soil, the upper 12 inches of subgrade must be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density as determined by ASTM:D 1557. A polyethylene plastic vapor barrier should be used under floors likely to receive an impermeable floor finish or where passage of water vapor through the floor is undesirable. Based on American Concrete Institute recommendations, we suggest placing a two to three inch layer of clean sand over the vapor barrier to protect the vapor barrier and to allow some moisture loss through the bottom of the slab to reduce warping in the curing process. Sand should be used to aid in the fine grading process of the subgrade to provide uniform support under the slab. As discussed previously there is a chance that portions of the underlying soil could liquefy during a seismic event. The foundation and structure itself will be supported by means of the deep foundation (pile and grade beam) system discussed above, and therefore should not be affected by liquefaction. A unsupported "floating" slab however could experience some damage should liquefaction occur. If such a risk to the floor slab is unacceptable, the floor should be structurally connected to the foundation by way of grade beams, but should otherwise be placed as discussed above. 11.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS The perimeter of the building should be provided with a drain at the pile cap elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set 2 inches below the bottom of the grade beam at all locations and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain 8 Io4 0 system but should be handled by a separate. rigid tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped JuwnwatJ away from the structure to achieve surface drainage. 12.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS It is our understanding that the site surrounding the new building will be surfaced with a flexible, asphaltic concrete pavement (ACP). Our pavement design recommendations require a firm, non-yielding subgrade. Site preparation should consist of removing all fill from the areas to receive pavement. The subgrade surfaces should then be slightly crowned to drain to the edges of the paved areas. Next, the surface of the exposed soils should be recompacted with a vibratory roller to a minimum of 95 percent of their maximum density as defined by ASTM:D 1557. After recompaction, the subgrade should be proofrolled with a fully loaded, tandem axle dump truck to identify any soft or "pumping" areas. If such areas are observed, they should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill. Once the natural soil subgrade has been observed and prepared as described herein, the fill soil could be placed and compacted to bring the area back up to the proposed pavement subgradC. '111c suitability of the existing fill for use as fill beneath pavement should be evaluated during construction by a representative of Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Since the majority of the pavement area will be used mainly for parking, we recommend that a separate pavement section be used for the low traffic parking areas. Our recommended pavement section for the low traffic areas is as follows: 2 inches - Washington State Class B Asphaltic Concrete Pavement 5 inches - Compacted 5/8 inch minus crushed surfacing leveling course 6 inches - Sand and gravel pit run with less than 5 percent fines (as measured on the minus #4 fraction) compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557 For areas that will be used for more than parking areas, we recommend that the pit run base material be increased to 12 inches. These pavement sections are based on a 20 year design life. 13.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING We recommend that Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. 9 Iy We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or require further assistance, please do not hcsivtc to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington George H. Bennett, C.P.G. Staff Geologist 90698 ct' Q1 TE?:� Ss1nNAl, EXPIRES 12/ i t/ (p Gary A. to ers, P.G. Michael G. Byers, P.E. Principal Project Engineer GHB/Id G95190A.1 10/1/95 Id-WP 10 sW Grady waY r PROPOSED PA"IMQ EB-7 • EB-6 • / APARTMENTS l PROPOSED PARKING i 1 Zth Street 3 / SW NORTH PROPOSED PARKING Q r � C PROPOSED EB-2 Q J PARKING • EB-4 r——, E•3 CL J L, PROPOSED/ Street � STRUCTURE SW 13th LEGEND I IEB-5 EB-1 Approximate location of — � ' exploration bonny EB-1 r I • I 0 100 200 LI SCALE IN FEET SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN ASSOCIATED GOOD CHEVROLET PROPERTY EARTH RENTON, WASHINGTON A&M SCIENCES, I N C G95190A 9/95 FIGURE 1 107 Number EB-1 EXPLORATION ORING LOG STANDARD PENETRATION ►_- -J Z w RESISTANCE SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION a- 0- Z) �_ Blows/Foot U) 0 � 0 Surface: 1' topsoil/fill, broken glass shards. (Fill) 10 20 30 40 Dry to damp, dark brown, organic-rich SILT. At T dry, yellow-brown, silty, fine SAND. - T �5 5 1 Moist, brown, sandy SILT. - I 3 Wet, dark gray with yellow mottling @ 8'to 9', fine to A medium SAND with wood, charcoal, and thin silt lenses. — 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- � 11 Saturated, dark gray, fine to medium SAND with trace - T Wp gravel. 1 — 15 As above, with wood. A 21 — 20 1 As above with trace to some gravel, wood. I 2 — 25 Saturated, dark gray, sandy GRAVEL. I 36 30 I 38 BOH @ 34' WD =while drilling Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by geologic interpretations,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By N S Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A cnc�) Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 Fax: 206-827-5424 EXPLORATION BORING LOG Number EB-2 STANDARD PENETRATION I=- a z W RESISTANCE SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION o Q D �- Blows/Foot U) 10 20 30 40 Surface: Field sod 0 to 3". Damp, dark brown-gray SILT. T 9 Damp, yellow-brown, mottled, fine SAND. 1 5 T 28♦ Moist to wet, dark gray, sandy GRAVEL. 1 — 10 WD Saturated, dark brown-gray, gravelly SAND with thin — T 10 lenses of brown silt. l 15 Saturated, dark gray, sandy GRAVEL and gravelly 23 SAND. 20 Saturated, dark gray, gravelly SAND, some silt, trace wood. I 8 — 25 Saturated, dark gray, sandy GRAVEL. — I 47♦ — 30 1 As above. T 50/4" BOH @ 34' WD = while drilling 1 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by geologic Interpretations,engineering analysts,and Judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By _. IS Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 E9 Fax: 206-827-5424 Number E13-3 EXPLORATIO ORI NG LOG 0 of STANDARD PENETRATION ►_- -� ZZ W RESISTANCE SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION a- ¢ � Q Blows/Foot U3 3 10 20 30 40 0-4" Topsoil/sod; damp, dark brown, gravelly, sandy 17A,SILT with broken rock to 1'. (Fill) 1 Damp, dark brown SILT. 7 Damp, yellow-brown, mottled, silty, fine SAND to I sandy GRAVEL. 5 — 1 A43 BOH @ 6-1/2' ' Blow count not representative due to rock in drive shoe. 10 — 15 20 25 30 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by geologic interpretations,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By G N 9 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 110 Fax: 206-827-5424 EXPLORATION 3ORI NG LOG Number EB-4 STANDARD PENETRATION SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION a � z w RESISTANCE � LIJBlows/Foot 0 0 10 20 30 40 Sod 0 '3'; damp, dark brown, gravelly, sandy SILT, trace I 10 organics to 1'; damp, dark brown, sandy SILT with 1 pebbles 1' to 3'. (Fill) __ ______ ___ _______ _______ __ ________ ___________________________________ I 8 - Damp, yellow-brown, mottled, fine SAND. Damp, brown, mottled, gravelly, fine to medium SAND. _ 5 I - 34 BOH @ 6-1/2' 10 15 20 — 25 30 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by geologic Interpretations,engineering analysis,and Judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By C H p p Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 Ill Fax: 206-827-5424 EXPLORATIONR30RING LOG Number EB-5 STANDARD PENETRATION � _J Z Cr RESISTANCE SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION o Q 0 Blows/Foot rn � 10 20 30 40 Sod 0-5"; Damp, dark brown SILT, some organics. (Fill) _ I A13 ---------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- 1 Damp, yellow-brown, mottled, fine SAND. T 8A Wet, brown-gray, strongly mottled SILT, tiny roots, trace 5 T 4 charcoal. l BOH @ 6-1/2' — 10 — 15 20 25 — 30 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time end location of this exploratory hola,modified by geologic interpretations,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By . it Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 Ilz Fax: 206-827-5424 0 EX PLORATIO ORI NG LOG Number E13-6 STANDARD PENETRATION SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION a~ CL Z W RESISTANCE WW Q O Q Blowe/Foot to 10 20 30 40 Damp, brown-gray, silty, fine SAND, trace to some 1 A 22 gravel. I Wet, brown-gray, strongly mottled, clayey SILT, trace 5 tiny roots and black organics. T A,5 BOH @ 6-1/2' 1 10 15 20 25 30 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by geologic interpretations,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By It}4 G Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A 113 Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 Fax: 206-827-5424 EXPLORATIOPAORI NG LOG Number EB-7 a: Z W STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION Q Q 0 Blows/Foot U 10 20 30 40 Asphalt 0'-3'; moist, gray-brown, gravelly, silty, fine I 18 A SAND. 1 Saturated zone 2-1/2' to 3-1/2' atop silt. I 7- Damp, yellow-brown to brown-gray, sandy SILT. 5 T 9 1 A BOH @ 6-1/2' 10 15 20 — 25 30 Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by geologic interpretations,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log. Reviewed By K4 9 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Good Chevrolet Property 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Renton, Washington Kirkland, Washington 98033 Project No. G95190A III Phone: 206-827-7701 September 1995 Fax: 206-827-5424 GRAIN SPE ANALYSIS - MECHAMICAL Date Project Proz No Soil Description 9/11/95. Good Chev.Prop G95190A Tested By Location EB/EP No. Depth ADF 1 17.5 -9' Before washing After washing Fines washed out Wt. of Dry Sample+Tare 171.700 107.000 Wt. of Tare 0.000 0.000 Wt. of Dry Sample 171.700 107.000 64.700 Specification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained % Retained % Passing Minimum Maximum 3 76.1 0 0.0 100.0 2.5 64 0 0.0 100.0 2 50.8 0 0.0 100.0 1.5 38.1 0 0.0 100.0 1 25.4 0 0.0 100.0 3/4 19 0 0.0 100.0 5/8 16 0 0.0 100.0 7/16 11.11 0 0.0 100.0 3/8 9.51 0 0.0 100.0 5/16 8 0 0.0 100.0 1/4 6.35 0 0.0 100.0 #4 4.76 0.3 0.2 99.8 #8 2.38 5.8 3.4 96.4 #16 1.19 10.6 6.2 90.3 #30 0.595 14.1 8.2 82.1 #40 0.42 11.1 6.5 75.6 #50 0.297 12.6 7.3 68.3 #100 0.149 26.7 15.6 52.7 #200 0.074 27.3 15.9 36.8 65.000 37.9 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 100 3" 3/4" NO.4 NO.16 NO.40 NO.200 90 80 I TT-1 _ 70 60 c 50 ---.. ... 1 Q 40 30 20 - ' r- 10 --- - 0 -- 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Grwt 31is.nxn GRAVEL - SAND - -- SILT OR Coarse Fine I Coin+ AMwxn Fine CLAY ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ��s GRAIN SSE ANALYSIS - MECHA41ICAL Date Project Propct No Soil Description 9/11195 Good Chev.Prop G95190A Tested By Location Eglfp No Dopth ADF 2 22.5 -24' Before washing After washing Fines washed out Wt. of Dry Sample +Tare 546.400 472.000 Wt. of Tare 0.000 0.000 Wt. of Dry Sample 546.400 472.000 74.400 S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained % Retained % Passing Minimum I Maximum 3 76.1 0 0.0 100.0 2.5 64 0 0.0 100.0 2 50.8 0 0.0 100.0 1.5 38.1 0 0.0 100.0 1 25.4 0 0.0 100.0 3/4 19 25.7 4.7 95.3 5/8 16 11.2 2.0 93.2 7/16 11.11 18.2 3.3 89.9 3/8 9.51 4.4 0.8 89.1 5/16 8 11 2.0 87.1 1/4 6.35 10.4 1.9 85.2 94 4.76 11.4 2.1 83.1 #8 2.38 26.8 4.9 78.2 #16 1.19 31.1 5.7 72.5 #30 0.595 70.5 12.9 59.6 #40 0.42 66.7 12.2 47.4 #50 0.297 73.7 13.5 33.9 #100 0.149 86.7 15.9 18.0 #200 0.074 25.6 4.7 13.4 74.400 13.6 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 100 3" 5/4" NO.4 NO.16 NO.40 NO.200 90 -r - - - - - - -- --- --- -- 80 70 , 60 T 50 40I : }'I - - -' - - d 30 ^T' 20 �I 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Grain Size,mm GRAVEL SAND _ SILT OR Coarse M Fine Coarse edium Fine CLAY ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ��� VERTICAL ; LENGTH OF CURVE = 50 VERT CORR AT PI = +0 .505 CURVE ; LACK GRADE IN = -5 .240 AHEAD GRADE IN a = +2 .846 CALCULATION ; STATION AT PI - 80 .00 PI TANGENT ELEV = 17 .65 LOW STATION - 87 .40 LOW' ELEVATION = 18 . 11 "TATION = ELEV ------------------ � 55 .00 = 18 .96 61r�ti 60 .00 = 18 .72 65 .00 = 18 .52 70 .00 =- 18 .36 C ✓L V I 75 .00 = 18 .24 80 .00 = 18 . 16 85 .00 = 16 . 12 90 .00 = 18 . 12 95 .00 = 18 . 16 100 .00 = 18 .24 105 .00 = 16 .36 iifL- > <Prt Sc> print <Return> repeat <Space Bar > back to menu ---------------------------------------------------------------- VERTICAL L-ENGTH OF CURVE = 50 VERT CORR AT PI = -0 .303 CURVE ; BACK GRADE IN % = +2 .846 AHEAD GRADE IN o = -2 .000 CALCULATION tiTATION AT PI 145 .00 PI TANGENT ELEV = 19 .50 HIGH STATION - 149 .36 HIGH ELEVATION - 19 .21 >TATION = ELEV ----------------- 120 .00 = 18 .79 125 .00 = 18 .92 130 .00 = 19 .02 �tr✓Lt /f Z 135 .00 = 19 .11. 140 .00 = 19 . 16 145 .00 = 19 .20 150 .00 = 19 .21 155 .00 = 19 . 19 160 .00 = 19 . 15 165 .00 = 19 .09 170 .00 = 19 .00 hift> <Prt Sc> print (Return) repeat. <Space Bar > back to menu ---------------------------------------------------- Ilj • i VERTICAL LENGTH OF CURVE = 50 VERT CORR AT PI = +0 .250 CURVE ; BACK GRADE IN % = -2 .000 AHEAD GRADE IN % = +2 .000 CALCULATION STATION AT PI - 240 .00 PI TANGENT ELEV = 17 .60 LOW STATION = 240 .00 LOW ELEVATION = 17 .85 STATION = ELEV 215 .00 = 18 . 10 220 .00 = .18 .01 225 .00 = 17 .94 230 .00 = 17 .89 235 .00 = 17 .86 240 .00 = 17 .85 245 .00 == 17 .86 250 .00 = 17 .89 255 .00 = 17 .94 260 .00 = 18 .01 2.65 .00 = 18 . 10 Shift> <Prt Sc> print <Return> repeat <Space Bar > back to menu -------------------------------------------------------- VERTICAL ; LENGTH OF CURVE = 50 VERT CORR AT PI = -0 .281 CURVE BACK GRADE IN = +2 .000 AHEAD GRADE IN % = -2 .500 C:AL.CUL,AT10N 7,-TATION AT PI = 320 .00 PI TANGENT ELEV - 19 .20 HIGH STA.TION = 317 .22 HIGH ELEVATION - 18 .92 STATION ELEV ------------------ 295 .00 = 18 .70 300 .00 = 18 . 79 305 .00 = 18 .86 310 .00 = 18 .90 315 .00 == 18 .92 320 .00 18 .92 Cti✓L�/✓ , �Q-- 325 .00 18 .90 330 .00 = 18 .85 335 .00 = 18 .78 340 .00 = 18 .C,9 345 .00 = 18 .58 Shift> <Prt Sc> print <Return> repeat <Space Bar > back to menu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I�� 9 • VERTICAL LENGTH OF CURVE = 25 VERT CORR AT PI = +0 .104 CURVE BACK GRAD _ IN o = -2 .610 AHEAD GRADE IN % = +0 .709 CALCULATION ; STATION AT PI = 402 .00 PI TANGENT ELEV = 17 .06 COW STATION 409 . 16 LOW ELEVATION - 17 . 13 STATION CLEV Its 90 .00 = 17 . 37 395 .00 :: 1 i .26, 400 .00 = 17 . 19 405 . 00 1 % . 14 410 .00 = f 1.. 414 .50 - 17 . 1 hift > <Prt Sc:> print- <Return> repeat <Space Bar > Lack to menu �I� VII . BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS N/A IZO) VI_I . OTHER PERMITS N/A �ZI IX. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN Grading and Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control Plans are included with the civil drawings set. The 1990 King County Drainage Manual (with 1994 update) has been used to calculate sedimentation/runoff volumes for the TESC plan. rju PACIFIC ENQINEERINQ DESIQN INC. '108 �CiO✓J GM✓`V " �� C3 CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS SHEET NO. OF CALCULATED BY DATE rT)' -... I Z l.n u .. . . . . ... 7 ..:. .....: 22 7r'v f'.pw ,(`7 GP$ CtG.yr2, _ .C1°) .. ........ . ...... ... 5 ;. S -C.t .lA ;..2. x .zG.sGGO�� G2 ?.aSso S�1,Cr� ............................:. ................., ...... ....... �:........3t'T c,2 SS Sq S.` ......................... .... ._... ...... ...... sf'Il l L..Ay...... �n ............. 3 .... .. ... SPi . ... ... . IQ�`zrC � -✓ ... ..... ......... ... ....l_ .Q laa l3 . .1..X.N � E-f.. ' .G.Q- .G z....'`" .. . .... .. _. Gnt,� Irrt .... ..S ..... .... ..... Z4 h2 ......................... ; 3Z. . /� f..... o.s ... .. ... lo.G k.3GooTcl .... :... . .. .. ............. 5y 3! x 3 S _ �7.33 I .......:....._.... .... �3a0: ................ Z . ............... I76kG.3 . .. ........ ............. ..............:......................... ....... ............................. . ..... .... .. a:o t t .. 130 ANDOVER PARK EAST, SUITE 300 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 (206) 431-7970 FAX:431-7975 0 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 4.4.7J RISER INFLOW CURVES Weir Flow ---_ Orifice Flow ---�- 100 — -' 36 33 30 27 21 -. a v w _ — _ 18 E U 15 d � 12 10 - -- 10 7-7 ,- 1flIM, - — 0.1 1.0 10.0 3.s' HEAD IN FEET (measured from crest of riser) SOURCE: USDA-SCS 0WIER = 9.739 DH3"2 OORiFicE = 3.782 D2H12 Q in cis, D and H in feet IZQ 4.4.7-10 1/90 0 0 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL o Design of emergency overflow spillways require the analysis of a broad-crested trapezoidal weir. The following weir section is required for the emergency overflow spillway: FIGURE 4.4.4A WEIR SECTION FOR EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY �ME.R4ENGY oJEQ.{=LoW .�, WATER SvR-Fob. 4 ! 0.3' YY1�N. • 'x t. I �P�ap �Abl��.3•bq o The emergency overflow spillway weir section shall be designed to pass the 100-year, 24-hour design storm event for developed conditions as follows: For this weir, Q,,0 = C (2g)"2(2/3LH3/2 + 8/15 Tan 6 H5/2) using C = 0.6 (discharge coefficient); Tan = 3 (for 3:1 slopes); = 720; The equation becomes: Q,. = 3.21 (LH1/2 + 2.4H112) To find width L, the equation is rearranged to use the computed Q,(). (peak flow for the 100-year, 24- hour design storm) and trial values of H (0.2 feet minimum). L = (0,,,/(3.21 H'/2)) - (2.4H2); 6 feet minimum Access/Maintenance: Pond access tracts and roads are required when ponds do not abut public right-of- way. Road(s) shall provide access to the control structure and along side(s) of the pond as necessary for vehicular maintenance. For ponds with bottom widths of 15 feet or more, the access road shall extend to the pond bottom and an access pad provided to facilitate cleaning. For ponds less than 15 feet in width, an access road must extend along one side. o Roads and pads shall meet the following criteria: - Maximum Grade: 15% to control structure, 20% into pond. - Provide 40' minimum outside turning radius on the access road to the control structure and the turnaround to the pond bottom. - Fence gates shall be provided for access roads at straight sections of road. - Access roads shall be 15' in width on curves and 12' on straight sections. - Access pads shall be 15' in width and 25' in length. o Manhole and catch basin lids must be at either edge of an access road or pad and be at least three feet from a property line. o Access shall be limited by a double-posted gate if a fence is required or by bollards. Bollards shall consist of two fixed bollards on each side of the access road and two removable bollards equally located between the fixed bollards. o Access roads and pads shall be constructed by utilizing one of the following techniques: Izs 4.4.4-2 1/g0 0 9 KING COUNTY , WASHINGTON , SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL Design and Installation Specifications 1 . See Figures 5.4.5.2A, 5.4.5.2B, and 5.4.5.2C for details. 2. If permanent runoff control facilities are part of the project, they should be used for sediment retention (see introduction to this section). Determining Pond Geometry 1 . Obtain the discharge from the hydrologic calculations of the peak flow for the 2-year, 24- hour developed storm (Q). The 10-year, 24-hour design storm shall be used if the project size, expected timing and duration of construction, or downstream conditions warrant a higher level of protection. If no hydrologic analysis is required, the rational method may be used (Section 4.3.3). 2. Determine the required surface area at the top of the riser pipe with the equation: SA =2 x 02/0.00096 or 2080 square feet per cfs of inflow See Section 5.4.5.1 for more information on the derivation of the surface area calculation. 3. The basic geometry of the pond can now be determined using the following design criteria: • Required surface area at top of riser. • Minimum 3.5' depth from top of riser to bottom of pond. • Maximum 3:1 interior side slopes and maximum 2:1 exterior slopes. The interior slopes can be increased to a maximum of 2:1 if fencing is provided at or above the maximum water surface. • One foot of freeboard between the top of the riser and the crest of the emergency - spillway. • Flat-bottomed. • Minimum one foot deep spillway. • Length to width ratio between 3:1 and 6:1. Sizing of Discharge Mechanisms Principal Spillway Determine the required diameter for the principal spillway (riser pipe). The diameter shall be the minimum necessary to pass the pre-developed 10-year, 24-hour design storm (Q10). Use Figure 4.4.7J to determine this diameter ( h = one foot). Note that a permanent control structure may be used instead of a temporary riser. Emergency Overflow Spillway Determine the required size and design of the emergency overflow spillway for the 100-year, 24-hour developed design storm using the procedure in Section 4.4.4 (Emergency Overflow Spillway subsection). Dewatering Orifice Use the following steps to determine the size of the dewatering orifice: 1 . Determine the size of the dewatering orifice(s) (minimum 1" diameter) using a modified version of the discharge equation for a vertical orifice and a basic equation for the area of a circular orifice. First, determine the required area of the orifice with the following equation: A,(2h)o s A° 10.6x3600Tgos where: Ao = orifice area (square feet) As = pond surface area (square feet) h = head of water above orifice (height of riser in feet) IZG 5.4.5.2-2 11/94 KING COUNTY , WASHINGTON , SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL T = dewatering time (24 hours) g = acceleration of gravity (32.2 feet/second2) 2. Convert the required surface area to the required diameter of the orifice: The orifice diameter (D) in inches is: D = 24 x 3.14 3. The vertical, perforated tubing connected to the dewatering orifice must be at least 2 inches larger in diameter than the orifice to improve flow characteristics. The size and number of performations in the tubing should be large enough so that the tubing does not restrict flow. The flow rate should be controlled by the orifice. Additional Design Specifications Pond Divider The pond shall be divided into two roughly equal volume cells by a permeable divider that will reduce turbulence while allowing movement of water between cells. The divider shall be at least one-half the height of the riser and a minimum of 1 foot below the top of the riser. Wire- backed, 2-3.feet high, extra strength filter fabric (Section 5.4.3.1) supported by treated 4"x4"s can be used as a divider. Alternatively, staked straw bales wrapped with filter fabric may be used. If the pond is more than 6 feet deep, a different mechanism must be proposed. A riprap embankment is one acceptable method of separation for deeper ponds. Other designs that satisfy the intent of this provision are allowed as long as the divider is permeable, structurally sound, and designed to prevent erosion under or around the barrier. Depth Gauge To aid in determining sediment depth, one-foot intervals shall be prominently marked on the riser. Embankment If an embankment of more than 6 feet is proposed, the pond must comply with the criteria for Berm Embankment/Slope Stabilization in Section 4.4.4. FIGURE 5.4.5.2A SEDIMENT POND PLAN VIEW KEY DMDER INTO SLOPE TO PREVENT FLOW AROUND SIDES THE POND LENGTH SHALL BE 3 TO 6 TINES THE MAXIMUM POND WIDTH EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY o O 04 POND LENGTH oO Q INFLOW- SILT FENCE OR EOUNALEM DIVIDER RISER PIPE DISCHARGE TO STABILIZED CONVEYANCE, OUTLET OR LEVEL SPREADER NOTE: POND MAY BE FORMED BY BERM OR BY PARTIAL OR COMPLETE EXCAVATION Jz� 5.4.5.2-3 11/94 0 0 KING COUNTY , WASHINGTON , SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 5.4.5.2E SEDIMENT POND CROSS-SECTION RISER PIPE CREST OF 6' MIN. WIDTH (PRINCIPAL SPILLWAY) EMERGENCY SPILLWAY OPEN AT TOP WITH —� TRASH RACK PER FIG. 4.4.4E 1• MIN EMBANKMENT COMPACTED 95%. I I I-Ill= _--°== T PERVIOUS MATERIALS SUCH AS DEWATERING DEVICE =r_-_=r__-____ } GRAVEL OR CLEAN SAND SHALL L S (SEE RISER DETAIL) } �' ___ _ __ I NOT BE USED. ____ 'y L�f ;111UEEW—EW--=L—I I—III= ,, --------- -- ' 11- I I—)I(—I(j-111—I DEWATERINc I r WIRE-BACKED SILT FENCE. ORIFICE STAKED HAYBALES WRAPPEDI— WITH FILTER FABRIC, OR DISCHARGE 70 STABILIZEDEQUIVALENT DIVIDER DISCHARGE BASE CONVEYANCE, OUTLET OR (SEE RISER DETAIL) LEVEL SPREADER FIGURE 5.4.5.2C SEDIMENT POND RISER DETAIL POLYETHYLENE CAP PROVIDE ADEQUATE Vf G PERFORATED POLYETHY DRAINAGE TUBING, DIAMCORRUGATEDMIN. 2' LARGER THANMETAL RISERDEWATERING ORIFICE. TUBING SHALL COMPLY WITH ASTM F667 AND },S' MIN. AASHTO M294. DEWATERING ORIFICE, SCHEDULE TACK WELD 40 STEEL STUB MIN. DIAMETER AS PER CALCULATIONS 6 RAIN. 1L__- ___jALTERNATIVELY, METAL STAKES WIRE MAY BE USED 70 PRE CONCRETE BASE I PREVENT FLOTATION �---2% RISER DIA. MIN. Maintenance Standards 1. Sediment shall be removed from the pond when it reaches 1 foot in depth. 2. Any damage to the pond embankments or slopes shall be repaired. IZ 5.4.5.24 11/94 LENT OF MC,RICUTA URE0 9 CRVATION SERVICE 1 47o30r2o Sr • R. 4 E. �S£ArTLE(ClTy PO.)to m'.112'30r' S Mr ro wr£RSTArE 90 �Jp r _ .rrn.;-'�\ U lYlt3 i 11L •� � d 1r• ', `� •• \ $uosla 11 ri. •� I �' L ` � t � *\ r I I _ 18lT ■. Bla {4 - 1 A R O I I �•� � r j � �tnleuc ri. i, C:r 'field R r . . ., -�• ,Bed •I 'F :� .! . iv _ AIF I i90t1�1 BM •�� .. .a. r .:: `asa k +;t�• I, 254 _ - �r �'# BeD A. !. rroAo rrr Fr d Wo' 1Z •• _ .I. /• .\ 1 'f'�1.i"f +c `1 _J -` yr• •.• 4 Wo I �l , -I y Ur /�'+I - 'r' Y •I InC jR 13 Ng� ' DeC Goll lJourse I ■ _1 'JMLJUA � -�•�� r• q\ Wo I .o. I W \., Ur I a. PA IF I r l•. _ - 3. In 0Mri o I �' II Sew ge ORTrI , . - N 2 - - Subst ` I Ng Ur `- AgC nO AgD 20-^• I Pu , � Irrr w `AA. I Ev Ur :Longacrag:-= PuPu 1 �•I� R ,, Py I Wo ©eD 9m• eCl la r v Ur •ola-• I - ►� Ur �ti..� t05 OII � _ r i «� ��� I U ' .l I AgD �' - I 1 Track29 27r30rr r r Ur Ur 1 D I ��' •`ems OJ R s rvoir •� ply so Tu 2 W j Pu i Sk Wo 1 I M Pu lame 25 0 I©M 129 — '.� Vl ur� y 160 203 ngc i \ � Py Wo�'r n L S Cil i I Ur ; - ~ • 0 0 X. BOND QUANTITY WORK SHEET, RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET AND SKETCH, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT The Bond Quantity Work Sheet, detention facility summary sheet/sketch and Declaration of covenant have been included.