The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA96-162 • w ,A. THE BOEING COMPANY BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25 -20 SITE DEVELOPMENT - RENTON , WASH IN GTON SEPA REVIEW SET PROJECT SIT 11a = 1tt y r" ,~ ", _, BOEING PROPERTY UNE .. ..-LYNNWODD "" _ - t Mnt" - _ 4J : •`,�.' S.W. ST.9TEEi , I -,. . iip V -- _f R.�lt Is �,` 1 l- '... PRDlWOND I.•--f O�p,�, 2 11 T CSTC 1 - - ----S.W.19M STREET ...._i.. PARCEL rs 5 tSeM?--o CITY PROJECT 1 COY OEI I BOEING 1 OF SITE i 4 ; J A S.W.23RD Moe, teetx r. I :. :. ish.r �,j/�/� 1 BOEING PROPERTY UNE— I , I J . ..:. BOEING 5 i�i PROPERTY S.W.nIN STREET ..- /,/ UNE - '-_ //� ISlANO / R£ViDN/ -nil � --_— ___-- �-gl• • - MEETAli i ' i .. 0 91E LOCATION 4 I J. .. ;D .T" S S.W.J STREET BOEING PROPERTY UNE o i m 1 1 T[ACE m. i I VICINITY MAP �_ „ SITE LOCATION N SITE PLAN 11A SEC.I4,L Ill,R.g.11Y SCALE:NONE ° SCALE:NONE SCALE:NONE ,��;' IL 1/22%I IX It Svord rup D;m, "E . DM . CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DBE:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE COVER VELO EMENT SHT _ mm1mJ.J.S. wn, 10.29.96 nu we,SEPMDDD J.G.S. PR ea - aa® - er IMAS NOTED 25,Y0 No. REMO eV Arm ma arnaTEN ........................... NCO 2.15.96 O O ‘,,fn.„ • ' 1 = -, -- ^III 1.---_-t: ------ „..---.—_-:::::::::::- 1 L-- _J— = rll i i % .i 4 _ O --- ---- --- ....__i=:t-_.-:L.:,,__,.-.-,-,---.-,:::._:.//!;.-:.__--?i:(__<.*----\ --------- :\i_ �. _ it . N. d11TJLI: 'r - --i 'S 1 r. 2 . rn S' °`` v. I`l� 1 „�i 1 BUILDI!G 25-20 v J '� ti 1 , , ipp PROJECT SITE 11 0 , - 'I, , n.„._, N• , --,— ; 'T I i 1 9 T — S I W If k .„ 1 O '111i S• gTH! STD i;!,„ . .4 :- ,1 I I I- .,‘, - .., „, I CITY OF -- r ''', CITY OF i 11 RENTON 1 ',� TUKWILAj I11 PROPERTY `' ;r i I l LINE© (----S.W. 23RD ST. �I I. - - T O ► O 8�; �, � _ -I S . W . 271 — S1EET 1 � - __- — c 1 O0 • n Z I' -BOEING I D lrn Z PROPERTY _LIN _ _ ID tn I I '' © (1) J < III ; O© z 1 W O iC Z Z II Z S.W. 34TH STREET 01: �;; iID x Z H— i s I Z 1i 1 x (1) • ii Q ` O i� 1 ;; I r• I.I 1 INCH = 300' 3 ,, i.-' 11 (APPROXIMATELY) r ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS NEIGHBORHOOD • ? O1 WSDOT ®BN RAIL ROAD R ®CITY OF RENTON ©GLACIER PARK PROP. DETAIL M A P i ®WINMAR O McLEOD i I CITY OF SEATTLE ®ALLPAC CONTAINER. INC. L O N .g ` 8i 0• 0 ; 0 H g E x idg Z 0 m if W w a N m x 0 CL,L18rv4 z I! iF a I m5 6 z o pp m Q E ®p® V 6Y c 0 x m cawz a z l- �� CO n oz m 1—Z� w a a i ;;;spar oN«�ry n n��cea�� ` ...... �� 1111111111111111111111111111115 F. m-'mm''mmnry,«rvgtnrFrrR:,R RS.one �u u uIu��u uu uu� U' o00o m o0 33 333z=z 11111167 Z caa uEEu cR uucaa mc&acEE uucpa 6 W U u U 3 ��R�ffi �i�Y3� Ysu�auu �i GG LS cR MM ggnE Rollo R RRR RRo �� S fig§ § gg § gg gg22g gWMPggaNggggggggP � Pgagga P ===Iaa:$m:=1 Uto g NZ .w zm oz z, I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I ...I..I I I.• •I•I I I .I. I....+..1.•. I I I m: n�o=r-49,.nrrrA««RRrRS::Se C 1$7 'W:! !!'1!!TT _72� RrvV,P,XPU1 nRGRAn.3Mna Ogo eegeeeCISmononommoonogoomonoommon Mggig gggeneeeeeeHAnee RRGRRR RRRGRRRRRRGGRRRRRG GRRR N iiiiiiff34 $3Y3 $33333Y 4333YYYY444444443434YY4Y4444 zo o=riz COLA CD Ce Z Ce C zri ■..■ I •■ ■■ ■■ I I •I...• I I•I I ■. ■■ ■•••••I.■ _N 7 H Z �. �mm�mmo «n.�enm m-rne'm1'Rr«R«8rvrv4rRnnRnn3ox83 QRb ..M��Hrn«nrnSRRxR3.�Ra a� aaa a a3aaaggg8 $go eat .. uu� uuu�u�au uuuuuu �uuffi�uuu caw m - � CDCCn A gill o oZg z p, g••■ ... .. .. . .. .. 1 'i 1`� :;j` _ _ .f is `� il :‹.,r...ti %•'••.i.�,.i;?+••,.:::. -.. 0 100 200 400 600 1,- 1 �rtr -- - - C SCALE xi: -P-y`;i`; :•..,.. :.._ti..• : :'!?::5� ce. �.., .'ti." i:C:^. tT�: •.� _ T•Iii:.•'�. ';�:`i:'f,::,C?;:;'.:.:., _ - 1 •iY iK' i.1 A _, 'i0.2. - - is ::°i: „J _r• :1' - -it: - : .•:ir: ::Ilii.y::%>:'i4:€• N ';';;:% ;� ..l.L'i�:Al:,?d'1:�.A..1...A_, 1•:1:I..::v:•.a..::••:r::nv.�::•,•. !41 f pi�..N. 7 I �4 r. _ - r ::i i' "ate; ,''>ii:;:;:�: '�:::. r :-�' ;j:i. 3 Ali,%_ I _ `mow � - •ti Elm LEFT 'I Inn: .'I I• ( • \v ::i::.;.1.1'.t1',i't..-i'1',..!-,,.s'-':' p :I'• 1 1 — >.t I r 7 ;11+. - I - 'ram 2� ::7ii?1:; - - 1 1 iii iAl. it li•.. - ..f: '-'.:::' Y....!;Z: TA it I i�I'.Jt Ali ' ' - " l'i I. - i p ti;I1, I� _ - I cji i. _ <ji •It _ - 9-::I — �. ®.ate ;,...- , r -d >�1 a _-.--: 5 t ' i•:....4'II•> ..,, 2 :!?, {;ram Q ii' S14. !i '-\. - ...... 133�.ar anrnnn ;I.. ,a.. t; \ \ ,i- i;f `I' — :1' GIs :I. :! i -::ii: 'i �j ?:t k b�•i 1:•: _+- :}�:._< C ice' _ _ •. e t.. • IiG 'V :f \ I"-- �i \4r1 ::ti:+':I�_ t-� '+'W1lU1:P]N�IL��-.+.s„� k:�:'' �,,:...,..,. - :''.rCv - :ry. a; v i, - 0_ E t ,�i I 1 4 - I f�ti+ -.1 'f... E'. F �F-•fr i ^.i:. ♦E fir' � G r alE. e, t :1�•-'i:';;�,re' • - f t! 1r" t r l: yy=:,E iE - 1'. I. :t ,.i' :i :Ir,:�' - .r,.{ �l it- ` lE:I� ,E� £ fE' E'� 1 I`t �1 1 .i X I. - .` :> �' ; �I q !;i: Yi 1, 1+ r 5:9 1 a Ea;:. �£u E CI E I' r.;,• :I. i r!. 'i p- ,.It 't � C I _ {I ,,1,4 I •,I I` - il` 4: k'r•i __ I 1 :IE ::a f• _ • t is ... a -_- �-if':_: 1 ' 4E.� - --- - ,38 li Ir - �: - fi:E;_i, t't: it::j;:. i'S i-C �jl4i -" I :: ° ,• it :itii< ,�`, ,•,V:♦\. :,. /E:rim• 7:r :`. ; ,:::; St/�stMLZRR� III/CFI LPL-MOPE hart 7117 s..rar.p 9�wt X.. CIVIL, NC. tN6) -!m0 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS tote 2.11.97 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN OVERALL PLAN oIm 11.25.96 1111/U.SEP/13013 n®mmJ.G.S. a.,u Ile. 41p1111 Brarm ... Rum IA JCS/12.f 0.96 N J.. • ' ' /---------.;<'---',, 1 (.' i.1 '.,4' :2' :I" /..-,..:;-:t.?-:.,-.•::::-c. '...---\ \ '.:.-,--:'','''\ .I,. ' -' .,-...,..:•-•:-"<.:, N II • -...--• . -, ['LI 71200, • .L. , LIEL 20 40' ... 1“.20. . . • --L ..L.'''..- ,.:%-:', .... f ....,.. 4 .'.',1.CS'.('''......'.. ...,,,-- .-.'• ......"''' ,....: ......--- ..,....,' . L.,. ,..... -.• ....,..- ..,,.. . . L.., \ '•''''LL..__,„ •LA „....," 'L. ...'". •• ,• ' ••L,•, L" -, ''' . . ..,... . . .,...-- ,...- ,,..... . • ..,.., , , . , ....• . .-, . . ..., , - ...,.. ......... • ., .., •••••\'... \ .. ,. , .•:. .. . ..'" ..,....-"' .-'...' .,, .. ..., .."" ,..... . * . :.•.....•'' --.. .....,... .r•... •, .. , • * ....,''' .,,,,, __--'.." ... ..,"\ „,.."‘-\ .-'-''.......'„..:'.,.`,'.'.1•••'. ::::::&?:,',"::."'„, '„ 1 /.. .- ... .. ,„:"... ..., . 't . . 1. . . .. „...•-• ,,,..--: '..- ....,.."'... .............. .,......./' .,.. . 4., ..... i,Z,......,._..... ..7;3:...,''.34". ..- .g '..,•- ' ?';'?''''''.\L..-.''. ',..,.;/-'' ...,':,,, ,',.`'.. ...,".--- ''' ...... ...• '..... ,. ....,. _.,..... ....••• ..-..• .. .- --.;'''''.-;-:.' . .., .._ .„„„.,,-- . ••••,." 'LZ:i:: - ..`, .L ".....,.„.:,;;Lit„LL-„.• ';',..Ef....." „ IIEEMS 2. -LL"'"•',:' - 'L '' ''....L'fr'''reLL-. .‹...,'>%r':-./.:L'. .Ni": ....,/ REEEMILIII.m5 , '.,. ,,\LLL'.--- ••,-‘1,.,:'N'•''•'.':,‘ '...) ‘-%.-•\ -- \ -'"--""•;-",':--- -L-I-- -.--- ----.....‘:t ./ -..::: *_-2fir'•:.--;;;4,..;,-..--;;-';''''''"-,i: -, -" , .---":.--'. ..*:.:::.-.. .9.1...e...-.-::::..1,,SA- 2.7.:',;!--:;;:"."/" ,,,:'''.....:'v.-/ ,auamrvzia, -IIMEME1181 . .-..... .. ...... „• .„----: ,-- ,,-. •,,,,....,....,,,,:,1,2;n? ,/ . .,.,._,.. .„. . _.., -,-;•:D. • . *..''..•t- ..„-':../..;-.:P-'"'s.,-;,•••."--;./ \•-• / ' ./...•- ...,.. . • „AI .. • •,• '...,\,\:',...."--- ...;.-,-.."...-...,-.--:,.;.,---.....- ....••-•-:..---------1-1)- 'iti:7;"'."-'-':.:,-;" .--""- • '"',,,,.. _--,-.:'''- .- .-- ...-•:'•--;:_;..--••-•'....,.. .:-.:_:,( , l'.3 .',f1.,!.:.i—,._4.J,,.. ---fr"... \ \ , 4'.41116.--:-,,1•:, !--2„.„tit.,--.2 ,...- v.,,..,!.,... .--....., ..2 /....:„.-,_.,..,:.. '.-••-'I ••1 I •L k th:',III•II2: ,••- -•.•;•••'-'-'•-•TIC-,-"i•B-•::,,..'..,,,,-.'•n•:-•\''••••• /,•••7•77.3 'CI .•• • \ ,.....„-.....----."-\...•,...,•I ',"` , • •., ..•A • \..,‘•••••;•1•.:*--".7,II ,/ ,.;•• ••••„AI•• ; i''••••,..,:•.'2 1 5.'•KEY PLAN suLe ROC ,...... ' .. -'-i ,..'' ..' ' . .-..;;,•:,...'‘...-..., '. . ;Y.'''.- „.,..N.R...:%...„,'.;i',. .,!ri- .....,;:: "-. '. .?', S.IASEC a LIRA 4F.111 - ..-- - " n•'• • \ "--• • • ...,-,..-...... , I:' D'XI.II.,•i./ ..:':•••-•:::•:;••••••• 1 ''.'-'•;q?::::.• •I. .....; ....'.' ':•<••:..••• ' i I.-",•‘:•• .:•••: •C , CC § 111/2,5115.1.111.11.111 i.I . . ..; • _..-- , ,,,,." „• . . Iii.r!r c.I.T.0 p NW.W:"*"' CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS II I WE:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I SITE PLAN GRID 6 ......J.J.S. ..., 11.24.96 MI 101121 SEPA0014 coma Nam . ,,.. IMMO eV AIM MS MKT.. .. .,................... KCL/12.17.96 , .., s I — .. ' ,,,••'. t I .., , §—• • . .,':;--,..... ... ..••• 1 .: . 1%.-:::f:.• ;' ,••\ III% i:" . si,,, , , ........,........ ..1.--.. ...... .,.. ,.1 / •.:::::::,.:,•:•.;1%.*, ,•:-'%.-.--, -.:.:• •:s•'--. ----7" . ., .., •• •• ::••••••• \0 ,,.....', :/ - . .. I -•• ... . ;;. . •' • '. ''. •. \, 'r'S,: •-.• . s .1 fa .'f',2 . _ • - N; ., • ; ; t••••• 1 ' i ' ,.. .i./. !•••••••...- ;`.2..'..," : 1.-.: • ; : : ••\F-.--I , . .. •• 1 7 ./: .;!. . . • '• '' ..; •• ; .•"--- ... . . • ..• ••; ‘••• • - •• • - • •.• : • ,...' r .••••- '••:,•••.;;..Y.",'. :•••-.. •:).:. - Ili' ...1-\-', '",';'...\'',',...‘I••; \ \ ''. \.\\...\\\.,\.\\.<•.-;-..- ; .--•'-;:;...;)' ..-.,..:".:•:-/. .' .• t•••••.''•-;-3• .;, ,...•':•‘....... (_j .,,,\.\ , i 1 I• ?•'.,',=%;•7. •, V.\..\\';\\V•.‘„ \ \ '':, \;•,',\'\\`,\\:•,:;• .1.,,.,...,'''''.. -. ,.•,...,;•1,_..._..„, .; ; '• '' '7!,... "1-77" !i7 \-\-\,,'. .. ...•••-- ..: 2. 0. 1 1 :. i' ,I i i ; • : \ ----.--— • • .!.. -., + • •• /i il .:••• .!•,:: „..N.:S2:::::::::.\\:::\\.. \sn'....: l'.. ..s.::::',.:..\.i,'1:-',Yk\."7.-tA--- \-- '1' ------— I • .--- ; • i , 1: .. ....1 h: ••. • so . . , • : 4 . . . . . . ' . N 72.800 , • I • 1'''1'-'..!' '-'''... :I li /,.H: , - \, ... .-...:-.-V,•`:::: ',...:;,,,.-.':., \ \ ;..--- ...\,.,,,,,,.\\i,..\\ 4.--,---- I ------' i „ i :•.: . . ,,\ ., / ;•1 • . ..., , ....„ . .. . . . . .., . • . „' ' ,...H` • ,' , . ; :I i" 1--.....! F • ,. . . . . , ., ,i / ; ' ; • ; ,••; • !--- . . • , , ; ... ,...--,-•,,,•• . . • ,• • • • , ../ ,,.. . . . "!----•••• ; • • __..............____. /• , . .. •• -: ••• .. ..., . • ••.-.., ; 1 . ... -•••___ i s6 .4. ,•/r„ • ', ...1 ? ' .1 . 'Pi • •• ; •• -;---.•'. . .. .•• „If:;!: • • r • --••••••-„,„ • 7-' • , .../ • / _... ' . • .,;• .• ; •I • ..... ; .; ;'1 ,•. ... • / ?,..,: j5,'..•Ar,•-•*---•••-' I-.' '/ i fi'..; / . .......V..,,,,',V',\••••\ ••••:\.•. \ .1%.\\''•••••••\.V.V;':- ,l'__ .7 , ../ • • / 7 , "\ .:.;• •,1!.-)7:: • , ,..---- ,•.1 • .• /...1.1:r.:•,:P ' / / •''''. • / . '.-.•:;?;:• / / '•,, •••••'1. \'.\\T; '•; y'i.". V'S.:‘.,.A.2.,., ;*"...k• • ; i • / i ,, . ,:.. , , „ :... i ,.:\ ' ! !•• "7 •••i - - / • „ . . . .-.. ,, . . ..".. . . . , ... I I . . • ..,.. I 17 le 2 ,?. .. '•• 2 1,22 2 5 1 • • • . . , .1, : I 1 . 1 . . 1 : ;;, • • ' , 27 ''• l'• . ! . .1 / ., , ,• . .• 1 • •' ! , • : 1 1 .: : i : ; .• 3 31 1 • I I I •I I . 3 • ,..- .' ..--•".. . t iS.V, v.V,,...,V.I.,..1...\,.1 ..\ V,''.\\\\,';''' .. I . . __ -' • • 1 I j• • 1 4. , / . N 72.600 : I;: 72,600 'I.\';‘" '•••,..A.Y.\'•••'.•0'•••••+ ' ‘.:•\'''\''.2..%. \..• • I I .'' / / f + . . . . ....„.....„ •-,.......... • , .•"-.- . . • , i —61— i • • . : ! , ,............ ••,....\'.......;:•:1, '•‘.1....,‘,\\\*,:,..11,\%.,..... \‘. ; ...z '..,‘•,‘....v.,..,.S.'•; \•., . . . , . . . . '1: 1 ..! KEY PLAN WALL NONE : I . 1 .„........„ 1 : :t : / • I ...':'.‘\ .4%•\ '..\..\\\\''''Vs.:,.'\'\ %\\ '' '1•\':"..t\'''‘•• '..\% 11 8 S.1/2.SEC.24,t 231.R.CU .: : :-......, 1 . . . . . r, ILIA15,I.2711.It CU : ' ' • ' ' ! v. ''' Swiardrup '.0:::',...'.0 L,. .!. ‘ civil, /NC. (DO •132-6002 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ; am.2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I SITE PLAN GRID 11 . 0o0000J.J.9. coo 11.24.96 r92 coo 5E700016 J.G.S. —WALLAS SNOVN 111.1.1 KCL/12.17.96 . . .... ..% . • „ , •_._._________.:::::1 i i • : 1:i ::; I ii.--.- :. i•.; : fg-- ;; 1 ... ..., i ;i•:. :•.i ..-,,. ,,,,,..._:.: m : e: --------I.: _____ - :•-•-2— . !i! . :1---- „ , 6., .... • - - - •-.,.. c.3• 1 ' :1 . Is , ri;•- - 7.! ;i '-: 1- !.it .c\i5!, i; .11 ..:-...'2,. J •; !I i • ----; :1',., ,,; •• - ,.. ; ; .., • ,. I II i 1 ii; :i . :•.: ..----1 i'-' .-----1 ;i-1,77 ; ------:I !'-'---7 t.: 4. 3 •k ,. ,; - :; 1 .11,i: , , ,I,:;,-.4%-,IIIi:,-:;:;;'• ::.:„.•;;',. . , .I i Tii------- • f.....22:0 <., :: .,z6mt...::.e,.:,?f.:' 1 z;:wzail......,Ii:*•z;•: VZOn::::::fge) I ,77;7::::1 ArZ....:,...:: ,...- ...,..,(..,L.f,„:::;:„,...,....,..:,, • 1 i Ii 1 . I.J',.: _ / ; • ,.. I j ::::-_,.....--......_ ....,:..---..„ 4;'.. --- ---'----.tj> --::.,Ji- .,-,..T'C..-a . ..) .•• . X .:3 1 . 1 i0:..1,0..._S 20. 40. 1 .1tii 1 I C-1 . . -:. :.:, 1...20. .:', :,---------,, E7.1 , ,f : , ,i0 , .:..;.; , 1 1 1 .... ' '''''j 211 1 , ','-••••••., `•.1 M i::•:.., I', 1 • I • '.. .1 II ; '1 1 ,Xj•••2 i I':•••i I 1....; ; t / I ••'/' 1. i :4 1 1 l'A z I r , , l'A i E.--..'••••-':'...i'::-.• N 72 r.CL,600 .....'?...--.•••; i ; •:•••:. •,• ..., 15. . i 1 .1.•;:i_. : .,11:'-i.I : I •,'••.1-r'I--------- !;..1::::.1"1 •-.4-----if•. ... s.K::..1 \ _--L-':•:,;72,60,0 , 1•,:Esijiii E4t1:1:1111:1._11'4_:LL.t..3-1. i, j,.1.••11 4 .j•i.1•1•.1.-----------------------;''i-i--1-L1,-;LL#::::-t-iti-rC,----------------1,1•11',! '..! ':i:I.'',.;1!:2;44::-P-1-ii,l; 1 I 1 n \ / .• 1-- 7;5._ ___ — i )1:••-';',..k- ..\ ......---....—...... ..._..„.• .„„ i;1 1 : • .•'. •.------• . , . I i •\...... i . :. .. , ---— :'''.A----.--. .--.- „::'...\.........,...-.-- - ---- . -----•----- ..,• _._.._.. .---- \.., ,..----. . \ • '...',. ' '... ... '' ,.....,..\ --- . _,... . ..----. ..... •. - .. . 1..51 . ,. • \ ',, ..•••• ,..-. . ----. --,,,,,..44: : „,.• . ..... , . .• ,....„ ..._ . ..--- . .• ........,..._:...,..... .."........._::.: ..::....._...,,, .„- .•.- •, ........_...• ,....• ...,,., .. ••.......... ...„--- ..„-- .„- ,, ...•- .. ... ... _...... .. „, ..„- ....„ .. •-• .---, .. .......__.......... .,i: .4.91,....j!-Nr.....6,..... ...„--- ......• ../ ...- s „, ,.......„ ..... .. ....... ...- ....... „ ,. .,.., \\ „. - .•--- ••-• ,--•"•. ... .., „ ...- —, , .„ ...., ••• •GRIT REROVAI: .....--• '. ••• ..". N , , ".... 10 ..,• ,....."-- . ,- ,, ... ..• •.•",, ,..,'• ...„„ / 15..--......../ /• ,... ,,,, , ............. 1 17 le 2 '.4.. ••i t . ./ ....•• ... . . • .......... . gy ,.L::::: , ,„ ••„\, .. •.., . \ ,22 1 5 ,.., :., •i i', -; i • •••-•...,••••....., , , ...., , ,d 3 3 iii! ! ••,. • • • . ....,.. ' , 4 'I ;I II . / ... -.,.... .1 • r .1 •,•• \ •-......._ • I •; • . ; ; i ,.... ,• ............. N 72,600 II : . ; /...„•:......- ---./..—-.,...-••irj,;.;..:•::-:::.--2''''• i''' ± -':-/ •••!.. \ —7:----- s 't .1"!---,,•:. . , •-.. ± '',<,-.\:••‘.:: '------,__ — I, •.-.-^, •,:•.,:. •,,ii 1',: ! /.,:•,,,::::: 7:"1...7:••::::-::y-:.... ......_... '\,...,:: .<!..,:,:t....--•!../ ..,/ '-,--7,--..-,:::.... 1 ': ••.•. .,--:::m•,• . -, ---___ I '-,....'-::::.:•;".1 ';-:.: : %:I t I:1...':.'i t.-- ; 7... ''-:. --::::::::—.:.:-:-:-,'':\ KEY PLAN WALL Ma '..-::':,:.'•1•• i i I ;i... . .\ 1 ;•••• -------._... t)! • - ••'•• ••, SIASECKInt.R.E.0 /0, ::::•;;;;'-:. -.::.< ,. ,::••••:,.•,._:.':-•,.... ,•. -.. IL 1/2.SIL 24 1.111,11.4E31 , -... --. , :. .1.2 ./. ..-•• •::;:::..: _"•-:2:-- --_.. ••::.::::::•..,.., -...._ ,• ,,. 13 v a r d rup • CIVIL, INC. CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I DATE:2.11.07 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I SITE PLAN GRID 12 .. vsvmeAJ.J.S. DAM 11.24.96 ma NY&SEP70018 Dam, J.G.S. s8B2....5 SHOirN no. man man Oh KCL/12.17.96 . . • ,, • ' rs[: I'.) N 1 �� fF • pi 1 /.�- .f::. cf._:...:':-:'.:::.:_..:_':_-.i.:!.::,�..{/•.ice': I C ii • 3 .__t •p:r=`':,-..'..i)-.-- -----t — - — ::1:: - -"-!_ - N)2.eao `�i _ '•zr ft, /• t • • •.ram' 1:' .4.i. _ ! !f Eb !;. jr • ii ` """• � is • 1111 '+. '- %"••,t `••, .t -- I 1 KEY PLAN SCAM NEW • °' L'.' S1/�R2�LflLRE.lY CIVIL, INC. (WN°OW 000 MA Meru NL CITY OFp RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OR PUBLIC WORKS p.m 2.11.97 I BCAG HEAOOUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN GRID 13 a..J.J,S. um 11.24.96 ma•15 5CPM017 rum J.G.S. iw l:e• wSAS SHOWN' ... NCL/12.17.96 I �d:.: _ •1'1 "In% III::..t . ♦: '•t?: 1 I ( ..•kJ j , , pl•, • • : Z • / • ;.'' •.` .. . :;i% 1•.20' 1. .....; yYta n , , f is/.t.} • • N']3.IOp I • N]l T :u • 1 • • `• f% • i iii. • • • • il U , _- ^ , '♦ \ `\ - , ..._--.____._—.... - l,._.I..;� I :Ii t•;:Sili+ j ,I•LIi.. \ ` \ '' __ '- KYPLyC:II, .......•., . : ]lk sIL '.�• •rl 1•; Ir F.t w w`1'e, Sru�sSEE dCA�u .... CIVIL. INo.P r"si`�._eo� CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS we 2.11.97 ;I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN GRID 18 mrm,J.J.S. DArg. 11.24.96 GLa wan,SEP CO20 J.G.S. r 1..... au s snows .............. KCL/12.17.96 p y; i' . I :1 I € I I i<I :: ,. 1 f 11 i? 1 / v:, I. ;: } .. y�, ? t ,:tl:::i':�:•:I ,. -: � -I ,:',i a...: - .•{•_-...- ,:.JIB :,l•, - - _, _.... _ -r r I. t :.:.�III'—:•'__—.:....-. ,. — '. II - \�' ...�v�.)• ,_�;1I.:L'I::ijl 7.� ...._- r.'_l i.l. +�'. I ! .1:� I iF ...:•....-. I '_I 'I .' is : � f': - "` - :a,. . .. ., ir.r.? ;III : fL-. : ,,...: 1 _ o; . , . t r A00 : r r rrlc • f y: I' i I i , .i...................... i - _ I: of ';I v �Vr 1 : ^ -- — — — — r r' 7. / !/ 7,1 i r ,. .. : ;r •,... ; - _ 1/i I _ SORE:MOIL : "� � � KEY PLAN _. ..i-. ....-. / __ P/_..,t ter 2 'i' .re, i' f �' a/: s� SEC x R RK ,I - - c5i��, '=o�: — R 1 a L R LK _ y�•i'+i • stlta llf�rY CIVIL, INCP (m--I)iI3-evW CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MKS 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN GRID 19 mane&J.J.S. P•m 11.24.96 .21.2x SEP/0021 mum J.G.S. l.Ia Iuu:AS Sn0. na Immon m una BAIT umwna ............. MIT1 on KCL/12.17.96 e ' 1 § N `\*' :;';.`• 1 •. '\`✓'\ :_;`'., `• 30' 10'_ 20' 4.0' ;.. \' 1 ttl ` I •�.111 •1�, ':1..:1 !r•r 1; v�,., 1 '.,\ \\' ^\ .\\ \'.i j.1 : I I 11 `. r. 1 `t ' i't , . .t v_1} It ;1, � I �, . .. '.. � i ' ...... _ `•`\'•:: •\ PROPOSED WATER ' ' f i .$i �' .�` ;• _ _ _ _. - _ v'y}Fy, SURFACE EL.7.50 ii T-- . fi$i 45 ! x N \ '_. ,; KEY PLAN f . \ ' _ .. . . .. Sv.rdN lup CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPART=ENT OP PUBLIC WORKS I w1E:2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN GRID 20 nmcn�J.J.S. mm 11.24.96 nu lum SEPA0022 num sm. 45 u wnw5 w o.mm. n P. un ueenm _ _ mn on _' w KCL/12.17.96 S N n.200 , 8 • , •• " a • : , ,:...., ..„. .,,,,, .,.:, .„..9, , .„\ „. 2 .,....::::::,-..-.....-:_....-.:::.....:22:;:::::;-,--.-. ./ .... ,." .--1' ..... :I / 't ':.:1'''" ' '':',., ..7,,:•;:" I -1 •',.:,,.-,-''., ‘...'i•••, ''',.'•:........ - -------.:::::,14•:;:. • . .: . -;•;..g., `,2::::::,:,':;:. i ..../ _..___.... .../ /../ ./..-' ...' , . .., •••./.// „„............,..._ .• .. . 1-=20. -.• ,... . , . / .. , ,..'".' ,_.---- , -,. / .../ /.../......-":'\ ....' ., . .""" .'',A ,••----' ,..---- „Z.,:',,,, ,.'" •,• \ .:'iii,,, '., -,ii,,, ..si:;:,„.,.." ..•• ,,;.•••• ,...-"--- .."' .2ii::. ,>"",.(. :\--'''.. —.7---- ..."--;1.-11:21'".2-T-;':.‘.::-"--'" -----. , — '"::.>•-:.--"-„:;-..-•"--,-,;:"--- ...-'""-- / •." .., ,./ ..".• 1------,-..--•-,....""- ,....• . ,.....-- ,,,. „....'•-• .--".. .. -"--....------- ---•-•. ...."- ,..‘., /"..". ,- /' ! ' "......, . "--- 1--` ri —... — ------ ,.--•::-,""-:----.. ' ...,/ <.• ,, .-,,,"' ,,.....,... . ..' —"-- -. . .... . ._... .---.....__-.-.._ \..... .0 --....._,.. ------- — ----. _ .,:c• ! '-., ______... . ........_.../ •• — _____— 7000 ---..- .._...._. / "--..,.. -----., -w_72.00 . • 12. • I s"... • ' •I: lir . ..• -"--/ ' ikr 7-I. -. , ' I... I : ' .;. --' ....i. -. . . ..--- • : . I . -._., ....,.......-- i_ .....-----' .. . ; • -.;:;, : . : ; ,,,----- l _ _ _.. ' / ‘: i .:: ••-;-:• 0 : ; : . ....---- ...------- ------•---._. .. . ..•---- ,_.,.......„ \/ If,.... , ,..' ..11H i ?CO72" n,;-', -, ; CO '•,, I . • ••• '. , %. 1 , • - 1-11 413" • t•"" .". 1 ;..;,..... .6 1 3- 3 I 7 I ......-..-....._"- 10 ; /1 i 1 ..":./ II 1 ..,_----—...._... _....-.... i: i .. ! I!, 'i" ' ! ! .i ""'''\,, ----........,..-."•;.--.,, 1 k i • 1 i i i-,,, ., 1 . li , ..., _..........._ ...• KEY PLAN • .,: I ,. ,. - .• . 1 ,. • " , . i • 0 (5--- ./- i : ', ! •"--' 1 v •-• ;" i• i ; ii:j.' S.1/2,SEC.Kt MI 4E.li. • • i g . •----' 1 IA SEC.25j.Zll.IL 4411 „ • .. .• . • . • •- . •.•• ,- .•,' Fi : i, 1 r• ''': 1 ! • . i i L • _:-. N 71.850 BV•rd r Up "2.,..ra="' CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I DATE:2.11.07 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I SITE PLAN GRID 23 _=P,J7G1 . 04*. 11.24.96 :N...SEP40025 J.C.S. 001154.5 SmOwN ammm m Emmen DT MEL DATE MIMI& ,.., Min DOI KCL/12.17.96 • ' :-.,...:!'" //' ',-,... ,./.q.-it • .• ! i I .!, ; ,' ..:/,:'i ,i1,,•,,e „:-*"; ;;...... Lt ,i- 0 , . • - ,,f --.)' :.• ',,' •; ii ,/ ,::? ,,, ://.1, /,' ..--;----‹..,, ./ / ..',/ /".,,- -' ,,,',3p, . El : ..- • . i :. ! .,:;,; !„, • ; 6:. -... .__!••• --,••---- --- -----'; . ! ; ;; . ,,, , . . .... : • .• .,..., ... ! 1 , • I d I : •:: 1i; 53•Ba° '. * I I + Ht n li' '' '.'....? I ; 1 i / /•II'"'''',// / / ':%:,- --: I lij I II ........... . I ..'f i• ; ;; ;i e. \ . '........, -• 1• •' • , ! ! ! I : 11;t: 1, ; : ,/' . -: .1 • ''''-i.-.ifF•fj," ; i 1. i i • 1;; .;.i '' 1 ; • 'i C: ;‘,,, ''',.-:".... is .• I : : , _,; : • ; , !‘f!:!• !_: • •• :I.i-- --;;2:1, ;: :'47'1'.(::: / ''. • ,i !I' i I:1 ; 7-i' I ilTi'Vf7t"!----I aI:ji: - i! ,. ..-.. I: :I I ::. :4 2 :, ;.; :-. .... •....I r, IT •71 , 11 :1.11'17 :'.::::;1.i 1 • .• i; ,:, . ': : • i i : 1-1;• ; , I. 1 i •-::1',.....p.• .. m...i h ' i : i . :' i .1 1;1, ..''..:1 ;.',,...:'..--ii.'• i \t-..'..;,•-•7:.•-,i•'.-I''.'i i • ii' : .. , .:: : : • • . .. 1,“ :.-,-..,,, 1.. ‘.1,-.•:-....-, t i .. 1: • '11 .-I. :-'1 : i ; 1 'tr.,--.'..\' i'.. ''',-, ''.- .'.,.4. • -=' ,,. ., . / . ..',.:...!...........--- r !w : .. :'1- 'T 1.-4V ., 1 '• '•• ‘. ' ‘,.•-‘,.... ,,,, ,, •-,. ,,,\•-•• i•,' : •- - :.., • . + ------E 'c'y 7-- — A/ .• — I. ---1.-...7,, , . :...........„..,...•..',.••••--U6DfSR' ., 1."54000 L , ..'i- 'i+ ); 1' . II( ''' •---,- , • I - .i, -‘1.. \ ,. '•1 'fl.\ "--. .:;':::. ..--,\ \ \ ' . \ COMMUNICATION DUCIBAN K -• ..1,.:2;::', Er,1RR . /L_' : III -..„ . • . . . 7 .i''-ii-7 i.- -Y-- ... '7-'-\7---,..--„--;- 'T-----•\ L--,:,4,,,L-N--\.:-. •,,.-.: ',.., : : • ri • --lx%.:eii ...2.,..,-, ........::_4,..___',. •••\'‘. . '---2--.-.--'\,-, ..:„. ----..: :.;••i-•::: E i.'.. t.':\ s'-'• __-.-;;II II' . I \ \:‘,.:'• \ '', I III%I.I. \ ---,....... / :- ...P"Pt____ -- •II• I/ , . NII —.V..;I',Is. . % .- —...,I.-- -- ../,./.:,::, —7I ... \k,.•:-.,. : .. . /CRASS UNED DITCH\ ......... \-•,'''' \ -. .Y..--,--1-1:;-_:::.-7-,ir.•'_==.;.„.,....,-,-4,1,_,.,-....----' ''':;,,,. :1, ''.'"''''',1'..-, .. " :..-1.Y., '.,,_ -... .'-'1•,-_ ,.',,,*-:::_--•.r':f''''''",-: _::' ..„-_........,..,,2,......... ----',..... ....,.. .gC..ii , , ...• ,..- ., .__---- Nielkw. . : • — ..-',,,. IIMMM1.• \ , ,......_..-. .\*.,..J--ii-. ..''.:1 / 7' / ..."' \.... \ .. .......-..- ..._. i -13 ! i/ 1"-, . , - - •- ,. ---- ',',---.._. ------ 4 M . •! i' i ; in :........._ , ...,„. ,• E •S,20.0 • •%1 0) 1 . .-1 ..., • 1 i, 1 ‘ •1 i / • i. .. . . . I 1 i.1 ' ! i ! ; 1 L C>i . . 0 -1 MP --1.%. • A i5 I 1 P, r^ 0`-141i9 0 1 istx x --,„0 iti 1- 1 g , Pl r-.1-• IT< —'---- ,..m. '9 —_.• _......_ ,..„ rn mao z •-••••'• .......gia, . rV 3 g 1 In g ii 1:1 ti • . . E .. i'. :! i -:: . :1:.: 1;.:-.:.:. . . ...) g .7/- . i N 71.600 ± i —I— : •11 +, . .. 2 1 it t! f ., :!. ,,t ,....,., ;.,t .1;: t . ,..' ,... I t ' t ...- • !... :; 1 „....-_. 1.1 i' ',.. . . ' '' Ili 1 ... • I; t; .-i.. '11 . . ... • I ' /' ", ' ,..---- . i . ,- "•'''- ...-'' ' I •, ....._____ t... N 7LIE100 —..-..—..—. . ....-""a.'"...-''....... ! i !1' i! I . i .-' ; i • .',:•,:f.., '-'?i.P:'., . ... i /;i.:-:•"'',1.''''7.-.,. • ._./...ii....."...........ill.'....... ../ .,,.. . ., '-•.... .. .r.: •• ,• , , . . .s. .. .,..,:' ':'-'' r • ' 0' to' •.- ... ../1 i • • I .. sir F3 X 1 ...:* t .:. , ..„..... 1 . . . : " ! ‘ • '.. ' •. f:::,......'.- '.. ; 1 ,,.. •., ..,,. e:',... •,.; -•-•..:"----'-- ....:_...•- --- •-....„ ...._ • \ . .„.„,•,..f.;;-;:.-;,..-------:;.---',----.....7----- - ___.. --- -- ...: ! : '.;::. /;..." • 1.1 1-..-- .-... .•,...... .-.....• -`:-.!:;•',1!..:J..; i••:!•;•:, : ...,--,;-':::::•,2-'..-"';:..--- ".---- . ---- -......•i •iIi'.it I 1 ',1 i, ; ,;.;•:•),,! ...--- __.17.:;-"' !.: . Iii.0:: II 7 • ',''';',..../ F::::;.---.- - : I L'I•' ]l . . , I !."ti'''.. '-..--.'----'''. i .....---,,::-..:-.77-•..---.% : , ,:,..M1 56..:. . „,,-- . -'.. ......." ..,-;`,;"1..::„..i,FT,7,7,1:1,1::: :::.:rfet...Z,,:•:-...;:qC..)..''T1' :..-.'":-..: '-''-' ' ---7. .1.1•;,711 .. \: / ,' ,... ....-- „''...:4::':':',.',.•.‘::-•'- .,-.-:-..-- ,.,..-----..-.-- ._„:4:51",,'"Z"'"':.:!?:":... .;-''''''''' .-) - „„,,'";":"''';:--.',..-•:...:::-..-.-.. ..----..- _...-*---.- .-..::55;7 -''':';'':'''r.1-;.:.;f1i;.:'.ff''':f'''''''-' -::::..,,./. .-......,..... • .,. ,.. ..-•,:i.':,',1.7..?:",",......"-:"'"- .-.---- --''.-. ...--::.:;;;;;,'5,-"---.--:::::;:ii•-:,-.;;;',1?-!--7,!...5;!,•-'---- • . --r" '-I ! i 1 ! 1 if ,/,;•:•'7 \ MH Er i Id P 1 ..?"`! ,..-::-:!':•,!,-- -!" ,...- ...,;--- -..... ,--.... ;::2-7-,-.:._----- ..----- „,.......:•:,;74 -;;;;;--:-.5.0-'' ------ :".„,,,.,.,,.„55...5...---.•...,;•.;:. :..:.':.:?„?.-r•--;;;‘-='-'5'r.:-.-''-'--._'--,-......-ss.,..'''......--.„,.......— —-- - .•.-...........,-.-.- .„,'.'. ._.... ..-..-.-.-_.....-.._., ..--PLUG...E.X-..I' S'•T- .I.N G SE.W--..E. R. ...._.....•- .......-•....-,-__.. I.t.,i8.'.;,'.!-'''•- ''!--i•:: C 6:,,0'-4'1.„, M:'.i.•:.,,.:.,2i.i zCz1iB:,,,-.4 8..,.3\.i:3: ,-g--i-S--S-=--:•r 7- . " - — .. ..„-.... 1 ...... I ...:18S 6 i1 ". f 2 8 2 „,•—• ...------. ''• ---' , ....• , : I:.. , . -.•''•_ -,—..-, :-. ,, — 101116101fEo.4,4. z- • ; :1 • ,-;- _v....-.----........._ ...... ,..--- ..-- . .. ,„.......... ............._ 1 ).1.- ! 1 T' , : .i,-- ., 1 .--."•-'..-- 1 : .-1 : I : :.. I' I. ‘.. ...' / ....-•.' . ! ; , 1•‘; i ,. • C .. ...•-•-' ..----. •••I ,..--- ...-•--- .5 • I: ! —t"' '7"'" . ... —1- -1••+•• t .....,---' ...-•--- .' . . • , i:., , r-' ....---...- : ..... .1- ...----- I e4 ...,.- .... !--.,,-, .÷..,— : .., KEY PLAN — -, ..,. • ' st it i i • ''.... ! i. i 1 — — SCALE:NOW . .........• ,..---.— • • , ......... ..". P, ....---.... „ • 0 I i ; : : .H? : — --- H.'-. &1/2.91 24,T.22.R.4E,11 - • --------..........„.::---,..i; : i ' ' : ! 1:: I ...t1 I q 10-.81 t.3 ------...... , ., .....i; ! : : • : :.: , , -; ; • 1 ! : ! !Li L ; , - 2:42,=4=1! I rth22—M3 s erd 0. CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1,1 ['SPAR-11HE,, Or PUBLIC WORKS i so 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 i I SITE PLAN GRID 28 ,, vammo.J.J.S. MIL 11.24.96 nu HAKH SEPA00.30 mum J.G.S. .la cum. KamAS SHOWN Mt. 0-119m BY MIL UTZ 0111017. .............. MET Oh . . KCL/12.17.96 0 i" _ _ m •<' is \ I I I I I I i; I I N t COMMUNICATISN OICTBANK.!•.•., ....U.__ __I :.,-••-.I 1 , .----..,•,-••=L, ...i_-•...... '1. i i i ,,I,_;._::; I _ I . N 71,800 RIIII nING 75=74-i I • • I} ...-_ L. I I I I •i N 71,800 FINISH FLOOR .47-1E1.50 I / + i I; ( I+ _ • • I I I__.........., _ J : I : I Z ..( I ` I 0' 10 D' 4D' 1i I I •,. fr. 20 . I ..:._:-•.....:i:::__...... II : _ '^-_.._. .._.._..._.......-__._. 4 .... 1� I U �� I :.;:i;- I,I' II I NOTES: TOPOGRAPHY PRONGED I 'I --. ('I I : BY W&H PACIFIC. 1I I I I • I f� -. r� .... __ �Al•DUCIHANK • 'i••. ''�: i FI FCTR,AI DU ANK A + -_ - .�� G :.•�� III i ( I :•1 - .i ',. FI FCTR�AI OUT ANK fl _ -- ~.•.. `'F IRMA BANK _• ,• O 'DUCT @• fl \ UTIUDOR _ __ _ _ _ 71,T.1t]DAB.t — __ ..• 1 _ . ,h _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___u-- ___yam— _ -. : H '�_ -tiY }.6X+ R 1r ';. it ..L .'..k.. 4'W `:'M WAT:R 4"W .. ... 'N;' `�': 'I' `If• I ll .• y RWL :..MH 48. T._....1 7 ': VAULT I ..................... ./' • _ 12"F,r' . M�P01 F \ i 1YW ' 1': VAULT I i-- ti': I I.' ' C: .r.}g' SD ,1 • MH 48'•'t '3 .'� I li )•• . i I,q,C941't1. ,f.. 12� C9.48', '� _ CB 4B,I Bra49i o • . :. ... �.:i. •tii: -- i...:- ' '. �. 1 ! ..... �B 48' ... ' 18'-SD- ':.1 N 71.fi00 10 +- I CB'48'C 1-J- _..V..... 1YW ^. f•� .1:: }I I ''5:,;' SD •7' t I I I 'r. Nlld i ��C�� ,,,,,��///� .L ;;:-II I•i i _MH 48"1,•:: 15 1 ♦. % I i }.S � >t I i !V' I' I) 1 te,I I 17 IB 2 ,.L, 111 i I ,, :'I,I;Iai I I . 1:, z zz za s • .....1 -._ .,"i;'• .. __-...,_i 1_._.-li. I 1 I _...I !• 11 •;'ti;is : I ,`_�._ ---{ V..' ! I .. �i_ _ . a;,: it I I I ' I I'. s •II I. 'I �v :I :I '1. • L, I I I Try % , y: ; s S1/LS$Mt}XERa.OI i Pil ////.m.�\\\\� _"_ ...i OF//.�.�\ \_. ._--.-..... ///..=J.A\\I—-t- : ...'�"�---.. _ ?I--'t I r ram- �� :....:...i :�r•;;•:, :::s`! / I !Z.!L INS L . ,w»e o NL rdrup (=4..+N,,,,, CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PEIROC WORKS 061E:2.11.07 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN GRID 29 nmmrt¢J.J,S. w6a 11.24.96 w¢:SEPAD031 J.G.S. w.m cSILAS SHOWN PI. u.®oe n uva wn .nm.ea _ mtn. nn ..._ KCL/12.17.96 • , • • W . I i i G� r N , % EL.:-....— - i/ .: 'i I I 1 i lif i — • •• I •:: \ N t r—I • — 1'_20' i N 71A00- I i f : I_::I i ; _ i ''i — I ii H I —M1;'— — It 11:• � I I I t1.,\ �CCCC� i'f.RSD : __ • u iI I .. r ,_ I i. — m - - ,. ® ®=ssto 1 2 2• ss • CB 7Y I `- N 71,200 `' 't I _1 �,r- 1CB 7Y \ V 71,200 I ' I - II 0 i�' — KEY PLAN g 4 D I•' --- - I SCAM roc 3 j S1/��KL$RCR1L I u MR 48' a I ( ��`� /CB '_ 1Ce aB'y� ! ..d R 1/2, 1!1 L 211.14E.111 � ' n ! u IL - CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT or PUBLIC WORKS OM 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I SITE PLAN GRID 33 mmm:J.J.S. am 11.24.96 TIT WES SEP00035 J.G.S. fn.. sum.SHOWN CISKIET w KCL/12.17.96 .� .:... _ ! ; —i i:`F t� : ••I iif: , , i • , I I i r i ...._..___a,..�..-�... ..�.._�- k ,/ / /,' i - .1.c. i'•,,•i !- - r1 ; j `; ;i i it i / �r TYPE 1P ` 1 1t H I I \ 1 1 1 I •):' /ii/:'�4.f!.... !�N (TYP)—..•..— ! — _II I — — T 1 f{ ,"::7 y.. .... 1'-20 rr I I , I .INTl•400_i •�� '•�• I I I I l �` J F N•71 A0o p-. ' to i /- — 1J ;V I!}, .fir {•• 1. /// is —rnI:- I i I I :, I.I.t : r � - I I I t i Iv ': ' i -..I.1;vl.:'J I' ji;I I I t . I ..Y— rI TT I :\� I;I -.i. 1::.•y�....^l; t:}':;I i• - : i I: m • ; . � . 1 ! .i .- rj . - -• — — —I—! Na I I _11. . i i :i I , (:j-_- . _ -- - -I--1 77 i ' 3 V I'i` i I Iidri 'a •- I • I ' 'i • - o t fi I � I l L� S ! L � _7 T `} ' • �,::J_..:_-- ''f" ....—T-= 1' ,. � — : — , �I tr I I I , i • 1 ' l0 I: I I •i • I•, 15 - ;'` .?eZZ ,1 1l I t n to z£SM ® ...1-,- ! 2 Q _-.�mil� - ,�' i I 'I [ 2 5 =:I . I 27- • Ii—. {-I-.. I' ��TT- � • it • • i• ,!• J ] a 1. J■ • 1 1 ''f1 I.I 1 N TJ!I00 _ -': /J 1 .. 71.200 I I "CHAMBER;{TYR)—_.-. i I •.- I .. :TI iv I: 1,� • I}•, cR5T REQOVAL r .. ....---- 1 • U. I i j :I! ,� I K58.1118:NOW EY PLAN x r R f! • I I I : S1/t,�XLZ�.R441Y ae' f ; T. • I I c'' :•I. I ,i!.•• i;'` 'i IL IA SAE.?!►L Z�L f.1Y v ��JJ t , u u iT _ .-J.::i' *. •-i' ! I ,i�i•y.` i kc - ,• SY•Pdrup eoo• wew0°000 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET � DEPARTMENT OF PUSLIC WORKS I MIL 2.11.97 ; Be HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 SITE PLAN GRID 34 mWImJ J.S. tam 11.24.96 me NuIm 5EPA0035 J.S.S. 1N.m s a� mo5 SHOWN KCL/12.17.96 . , • , • • •.:.i 4 1 „..•,......-- . MH 48- CB 40- CB 4Er i i i ice i i i i :i i....12:, '?::::;-::'.:? - 1E13 !*; . E :. : •J:„i: • . von- , . ;2 t• • • • ci 8- IRR ' ... ; ; • I 3.! • ••1 I i i i.;AN 1...:".' i 6 •••.... — 1 . .. . .,, \. • N I — .....--... - ----4,... / L.: '•,,, I': ..*•,': ••.;--,1.---- : ___ - .... ___. „ il,l1;-. . .,... , 1 .. iv !•:.;::'---- • `i • •.• , .1 ::.....i.,),, .,..,.., 1., •,.\ .?1 ..„, I i -•,•,• '1 i ._.. • I . :: !•-.-..:.i I.., \ . • - :: : • \ ..„ ..'4-.:1.:' ,.• ; :-:::. .g. :. : :I: •. .• ,.. .•. . • :., •,,::-...? :....: ; / • '•;-: :: .,.. ... y: :, •:: • :,.: . ::'.::: ii;I•1 : ..,..._ ::" ........, : i , ::: : I • :I ::::4•? :j ... 20:12....9 2f: 30. .„ 1 ... ••: '. '• 9 ..... ., .. ..., , ,--I ::: . . . ,..., 1.20' --‘, ) I kr.-.:' : I \ ,- • ; i I i;i'l !I ..-•• . ., - \ / ; : : '' • '•• ' • / L•.- / .; • „.71, • :;, 1 „ i • . . - . • , ::,.•. ,.,::1 • -: .,, : , .,.• ,:i., :I,: : ! :.!,, . ..,--- , ... . . .. .. ,.. !v.i: ,..•• • , 4 • . :: ;:, ., , . . ... :.,.__..........., ..,. , I .. 4 ? ; .. ,. i ;(11, i: .1 . ! •. . . . : I: I :.••.:I .___ 1 , i 1 I • . ,... ... 1.. ; . . -4 . , . • -'I '1- ' li, 1 •j ' 1.-:-:'. ......- 1. ; 1; ', 4 . , . , • . ; • ' ''': 1 ' ; ';i 1 1, : : 1; • ,i' 1 . t r. 1:I t 3; : •(..!;: f. i '•, • : 1 1...„1 i: , i. . . , if: :i , . :.: : . I ; •:-: i '''i :": • x 71.000 1:1••,-I. ; .4 r...: ....-:, -•;,.. : . 4,i •.: ' • • .• • .:: . N 71.000; I ! •:''i . f : ::. :f. : : ! : ; ; !..4 I i; • f;! V: ? !. I': ... ,... ; .. : • .- • .... . .! ;-i.. ), ;I:::.i I I:I: • B / 1 . ; ..;-------....I- -. .-...2.2,---.••-: I : .-- ...; --1.1 r : .:: .......:: :i; H \ '(..;;.;fet:::'?;;;:•?.1;Vr: .;! J!!r; ;:!..:!II------V:',... ;---r -: I I : ------' --''-------- -....:;'------- i::::.C:!'/I, -;--. 1;; : -, —......_ • ', ' : I ..1 i:!.!I! ; . II • ' 'I; ...... •.‘. i...i:' : .-;I ; i• I ; ;I • I: I;/ . 1 -.i :.1.'•! ; ;:. -- - i,ill ;. ! : .".. • . ..L • \ \ •'..j": i 1 '\:,I'C8r:IRHE !ij 'IR ' ' i i . -- ' . .; ' , '.2:;"i: i . ,:::.• : •• ‘ ' ' . :,::,:i:ii 1 : ...--- ED• Ill Q \ i. • 1 • : .. , i _... :.... I ]: . z.: 4. i • Li{:,48:: .... --- ' 1 ,. .- . , Cti . • ,..,-. . .......'.. ;:'': '1 i :. ;1 Y.:• ir- -..,-----0-- • i, i : , :: 1 , .......' ,... i ., • ::. i! i. . . ; :.: ,,, - , iik:F• :it, 1. !! •f• !! ii;. ,.i ,. • ..:; .. . . ,.. ... , .. . ,:w,,,.,,,.., -,..„.. :.,...• • :...,..2:::-:..:::.,.•!•••i't il 1 .i : itriir••:74 EV.:•-rlill=11-1213 • t.'" / ,• • •. it:.I t; t eliwar.r4V 10E1 • ,- -- - ‘. IiiiiEllIiiALI" ••-•--" - -. -- . • .i if:...: .4-_ .. . • ' . . •, . ; . 1:41 i' H... : 1 ;,,- •• ,.... .-.• .V; .:i. ••. .1 ' i . ... . EFF11111111ZZA1 _ -...-.:-.•:! Li_l___-.i. •.1...;-----' 1 -• — .. : -• ..:.".? . •,,;• '•, :• ,- .. ":;;:..\ ••••• ,.., ; I, EnEtErit.t1 I : • i • 1 i ,--" I :• : , ,I t , .... • , ,- \ ' trialiEllia II • i ti ' . • i. . z tt-1 t , t t t ; ,, ; • it..3.\'• \ ' . IgB I & 1- ' ''''... ';';' 1, 4-•*1 :: •,. . ,„ !:.'.;i '. • l. ' P-- ; 1 , IICIE : ;••'1 I ,' • '1 • , •• ; •.. , ., ,..... • ,•2; • ,1... • •••• ; ; ,-- ; 1.01 .; \ ; . ,. . ; •• g, i i;;:".4!;! \::: 1;,...'• '; ''I '..*Xl....\,, gll ' ''.. ' I; ;.; •-`.1-', 1 0 '..,•"rii: ;••• ••• : .. ; 7 El ,--,•-i .S./:'.: ii,...... ;. '.i . .. 1. : ....1 '\;\ . , Cl _ .. .. - i....... I, . .... ; ... .. • ,--.............. , i •••••. I , ...., . ......___., ,!: '' : •.',..... t: t • \ ', %,.i%'.5,\\ \ \ „..i . . KEY PLAN SCAM WC ! : .....--.'\I\ :;:? - :I 'IZ'; ;. ','1. I :: ;'. i: \ ?!-\:' , \'• 1 11 ' - . : , '.. . 1 IA SEA t 23.R.CU •.-.....,. ----..... 1 : 1---- .. ..:1---........ -'---.-- ''....\1. 1:.-7• . , :.1 k :' 1' . I ; . a-.. , \t i i ,i: , \ ..... i .. 11/1.E.25.1.01.1.1,11 ta ''.....;, '.; - I : •Ii' I I ir.j: • . . ‘ N 70.800 : Ls__: : 'ti, .__1 1;'.1 , ',_• .. sr N 710 .8 0 0 SvErdrup CIVIL.. INC. OM B1-6:03 CITY OF RENTON I PERMIT SET I 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS _ WE 2.11.97 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I SITE PLAN GRID 39 1 onmarakJ.J.S. ORE 11.24.96 /so NW:5EPA0037 J.G.S.unt: HO EL -----'-- CMICKMO: mugs 560. Ka./12.17.96 . . . • •-- . . ,.. i / i I I • I .--' , ,,. , I i • I / i .._.. , I, , . : „ .I / .‘1 .:. I i :. • - :. . • ..- -a- :.:••. C,,..,. _ ---1-..----,,s, . i :_,' -----.--- I • .-.1." • • N t ' .....4 / ": .. :i ' • . ' I 1 f.,' .. • 'i i I .' .. : ..... • : - . , :.,.. J , . / 1 1 ; / 1 ;;1 I il -k „___..., .....1i, 1 . .1 t .:... . „ . : . , , • • , !..1;:i I: 1 -i :I : • , -. • - • ') • \ .... !.• ; •• I : , •-• ---i• / 1 .• : ; i°:_1.2*_.2 2.,,: tio. . • . / --.1 •:! ,'. 1 ! • i: .,. r=20. , • • i r ... .. ,. . . _...I • . . : ! i i ; : ; '• i -•> ,. _____ . . . , , : :, , , • • ? ..-, , ,; .. .....„ ! • , I I ii, 1 , • • : e I • t • 1 • ..-.1. '.1: : ! . • I •. .• • I' .: 'I.: 1 . I 1: , . .. i:I r•• .. .,..--, "5 ' I •I.:,:' I '...i. •:s'i:,.i: .................:i....................._1,,..f.. i.............. r• : .1: • • I I C t:11\ I . , .• ,....1 .1! • i : "••.•-, I ••• I • • . . .. .1. 1 I..•! • ii.... • i 1 r.:r•••• ••••., i. r• ' i •:1 1 ... ; ::.; , i ;C.:T.' I -1 :H ! 1 .• i i I '•-• • i d i.-., k :.' , ' z;:.I i i : ; 1 : • . : ::::: 1 L. .,- • - 1.. „ :: -':1. . ill' i, : . ..-... : • :. :•., .,::,e,....,,-,-.,,,,--.,:: i , -.. ., ...___,.. • : .. . . i, ,, ti.1 , • , :: : • . ,, • ..., .•: ,.. ) ...---• ,: ...--: I .-..j Hi 1 ;i. , . , .c.,::,..."....:.-.-:.-7.9- •,,,,.„ 1.. .../Ti 'a: ' .• •.. 1 I F.- • .. -a I 1 •, i -:', • „ •- i: : • >_.1., --..., : !.. . .:,•., 1, . • ,_... .,. , ..•.::::, ..I :1 • . . ... ...._ . •::-.1 .i : ; ...._......._.._.. . -.•••::. : • .. ..:. , • . ••,%„.•:.1 • . . -----.., I ! ; :, 'i i'. .•• i: ,i : ., ,,• %..1":1 1, 1 H i ',''. • • -.:,.. ...i.. • • '' , ± N 70,200 „Jo!.,.•11 j1 .:i 10 , D , • 15 ifialT ,. .dmimokul* 2 ,.•:.: .... ,I ' : I 1 :, \ 2; 22 23. ' ,. 5 ;OP ;: a :',, • I ,.... •• i • , . • 3 33 I1 I\. ;i • :7 :.... .• i 1j.,• ; i I."r:'1 1; •1 I . ' : • • 1 \ . :" . .... 1 I'' I . . ' ... --. .I l ',„;; i . 1 .• , :.-1 1 I.. , ..„ . , ...._.•_...._... .: ,, . , -..... • / „ . . , ._•, .: • i • . .. , ./. •3 ; • ; / KEY PLAN '.i. _........1i ! ..1! i ', 7 SCALL:NONE 7,„ ....-...........---..- i I ,. i i' ; i 1 ' ',VA' •E.. 1 I S.1/2,SC.24,t EL IL 41.111, ........ ..---: : '',,,I • . ---_.__ § • :"-.1-:-.-,i. . .., i. ! i --: , : •: ,i. ......_......_---..„ F. k 1A SEC 25,1231.11.44111., . - —. -- z . , I • • • fivErdrup CIVIL.. INC. (20e) 222-2000 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I • DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS .1E:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I 1 SITE PLAN GRID 49 normaJ.J.S. nArn 11.24.96 G..1...SLM039 TOTE J.G.S. Ion ma. scam/6 SMOWN cm:am SO. MID. VI MIL CM le21201:22A .... 21=0 I. KCL/12.17.96 . . ..; !„ !I,.-.!1 i § :...:§ A w .I 2 • i • \ .•------ ... .1:' . 1 ! 1: .! ., .• 1.1. N . ' •-•?: • • I., i , • ..-• ,• :: i ,;:' , :,.... •.. , \ , 1,-4 . .. • : . ,-, .,_,..-., • :. : 1::: :., . ...... i ,:: :: ; ,. ., :,. .•. ._ .,... ...- ..., . .. 1,...r. , . ,.. :1.,./ ii.; ... iciL 22'_2 , 1 !•-•.... ./ 1 !.,,, ! ...., , , . (•:iI- i ''.. . .• I '.• S .I ..;: I i . . ., / A:.....: ......Jr;11-: -: 1::::::;r,.:ri:- '..'.. 777 ............... • 7 :..; .'1 ,:: —------- •---•• --.. ... N 70,000 ......-..............___. ...- --- • . . . . ' "-'..• • • • .,/,----04-. "•if'"..1:i:-'1 4 ': : ... .••.:::•-•'-'..'•.'''''''' "'",......I,..7,-..F.i.I.9-;I-,T.,1.;.,-,,..,...:=_...,.,.,,,;.i..-i,:-..';-.1:......:,;...q.C4::,,,,:"...C."•;if,7:',:it.7:Fi•.',-'----1;'','*2-'1;y:I,'"1/".41-' '. ''', :-.-C I, ''.-j .A......‘,..,,„'.......,.,,:',_...;••••''. I-I ••-- '.......--....:7 '...L..7Z_I_Ik,,,,..=,7,-,.,.. i"*.'iff'±':•".":"':'.".';',",.:'.__ . (1.-,......1..-. . !: . .. . - ..;;:.......r.--''''''•1 I I',:., ':,'I•::i ..!, ' .-....... _. i : i. t... _ \•-:;,-.-,:- -----r--.... ,..,-ZIITI: ‘‘.L.; ......,-..........,.•:--.;••:,.;...,;,___:-...7.;•:...::..-•_:i'H ....:_-..:•,..- i.':;_:.".;_:::::;,:,L:::::.•:::::-.• ..-.. ...'5:.•.'14.''..r.t''''':Tn.''';;;'"';':'..:;:- 7-.. —" .:--•-:: = l.''':-..—:.•:•;--.....--!---': . .._......_ _. ..._......._......._..i .., 1 , . ...•:. __.• •_..... ... -... ..... ..„ :. ...1 ,. ..,__,•! c;,..-., -.., ...- Ai. .;:. i.:_ti ,, ,.• , . .•••• .....- x . . • , , . ...•: .• • • • , ..._... , ...• .5 .._ ..; ., c'• . / . ; • • '4 ' I ? .? •: ; i:t:: _.; • . • . k 1 .• •.,1 • : (Io•• •---..•-:, I."-•/--.......... ••' . . .. ,. ii: I .;,„. i., ; • •I ';.• • ' •••• • .....- ..•• ; :•;---..,..;.".;••.3.:::::-.:1••:...::::,..r.•;•••:.'•'____. I I., 1:— :•,. ' i. ii •;, :: .•:1••;A . lc; .: 1., ..• f 1 • . : i.:::::' i::: ' 'I, I 1• - •:- : 17 113 2 I IiI • il I 1 : • ::: •' I: .•• 22 1 5 ,..; rII ! i,. 1:f ;1 i .1 : ' • • . .. - „.............„. ..... '. ...'",.:. ..:.I 11;.. • i :I . ,I 1 ,I s,..----:. I i: ,.•. :, if I . :• j...." Z....,,...51:-.T., i 3 3‘'...... .-1 I :7 i ,. i ..:( '' ._ ;J:',•;;:.-I:j.,...'I • ........,...... .1:1...F' N`. sisoo .•• 1: •,...‘'"\:' •-':'.; '', :..../ :: : '' : 11 ; ji; ..•:1 . • :: : -..:-.:. /:-.- i .• • i I l', '•: • :: ' i ; . ..• N jt . %. -.. ' • •• • • 4 ••••••.•... ••• • I• • . `. „. . • q N 69,800 f......, I .."): ' / ei I ! ...-•-: i'- SI'; : :' • .•,:' :... ••..--• , .,. 1 ,-. .. 1. • • ' ' ,' / / ,• , : I: •.:'i : VI.1 i .... ( KEY PLAN ' •!.• \ ' ' ' ; • ' ; - :: '•' ; •T:t; i ,:••......--f •'.. SCM.L:MK S:, •,. 1 ••''' ..•(.... 1 ". / 1 --'. 1 :'' i: '::. ' ',".• ' • "1' . ; t 8 C.4.S: . , '' '' / t, .4 , ! :i. , , ..• SIASEC.24.1231.atil • . 1 . \ ,•1 • ..--..... ... ... „•• .....- i . i i !I .• • • — ; 1 • •-•. 'Alt 25. IL Mil .. • § ... ... . . .._.. ... . / w ). 1 / , - . g • _. ,- I -.. ••A . ! ," : . • : Sverdrup ..- -,..„.... 1 . 1 . -: CAI,. in.IC. •'AII.;I.........., I •. 1 : • . • CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WOIRICS 1. . I BCAG HEADOUARTERS BLDG 25-20 OM 21197 SITE I I PLAN GRID 54 r....a.JJ.S. _Dam 11.24.96 ..R ,,,..., J.G.S. scalsAS 6909,9 c.c.... aunt .-Irti. 671211011 KCL/12.17.96 • . s i s w• w T:• . :NJ j _J r W J- _,.._._,: 1 j L,. I I i (I I:1 'I ,,i • . ' i • • • I • I • I_, i I i;i i l.. __ �( N 69,600 • : I • : . ._.... 1 •I II L1 • • • • :— 1 ' (1 I • I 1 • : . I • iI S • 27 S • Y — , .rt 4 -_. ...... ` S i.T ( .. ..—....__.. ._-. .. SCML NON[f i' , _ .! v L.di_ I KEY PLAN WY:l S _ 'i 'Ioverdraw e Pup 60 .mm.xt cIv , INC. 452-IovoN 69:100w CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT Or PUBLIC WORKS E:2.11.97 ; EiCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I SITE PLAN GRID 59 oenml6n J.J.S. PM 11.24.96 nu Num SFP50091 J.C.S. ¢NyAS SHOWN Ito llc an YI®ax MIL BM uv®rm ................. man on KCL/12.17.96 . , ----- -4,-----1----;;-----r:--kz.t--_-7.tr-.7.‘7...:•.T. 1.----:--,„..,••••-j.4•;--- •••••---- _,•E .:.; .... ....,•;_pey . - E _____....... ---..,. ----‘-- ...•• --..... _............. \.•••••••: -..=:••;•:•••:,••;•••••i•-••:••'•••"-r• •--• ; .; ; ,... _ _...., _........_............_.—--,.. '•-•--Je•.:0(.::::•:.C.::,v7.. '.... ''. '''.. L.Arlf?...j!i.i; -••••...1- 7•••- •,.....--../1..,:i., ,..•• •.. ‘,,.' .Tat'IV- ,.--'''••?••'( ,....1 .. .!';:::•.••.-, .. . -.. ------•-..„._........,.....---•"--••••••-...„.. •••,. ...,:. It..“.....,;',A,t-• 'ili:;_ •••,. ./ ''....' .•;.:•: ; '..cr..'"::•.. ,..,, ......—'',..., \ ••••, \••••,v,'',1i;.,..•',. ...,_,1/,.:•;k ' ?.." ...-•'• .•-•''' 1 ---:..---"-- ....—.• \li "-.\.•,•U''.4:,k2...::.i .••/ ,./.;/./ ../ ,...- \ \ \..: •lif•g*;: -:='-::::::•'. .•-•"..;:••% /_,. .. -- /•••..,..' ."A... ••• !,I\ • ..--- .-•::- \ \ vf jp....s 2. o _=• •:, . 1414:i •' Z'.?'.-,. ''.:' .............. ..... ...).-;'.:: _.....---..; '.. .:Aii,i: . r=20' ••-• ': • ; • .',;•zII ;'••-'; •.•• _,....,..• ... k•-• •:-_•..'.:. '''''''.4::::::•.•Z-...'2......-‘'.;••; ,.-'--'..; ! . 4 .--. i ', "::-•--/* ,...:,.L... ...„ •• ----------• . , „:„i--..4.: .,: \- ------ 1 i --..._. _._—.._... ........„........ ----7 : ,.• :•,. ,:i,.i:: . ,...:, .,,lie.: ...,-.. .. ,_ i.,—...... .• • .r•• i . ..••'• i: • , 9.:.:::i:::,.•: ....•••."' '. ... \ ••. I •4 ! ••:t;;I:; ; . 1- '.% • .. ... .., , ,... •- ... .....,„ ''...:;"...\.....:\ \ •••., ":7.; .''.; I IW•;j !i ••:• .„. . .;;.4 i, 1 •::,7':•.;..f.;4....,:.5-:.Y.'.it .---- --.......,........-- / ..23...•.;••\., \ • I 3. : ...i V. • - ',:r- ..•:::,-,•-•* . \„......,., :Ct.\\\'..1.‘ \ : 47;i I.:!!!:;.itri-i''::t-"Y:.-- ..?-:: '!:.FJ":•;;;•''''''X •.• .. / . i.)i 'f.ii ii-,—.„•::"'"-:-.;...'jti.-.7-..)-:,;f:::.:-.?.,......,,..\ % \........ !z. ;:f.j.!• •-. .....___.......... ____ ... ''%.1,...\\:%,..\ .'i!.• • Ji‘'i--';''-rfit.11 .:5;'T .i. i .•-.:.•-"' L.A.\\ :... ..' 1,..? 1.: -,..I.:. • i I ,. 1 - , . , : N 69,200 N 69,200 ± ; , .. ± t., i: 1 i:i:q• i 1.:.;•!:::i:,:. , + ------! ,•7:: • ;, '• :. ' • .•,$:;r; • , • al; ; ..;,r,.,:. ! • , .: A ,,,i,• •:! •••i, •4. ,• !:i-,; ! .• i , ,..., ::-.,i, ,,Ii:.„, ,,.! i•,,,,,., : . ,..,:„.• ••• ,:• .! ,f! s,:.;,,! • _ , • -ri • , . f. 15 . . I la 2 ..,,i.' . •I.:,:; ..,1 • 1 1 i; ! .!.': ' • !::,•1.,:' : .....'.' —`:',..7”:6:,,:.WO,....E . III .• .•• i• .•• / ...• .... . ( ', . .„ , I IC. ':::‘, 1: 11).1 ..‘'.'-: ••• ,... i KEY NAN E t•• ., ,,....._,... 1iI. ,. ; ]•,t,;.•••: i! •:r.(;i.:•:,:!i .j!:]1•4.':.'''' n•-,., :.... ., C11" E '. •, •, ' SIAR.24,T.ZZACII ..... \ g • ; irl ,' '' ',,,,;: i: •,.• • . IL IA SEC.25.t EL ICU ,...li;n:', .' : ------ ----_ sverdrup r.,?...,trazz"- - — CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF pDEILIC WORKS I DAM 2.11.97 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I SITE PLAN GRID 64 _Demval.4.1.J.S. om, 11.24.96 :na MYR 5E990042 'SUMAS SHOVAI C161.3133 1 KCL/12.17.96 . . 0 100 200 400 600 11.13 ti o,�,✓Cr` -• j • -s '' I _ '.i 1 ;''st 1,1:- GRAPHIC SCALE iI -' , ill', i a.;.iii:ai,� _ _; 1 I . 11/7 Itp r': I '` a»Ik , • I � 14 :.j • i ,',.1.1;;!•::•;:::..i.:t•iA11 • ; • NOTES: •k.. _ -_ -- • t' • ';..'3 :•'' •15 II�OC LW-Q�LEFT 1. E%IS71NC TOPOGRAPHY PR0WDED BY • :"• WhH PACIFIC. :;-::::litl:ts.A:s..' -- '.�. • • 2. SURF C FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER i t. ,I'; a� • �'�.,.;;'; , SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT s ',• .�a - • -.i' ":::Y;q a ;::i:•., i•'•, SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME E%IOUS _ :;• ;:•� -H,' '.I —,. 1 :,y;(}, • -_-�_� -_ - .i _ CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. ♦ :'• �' _ 't 3' 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEO REP RT !li •�'M'' tJ INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT B'/ _ _ _ _ _ I , ,�`fir• • GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT -_ '!;j;,,_,f.i��:_:; $" �:.�'..,-,.;::„ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING I":"r:•j;4`c '5:,._ _ I'�.::.':• — -- ■ .:..:?'.� : _=::ti;s:::`.:c /• SERVICES,ROEING LONGACRES PARK. I.: :I;. I I i..t ::`':. {.. -•':: ti},,,-v....:,. :rr L•''•:[ •1:,: :.:.{'-:• y't, '$`.� I REMON.WASHINCTOPf FOR BOEING I :+I: .: .W.,.'- ..,';`:-r:_:f - 'j' :'I `;:1:' / . • _ SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CDMRA F.?,,.,ra;.::; ' I� ,t :%;1:: SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN _ I CONFORMANCE TO TH'1 ?/ E f'• f' _ % _ _ '_ MM AI F.n RECO END TONS 0 THE R PORT�1 I E ' :; -:._.- ,--- ----; : -._ - _ _ 4. PROPOSED CONTOUR:IA ND SPOT • ::'t ;1 r � -'— � - t - �- • , , - '•�9 ELEVAT ELEVATIONS SXOW FIH CRME. ;..•,, >I• - �:;:I:;( '�:::; '''!` __ "1 � • � THE CONTRACTOR SH REFER PLANS , �•. :.:• ,i Ijl't; : T'"--_..-.•: .._ _ - SUBGE :•:: :I I:_ LEVATI N �:',�• � T NC i TD D - ( ":I 'J„y', i i" - i:.-:--c.,.� -�k ;-+ +{'I• - 5. CONTRACTOR SMALL TCH E%ISTINC • •f"' ti p'-- �• _ _ _ `, GRADES AT THE PROPERTY IJNE. +'- I .; it i ,h,'____., ::A _ ; _ - _ ...:H +.. +- I•. 30 I 26. . 27., - 8 , I ! + 1 31 " n 3- 59 - a i is :lii: ::I� a U i ?L :ilk `'1•,••�j'; i 1±I+.. _ 1 fti SEC.M L M R i.U WEN LIE-AOLt[MUT .m Sv��d�up civt�. 1�!w-� CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS wre:2.11.07 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BL.DG 25-20 GRADING OVERALL PLAN um 11.25.96 lu**STPA004] J.G.S. M Y. Iwn 1'_150' �Iw® KCL/12.17.96 r 1 \.1j i N 7J.200 - -•T., I+ r•lll.l I .) „I .'.`1r �•b,-:�;�: r 20L IS•_0 20' 40' \ti ' i ,:1,:1,::1 :t':•1 'l �/ t.!.lilt.• ,i : '`' :'! :Il ; NOTES: • t I-•% '1'I'��T :'• •;;+:• I. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY ''•.\\ ''- `it'•, \ W&H PACIFIC. i I 2. EXISTING FOUNDATONS AND OTHER \~ '•� '� \, •', •l, .� : '.! '1 SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT 1 �--.. 1 • `; `• SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING \ • tI I CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. •• �'•t' 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL I ,I • ` r `,�•'•,:\';1•','•,';•'; INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT \ ' rl !••• ,'1,,'. 1 •1,•\ SERVICES,OE NG INEERING LONGACRES PARK, :1 RENTON,R SERVICES. FOR BOEING j ,';`1 SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR _ SMALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN :�.! CONFORMANCE TO THE I RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT, ...... .� _% \\ V 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT 9/ `� _ _ ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. •`\`,•;' —_ _ THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER - .\�':\,`, - TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS r'' ."-.'S`' Jj;.:'r''>" TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE �," --- ELEVATIONS. __ 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING /• . ` GRADES AT THE PROPERTY UNE. -- \ ,1 ; 7 . ..,...'.• / �_ _ _ - __ _ _.... •• N 73,000 ��;y ' 10 �... , 2 22 2J } , 115 • jl :' "�, • „ — SCAM NOrt �::'.`i•', 1, KEY PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUSLIC WORKS osre 2.11.97 - I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GRADING PLAN GRID 6 rearmos.J.J.S. um 11.24.96 Pus OWN 5E1.0044 mum J.G.S. 4.... ®, r11nAS SHOWN Ma �s...v KCL/12.17.96 . . .. . 5 I — I . 1 ; • . , . . i : I 2 „. : ". 1' ........ I I .• :/ ./.. . I , //// ,/ . La N . .:I. . .• . ) I .•'. i , 1 ,' ... .-...-..._............. . . •, .,,,,•,,,,. . .. , . .... ,.. . . '. • I ... . , . I . ....... ... ' . .i . .... . . . ..I.f../ , I' ••••-•-- .___../ . i 19.'_2 20 40' f 1 • , . 120' / / ; .. •-,•..-....2.•.. • / .,...-•••. • ' .• . .. „ . , . „ n NOTES: . . /, , • ,; ., •. • "---•111 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROMED BY ., . --.'........ W&H . : .. ; '• : .' ••••—-- 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT . : SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING • ., / / I / CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. ; ,* \ I . .' if 7 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY \•'...0,.1,":. . ../ ./ . CEOENGINEERS TITLED REPORT' ,........- •...._ , /'l , GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING . ..., ,' SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, , •—— RENTON.WASHINGTON' FOR BOEING •.•,.,.,,\%...L. / /./'' . .....-- - SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR .• SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN •,\..„•,•,..,,v., I ' ,,/.. '' / ir" '' CONFORMANCE TO THE / ./ — RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. i . . .' ...-- 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT . . .., • ‘•''%',.vv.:, I . •• ' ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. / . . .:, , THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER I... TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS , n• •",• '• ' . TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE / ELEVATIONS I . / .." ,..-. . ..,..\\'.%n.•‘,.',...V,\ ''s .• .. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING :,:•.‘n.n.\AL k.'.:, ./. GRADES AT THE PROPERTY UNE , / • • / \ i ....,.........-;,_..... ,. r X ‘\,1.$ . / , .' .. ,.,..\,'.%.,Al"..... \ • . ‘ r .' : 1 .,•\..'\1';'i , : . / .. . • .. \V,\':.';', ' , ', : , : i ...n..rrii . : ..' . . . • • '.om. X 1.,/ .; . , -..II .•IL.,..•\\ .. . ..,, .• / \..\\•'..1•.`..',,n 01. •\ ''... IFI NES II i .' - , • lit V . I i ../ WillfilLIEFIWI .. • ,,,,,-.:..\.y...\\:,.,,,, ,,.., ! / ..• I. , • •\,,;;;;;•1,‘,?, •;. . • i. i .. • . ,;,..\ ; ;',,...;,,.;0:;.•;,,\% , .. , • , 3 lih ....• .• ._•. _......... . _ I, .. . . ......... , I mg / ......--- ,•,.. • ,•\,,,....-0;, ; ; \.,,,„,,,.; •‘, ,• I • ..- • ;.,..;,‘. ‘',..;;%‘;‘',..v.t•, ', ; , , • c, MI , N 72.600 IN1 li : I .N 72,600 \\..I ',\ '. '''''..V.\\‘'+ \\.y.....VV..,..., \% I 1 ---.... i 1 --- , , .,. ' ,..V.X.,',..„ \ i + -..... i ..310.' ii I 1 ...,., 1 i i -. . ..:.;.'....•'.. ‘..,...‘\.1.1",,,....\, 't % ii . 1;...,• -,•• ,.',,,,... ; . i . ...... I KEY PLAN ...\.*.W.\:•!'; i\ ! , . . se..az:Kw 0.; St \ ASEC.24,t2311.R.Clit ----. i § ?, \ .--.. \ u,„,..:1_ ,..; IL 1/Z St.At 2111.11.1.111 ,',..-..,..,..;'.1;, .•,•,..'..,,\,..,x4,. ; • : , ... w. thmrdrup RitZtrgr''CNA L. INC. CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS a I mar:2.11.97 a BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 11 rIDIORNJ.J.S. NW. 11.24.96 A NNI.060.0045 Dun., J.G.S. Iro xi. cum&S SHOWN =caw IN. MR= IR:AWL IIBI MINIM ... WM Oh KCL/12.17.96 . . . . I • i g ......_..._.. i , I \ I . I • • • N i i I I 1 . :• .1 I 1 i . • • • ioL 22._s 2.040• I . ...... I C=20. I i 1 72800 1 .. +_:......iii..............".":"..,..i..".... ........_:.."...".".......i.....":...:i.:........:...........".".:::...E.....i.....:......"......T_...."."............_.,....,_.............._......_,.....,..i..."........,... ...„..\......\ ,..± ,,.......\...N.N.,.:.,....i.,.i.....:..........,..........,.....—.—.--.—....,...........-\n"724°° 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY, . : I 1 k• , 1 1 1, W&H PACIFIC. I . : ..". i '' ..—•• .•--•--- 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER ...—. . ---- — •-••--••• ...—... ...._.... SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT • • • , . SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING •-- ... \ \\ 3. rmOrRo RS.AU6InSoUNR FRA EC FEE RG ETOoT E RC EHpNol C A LR i.6 y .....—.......—.... ....-...-....._.—.... _ _._ _ ....-...— cGs EEE Rv 100 TE,ENIEHIsNN,.E7icAEs RoLS,E.,NET INGT 1 EG ft.NoDENERR,NE GPR OE R Ts p A R K. • .. ......-..__, .........--" -•-"--- ....---••......--.....-, • --_ , ------- .. , . ........ \ ' i ...-...—..._... • REWION,WASHINGTON- FOR BOEING ' SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR , ..,.--• . , ' SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN .•-••..,. ..---- ,--- , .......... . CONFORMANCE TO THE 1 . RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. 1 I . ,'-''..... ..-•-•-.- •., 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT --- - "... ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. • . .--' -••-._ THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER •. - TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS ..•• „.•"' -.._..-.-... ._______ \ ....••-- TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE .: -- ELEVATIONS. • '. .- •• . •1 ..'" .• . '' ...........- .... .........,_._.....-......"...--.--......-...-. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING GRADES AT THE PROPERrf UNE. .....-•'''. 7. 1:, ' ...."' .....•--- .......'... ..... „....- ..----- 1 ......'"-- . ,,..• ........% ._......__ .......-----. ,......1.....,... ... . '. •. . i:I ii./7 ...----- .,...... ..--- ,••'' .. .,, . — .--'' • i ......... 10 AI 15 .....- • 7. / . •. . i• !j; !i 1 !. ..• . ,, „. , .'-'---...____ , •• , ". ..., I:, •1 j I '. 1 .. ...„... \ , -•--—-............... 2'..,1 22 2 5 . ...„, ,., i 1. \ .......... .1 27 J . i d 3 3 1 ,, '..---.... • ? , ' N 72,1k0 j j 1 i .„....., . ---...., ii . . " . .. ,./ ..., . .„, ....... —....._ ....• .......--....—.. . .....- —... ... . , ...._,_.. ... ' . — - - —.......--, ...' . . .._.......—.—......... '-, ,.... '-... —— ••• ',.• ,. ,i;I I,i :. „..--..:--......- .._.._.:7.....,„ ,.:...::.. ••' -,., ,..... ., .. . . , • . ..... ‘ ' 1'' • '''\•''. , i /•-•------- —----'''.\ 1 . ....__• .....-....„ '. -. ... . .. KEY PLAN ...., ,.....--" ..,. • .. . '..„.. .... , . ,.......—....—.. • 11ASAUXICIIM. . .. '„ '''-... 1 1/2. I.MI 4E.U. ,.... to • .„ ` '''...-..... . . !!!!r gliNrCM P CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I e DEPARTMENT OF PUOUC WORKS OWTE:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I 1 GRADING PLAN • GRID 12 nwer....J.J.G. ,..,.. 11,24.96 lux 4..,SEPA0046 onyx. J.G.S. we ma. MECUM MICAS SHOWN KCL/12.17.96 • W W W N I 3D_ 12'_S z°0• 1`=20. NOTES: N 72,600 + + + N 72.800 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY W&H PACIFIC. 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. " �— ... 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY - • GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT \ _ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK. RENTON.WASHINGTON" FOR BOEING • SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM AU.WORK IN CONFORMANCE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT \ ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. \ THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER _ LAN DSCAPE NDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE ELEVATIONS. B. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING GRADES AT THE PROPERTY LINE. al0 5 1 17 IB 2 I tj 22 2 5 J. 4e N]2,600 ,\ ! N 72,600 • � I it _ \ 6� i KEY PLAN _ `„ \ sc NM • W I W sv.rarup 6iw. NC. P06)�!]-pooa,.w.Nt CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ' DRS 2.11.87 'I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLOC 25-20 I GRADING 1JLAN ononm.J.J.S. omm 11.24.96 rru mom SEPA00.0 J.C.S. 7p N raEAS SHOWN No. Ramon NT 122E MR AM AR _w MO. on 1XL/12.17.96 .. . ... 5\.,...... •5 \ g .,, ,., 1 -,...,..,.. •••.... .,..., - \ ,. •. • N ....N. a..__............. .., • •.. ,-._..... ...„, „... -„,.. • • , . . , -...,............. „.......... ., ......„.„. --•-••--_....._ ____ --., ...-..,., ., • \., -,..._....,..„. .. ....... . „ \ . ..,„.„ .', ..... ... . ... ....... ., •, ioL 1E...9 240' . •, ... I ...... . ..., .. ,.....___ ..........._.._..._...__ ...„. . , . . . , • \ ''.......„. . , •••„„. ..\ • .•...---.......... . --... • NOTES: , \ • ,,, ..... • , . -.....„ \ . \ , ... , • I. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY ••*. .. ".. . . • . •\\ I W&H PACIFIC. . , • , . \ . . . , "... \ , 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER , •.„ ., • ‘ ; \ ' • .\. ', • ., SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT I • , , I ' SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING -...-...— I , 'I .. \ CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. ._. _.............____ • „ \ \ • . I.---• --- s ' .................. \ „ .„. \ \\ \ \ „ , •‘„ 3. FOR SUBSURFACE CEOTECHNICAL , ..• , INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY • . .....„..... •. . , GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT , . '....„.. .....___............____ • •• .. .„ ; GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING \ „ ' \ . , I SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, „.... \ \ •, , N 72.450 RENTON,WASHINGTON' FOR BOEING , •, • . „ SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR ' \ ‘ ± ' , , . , ' • ''', SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN ._. ._ _...._.._.. _.__..._.. „ . ,... . •ti"22,4110 . . . . . . •. • . `• "'' -..-.... 'I ....-- . - IMXIENDCAOTNIDS THE, THE REPORT. „. •• \ .. , \ „ „ ' „. . „ 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT . , \ ...- , • , „ „ \ . ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. . ••• . • • • ',. . „ .. „ \ ' , . THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER , . . . • ' ' „ t \ TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS „ ' , • „ ' ' ' TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE • .„ „ ,, '" •„ „ „ „ „ '‘ I __....._.-...-. __._.....___„,. . „ ' ' ELEVATIONS. , „ ' , , „ , , , , . " . ,„, . . . . -....• _.._ _..---..........___ _„„..._ -. "..,._ • " • • 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING . ‘ „ '-- • • \ • • •. . . .1 i GRADES AT THE PROPERTY UNE. . . , . . __........__ _ ...... • , . „ ...„.. . „ • , '. _ .........._ _„ --. • „ . . • . _..... -"-- --•• -"• " . . • ..,. .„ . ------... -"•••. ''-•. . • „ „ • •-••-•-.. "••. .... '.. ".. • .. ,, , •,.. • „„. -- ....- ---.., •-... "„ '"• Illi lillti •-. ,. -... ". ... \ •.• • '., _..• '---------:::.....-..-....-..7"''......"'S.:"••....:.:',,... \\ \ „.. \ „ ."--.........„ S. ---''"-•:-...S-.....'••••••••:-<.."'- '\. \\ •, . • . \ . . ' „ .,-••-• 1111Pri • -. •= I ID ' -• ' , •• -' . .„... ,----- ,1-415.I .. •. \ „ , ..." . -'Mrfl q , „ -.._......-..... .-- r' - . . ••••••, .. . \„„ .,.„ ,, . .. .".• • ...„„ ".. ••, „''.. , ' „ -••-..„ I I la a 1 I ri,ral 17_. • -''''... .,„.... I • ..........___ ........-, - krialailItl• i •„ •-_ •-..._. ' ------... _..........._ ... ----...... ------.. 1 ig ''...\,,\.,'2..\.........\ . . ... s '. . • .. '. , . :i. . -............_........ ---"..., --, ............... — • ;1 i!i"...---......----.... :---72.....---.== -- , 51 Si ''''..'.....-..---- .......-----••----- .• 17.-••::::...•-•:-.-1.—-.........V!!! 1 I'...:•:"'.: ::::,:::...:..........•-... .......:1-''.:: KEY PLAN SCAM WC \'... \\:-\''''. 1 i :.•-- . • - t \ \ \S'N - -:::---- -- --"---:.::-- --2.:" ../ / ..'" ,--- ...... .... §.i ... - '• ---• .-". IL 1/2.SEC 25,L2X.IL f.„Ill ..-.... -....„. ,... 101.Am.NE ...„.- ., .• ,• ... _..-- I .. Po u .. • ''''' 8 vs rd rup Fr,:t_0001 CIVIL, INC. . .. 2 • , ; . . . CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SOB 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I 1 GRADING PLAN GRID 18 vemmakJ.J.S. Co 11.24.96 me Kum EEPA0050 "mow, J.G.S. Boo scue..SHORN cKscrzn, wow, On NT MIL IND MINITMOt .....,.................No. MOND KCL/12.17.96 . . • • N 72,200 5 / $ I ... 4 N n.]00 IT • N /!',• - - i /�lJ fr:irr fI • 1y-20 • -NOTES: • -i" i- 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY I f•r !f' _ I. / /rr - _ 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT l•r SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING /•- - i CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. fr _ / • 3, FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL • •`� INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY _ RES PARK, _ _ ` CEOENCINEERS TITLED•REPORT fr I I C. 1 CEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING .- !' I RENTON.SUPPOR WASHINGTON. FOOR CONTRACTOR SERVICES.THE BOEING I• _ SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN - • • ) -+-- RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. - — __ - 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT • - ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. • • '•-._-, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER -- - • --._____ TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS '- -- TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE iN 0 ELEVATIONS. J • -� ^'�------ _ 5 CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING i .- j' r --~-' ---F---,�-- �1B4OQ GRADES AT THE PROPERTY LINE. J2.00 Y i i 11 1, 1 II 1 I III • rI i i.,, tA91P 5 ` Ili', 17 1 �3• Z2 � �f. 5 . 1 • ! 4 j KI IC EY PLAN -_.._ • 7,0.1". ...."- / SOUL NM o = • a S1/��24L2�R1,11 N 71,850 �^_. • , N)I.B50 SY�1'f�1'Y� xG CIVIL, NC. Eitta`'EOW CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS me 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GRADING 2PLAN GRID06536.0J.J.S. now 11.24.96 rt.au¢,SEPA0055 J.G.S. A''A AS SHOWN omos 00 L Maim n un. ma .name ............,..._ ®n OS KCL/12.17.96 \ '-----.�-' ' NOTES: ` .� �"�� W&H"ACI"" _........ __ _,/' � EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER `-`` ``- -'`-_ EREFORE SOME EXISTING - `--- �_-- _'-'- ~'~ ,'' ''' ' ,/ ''\ / / �/ � �� \\ ``, ..-_ ..'' _ ,' �` ` `~ z WN CONSUOFA TOURS APPEAR '`-~ --`--_ - '-----' _~^�~ .'' '' '' ' \` `, .-� ' FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION R FER TO REPORT BY -. ----- / / ('' ��' __��_/' / ` ' -�-)--- GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT ---' ' -' '------- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ( - ` � _~' \ � `-- _ CONFORMANCE TO THE _ __`------- --_-__-�'-'_'-___'''' ---' _ IN .~ ---____ / `^, -- --m---'--n,___- RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVA71ONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER To LANDSCAPE AND PA\ANG PLANS _ ___'^_ x ��X��~�y�� - '---� --'-- ~`-----' ~ 10 /75a ] .......... -' - \ --- � ' -'_--- � - cl �--- KEY PLAN u .'� v/' "-\ | ` ". * - --- `'— '` � / & ~~' -^ ` | / r--� .- ` Svordrup CITY or REwTO* UPERMIT SET .~^~~�, OF ,,,,= _~,KS " ~��*o/ . oo� *mw - us-uv v v GRID 24 =~ "=" ==� '~~ J.G.S. . . ..1 ...' l' : • ! i ! - i 2 .-' ...., i .. 7 N 0 ± ._....'" .../ ..."r...../. . •: • .1: ...........-- ....--.....-......_..-"."-'. .. • • i N . , . , i . „ • . , 71,80 - ..IVi • I . .. •. ..........__....."1 :j ..- N 71.000 -.--...... -........._. .. ''''-- ,............... . ..: ----...._. . ...--•''' ../ ... ...I 1 / 17 . 7E: lfl. . .r.,e .• . . . . ' . .• , .• . . ' r=20' : . I 1 • (../i.1 . „........ ......._....._,_ . —... • 1 ..1,--.-'" ..,...._ _ . . . ; --. .1 :• , ...................___.. • . -,.. .,..... ..,,, ..,::::.:.,,....-...-... ......,:. ., .: ., -; NOTES ' ......_......_. I. ziNIV.CITREIGRAPHY PROVIDED BY •,..,,......I:4:!!..N,w,N, - .1., .., ..., ' i 1 „ . II A'.. il i...'.''' , • . ..----,--- 2. EXIS11NG FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER .1 1 . .,. ,,. .. SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT .. • . .----• SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING / 1 . /I.:- --- CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. .;,, „.. ..-- ...---- -4- I: .-•------ . ''' i ".' 3. rNOFRO RziAT:F,vrE,EfIlEalligt BY ,• . ,! 1 . I- / GEOENGINEERS TIRED REPORT 1 I 1 . „ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING .• .,, SERVICES,80EING LONGACRES PARK, .. . . 1411rP°07 SUPPORT WSAESZCI E TS°.NTH E Og0 11-3 El"CONTRACTOR - ....---'- .„,,,....--- - I ! ' , •• , ..• I .r . . . I I i .,. •-......_........*. ,.....- SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN - . I '-- -..----' -.• ,.....:-...,',,,-.:.-4,,;-..7,:,,7-7:::,,,,,I. .! i .• . CONFORMANCE TO THE ,„,... „ - ....... „,....--- % I .... ,„.. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. ..-.- „.. :.:!..,,,,,- --------,".7•;;,-.1!!::,..,;,,,' ! ' ,.. „.......- ...... :_ -= . ,-• 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE „....---- .-•!-- , 0:...,....--•• -0 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER ,,3 , ! .......- ''''..'''T TOC :: . : 1 2 , . , TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS "• " TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE „--.5'r:-.. ---•"'- __--""-- .--------• - 2. :.;_ .f-t;:,'''''.. --' ....... : : •, ;: • ...,.../1 i • i ! ! j..,/ %. ELEVATIONS. .../ ,, i i i i .7/ !`„ ...- I ; I , ..• . • i 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING .. . ...-- , • GRADES Al THE PROPERTY UNE. . . --!---•-.. ..7 ..?"N"... 1,.- : • . ; • •, •.....--" ...- . . I !.. . ' • -..„ ./ 1,:7-'.i" . ; / . . . . 3 •L i 1' I I I- V!"- I I . "'!!. ,---!. ...,,,,,;:! .1,----.....,•:::',:-:--,------!"- .„,....-----"-....,..........---- : .... - ..-......- ''' S r I I ... .,._.... ..._....._...1____.•-.- l , ..,..." ... . •± . ".•- .. . • • , I • 1 . latirawarr kt5 /14t,'1•600 ---,---.6. iallitr,--i--=', ' ....... .. i _-..- ' • .. .. ...- ......--7 -1-- . . i \44.2-- + " ......--" ...--- , 1. r \ (--. -'28EZ %, CSMZ--7'77-172, 1 • Flee ell __.- ... i. i --...„‘ ...., ....' ....,.. . I oc .L.:: ....\,\ 37.40 • .. . - ...- ', 17..55— .!' — .14,•Imm,'r'1,74 1! !.. ,.. „ ...-* ...„,,...... ..--• . \ I z' ....--!! •„_.._/................. --_.....„„„........,...-.-------- - .--"- 1 ' • — '.. .........,- ,...- .. '...- 1 I2H ...- . 1 : ...-- . i I I ,,.. ...... ..... -. •.. ... - ....--- i - ---........- - -1:-\ .....—. __,.....1..Gr ,,,..-- i'.---I i _„,.....-.. .. . . , — _ ..- i ... KEY PLAN . ..', : i: 1 • SGOLF.:Keg .- 17.40 i---- — 17 55— —l: 1 1 . ..-.- . I. ; \! !_ / ! , li!:! I I :! i / — I'ARAI 2313CIUL P ____.• . •••••. , s / 11.1A SEC 25,L 21.1.1,1111, ,..-- .. i ; t —/22227 -C1:0 I .122%Mt --13M' ..._.... . , 1 ; .,i ; CITY OF RENTON ill PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 8 SNE:2.11.97 U BCAG HEADOUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 28 arocartJ.J.S. Juni 11.24.96 me C 3E949060 MM. J.G.S. Er..150G 4101'N M. 011/00N IN OM NTS MIMI. . VIM 0/1 • • KGL/12.17.96 • . .- "----....-....._......----./ .-....! ..' ,..•••-...., ' 1' /.. '''•-.,„. Z\. ,/ " __..... .- ... ... . ---•____.__-..... . . '..-..,. , N / /.// •.. . N 71.800 , . ..1 i N 71.800 f. /91/11OING 7470 1 , t ± i FINISH FLOOR = 18.50 ± L ± . . .... •I: 1 .... .....„..., iI, .........„ ic,L_,,,.._s 24,, ,o, • .._ ...___._ I-=20. '`..._._........• -............ -.---....._......1.1 I: ----111117.::: ..___.-.....„... ,.. ,/ ....------ .... . ..-.---- NOTES: . 1" -.,.________....-• -..................------- ...- _... , ...............,,„, i ." I. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY W&H PACIFIC. _...._ . / :• ,'•--..__.... ..... ____. ,,, . -_.....„.., NM* I I 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIDNS AND OTHER SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT ....•." '..... •, ./.., . ....-/ SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING '..„.. -.., . CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. ...------ ---__....._......_...- • -. ,.... 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL '•... I INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY --....„. / , GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT .......- 0 ..,...----•......,„ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ---.....- —•• __. SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK,,....- ... 1 ..,.. _ .,. . •, RENTON.WASHINGTON" FOR BOEING •, .. . ../ ..'' ... . ......-'-.." ..,,":...........,:...__....I, '..,. .. SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR---.-. . , , ----.'- •-.......' '''... , SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN .----. . -•.........._... ........-. CONFORMANCE TO THE . , I RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. • / ..-::•;,...-.',\'...,„ . , .. ........-..-_, '"-....-',;.-1:•:-.':.::.',^=.,,., ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. • 0 0 0 0 . THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER 1. TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS i '-....-- .1.,..7:.,;•1-'s..,.:„, ' TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE s.. N, N. N'. -'::: ::', :.i-::..:-....=' 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING . ' it .IL ''........,:::,....:::.:',..... GRADES AT THE PROPERTY USE • . 0 0 i i . , i . . . . . r • ' . • •'1 :,. ... , ....., , ..'''•'V.., . ...." • 1 1 i 'I': /1L+ /11•15 . .._ . . • ., .... N 71.600 .----.:-... 17 , . ... \17 55 ii-..._ \um ..: ,i . • .i I lkillirafardilaEll . . '1 CSSZW-2ZZ2Z 1 6SSZ-77-,72:2za ,.. ' ;.li 1' Enneviou: , .,• . . . / ,,0 A, WEIrimV--.11 17.55— — /.12,55 ".7. ftl... — 27...5.X I . . ; ! ii!: It:,1: ;.:.::::;...r.:' Ifil ffiEllip- / . I i i! 6 ••.'," II.n — — . .. N ••••„. ,..,..,..., ..,,,,:::.:::-.----• . ... i .... ..•..• 1 11 • .' .. : i i:. ii!.... .,. 1 if ii ,:.:-,-:,--,:::.-:,..:•:::-_-, =2,___ /11. -22:222,___<114r_.:±_.___. -•.- -...— —...- — 1.71_ —•••- -me ! ---- . , i ..• I I; ...._ /7 Ill. . - ... • • • :. _- - - --, - ____- ------„, , . . , J ill 1 KEY PLAN Mu&Mt --- 17 55—, — \ 17 55— :-I-:- 17.55— '----- ''... 17 55.--' '— 17.55 . \ ".•— .v...„ . II t .- &IA a 14,T.211.1t 41.11 i.._ R. / -.• / 11.1A IC 25,t 711.IL ILIII. I ezzEC--ssso I 1, - , .1 i 1 •----:. • ./. .-- Eivardrup ..v.,. I NC. MO •=-Oc. CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SCSI 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 29 - oemaaJ.J.S. vale 11,24.96 004 Nur.SEPA0061 mum J.G.S. ••••its. was.AS SHOWNcescao, 16 MS= • FT YR UTZ AMOR. , olcort, on XCL/12.17.96 . . . .• ; ; I „ • .. . J, ..• • :?; i 2 • I I :,,, _____. .449_ -•-•. . .... . .-- •....,, ,,, ......- ... — — . .--• . . ;•'•-. r ............ .:• I / 1 ---i---: — t — — ..... N .-- .. . . ...--- . . . . I I . .. i . ; . . — — i 1 • . '‘ i — — ..... ... -- . I i ! _ _ - II • , , --. , , ... _ ,.... ..-- • .. .• • ,-.20' ., —, — 1 ! 7--- I . ... :1 . . --". ', ..„ :.; ..... i .' . ---T-...,, -Th, I'i lid°\ PFM=T4M9 /17-552 NOTES: ', '•;\ ;1 moo /TOC ..44F I 71.400 N 71,400 ---1— 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY .. . , .•..., / / ,' • \ ',\. I!: W&H PACIFIC. . , . , . • . ii I1 ...•''''''" ,. ..... ._ 2. IVNG FOI=ONSANDOTER -., ,, . 46C\ . — Af- - ZACEFE AWE NOT SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING .,...-. , -. i. • CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. / .1 / . • 1, ' , 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL • i — i — — INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY I i GEOENCINEERS TITLED'REPORT •il , 17.40 I — '1 7 55— — GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING .• \ SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARR, ....•—--....--e--7....-...:17. .4 ......2........... i i — : — /. - RENTON,WASHINGTON' FOR BOEING i 1 , SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR , . , , \ ! . , I — — ''. — — glgaERFIA2MTOALI.H.WORK IN , • \ 1 1 i RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. i 1,0744 —;, I — /14— ,.,—...: , , ••••„. I i I 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT "... . I :!; 7777)- -gS:g - \CEM3—= ELEVATIONSr, AVAN SHALLI•1 FINISH RGETRE. S. '-o-,7 I— • TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS ; i . 4—'1 — — TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE ..„... ELEVATIONS. ........ ,1„-" ,....". . 17.49\ .;._ I. t 7 ..... •--. ••• I — 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING ,." . : .. ...-- i GRADES AT THE PROPERTY USE. — — i ,...• ._.-......-. ........ .......,._.-•" ., .. .,..., I i , 1 — — •-—.4, . ...'"--. . I , f ----- ---- ....--::,-,-. ...L.-a•-ii lo.11-11..ir .., ,11 V.... • --.., I I IMQ\ a2ZIMS) /7."Mal ,=S 1 ii 17 lir 2 2 22 23 • _ 5 I 1 I -.--.-• , 1=041 •. . 1 • i 7t.''J 3.ff'I., . T- -.--.-. .- . I _...- T.T......._ .WI± \ 4 71.200 4 I 1 N 71,200 ‘} \ ,., ... 1 . „ KEY PLAN ; .-•--., ;\ i SCAM FOC . . 18TOC 00 • . 1 P• 19 nn i 1 1 it'd-\ IrSP\ S.1/Z St.24 t ILL 4E.U.; Sverdrup . ; =IV,. INC. (n.0) :42-eaco '•-._..-- CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1 ....2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 33 ,_44444r.J.J.9. SO. 11.24.96 .u.4 Kum 5E1,0065 OltiVer J.G.S. ... ___ w.u.oAS SHOWN 011.60 KCL/1 2.1 7.96 . . . . / ,.../ R ./We— — .• .. —....- .7-•-g— ..irr.r. 4-----.-- 'zw— _....-3/-...—.. . • / ., . ,--" — ' ,4 ,• J_:: --r'--- :, — — — — , I I, '•, • I .' . ,. . . '--- t — — ..,„ ,.,. .' • . ,.... ; 1755-- _ -.=........ 2.1a - '-:: ,'',:.:' . —, ...../17-55—--- P5— /2"55 1 .,,, • t 1 1 / : I \ ..• . • : . : ' .. ,i:11:1 •--..... ' ! \ / - -_ -. - / . , :.1__• ! 1 \•.. - .. . I i „.• , •.' • 1 %.-' . . ./ , ,.,.........:: , ..........um--, ,.i.. , 1 i , ,.• ,.:::....,....,.,,,,74 ,....L___ .11.. .... ,z-r_ __.._ ,(4,_ _.._ ,4.,__ , ,,, , • , :,,,,-„r.. ....v.;.: io „.._s 2, e. ,. . ,..,.,• , • — _ 1-:.-1:1: _ 1 _ _ „,„ 1 . , . , . . • , . i , . . , . . . ,.., ././../..;:,. ..,.:;,....:4, ,......„.4." „,/ ' 1/4,..':,"/./....;:••••,' 1.2W 022== 17 9.51;77 , 4;:.••SMI 17 55 mzasms, 17.55�_®/ ‘/12'55—, • ./ i NOTES: / ,..,. / .;v N 71.100 N 21/0102M —' '-- .------ .i„1 ''.X '-.—.---• —, — —, -.--- --E- —. I : I ,. • ' I i ,1 • ' • •• ,,,•;.1....',M....Yr'--- •...' 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY ,. '' 06/// .. W&H PACIFIC. — • n. 1 1 1' I , • • k .:'....',:i iiiy.:•1/ -.".' 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER , r-I.,- % • ... —... .. ,— — .-, .I. .-...- .. . • • - 4.I:. ,.1.,i, / SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT _._ ,,,,, SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING ... _.. . ., ,' IHR ifiditi / ,/ CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. — — ..., — :;.1.:;.. —. — —., ••-...... — . _.... _ -•_._,, _ 1.1 _ -.......— — .,... "*. _.; .„.. •. ., , I il • /• , III •: , 4,P! , •..•r•.ur c! • 1,,.,1:il:t :.1 il, , 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL i .•' INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT — .....jum— .E.. _ /7.55— ,1.246— ,—...,..,...•••7.2.5.5—„_. . . ;, ; illi./:„ill i.,ki.. i GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ... I i• ; ' SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, f---- • i _..,' : 1 i ', • .• . ; 1?I;i,: RENTON,WASHINGTON" FOR BOEING .•-••" I . / SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR , 1 11\lill I;II I • SHALL PERFORM ALI WORK IN -. '.- .. 71:7 •I _ i I \ , CONFORMANCE TO THE _...-1----.—.---. — — ..:..L — 7-- — — —. ! .1 . . . ; . : RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. i 1 i I, . I '1 1 1:2,11 I.,, •,_ _,.._ /1.1r r'•il I i 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT I I 1 :1,'AI' i ; : ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE.P2M2=SSM t 1MM :1.-i-,- SSMO i EE%21-=SMI 1 022=6=31 — -. . .1 i , * i THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS — —±-'• — . — — — •-__ ‘! l;! ; • , ,. :2 .; i I ; ; 1 1 4 1 " ' ; TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE /1755— — /1755_ _ /17 55 ELEVATIONS. .• • • , , 1 ::; •i 1 . •i-•,- I • , 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING :.I : .1. •• , GRADES AT THE PROPERTY UNE. — — .I._ — — — — ,— % . i ; --!--,- . • !I: i— I — .::- — I • — — — — I ... • i X(.:.:r,:.:,,Y 1 . ! ! i ..,.. j. . ... •• .,, . .. . . .' ',,i ' 1 . ; i _ _ _ . • i i . i,i;I ' ,. .. . . ' i ,' i t! '• , , 1 . ... -----. , I . • , '1 ... „.. • , , 1 i i .5 EZ2=6=31-------/-71%223,== i I. • • ,,' 1 ! ' \ 1 i . : .1 V., I 17 1 Siii IN-. 2g :2 :1 5 ---- -____- ------ ______ • •.„- 1 I ..:\ : —.., ::I 1 1 • ••• ,••- i i / ;; .,,..'. .., _ „.„ „.. ! : 1 i 1 s\--, I. /.. . .; ; .-:: I .. — . • I i 4!1 ! 1 ......--_ .: . : ::: :; : : •:• . al / - ' I • ::: ii_ 1.‘N 7I•200 II— ..-. ---.,- ...::.--t- — ÷7. .1' . • . ., i ,....--• i i ....,' H ,•::. !k i i i : . :1.; :. 1--- "Ct:%2Z '.- L' SSSS9! ri=,—,ESSS9 1 q2ZZESZES7)--... ........... .. , I _ .— - !I-: 1 • , f t i : I 1't ,I .1':i../.1 Ill KEY PLAN b SCAM MB S8° \ ifaQ i i Pee "r i 1 ! SIASEGKT.7311.141,111. ......_..............2..... q . \3, Nit I I P i c." ..; • • • Bwordrup CIVIL, INC. tiorkt1200". CITY OF RENTON I PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I DOB 2.11.87 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 34 1M11103,I.J.S. Mn. 11.24.96 AB RAM SEPA0266 mune. J.G.S. 1n11 IA - DERMD, acaz. l•-zo• KCL/12.17.96 . . . . .r..1:,:.;..i,::. :1.,.1.1 . . . . • • • •• " .- ! I i I . : . • i .. , , • ,.. , . . i • . N, . . . , . i I :rii:*•1 :: . . . , . ..,....... . ..,, .. ',-....• ; / ‘. . • 1 ' •,,.:.,i, ,........ i , i . I 1 . . i ..... ; !.I i,,1 •• : . . . ., • ....'' •. ..., . I • i I;:::I ii ,. 3°:_'.9'_.2 20' 40' • ) • ..---. ; 11; ii' i. T . \ ...'. . 1 . r=20' .• , \ ../.• , ; . .' . • : . , . I : •11 -I . . i ... . .' i I 1 I 1 1,, NOTES: . , . ..• ,• •. ., . i . . • -:4• ; i . ..... -' I. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY .-•' W&H PACIFIC. / • . 1 : 1 1 I . i , (1 I • : \ 1 ! ' • . . i I: ] '., i 2. VIVIAN&FFOEIAINTILDZONASREANNDOTOTHER I ! I 1,,•, I . 1. SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING ,/ 1 • 1 I ; CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. ' t i 1 1 :::1 -I ; : 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL I I I I 1 ,: I i --I '.- INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY i , 1. CEOENCINEERS TITLED"REPORT • i.N 71.000 1 i 1. i I : . i • • w 7,0x,', GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, I 1 . , 1 ; ; i:: : : ; I RENTON,WASHINGTON- FOR BOEING 1 ' HI I I: I SUPPORT SEM/ICES.THE CONTRACTOR T i ; i I I H .; ! I ; ;II:1•• I I: i SFIALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN CONFORMANCE TO THE . I : I 1 ' ! II!I': RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. . . ...----'i ; i 1 .1 ____......--... II - ; 1:::I;j1j!ij I1 !: I, Ij;III'f II - 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT --..-..._. • ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. j --.....- • i I i: '.... I . . ........_..-.-.- , • : i •, I.;'1:1 I I; I THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER ,:: I 11!11:'•• I 1 TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS \ iI • '''1'!I' ; I TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE I I F11:•..• 1 ELEVATIONS. ' ... . „. , ... ' I !. ; !1 I • ; '1 '•1 ' 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING .-. . . \ :;! 1 1 ' .I. ;11:II4.1' I ! GRADES AT THE PROPERTY UNE. ., ...,. , . ..... .. ...--.. . . ......-'' . 4.. i ;I , 1 ' : 1 ..........._„,,,_,,_...../ ..._,.-...... : : ...' .: .... il , . .--'.; ..:1.,! •„. . . . . ;-.,...: ,1 . • .-- . .•-- i r, , ).'. i ri'‘, ‘. .••.!...!,,A. , ,,,....,;,-,-------0•!......;.4.11, . ..._...-- ...........i....;_....__.,\ i!! , \ • i 1 , ../.. ! . ., t'1 . ........ : •II , 1 ___.... ... .• • ; : I 1 i 17 18iiir 2. _-.:::•:—.::.—.-.....: . . . I' -......„, 1 '. . • \ 27,4 )1 I :: • 1 ... jIl 1 1 I '. • .. i •I'•'...41\I ' . • • 1 i. '..1 ..,1 \ \ • 114 .301' . , : • Ii '. 1 1 •.. .,le . ; • •, 4-1 i. .. .... : , ,..• , '. , ',lc , . •, • : , , ,,i 1 , ., ..%:::: .. . •. 1. ,; I , 1,.. 1,.,:. ,.. .., •I .. I ,,... •,,, . . ! 1.1.,, :. ,. . .. i __. 51 i i 1 .. • I. .: 1 i i 't. P. \ '. % I. 1 t .........-... ... : •i 1 . 1 1 Vi ,i..-f.% , \ . KEY PLAN . 1.'..; I.. 1 ; SCALE:KM ...... , i k I. (-• : : ,I. i 1 I . IZ-... I ,...... ............... • 1 . i 1 .i I ; 1 S.'AEA I mil.u ; . ............ - ................„. • : . : , . , , . . IL IA SEC 25j.2313 CUL •• w.•',',\\,:,„ ... \ --------.. ...._......_... .,., 1 • 1 *... ..... . •N 70,800 I •‘. ...".. ',:', I I •I ' 1 ., • •,•• \• .•• 570'••800 Svmrdrup (205)-AM-8000 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF' PUBLIC WORKS 8 8 i CATE 2.11.07 a BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 39 _vaponse..I.J.S. osn. 11.24.96 lux 4L144 51:PA0067 runn J.G.S. Ws as. SCALPS SHOWN .,...,, XU. 01,9110/1 UV •11. PM 1.10”7113; ................ ...... of, KCL/I2.17.96 . . • . ...„ • ... t . 'R •-, \‘:: ::::, N 70.600 N 70,800 --'•••, ' ..„,... . § 1 .. , ) g -. g -.....,.., ., 1 1 . . • ' •''• A, s'', .-: '') ',. •••,,.... .• I. 's,\ •., \ : • , ;: „ .v....." - • • ' I i: • N • i ., „. ....., .."' :; : ! I • ,...•.. ., •,, •--... ..„ . , ..--' 7, • . -.„ t s 1 i '',I ;•-, \ -.. , , , •, ,r •....,:,•,-.1.1 ,. ..--- t 't i ..., ...._.... , -..,... . -._.. • : ; ; 's s•t",.....;:••-. i• ---._ , I ; I ...,, .. 1 . . . . . . 1 j• "-. • , . , iCIL 1E_S 2.616.11.0. 1 ' f• . ..'t 1 • ,• k :I i •• .___ ... . . ,. • ...., 1-.20. '..„..... I i 1 1 k:• ! ;; • . . • NOTES: .• '‘. , ---...... --..,. 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY , ../.........., ,\ „ . , .. ' W&H PACIFIC. 1 , -•-.... ''.''.... -..- „„... .. : . . ''... -.... j i \ • "••, --, 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER ....._..._...... ...... . `,.. • ---. SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT _. -...... _...._ . , '.... --•-... '. ----, SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING - •• ". CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. ...... , ''...... ..-",-..„ •\ •••.,. .. : / •••. ,„, ., % . . \ ' 3. FOR SUBSURFACE CEOTECHNICAL ',..., , , %'''''--.. . / ,„ ...„... • INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY ''. N. • GEOENG1NEERS TITLED REPORT' . . • / ., 1 / ......,„ --'.. ''''.. '''• . . ..„_. „, • / ./ . '.. •., GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING •%. ' / 1 .1 '., // -•-•......-. -.. .... --'-'••:. SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, , • ' . . / .. ...„ ••,„-., RENTON,WASHINGTON. FOR BOEING .....,. /.......„ ..„, ,. SUPPORT SERVICES THE CONTRACTOR . 1 - •- SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN 't . .... ..._..._...-." .. .. CONFORMANCE TO THE i __._. •....„ ) 1 1 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT „. \ '; : . . ... ,• i,/ 1 / \ / --....,....„.2.,,,__. 4. Et.E PROPOSESATioNs CSOHNOTWO OFR,SN I SA HAS EI GRACE.SPOT ----- THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER •.•-•..... ---• , . . / •..„ , . TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS .,s....• ..• / TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE N 70.800 ± ''' • +' i ' /, ' • .{ ± .....N.70,500 ••-•.,,'' ELEVATIONS. ,, ''.. \ 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING / RA '1 GDES AT THE PROPERTY USE. • /, , \ '• , , "-.:••:--- , .....„. / -• .• .. _.'. -. - . -- ••. „. „. - . ... \ / 1iGi',,,..:..,-:,:.;;•"--;:...•••••••• --.c„.• •,, ' 10 ../. 1 11'I . I. \ .... / ...•-• •• \ h 15 ./ •, -..7 ......- r , . ,. I ‘ N 1 17 I B 2 ,•.•- I • 22 23 5 .....•••• 1 .••: ...... . i 3 1 .•• .1 / ....•••• 3......• 1 i'' 2......,•.. • ..• ..••••••••• : _.--7. : .. ..., - . 5 ...- .. .........., / ...- .. -........-- ...- - . / I KEY PLAN SOME:NOW....." ......-" . •....-' \ / .....•- ....0."'. I S.1/1.SIC.24,t all.R.1.1111. IL IA E.5J.DILL CU . 3 . / I. 3 " .., Svordrup CIVIL. INC. Mr&MOM CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I I omS:2.11.07 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GRADING PLAN GRID 44 numso,J.J.S. cum 11.24.96 roa rum SEMO068 sum J.G.S. m u. mamOS SHOWN ILLIZik KCL/1 2.17.96 /' It i 30L 1ti'..S 20' 40' 11 1'=20' j / i j I NOTES: 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY i W&H PACIFIC. \j �, I 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER • SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT • SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. II ,• j I 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL • INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY • 1 • . GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT • 1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING I SERVICES,-BOEING LONGACRES PARK. '! BOERENTON. ING 1 SUPPORT SERVICES.LL nTHEOR CONTRACTOR i SHALL PERFORM A WORK IN ij. CONFORMANCE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. • 1 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. I I THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS i TO DETERMINE SUBORAOE ELEVATIONS. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING I' I I GRADES AT THE PROPERTY L1NE. 1 i N 70,200 IT I 1 I I N 70,200 1IAII 10 ] 1' / I I N 54 r KEY PLAN 1 I. SCAM MOW a II. I. x II/A��T.El,I.4.U. SverdrupPam KG CIVIL. NI va_ama CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS oo 2.11.07 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GRADING 4B LAN maten:J.J.S. sum 11.24.96 Nix Kum SEPA0059 mum J.G.S. 1..... 1 &AS SHOWN M. MINION ET UT. DM &MOM. _ EMT m KCL/I2.17.96 2 I $ g x W W i N I i I _ o. 1•=20• NOTES: N 70.000 II .• • N 70.000 Ii 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY W&H PACIFIC. I ', i 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER 1 �� t I SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT \ I � I I CONSHOTOURS APPEAR THEREFORE. DSCONTINUOUS. f SOME EXISTING `- ' J. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL 1'I \ INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY ._..-_ ''� � CEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING I I i I SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, RENTON.WASHINGTON• FOR BOEING 1. L Ii' ' SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR 1 INFORMANCE TO THE 't -�\-. - SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN ! I RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT • ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. ' -+.. 'i •f`• I I - THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER • I TO DETERMINE AND A PAVING PLANS SUB _ l I ELEVATIONS. 1 I 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING I ? GRADES AT THE PROPERTY LINE. is . II I i 7 - Ii i to !' 'I 1 n 1s •II l 1 1•I Alir ]. 1B } I1 I a >= 2 6 ii ' J 1 l¢ SiN69.800 I• •� I S 7 ag.t N 69.1100 Ill i I 1 Si ( .j KEY PLAN . SCAM NM • 11/!,E.$ E.I 1.1. . Svardup FSPIWa CP/iL. INC. ]-! CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; OEPARTNIENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SUE 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GRADING PLAN GRID 54 XIC0J.J.S. um 11.24.96 79!MIb SEPA0070 J.O.S. nA Na. w m ISAS SHOWN Xn YX®M n UM pan unvrm .�.......... mvn 9n KCL/12.17.96 • .... ' • 2.f .... 't • I • • 30_ 1`'_Q 20. 40. e1111— r=2D• • NOTES: 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY 1 :`.. _ WAH PACIFIC. 2. EXISTING FOUNDAT10N5 AND OTHER — SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT 1' SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. • 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL '1 1 i I INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY N 69,600 I CEOENCINEERS TITLED REPORT . N 69,600 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES,BOEING LONGACRES PARK, f RENTON,WASHINGTON' FOR BOEING' .I 1' SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR 1 SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN CONFORMANCE TO THE r,,1 I •I RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. • i 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT I ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS i TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE ELEVATIONS. i 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING I rl • GRADES AT THE PROPERTY THE. 1 it I.r • Ii \ __----- __-_ .- I RII�1 to 11 15 27 SCAM MC J J • ..- i` r _ —__...-......_..__ .__.i . I .... _— KEY PLAN �. 1 •n :$: ��LlIRE �ll �N 69.I00 ~�� IVfiv.. INC. =N� CIVIL, (]mil . - CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DAM:2.11.97 I BOAC HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GRADIINI 59 LAN Gmw`e J.J.S. mu 11.24.96 NIm SEPA0071 J.G.S. uA to cJILAS SNOW orvxmcn No. moron a OM OM MOM= .. ....a CHM an KCL/12.17.96 • N 69,400 __-- _ I N WD A1 � .._-_ \� 1 , 1 _ N M1 : I�ti>, rn r � -- \.„ i - ._........................_. ... I 2D l 1 ; z. I � il' • ....-._..-- ; / I. EXISTINGTOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY NOTES: :' ..:,_..::i-M'.\:�•`��4a� tr��;r�':,• .. WhHPACIF 2i•:1•1:;':1' .• �, 1 t ,I.I;' li 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT \1' •1 .ld ' SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING j• 7 } �'1+'I 1 - _ -' = CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. 1 i'. i 1;1!' _ -", " '}r J. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL '", : i I•' -- INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY • l ` I. '^: i I(i;1/I / GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT ....-- '' T. • •f.i,;;;j SEOTCEHNI O ENGINEERING t ! I SERVICES,BOONS LONGACRES PARK, '' I - �! RENTON,WASHINGTON' FOR BOEING ,I I. I. I 'I. SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR `". I.I ' i I:' • SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN -, ,_ t !• I I CONFORMANCE TO THE :• RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. / 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT I �I; ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER • TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS N 69200 I 1-'I r TO DETERMINE SUBCRADE i .. N 69,200 ELEVATIONS. i `I fl L'�I 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING i : GRADES AT THE PROPERTY UNE. I It: IG��1 10 i I \ 3 iii .Ti `�{GIs I 16�i4 b _ . .., it I i fill 2 � 15 , , ,..,3 . , i t ; .... - ,_: in • r I i A I .: `�{ii 41 II 66 KEY PLAN I • I SCAM HOC s i , II s SIAEAII .LCU .§ x : :: • I % LI/I.E t2xLCU W • W i • W A..N SrurdN up P IL. C. M• -�L CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DOE 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 IGRADING PLAN GRID 64 _Mama J.J.S. um 11.24.96 Fax uMn SEPA0072 num J.C.S. .. or.aM5 SHOWN mmoN n Mt OM OMR. Mart M, • 1 l /• ♦ 1 •�1: 00 600 -- - - - - - - GRAPHIC SCALE • •=':' ...-- = ;_ cl -! i;.,• - • — --Ilia, g, 'I!;,!I:; >,• • 10001 xx + ',',i,..'.. \ t.., 1 ;, ,\-. .. 4,:r. .[ • - /Vi.,•*..........,,,, ,...',,,,,i i :i:i7!,,.;i,pi •••;., ',.:,..., '——."'— , ..7. • ,, 17 ,18 : _ -.-' .%` .- ♦ , -I• I: I' V, I . I I _' f:.: . :1 ` : ` I 1 i I. - _ ; o( i, � mooJ -�: ; I .II -- 22 _ W^• , a,. � I( II ' 27 .--, �28.`..r<;„.L �-� . 11,i, {I:: 31 , I — 2 r 33 > I ' , 59 IL I 1 • ij' is t 3� 64. :II., 1 4 ,:`,:,.,, ;% ': -_ LIASECAtriLICAL 1` . 1 I ':. IL 1/2.EC!U M.R.E.U. IWMI UNE—MO11E IVOrt CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZED UTILITIES PLAN OVERALL PLAN DreCum Dam 11.25.96 Ha WM SEP.L023 Wm J.G.S. lw u Num NONE M MUM 01 YPL WR �YP�@ MOT OR ...r JCS/12.15.96 gl i $I § . W /'' r W I / / N N 73.200 I N 73,200 i IT O_ 12'_S 7,1310, 1'=20' NOTES: 1. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY ,, W&H PACIFIC. 2. EXISTING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER SURFACE FEATURES ARE NOT SHOWN,THEREFORE,SOME EXISTING CONTOURS APPEAR DISCONTINUOUS. 3. FOR SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION REFER TO REPORT BY .. GEOENGINEERS TITLED'REPORT '.3 •` •' 'r:"�"•T GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • SERVICES.BOEING LONGACRES PARK, RENTON,WASHINGTON' FOR BOEING • '' SUPPORT SERVICES.THE CONTRACTOR - SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK IN • CONFORMANCE TO THE '''L''"'1"" RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT. �' 4. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOW FINISH GRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER - .•f TO LANDSCAPE AND PAVING PLANS TO DETERMINE SUBGRADE ELEVATIONS. } . 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING `a GRADES AT THE PROPERTY LINE. :. iff %B ' N 73:o . IZ)_V 1814. 2i , -• / \ I• KEY PLAN / r•c r...,-... _ -J Stuff:NOW F. i;., tea s $t/L�ML?]RRERII IL 1ASEC25J.211.11.14111 e Sverdrup q,°, '" CIVIL. INC. roe)`st CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT of PUBLIC WORMS one 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZED UTILITIES PLAN GRID 6 mcrnWJ.J.S. wm 11.24.98 Inz rum SLPA0074 J.G.S. In IA =W S SHOWN mmcn m AM Din uravrea _ _ mmn 07: . ......... p ... KCL/12.17.96 • Si .t` W i \46 ..r;/ I. i ' 1 • . — . /I i \-, 40 „_ 1,•_p 0 40 II 1-20 I N 7a400 } I /�' it , 4 SO I I I I /�/t/.. N\\ 2800 • • • N•SS L • • • • • • ' :l 5 1 17 16 2 :1 \ I' 32 2 5 1 ] 3 1 1 N 72,500 1 ,, N 72,500 ' 1 t ,1 • 1. KEY PLAN ,\ ' SCALE:NON! g 11.,:-: $ g S1/��21rL2�R1FAll WI WI W Il1/L�ZrIL�RE.� Sim rdN up gtll� M„.. CIVIL. (]06)'�a�-ew0 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ure:2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 IGENERALIZED UTILITIES PLAN GRID 11 mmmeJ.J.S. COW 11.24.96 nu um 5FPA0075 J.G.S. m m - sma4S SHOWN 85. Orman m MR uu /Marta _ MOT on w KCL/12.17.96 i ' �� 1 '\ — S N i • 1 's C 3 jC� ' zo' 10' o o ao ....----•• I -:� 1'-20• i .......:.:. i ''• '' ::. • • Ca I :Mlln....j .,/ . GRIT REMOVAL `:,\ CHAMBER .I 1 ; " /y f N 72,600 'I ry J'. ♦ • ]2,600 IT �� - • {fir.,. /'// •`•., _ 111 1ti `. '••,::1 '- N1 1I - _.. :n{,:. ..t _ —;:vL, ♦ /'. •. • KEY PLAN SCAM MK .I :8 j SI/2.E.24,L23l,R4,11 ISverdrup wu .w we` I' I W CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WE:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZED UTILITIES PLAN GRID 12 man o.J.J.S. urn, 11.24.96 Ma ww SEP 0076 J.G.S. b,,i cnn® KR'S SHOWN NA meson m a wn arMOTA ..... WM, an KCL/12.17.96 V. 2 J / t• -1 a j :I: • • I i' A 1, l..t .._.._—. I ;l ... "IIi N 71.10 _ I\_Ii if?...' '1, 'lI` i1 'I ,,• i i • r 10 - . r _. .: / . i n:,l ;a. i I j?;i; 21 23 : II is lk :liii i i• • il fij: i'Yd • ' :yi1. , C KEY PLAN o •,',' j o1}:1. S1/L�.K1:fll,R�vl a s ;" 11.112f I Il1/;�l5,Llr�R�LL 2 i 9r.; • 11 II w:f.. Svur ip �e nc CIVIL. INC. l+�)n:]]-em0 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DAM 2.11.87 I BCAC HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GENERALIZED UTILITIES PLAN GRID 18 °mm'mJ.J•S• Dam 11.24.96 KIK wiz.SEPA0090 mum J.C,S. bp. W.uoAS SHOWN Ica roman nr ura pm urmae . ................ MI. an KCL/12.17.96 ;y .._.... ...... ...__ I )/ .... ...... . W1 -1 i I fl �.. I. / i l I , __ -.�'`R 0it • t 1 i•_ i': v. _...,.__. 1 bi of I'` I i I i i ti:;.- '•�•V. i s 1 I.k. 1; I . : : K 1 iI 1%1.11r1-2i— ;I-•-":1 i._._..'..a. •/ f�a,:.i21' I ,d ..1. I',, it -r rr, :II is : rrll r..l....l....� 7. ,...a I 1- ' t=t:s- ::tw 1 G • '1 ::4••..Ir4I-.:•....,..IgI.t::.:ki•'..,,..I... -'7 I :l t CI::i.iv .t N 72.400 --- _ ='-F.�:::-1-c:�:zt_�: i a�:lc� ?__i-' 1 ,.a::.;:'Y- �h:•- U, 'sl ;°..f �T` Y, • '''':._-.: _ 'yam' I^ - •14.:CIF'' _>.„> — ' t::l— 1 . :1. ii .1 ..\ i" :,,.ai<&(ii'•/•:.it. 1 1a.:d:1 _;(1 j ..1F tfr.::. ``7°.:\• --i.:.>- j.'1-1 ' • I j \ • :F.: . .....f � i : :�� ::� s � , O • r / i - _ • • •`,\\`t .,\fl 'f • bii,// f, 'may • KEY PLAN =Am HOC f'i/ r X/ �'' t, S 8 6 / %fi g`,; 'f--- r• _.. "''-- 51ASECC�1LMR�. A r i / N 72.200 Sward ru p rAwu, .L CVL. INC. CITY OF RENTON I PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS sore 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GENERALIZEGDi UTILITIES PLAN mm.SsJ.J.S. PAC 11.24.96 ma Wm SFP00081 name J.G.S. r..0 r0AS SHOWN N. MS= n .MIL PATE Men= . PO.PO. Oh KCL/12.17.96 ` N 72.200 8 $ f / ."11 ,X TiN 72,200 n )1 11 . ....,::, ...:.:.:;,' La \ �1N .J i ti / t f / O H 46- • N]2.OW" - ..p iiiiiik I 1 • * * 10 it 1111 1 �15 1 qCB 72• , v Ifihie 23- CB 48 E., n :+..yip. ! \ : ! . . ••••• I i MH 46• 12. RWL I Q ll y I i I• ~ 1.3 N 5 1 • r 1 51 1 b KEY PLAN seat:xue 7 Cr- SI/;SSML231.R1.ull m ? IL1/2.SS.2;L2�RE � N 71650 -— -- �. 1 I I/// N fl.&50 SvsPd1'up pmJn� CIVIL, INC. 1aeQ i]i-ms CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1 WE 2.11.87 1 BCAO HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZEDIp UTILITIES PLAN 3 U®mFS J.J.S. me 11.24.96 S Iwm 5EP40095 J.C.S. D..M> . .S SHOWN.., No. e.moe 00.00 �n . KCL/12.17.96 - F Si �f//-""�. it •.- 1 20' • • O ma.- ----"-"-"-""----- ---=-"-"—+ ---- - -- --- -- -- ——---_ — ._ n: CS.-.::.._ _ _ 12' SS OMH 48' ._ 12"W 1Y CS •__. MH• 5' N]2,o0O , I I 1 r I ` I N]].000 • - \itor \._. : • p a • : i` t5 lY SD / rn Y I I�' 17 1874A 2 2 o �'ri"ice:. 10 • 1Y RWL MH 4: "8a I 4 jJ 3 fit- 4-D + 0 5'1 T T aO� l\ t o :yI I A • • • U u� • w I KEY PLAN 0 O 0 0 0 0 O o c I i SCAM Kali 8 — 8 sIAstML?JI.R�ill ' m � a R1/;RALlll.1E.11 SvvrdN uC.P C„ ;Ann.ILE ; CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS /MB:2.11.87 I BCAG HEADOUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZE�Di UTIILITIES PLAN 4 mcnu.J.J,S. w..: 11.24.96 rru BIM SEP40095 D¢r 'm u�J.C.S. -,,.w5 SHOWN ID MB. KCL/12.17.96 ... . s § .... a 2 `i i N .• x\ • • i N 71,800 I I I ii N)I.eoo I+ I} • o i,. • /± i : ^oP 1._20 +-1 G Vi 1 L i MH 46" / d(i 'fj _ • • 1 / - O O O -' 1 .2 T. "ii— .... ..„ ........ ............... ,........ . • • •PLUG EXISTING SEWER) , I ' I I r . r . r I 0 t6' SD N,.]1,600 cri i C 60. CEI 46" N 71.600C • I 10 I j W p 1I 15 ..-,-r... 1 17 10 P .:.0,.t- 0. ]] 2IP° 5 O - 1 I 4 5] I II 4 I I I I 1. i— 1 'a- - I g� — KEY PLAN i :II swt:Nvc S : . �. S. �xLrx,R� 111 , ® 2 2 Ri/t,R7�LflI.RE.UI �llla <CCCI Svardr c° tmnlmu..e..Nc W W P 9.0....4u CIVIL. CITY OF RENTON II PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS NOW 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I GENERALIZ cD10 TILITIES PLAN - NNONm:J.J.S. D.T. 11.24.96 uns Kum SEPA009O J.G.S. 1W.a KNILAS SHOWN N6 O1mNN R OM NITSIMMER _ Coln Oh - —' ... KCL/12.17.96 • .,. It v • I 1,111' — fa i N COMMUNICATION DUCTBANK _ _0 • I f + RUII DING 25-2Q / I• ,: ' ± i V j I 1 I 3D- 1`,-l n 2 , •I I 1•.20' • • MH 48• J 1 ' ' NOTE : EXISTING•TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED + + + + BY W&H PACIFIC. V I \\\ \ ■♦ 3 I I • ( \ \ !r _. 1 T T T T . ? r ELECTR'AL r— C�-Clitl,`.AL DUCTBANK A I J FIFC1R AI RUC R _ • ` (LFCI RI�A1,DUCIBANK B 0 1 t ____`,L_______ UTILIOOR H _ __ _ _ - --�_v__ ,µ_ Itl HDB ; n •- --_ I L W . 0 0 0 ...-.. p sI _. _.._ ....4 W MH 4 WAA "VI 4 W 1 I I RWL MH 48.. 7-_.._..__.__. T VAULT 1 •Q.'. I V H■ 4Ji, O O 1YF ■+■PN Fl = tYW ~ ', •y\ �V VAULT I, t c 16• SD MH 48• \ 3 .,I :�.-.Ma,kp. 150CB 48•I: O i iB' SD fly4� 111111 . SD to_ 1 CB 4B• Lam• N)1,600 I CB 46•p 0 1YW +� r- I + 11 } I5 j�, 1 } IAH 48• -r7, I LJ I 1 ' i 22 2 s \ _ i - —L_L. 1 I 57 !'!' TT Tr KEY PLAN 1 1 I I I SCALE:NM o ;.1!V — -- 'Ir- •±b! S1/t,S�2�L1ll,RE.UI tf• ld' I I 3 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DE PARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1 oa6:2.11.97 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 II GENERALIZEGDIp UTILITIES PLAN 29 oral 11.24.96 rm.wan 5E810091 J.0.5. 9R u cuzJS SHOWN _s ... KCL/12.17.96 • 8 8 § i : — N D ��DH- i i - - 30__1:'_S 20' 4' I— — 0Z71 MiS D ® ® N 71,100 I -_ Q I to f —r—v 71.000 H— H I f..— — :l H O O Y — S .V L - . — — - - - U'1 10 I h 15 -- 1 v to z 22 z 5 27 J -- CB 72' 4 • Y , — 3 N 71,205 I I Y_CB 7 v 71.200 I+ S ` S N 5] O y KEY PLAN 0 Sau.:NOC P. $ j 1 S 1/M.2L L 11L (.U 0 laMH 46' W \�_n CB I7Y CB 46' z T a ILIA 25,T.IL ILC U Swrd�upC. . CITY OF RENTON � PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS o.,E:2.11.97 I (WAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZ cDlo TI1LITIES PLAN I IOREJ.J.S. vn 11.24.96 Fill KM 6EP10095 J.G.S. /w u .0 S SHOWN •o. Immon IW .na BAIT /111Me¢ ......� vm, an KCL/12.17.96 :i. : T1 . 1 1 i I i g•11 1 - = - 1 t - 1 1 TF- v W - t . - - .... i —J I I.I.-. i:�...................: I I 1 N 1 1 I — r I__ <c. — —< iJ a •, i . — — -1_1 v I 1— - — L i ::--: -...J....,...= - I I I I • 2 _0 0 1 CI1 0 10 2 4G' TYPE IP YLLLCL��= OM ® ®=� N ,[,/,/,/,/,.=M\\V �I— • Y`fi 1 71♦00 rn In I I I 1 1 I , .1 LJ �--I— I • a; aid 1 V . * U 1 - — 1 \ 1 1 T 'Ili:.c::1: I I -1 r —1-1 .--1� 0 I . 1. -I... — .1-1I —IT • :._ I •I I - ' 1 1 v ' ' - —_ ' — .L...—J -i' J t J — — ,� — ,--I ,; —T • , I II ; I I I I 1 ti 15 :.. D771.T i<CRl P111.i!" I 11 U i •• 1 17 to 2 I I I I I • 323 5 — — -_I-- — — T 77 N]Y300 ;\ -l.M1.- _— / ' _ -1--: 1 , ' I N 71.200 j1 `GRIT REMOVAL I I f / CHAMBER(TYP) `' I ! I KEY PLAN / I WALL:NM ' 8 •.1 S1/LS KL214LE.LL I q6', 7-1 D �� ; i ' •• ;,• ,� i L1/L1EC25JULL1A1 • - i Srurdrup 9 nu°^ -- CIVIL. l�aa):]a-®o CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 0617.:2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLOC 25-20 I I GENERALIZEGDi UTILITIES PLAN R4 ......J.J.S. wm 11.24.96 me NAm 6EPA0096 ,�J.G.S. fic...0S 5N0NN u Na m®DE v MIL DATE uvaoraD . .................... sawn an KCL/12.17.96 • • MH 48" CB 46" ._ .I.r: .CB..48......_...• CB 46" I I I I ICo 4�1 I I I • • 8 L_� u m u u VIBE g 1li1rI B fi 6" IRR 1 x 1•I • 'Vac'•:;_....... I ti ` • :III 1 ! i • • • • i ?' 0- 1`'-S 0. • Y=zo . I I • X I V I 11 i 1 I • • c. I N 71.000 .•:. • V II 1 - :t. ir: i I i i • i : .,,,.....:I..... I VCB TYPE 1P .:I15 .:_-... 1:'1 I _ I - 'I I I I • • --' II i] 15 li i V I 1 I] IB • F I ] 22 ] 5 1 C ' . 1 J 37 ' i--�,,yyL'',d��r :1 1 I I IV • 1 + 5, 1 Ni• • • • 1 A.' KEY PLAN . i 1WILE:NOW K .______� • •• . 1 • 2 I g ,• I 1IIIL $1 �l�LZRRE.IY N 70.800 ...... ..... ..... ....w. .... .......... ........I......_............__.....................1 I" . I r•• 1' i N]0.900 P aa..x.E YYr PY �ti.::". IL CIVIL. INC. (x007 " - CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS w,E:2.11.07 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I GENERALIZED 1UTILITIES PLAN 9 xmmxm:J.J.S. NMI 11.24.96 Nt.,Ilxl¢:SEPA0097 J.C.S. Me m. wCAS SHOWN NO. MOM OT MIL nxn mm m mum 08 .a s.."� KCL/12.17.96 x]o.ew I :: I a• • o x]o.eoo IN - W • v •I ! O POND W `\ OURET N i Iw Wa STRUCTURE .,. I : iy .• • • `/ i V .I—r...n r.• I I. I cr.:x:'••• ---- D' ID'_9 2O' 4D' i 1 3 1'=20• 3 • I • • 1Y PI5E e: • 12' PIPE I 'CD 48' 1 I A I /J I I i . J I • / 1 • • ^ • _ i I I • • • • I i / I • ' r t ""/ :I' - 15 Kt= • • •!''i',"• 22 23 5 ti / •► /• -..r / I I I • I I KEY PLAN .... _ _ ._-- ./' I I suer:xve & •� ' g !� / 1 k : F. SI/L5�2�L23I.I4E.0 /• a • • s ll/l,�Li�LZf,iIE.� - / I • :• Sim rdp � xz IL. INC. (�.51.NCO CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS i omr:2.11.07 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZED UTILITIES PLAN mmlmJ.J.S. wm 11.24.96 NPM.srmoose 1.611, J.C.S. .1 I. a® SOMAS SHOWN 6. mmoe v un wn ur®rm ��•W� ®n on KCL/12.17.96 • • / — � S i/- I � ; : —: • I ; i I/- W/ / _ - _ / I ., • is W/ I I; I N]OAoa —IF— I+ I :I . is I 17. I I I I • • • sl %I II: • • 1 N 70,300 • I I 11 r I N 70.300_ 11 111 I IS I+ 1 I+ ' J IB 2 2Z ZS 1 1 " I I 1 1 KEY PLAN SfJI{L:NOK K i i• ' 51I�:I�L7JI.RC.0 a I IL 1/Z .L EL R�UY I ' w eoo Svierdrup ., . 0. (..I w-emo CITY OF RENTON � PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS wrz:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 GENERALIZ cD10 TILITIES PLAN 9 mOmJ.J.S. on. 11.24.96 ma SOS SEP40099 J.G.S. 4_u euuiAS SHOWN lanam M. oinmoe 0 NM WR MN.. _ eOm an _' W KCL/12.17.96 : i 1 • • •• • =zo • i • L • • •, • :. I ..—_..._..___.. •i::• ..:_-... __.. �..__ _.._....__.. .._.-. f ill .. . . ii 1 n ' 1 I I I I • • i ; ul • • 1 Ili 1 17 19 •n12 27 y • N ti9,400 I I CE N 69,900 I i I+ • 61 N i 1 �L ?i • KEY PLAN sCN.L:POOL I i 8 x Rf �'ML7JI.R�.UI 1 I • /� ziLZw.REtr s..rdrup m.�.us. L fi-!M IJ CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS _ 2.11.97 ; BCAC HEADQUARTERS BLDC 25-20 GENERALI2 cRio sa�ITIES PLAN mama um..J..1.S. pan, 11.24.96 Aa sum 5EPM100 J.C.S. SUMAS SNawN M M. 80. moron uva MIS ueemm, _.. warn .n .� KCL/12.17.96 • • N I i;l i : 30_1E•—Q 2 40. 'I I I 1 1=20 I I • • i . I • • N 69,600 I N 69.600 11I 1:". i I I 1 • 1 I I t . I . � o t�� 2.1 22 2 „sr, •_....... . ,......._,.....jr, 4 ilS ..._ .. t :1... .. a.-14—, ,. e :r 1., i SCAM MOW a a j I a ILIA�l5,Ll.KLEuA N 69.400 1./ "' I ,-_—_- N 69.400 �+ AE Sverdrup CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ORE.2.11.87 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 CENERALIZEG D i UTILITIES PLAN 59 ma00J.J.S. am 11.24.96 nu mum SEP40101 J.G.S. In u suLAS SNONN N. 111,11120,1 In aim MT. .AMC _•,Y al. an KCL/12.17.96 N 69.400 g ....—_... s. .I .......... ... I I N L., _ I -. ..._.1.�3_...._. •• I • • I Ii20' 10' q 0' 4,0' 1'=20. I I • i I tl i : II' \ _ I I i I I t N 69,200 I} I I I I+ N 69.200 I I . I I I II I • I a � 6l Io �w� {rf IS i t:, IT 161ir1 2• 21, 22 2 •� s �i 'i 2T`l I.9 . I ' ' I . i • I ' N • i I jy 1 KEY PLAN I WAX:NOW 8 I : 8 SlAnnta.RE.11ll Sv.rd .p NL CIVIL, INC. p0e) CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DAM 2.11.07 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLOC 25-20 GENERALIZ EDIo TILITIES PLAN — ma.OWJ.J.S. Dam 11.24.96 Nu u®SEPAOIO2 J.C.S. Haw .nlc.S SHOWNCOCOA Ink mm01. n OM OM IMO..a mn on �-w^ KCL/12.17.96 e I - I ,.I 1 ! 0 100 200 400 600 6 7 8.....-.._ === 10 ,._•:.'..- i 1 ,, i I ' -1 I I I I I• . 1 1 ( I, II 1 1 I N .!... 14 i • 1 1 ; :--... 13 15 - . — _ ..�.� •_ - MUCH 1!E-won LErr 1 1 i` I I I I 1 1 , . I II I - _ - + I,, + — 17 _ . 1,8 ia. _-- 1 g', ' 20 - 44 - 1 6 • _! ... - 1 1 -I- I I = I I -.I:: 1 I i I I -1 I I' I I _ 21. _ 23 ` ,, '�2:4 • - _ 49 i. 22 °� • 25 - • • . - ( 1 I I I — I 1 \ � l � ' I I I + - I I > �.... 54 26 27 28 _. 30 ,;1 I 1 i 1 I I )- 1 I at Y 1 I� - - 11 ei P . 31 32 33 J ! I' . .f. 3 8 :.1111:r . --,,,;- ' I:! :.:: - + +- 64. ... -...it, :,T. :;., II &I/mm.24,1=31.ul r;;:- >:,:;•-- .:,- _ 1 . 0 E I 1 R1/&SEC$LUI.RE.UL IWCH NE. 11/01E wmrt Sim rdru p 30i! W.c Clvll. INC. — CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 0.41,12.20.90 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORMOVDRRAINLL AGGEI PLAN um 11.25.96 ..n SEPIi0103 ,_mtannIt J.C.S. eE�lyAS SHOWNmee. - --- ea mem m m ema UM /mama ................. man un JCS/12.16.96 . rr., 1 111 i rs, ' 5 j . 9 Pin tiksr _......_z_. . 4F-41iirmiliiiiii if c''' LE2 s .6.4 g ,Ji a'; • :.:Utim-i ri... der Olilidi El 1 ..- 11-. .6-12 7 II -.2: klairari b w ;> [4 .- . .4.1 wo 5 5 iL7) . „ . . .„ , .. , , , .„ • • 0 o -ol . .., .. . ., . .. . ..., . , . . -N.._ ., \ , . -..:::',-. , • • ... r. - • ,, '':,..•.: \ .., \ •";,:.• `i-:::.•••., ...,.m..• a , .• A . , . . ',".... , g , , , i—• CO I, '''.-.:i..:,..\ ''•; \ \ \,; .. " CO • • s \ . ., • . „.., / .-. •, .,. • \•„2:',:,, \‘ n. " . ............ \ ....... . , \ '.::\ \ ..'„ '‘., , , • \\ ., ,•,. % • , ., • . s 5 .- \ ‘.. ', . •..........._ =:-,:'; _.:, , •. '.. •. , . , • • . . . \ \ \ if , . ,•----- „ \ •., \ ‘k• \ .---/"':, Ale ', ..--- .• •• ••••, \ \\ . .. . \ '‘, ".. , „ 'v \ -,.; •,•: •,,, • .- -."----:-..."' \ ‘.•, \ \ \ 'fl....A '', • , • ", , • . . . . _ .., ; \... ';':.•,....•:---) , ‘, •:, , , •-• .: ';, :;• •, -.,, •*ii- \ \ .. •. 'i ':i'i \ 1•'1, i'‘•-i.-•,'1. '... I,\ \ "••.,. '',. ..' t•- 1..,\,i 1•\ \-, '.',.\ \\ . '\, \\ '•-, • •• •1 ., \\ n„ \\ • .. 1.. \ \\ • \\ • \ „ \ . • • • ,..., • ):::•• \, \ • \ s;',:(.. , , • , , '''• ;;- ...• „ , \ \ •••• -.--- \ ' •••,.\, .„, ,..; •- ''.•'.:-. :.,.. •-•., . '\;•:. ,,,ic,-1--- s• \ 2,-;,:i • '... •••:, ••• „. •••4. .. ',.i.,:. .---..,,, . •- '::.:•,....::-•• ...„ '•:\ ,, . . •-- . \ •:,,•,•., .;„.- :.. .. ..-- \ -- ••••• •,,, •\ \ ':.,. ':,,, \...--- .--- .• •, \ ..., I . , ,-- ,„-- • 't ..4 \ \ •-• .,-- . ...... ..--- •-- \ \ . z ..-• .--- . . N i 1 v° :70_ ' '_4 �_y. 1-.20' 4sa 0. 1Y SD 1i 5° t 4, 1. 10 t 15 1 1] 1B 2 RR R] ,�r�2�5 1, 27 zvi(� 1 3 5 II( 51 1 j KEY PLAN sum MAE LI/LSEC25L32LE,IL ..., __ Sverdrup r)NC. ( U2-euw CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS so 2.11.9T I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN emJ.J.S. ... 11.24.96 .1.x Run SEPA0105 plum J.G.S. 2n 2a ruyAS SHOWN a,... w NCL/12.17.96 • `\ I' .. .-_ cb CS ...., l 1-.20' 'll • • • f, ! ! 1 - ! I 1 l i. I I . I I. 1. 1 . • Y SD so _ o❑o `SO I GRIT RE '•— CHAMBER • • c ,; Mi��1\iIIYI�t♦�• 1 • lumitipri • MINEitel i ,' s. lil Mt • N10 • f 61 1 - KEY PLAN . - SCAM Mac • sl/LStCxLZiIPLE.Lll LIA EAU ILL E.0 Sverdrup STI. «t CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT or PUBLIC WORKS o.s 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRRAINAGE PLAN G12 0 CI J.J.S. Wm 11.24.96 cA Pm SFPA0106 USLWIte J.G.S. a.Pa .WIfAS SHOWN 6PmoI. R .PM WI uPPPPm MUT . �-ws KCL/12.17.96 CC i • k;_ • 1'=20. f 1: : i : : , n :411 i.,q_ . kill • • • • ('N ,1 •17 10 I 15 ] 18 ] 22 2 5 • / Je 0�J si I� KEY PLAN SCAM MC S1/LSECMLflLR LU R1/;SE.25,L2J,RE.U. CIVIL- INC. ms) .02-ecao CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OP PUBLIC WORKS 1 0//E:2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 13 mRm:J.J.S. wm 11.24.96 w wm SEPM107 num J.G.S. He. arm .uu:AS SHOWN ................. KCL/12.17.96 i 1� ,.. =20' ki. I I C' :!1 10 f �IS I 17 2D^ • 22 2 5 27 J I KEY PLAN Sate KM 1/tsB.xLZfIXR1.11 IIASEC.l531i,Rf.0ll S!!_.r P CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I1OE:2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 18 vmlm:J.J.S. mu 11.24.96 vas XmM SEMI 10 J.G.S. In m Xr0X.AS SHOWN • Xn IMMIX I ur.. mI m mM a �.... man m KCL/12.17.96 ,` N -- / II /' 30_i`_y 2Cdo 1"=2G• • • O 0 0 • TOC , \l` _ -a fir•_ YCB72" CB4& 191101,210 gt ' O MN 48• 12• RWL/ ray sr. �ocQ 3 ma, ii C KEY PLAN sets:xort 11 SEC.t5,L ZE,1I,U. • Svrdvup -".. CIVIL, C. i osl�'•u CITY OF RENTON 11 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS t DATE:2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN G 23 DDDED EJ.J.S. DAM 11.24.96 ALE CC SEPD0115 J.G.S. IQS r2AS SHCbW In u •D MIMED eI MM. DAn WPM= _ _ mms pp... KCL/12.17.96 / \ I N i • 0' 1`'_p 20��' 1-=20' • / • ;r• • j' iI 1,'1 P ) \ / /17 sQ ' / 1 ^ _ 175Q 1 I 'I ' -7i7v,....•.••-•..-2"-2. 7•4 io s 1Y SO —, 1Y RWL MH 14 I • J J h MM 4 _Imo _I ._.._ .... TOC4 0 • 1,;111/41 t .,, i KEY PLAN C O O I O r O O O O w jL'MCi S.1/2.SIC Mx?3LRE.tY • 1 I IL1/;Stljil�RE.tiL i i Sir ardrup w Nz CIVIL, s)`w w CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MB 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 24 _osmmenJ.J.S. ortn 11.24.96 mum SEPA0116 J.G.S. 1a 1a ausAS SHOWN' moron 6r OM ua mmleu _ an KGL/12.17.96 7/- 3 s moo. E 1'`20' MH 46" D O O C MH 46" 12' -.m=1lI \ ilWIllhi q O — C 60' CB 46'11 17.55 C ,a CaZal ILLJI IT 17 19 4 22 z2 2 7r�s 17.40 KEY PLAN SOUL:WOK 17 ao I /1755— �,,� I -sm L1/1,�lF,L2�L�a r-, sir.rar uP ;. _ IL. INC. I206I 222-0280 OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OP PUBLIC WORKS WS 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN G 28 ommlm J.J.S. o m 11.24.96 1118 wm SEPA012O ®J.C.S. w sAs SHOWN lw va I 110. MEOW. A W0. OM Y9t01. ip�wm ULM Oh KCL/12.17.96 • 0 N C.- V Czi__r0'_0' 1 p z 0' 0' i'=zD• MH 48' I el U V (.....----------\ I I I 1 o f 0- 0 0 0 -MN 48' RWL MH 48 Q ilt J O O \ -----I V I `\ 18' SD MH 48' \ `MA.v 1�.Q CB 48" O! i 18"SD CB 48' `- 3 48' 18"SD i J�jI raiSSM.—M2M1 / CB a8° 1 \77.55 CB 4 \17.55 7p� R — ■WI��y- ."�1 I... lLGCLJ 1GRT/ `. v MH 48" �t�L JLI \O 4"D �Y��® 1 7<'I� CD —_ — .1.. 1\ I�i11�FT��lEd ICI KEY PLAN FL— — i [I: ;6fp i 1, _ ........ 1 CI i FA SCALE:N 17 55— .'` 17.55 17.55 t _ I 117,55 — — :i° — / / Sf/2.SEGML?XR4E.III :t— LijZ SEC lStiLt31.AE/ll °B:. DOB CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS BBB 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I STORM DRRAIIN AGE PLAN nmwmK.J.B. DM 11.24.96 rto um SEP40121 num J.G.S. we C cti5 SHOWN CnOtop w nn =MO m AST un BMW. _ _ mmn on .�.e ... KCL/12.17.96 . . ,,,t,,,_ _ fr,g0Q_ _ _ _. .. t 1 __ _ N 17 4\ o _ — 41 _,— —__..__ i _.— —._ .'"P� —T _ / 20_ ty'_Q 6' 4G' I f r=2D' 17 4G "� 17.55� �_ 16 \��— P, / TGL� 4N_ — I, 7 0 — i _ _ — i _ ___ t — — t — — i _ — 1, — ®=� —! ®vim • 179Q1 - /17.55_ • I-Ai I -e _ 1CRT=°a _ 111I I -,. 10 „ h 15 17 4Q 1 17 IB 3 3 23 2 5 37 iiiiii CB 7Y 11e__. ii .r O \ I BI 0 KEY PLAN SCAM KW o 1P01 g,p gp y M C. MH MT � _ CB 7Y CB 46' �t !<1� L�,IL Cli OSvErdrap KG IOW.,«,.H. CIVIL. iNC. (]06j r-Bm0 • CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OFUBLIC WORKS Ii oac:2.11.8T I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 33 dmJ.J.S• me, 11.24.96 nu Bum 51PA0125 MIMI J.G.S. ..... ..LEAS SHOWN B. m®ue BT OM wn _mmmx w�,W.... dun on KCL/12.17.96 • - :I:': N /1754- - 17.55= :I:1. - - /7755 0 o / - - - — — - — i 7GR1° V - 17(7ND)YPE 1P l _ — 17.55— \,1Z54— \,:Z55 1'_20 2 / 7/7 2,17.55= uii / ®�� 57 ��=� it — _ i 7�Q1 1v — h7 pp- 7GRT— .I,I ,. 1 '1 — °RT i ci1 - t - =_; - 1 - - 1 - - 1,/17 44— ,17,55— /17 55— /7.55— 7.55 vj _ -- I-' V — :1-H ----- — i f --- - - 1 - - 1 - - i 17 55 •7.55 •7.55 }]�O J. f f = - _ 0� I _ _ 15`. S__ Ilk. 2 /17 4EMZI=SSM /7.5 =2 .1:-- ® /7.5 ®== ��=® ,- V w6 1 --- ----- i, ---- 'II: '----- i -----' '----- -----' '-----. 1 7,40---- _it.3 3 1 1', — — - - — I — — — { 1 � 11 �� i -� 1 1 v i -4 GRR REMOVAL �CRAMBER(TYP) ♦. KEY PLAN ° WALL we 11 d8 ccr' N / :;;;: ( Il1AU:� � a +� TOC _ Sverdrup E "' CluiL. INC. CITY OF RENTON iPERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WS 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRRiAIN3AGE 4 PLAN GDmcnmJ.J.S. DM 11.24.96 Ma Nxn S°'AL126 nap J.C.S. 1N K. HULAS 5M0. mmu n AM PM urrnme ..„Y.... LDDm eh KCL/I2.17.96 MH 4B' LB 48' CB 48" CB 48" CB 4B' nE VU�o N V 1..20' V V V CB TYPE 1P ■ MH-48 10 1� L`f'l IS 2• 4rrAzw 6 k. 0 1 �' w i o_ !r a 45 jI 1 KEY PLAN SCAM HOC s1iZSECxL23I,RLa ILIAM25.173,RE.0 SvordN up - CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WS 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRRAIN ID AGE PLAN G.An 11.24.96 Fax.um SEPA0127 u®',J.G.S. 'KS SHORN fro Ay na um. n0111. UM utnna mum on KCL/12.17.96 a U t 0 POND D OUTLET N 1SUCTURE a a TR on 3 N D 0 30_ i`'.Q 20' 40' 0 K 3 12- PJIE 12- PIPE • C9 46' A /// / A / a: / to / � �1IL15 E1RE:1EEI'" al Iti J ErialIii I / rl1rl / ! ail I/ Li • / KEY PLAN / SIP.SEC.24.IM. LIN. / LIAR25,L?xRE.11lI / Sverdrup E)up . C. ,HOC -e® CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; _ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I Dom 2.11.97 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM D RRiA IN ID AGE PLAN Gn Coo J.J.S. win 11.24.96 EU0 wain SEPA0126 J.G.S. a AS SHOWN hoe FM IMMOP IT DIM. vn AMOUR ,...,� Minn on KCL/12.17.96 / / I A / :I N . / / i 0' l0' 0 200 40. / 3——`— Y=20. / / • • ) . t / S O O • • • L�J�Wk 67o i.L\i/rfl' ©iZll®II1 !71 Ell Mt / KEY PLAN sCNt:NMI S to SEC ,1;ZilA C K R1ASEC.25,Ltir11.4E.11 - Srardrup .="L CIVIL. INC. Me)I iN- CITY OF RENTON � PERMIT SET ; _ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ws 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 49 ▪me"mJ.J.S. FB 11.24.96 ra..OWN SFPK1129 • J.G.S. »a.. suaAS SHOWN m®aK m MT O R@ w...... ®n an KCL/12.17.96 I n N ,z1L '.' s A 1'=20. U A A 10 15 I Il 19 2 2 22 23 5 11 j 51 ' KEY PLAN SCAM NO4 1/z�exxt11,RC.0 Il1/L SC.}5.IE11A U. Sverdrup F, =NL CIVIL. lme7 ]-emo CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CAM 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 54 mm1@J.J.S. ram 11.24.96 M1u.SEP/3130 rune J.G.S. lK 8CM7AS SHOWN Aa 110. Pr MIL dB BMW. men YA KCL/12.17.96 N • 1•=2G• I i •I l 1 1. 17 1 26 ._.._-.-_..._ _'t 3. 3. I' f E' - -.... __- KEY PLAN srxc Roc I — SIASEC ,LflLR4.lr R1/L�l5,L?�RCRIL s..rdM t1p VAIn T" CITY OF D. RENTON I• PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBUC WORKS I FCC 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 59 mnmJ.J.S. -um 11.24.96 w•�S..) t J.G.S. '"". ..I.4 SHORN n mmw m an. vn uerne ��.�.� �n on KCL/12.17.96 • •• I E. 1 ice+ )0 IEEE= 2. 21 22 2 ' 5 _ lRiCIP'...L._..._ t B EI�RI 4 KEY PLAN WALL IOC S1ARS,LZiI,RE.11 IL 1A SAL Z1.R.4E. . • Sverdrup F4 , N� CIVIL. NC. (Joe) - CITY OF RENTON 1 PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CCC 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 STORM DRAINAGE PLAN GRID 64 _ ,OR J.J.S. PM 11.24.96 MI SEP22132 J.G.S. on m �.® cutAS SHOWN No. =MN m AM. MT uvro+m _ cum OR ..em NCO 2.17.96 :At: • - t •,._• _ 0 100 zoo 400 600 — - _ ;. rv[ _—al:,-;':'✓sir'==--- _ ---. f I ^ i'_`�iC i=T - -�:1. — GRAPH C SCALE • ' •••...s,",-, r.---.,. „..„,,, ,_ ,•� 'h : : ) ;:.: i 'ti ' '.1 3 '.i,ra.•, e-f-i " -J:!I,1-;-!:✓-',d"i_, :i im :i:{i rs�, •i • • ` _ .r.:.....: � �^, •': :; • -\,,i 1 I. l af-:>,% `. "�:j.- .y, .. ._=:'.:,f-:•ch: — WEER LEE-�Df r LEF T . . '-,: •' ' : •. F. , ri I `�`. iI%: ,'w, 7-r-r: ,- >ii•l I' 04°!i' i ...t: . ;+ .. . F:--. .;:: . il!. r7.;r- : ` `1. I ,;r ii: t — ,4 • .1 ' :1: ! l': _' _ - I ' 3 - ' } 0.\ ' - ` I lea.+ce!!?�'. 1 6'-1: Is : -- ;; i , dis 4._.r9 - - � I 4 I i.•1 _ \ �/y ----I I� :." • i 5 .I:G ?° . ; _ � ISIII !! I\ s• .•iII ' x+ ,.� ` — .}., ^ . i(i rc / r - .IMMLI�i p::vJa;; { I -..-:...�3 'c(:. -f I I i l !I • = • ' ! G !.' - • 31 :I' . : - i---- 2. _ 33 'l , I _ � 59 : r � ' 'Ii' I. Y _ ',jI .t ., i. P j;—_•�Ill t .38 .`::'; = o.;> ;+ I ,' A;i •i -.- iii1 y !LE-MOUE MR Sverdrup FLia. '-'"""' CIVIL. C. {�vsl .fl-1000 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SST:2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING OVERALL PLAN 0160.111 0°m 11.25.96 w".—.SEPA0163 J.G.S. m W. 11W.1•si60' n. mum re UM mo PRIM. ..,,,,,,,. w KCL/12.17.96 • 11 --- • /• /• //'�� $I cc. g / i �I N / ' N 73,210,,, x I N 73,200 T +\ 4 X! 7`;,4.I 1".20 Hi \ l \ E.VN,11C. 1 m: 1 y '/ j / N)3)00 — t<f'___ '" P.::thiYO" ! ! %.! f0 L.i(`(tL, /c/ }/! ' ,INT ./!!It /'•N 73000 IIIII'1 `.i' \ NAnI ER', '. 1},SiJ..- - t : —.-r 'i !.. f\\ \ i 144411,-:'-...- --. ::-.''''..-...:%0':.4--c — .4, ,4Y-,• . 4 \ i El \ \ \ ._c:�x6 c�uam T,,.naan..-._.J 1 f 9.' I I I// KEY PLAN evert BE s , ' :%` '..S s IL 1/2.E.25,1211.11.1.111 S N CCC::R9' I i 1/'"� 111 O .,-JF r ' Sverdrup �•'"- a; „is- CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS olr<:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 6 mu®:JJ.S. NIL 11.24.96 MY N.+..5CP10164 NUM J.G.S. IMO M. wuw5 SNOW, mmw m YR un unmTMk �.... ®]: .n JGS/12.17.96 , . \.,,.. , , , s • t i 3 L, f�rr¢i�\�M1F` t4 ```\� I j_�'' i��' /'// I I�'I, 'I 11a I' '1\ /' / �``� I. 'N.iIX .� `\ ,\ ' .ice/ / I� l I \� // I \ -__. `�\ I i':]F:i F.•'.,• - i • --- ..�i�� 1 ;ry /' /, �p iD_ 1�_ 20� m0� N]2.600 1 ` i< �``1 •t� 1M1"''I' - I li "rr �,1��/, I' I i' � \ \fioo I 11 r, I \ \\. I i !! i o ;I \i' I i ° /' / / &•!,-:i / ,/ 12* So • s. I 1a J •,�i. /r ! '� LL 1 i ��i r / b' i 1 v : I it !; • t .'.�.4'NV.Cf.FA)F�7E!t:'- r i% �I I'I I. I I al:c\r�.-ra¢t, i rl 1i .y1, / ' J �,,,::'1 l 9 •Jt.:;!¢0f•:a;'(., 1 `,.i `11,` /, I ai /• /// ;i'1, ,'1 11I J / IJ ;� /, iI /I )' I 1 I ,� I f; 1 �. i I / 'I 'I �n.n�nc i III 1 - to �., `ram : /, I �i is I I 1 1• • 1 LI , .I I !• 3 l 11 ` tl , I I i I I it 5 N 72.600 11 L1 I` s / I i N 72,600 , Ly 551`` @ � I i, 61 { : I1 i i,,y / I I ! {� KEY PLAN N atE I Ll Il ;11``` •• I I // '� I ' VN • _ SI . 24,12XR(,1II ;L n ; $ • J ; f, s N.I L 0. U WI Ili 1 WI_ W• /� 2x +� /._lE SS:' .KWh A.w.Pa. Sverdrup 96��MMww CIVIL_. (fro) :°]-Imm CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS We 2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 11 meaviso,J.J.S. n m 11.24.96 r8 nw SFPA0165 nom J.C.S. as n - - Arx&AS SHOWN co 6c220 _,,,.. w JCS/12.17.96 • >k1 �1 I SI CO j CB W� �' 'CIF,' o q 'CI— • N I ! i' 5'r, 'I F SL F' iY K x Pe- , o& ;\ c CB,' 0 CO CB ..P Co CE, -.CVHMOER---.L �) .. ._R--"• i I - _ T 20_ 1`'_sl 20�y' �� it Ni. - 1'-20' -i A: >o-- k. �q }} 0.i^ EA �� , 7 _ f O RY N]2,600 O' :� �-• �-�--__- M1 ter______ _____ ________ _ r_ I1-r-r fit'---- ?-;-.�'• 'L1J_ ?_L1J_1-e_�_L' - __ • '\ • \\ 12" SD 1 SO I GRIT REMOVAL \� \\ \\ I CHAMBER - / ,'' \\\ \\ • \\ / �/ \ \\ �\ \\\'\ /%/ \\\ `\ \\\ �—�'1 10 \ / i \ WI rr�O i l\15 Cl-. I N \\ / / 41mmr.:. 2. i ;\ ICI N]2,600 / I : _L-� `\ \ • `\L-__—__.._____--____ •� `\ ^\\ N 72.600 '�r i "'III 11 I \, N sI • ca•rar; `�,V I r _n / : \C '—g1 c H,h3'n �\ ,'� ..oNDUITS KEY PLAN I :\ :,� SON.E.NONE 1 /s / \1`I I $ S 1/2, 21,L fl R 4111 F:. I r, `I ! I W I IL1/�SS�AL7JLRE.U�Sverdrup N.6 CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OMB 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 12 cem:J.J.S. mn, 11.24.96 nu NME:2E6%0166 J.C.S. WC.. 'MB S SHOWN 0121330, No. 4v1ID01, 6T UM 01111 YlMMI: ...v..„.....a 1ppn on JCS/12.17.96 • 1 q I C S —.r_ g I a > NN i,; F• �.. i L 1,-- e��.�.7o-.u sv..vl_r.N16H , \j _./12• SD lgg _._ S11 C—' 1G' n 20 40' { 2G IV l /i' i n h ■ • N lz e55 •-•- �:-1 �, -•- ; _ to >1 q s 7_6; ].. toy_ tJ<u ! •n�a'�: ` o ].. A1r �',y 1.177 _-±a_�.. -:��/ sob \ i-• } _ ` G�/� 141 "a;�l,--ram ii -- :tom. L, \N. ,,� CB ,� \:\ \ �� • r 9' �: N. .D� `'�\ Chi ��yyy,,, IfR1 Go �' 1 17 1e1 z C'� = s. rye•I \. x`';C...\ \• \ i // '—. KEY PLANNCKE rg,. ','-1 e•". \V 2 ,\\\ \.\ ,,•!I /- �, S.1 L R /!L ' R x z� �. a" a �• \\ \ i __j "-`-� R1/2.S25,L23I.RE.0 WI WI �\.. \ : -\ 1 �u --41 Svsirdrup N� CIVIL, NC. FM'&ja CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET � DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ORD 2.11.07 i BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 13 mu®J.J.S, am 11.24.96 SN mum SEPA5167 J.G.S. "vs se.n�nx® wINAS SHORN JCS/12.17.96 a Ii - j. C J� r? "St .co' OOAJ!tIr - � ; / RW ,w u • \J \ `' O q0• C_,\D arc \\� d. �l2\ ._.- 0' 1 1'=20'2 • 4 t.--:•,ice- \,-- \ .':y2' Fr,vl. ------- ---- N 72.400 - _ \`1j1 Q F. :/J`:�vr :•n.: \ '� /. { ili.` I, . \ - y li 1` k: --— ;; \ - \\\ / .r ,''!i'T..,. 11 1@ \``` -cw\\ F •.s II 15 .` ,; I2 23 5 h 7 1, t ) , llA}{i J Sl)1, .I4 4- 0., r11.1.'• \ 5 61 ° SCALE NONE n�,�p;'�t 1;' _ _1111 LAN . I4,,T,r r,;II I, {" s s i iIj;I ;I Iil `sli\j ., \\ S1/t,ERLZfI,R�.Ut f 1 ! 1';!,I ;{1.„ !tL / \\.\ L 1/L E S,L?X R L,Ull W ( 1 l'l I . 1!{86 kt /` Sverdrup NE CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS nae 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 1 I TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 18 Onm:J.J.S. mow 11.24.96 no now SEP40170 wow J.G.S. nom Btale:AS 66046 110. - .....,..Iw_ JCS/12.17.96 s r _ _—tea I i E:LO '\ ; . __ ,TS C'eD : it \• \w--✓ . _ w1 N �v I Yst 2 I 01 '`'''• il /, 1 !:I I / '\\\ L _ ew\e i \\\\ - • / I /'M\ 20' 40' ' � ,+c: i , w // F ;AEC!:H-2;___ __ ---- i^.�:D0O5 ..•,.CAI— ( - • �,- �I,4 O f+ 'AtprN ; Niiiiix :i.F.I: : : : :�I: 1 • • '. _ I -- Y~ — -E-8-3-3I-"-2fci1E,r.5..:..r.:::',.-,__1_.,1;..3•,.,,..--_-,- ...1.-,=-73-:,;-:7,1-.c..:'-.--"..:.63.,--.1-„:-!-„:--,: , _,--4i4i...1S--•,- (t k tiAn wy r �` l 7— m-. 7 ;n• h ' LJ \��/ . ...' ".,._. -.,,._•; •",5:,I ---• . i CO\IN, .,-IC \\ -'r \.e,; - •• / �j• ,t• "ter\. •. / . \\ \-- 3—+--7 ram` .-•----14: '�?% `3t". $ ^kg \ \\-- L) Q ^' ,I4, "ry u \S, \\ /. r•r 1':1 / ,, II �1 oq / I T� • .2�s J r rr,4• 74— i / m, '% C9 • _ n -�a:1u / _ ; ;' / la ,''',I, s lt/ ;�' ;•,< t;// : I'I 5iI �Q u I 5 F r -' ;-•-. ' 1 ..../ l t.✓_--, \ i \V 'tt:; Ily-i_._: 42 l,r; If , ,] ,e z 27 \. �` it j / / % / \\ ,}, _------:-/-; , I 5`i-;. Z'",,4 / ', i ! % \ C-NOUr ,ice 2-" ;� \ \\i; ' i / AH •jr \'\t ( / /�ii,® //" �// / p \ '.\ /�.. it ;\ f` i, .i 11 ,',/,' i/i yS; q'/i • ,'' ` r 3 tr! 11////1 �% 15 ` /'/ ft ]T •`o /. `:•1 /f !\• Irh/i n'� \ /X • •- �Ip/�a/ �� i Iji�, KEY PLAN % //' I I!yJ_:___.1 1/ + i,%' I ryi ,' g \\ //' WALL“ONE • HC'nOIYAL:.1'G If--�_,/(.11/•',• y`�� t/ \ R I MtYL R RY N 72,200 wLJ N 'J/1/•: 4/.3, ,. ' \ N]2,200 Sverdrup °,:rtp r.1 NE I. • CIVIL. C. IA i!]-!Om CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS to 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I TREE CUTTING/GRID LAND19 CLEARING PLAN - e®Iam:J.J.S. tots 11.24.96 nu xcla.SEPA0171 DRAM J.G.S. N.. MBAS SHOWN R R.Ra1 R YR ton wean:5 _ mti OB w JCS/12.17.96 • N 72,2oo $ ;c1! '1 I1V ( ``§ I / \\, N 72,200 \\ sr N \ % / i . 4 \,'Y''' i /�% \\ �, \� �\ CO[,;J_S' J•/ \\ \\ 7 1 \\\\\\ \ A`\\ /'_ g__r_ /' \\ coHuul. \ C01L:: / j \\. \ N . .. // \\ \ '� \ \ ! \ \� \ \ // \ l, \\\ice:• \,\ , /" , � i %\\ \\\ \-- v..,,^ • \\ \\ I N 72:71 — � ,7.."vd:7...iii#: _ '___- - - � �__- _`�f._—�"__ _-P—^, \'Ir::4E MOIL A- N 72.,.0 _. ___„_____,..____.__„._.._..__. __ ..,.. . .. ..E I X * * i 5 _di%*\ . x 1 .....imr.,, ,,...._ ______...._---- _-_-- \ I I+ 5 1 6 f ea o I. KEV PLAN EGN2:xac ° ,_ $ �/ $ Loon so 1e.so S 1/; 2�L Zil,R E. 111 ~a -- / a IAllir l 1/L �t L Zx,R E,t� LI N 71.850 N 71.850 sY�rdrUp rl.� '"~ CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS a1E:2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 23 ▪®0IO2n J.J.S. um 11.24.96 Nu M.SE8A0175 • J.G.S. yKha. =az/4S SHOWN COECIMM M. mmm. �, [WIu2emm vmn on ................. JCS/12.17.96 • // m;7/' /• '-F�MM ..,\ !/:u _1 • /�4/) ,it •rf;'Sat.r 1h' i %/XXX \\\ '\\/ - =-rn:rF.ei_a• - :,i'e"-1 rV% 'cr / Iiirr,•` r -" \�. '_; s.o-LNa, s; =, of/. l`l ; j%.i�' p$ i \\\ `\ \N `'\ '\ ` / .1'11' : ii 4 2. \\ 30_'2_4 0 40• \\. n \\\ .^ !:' "�s� frj� il1,r • ;/I J • I 1-=20' . \\�( / j `Il, 4 ! ;U \'-: / .N\. i. GJ ,, \( \�. ii \•\ :\'s. 'i\! i' v 1 \ ---'- t\% ,. i J w' \ lil---'N/..s'9 rc'-iF- --- I I Y\ \' / ' I \ , ;il--, t - I \ 1 / :D/ l zs--'------------__''-1 --- 'i I _ ! a8 1Y SS MH 462'= 12` .__[ '•j i MH 4S' -,/---- __ .-__ ------------ ------------------ _ N 72.000 \ -- �, _ - A.Y i .�� 1 _ N 72.000 n 4 D 60 ••r' ---____ I- . : e • 1 - - ' • s' — �\ Neva \� i Ti I If I i 1 y ail'1 2 9 3 1 ice, yCr___________„/ ,, ; • �1 rg 1 ``1\5 12 D i 2 I II I 1 17 18 YC'• z I I! - / zY,_zx vI 5 c G / z illAN% 12• RWL o MH 4B"I L'� ' 8 l J �J •� ,.T ITF g a II . l i s I • c f,'. I Hi i i 1 if KEY'PLAN 0 O 0 0 O 0 p f o h1I I ' -.- f El E 1 1 I I FINISH FLOOR= 18.50 II I S 1�}. L R �° x i I IL IA, 25,1113 It I. 1° p _ CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ' I so 2.11.87 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND24 CLEARING PLAN CRID nS.J.J.S. S.s., 11.24.96 02 wm 5EPA0176 J.G.S. no- sYsiAS SHOWN . w ..- JCS/12.17.96 ; I e_G W I ; 1 rrl-: l ' RUN DING 25-214,I. N p I �\ FINISH FLOOR =�118.50 H S i N 71,800 I I 1 N.71.500 • I : Ici n ' C.1nAl i 7�e i I I 1r R '�� I ' , r, 1YM x t I A'D�::. r; — 3 \ 9CO:JAR: �.:. 1 - I� --x_'... - �� 6'W •`J NOUI!L'FR1''r\ ��. - �_, C�_.. dO _.'— -- : i - �. _ ,71-.---,-- 5 /, f-�- -,__.._.1---- / I /I ' ---=.�- nLw-<:- _•rP.4Na'Ifs 1 : D 0 O, 0 MH,48' 1 Y .., , : . r : �-" �'`�� it I�_. Inl 1 fir„r{'I {r. I _____ � r{ PLUG EXISTING SEWER�_. 1: _ .II.. I {Ir...I�^._� .I.I.. If{I H a g 49/ - 1. 18• SD . / H�f.600 �� I l,J Y C 60• I{ �; B'4�, N)1.60(� Inn 10 t ' t 1 I) 10 bir 2 \ \ i^InM I�f�ll. : : 1 III - ' ( - : 0 i 0 I II } .. I ' 3 ; I F I I i * f � H j 51 _)T_ 1- KSCAM MC EY PLAN II _ S1/;St24,LZ31.Rt.III 2 § ' Il1A SEC 25,L131.RLEll CIVIL. INc. CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1 OM1.87 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 28 trmtm J.J.S. OM 11.24.96 .ua 5VA0180 J.C.S. .n.. .cus AS SHOWN ea moon, m /PM wn /MOW. _ SHIM on JGS/12.17.96 • r- 8 i' r-- —r-' * -.- -.._- : I �--V : I °I II 1 1` I ' .•in� " 8 i i I u 'I a O 1 j P Ae:r�tAe iEcA ,E — h I I N— _ — r— A`v i is j ICOHMUNI'AT1CN DUCTBANK _ -- _ i �l �:•.IilnSh'e. .,"4"d,• i (i.. i i / I N 71.e00N 71,e00 I I e + I + 1 I v lelk I 36 ' . r idI , 1 p [ w- MF aB' /. J 7 ,.3 Q 41 -� 4 5I; ` I I i 1 NOTES: 'if, FIN SH FLOOR= 18.50 I .I . i __,,.1-___l2a------_-2y___.1 I �Ir"��1� �j_...�/r J • �' I /1I 1. EXISTING VEGETATION LOCATION T ♦TAND DESCRIPTION PROVIDED BY L _'-• Ni---:(/ I t .,k \I W&H PACIFIC. R i FIFi,AL DUC I \- 1; l : ---"-_-_ -�-_ ,_ se acr F , : , i I 1t `'\ UTNDOR/ H _ -_-i_---- - G90B` z == .;F__ `' U i \ 4"W I e• i :f; j.w \�{ RWL MM 4g 't _. -C VAULT 4•W ` f, • I ;4' L l /� 0J I '\:T I\ i' M.PN FI I IYW r gki ;v.IlA':1. , V i,`` VAULT ./ �/ '7 � I:: I\ ��,, 11 18" SD 4 o• ZV I_:: i B Nag, o CB afi't• II ter, `I • o 1e'SO , w ari' ( � I Ire;' : i ''�1`. I `{ --- w 46� J -I —tr.. ic' :1 B• SG I •t`. I CB 48"• :f.'. N 71.600 11111 f0 � ! © IYW �jl/�/'' X �•a�„1t '+ 11 15 1 I �I� • i zz z s '-t`'"-•--- .Kam.----• a.D -. wir` 7k;tg.a� ' ! I'7 ' . 1' ri ��fj I o'1i D TT \ `z SI 'U� e3 I I Ti r • ONO KEY PLAN mil i 1 - SCAM roc LAN 1" : D•�uP,1 r,w.' 8 111110 �`: , g St/��21,tflI,R�� T\ ? I a —II—m ! Lo Ilt/7,�$tfll.A��ll -,t x 'v ' Sverdrup Ps1Nt CIVIL.. INC. CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS W M 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 29 UM 11.24.96 rm.•RE SEPA01e1 _ WAwit J.C.S. wow,.mcm,J.J.S. -°�"L'SHOWN • JGS/12.17.96 • P. U. �� X - �'� 54 N .,, L I i off .:,Nan`J• i _cc I — ,a6 ?Gu>lu r—� a 1- ols .\/ ,I. _ 5 5 I - } MINIIIMI - .11 \ / 6— ,•=20• ; 8 r .flimei, .....v, 5,, - l\� ' p ~_ _ \.x. /58_ I , :I:c 61 %;. -_- _,: Im — — I N 1 6 0 9- "- x °I „ 15 22 25 5 1 L-- bs — 4L--- ICB 72" —T 41 — 1 CB 7Y N 71,200 45 N 71,200 I I :I ` J\ 5 v�--, I ei i I OW 4 KEY PLAN I 0 * SUM MCI x1 s1/2.2.xttx,R1,u1. u MH 48• '•' i-- �_, I CB 48• e T L1 IL 1/!,R.L5.T. R E.U. 72.* 0 0 ! 1 s„art.P Er SAA,�,, "1: CIVIL !>�)b]-EOW CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1 MB 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/GRID 3LAND 3CLEARING PLAN mmlm J.J.S. P.m 11.24.96 w NUW SEPA0185 J.G.S. snlnAS SHOWN Na to. IIa MON m WM UM uvmnu _ HIM on ...v JGS/12.17.96 (IA_ ' ? i I i _ .._— i i 8-1 K i 1 I $ j J .k 11 1IJ ' r—E4- - t - H W :_.- - i - -,.-..-i �— - --------------- J__... —1--I----- i L_—_ i' _ I I I L r • " I' /e 1 O•■ I I �t , I i,.) I / 1 1 101. .1 / i I I J--1._ 7J.- '__ - ti- ' . .•`7 { .LJ I I I I I • ^�/ / 0' f0 0' 40' / //�� I /— T1 I I I A.. 1--20, YLIILf_1 M N i '�� =3= O -I--Ih- ,• I ;:. INTI•,00 . I I In I I i I :1 = ^'—i �1- 1 i V y / 4r * I . ill , • —� i i 1® {{: I I I I NO I• f 4 — I I— — — i• SrT•G SEAM i I' ' T.- . - H - — I I I cr �0. �� I i: ^ I — • — i I -'—i —, , ileiri 11r_f I x I 1 I, • 1 T II • — - I I f / v: iI • x -a i r .1—J I I 1� 1 F nF'L.ki•'• N 4...: H.J....-... 7� I Y m J h. I I I TI- 1' I P-Z I ,-ft' -+- II , vm�_ cwraiar i inarip =1 I P2 ® 1 I ;v I f 1 NGL1 LJ 'I-r-- L Imo: j r� �-- lib I�; • �iIIET�E'„'S° - , - — 0 • I I I I I' I • '14 qqq ��_ir�� Is .J—� �I.. I. i I �. N 200 I I ic J - T1 1 1,{ @@ I N 71.IW N gli 1 ,hill r' j-�a ��l I`? visi "' \mow •iiii .xxxv el �_/ 4 0 II ! i Ql :] GRIT REMOVAL 1 II aI 1 I Igliogiihilihri ' I I I I • CHAMBER TYP l' KEY PLAN 1 1 1 di 1 I j • [:NM D ❑D �T 1 x g 1 S 1/L S I11?�R E.!!L i as7 T; i 11/t.��L�A.�U. O• I -�' •\� ,_, 71 ,Ji I • ' ' I _ Sverdrup gN ICUs,,V.E. CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - 1 DAM 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I I TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 34 ®wm:J.J.S. oRL 11.24.96 rot o2s 5LPA0166 mar. J.G.S. .IA _ WALLAS SHOWN n> URI= m AM lun ,RtOTA .r. omn on JCS/12.17.96 MH 4 CB 4Q" c J_ ,_ti;:-',-1-_ - CB 48" `� uCpB 4 u u I I"' I • I g44I E X W g B° RR '�/Lj, �Iit r •\ O;�T: X I XW� N 6 4 :• g.I I! �1,.. , , i I I p'o,` i • 1 //}�� / ^\y\ I I Q W I , , • i 1^ I 1 C • =20. i 1a X I i (y/�(•hL1,-i , 1 1,Q 5 ; ; I 65 II k I I I I - I y i I I Asiip2 1 1 ,01 I, _ 0 N 71.000 L. I .;,• ---"' 1 1 i 6 1T I� J 1 N 71,000 I //y-�7 r J111I I M (i,5•:NF.ItJ'b'.T•b: ! iqp Ir i I; ' lgre 1i 1 14 I .11 r117 IP : P i � I iI AIH-48' %-Irh=iL.da,Y Mr.::J:r -- ---L - f NJS.bS P, % W.. -. I:(N"O:Ir H. P 0 7, • ' I / ► v , j �i�m�E 1E 1 18ir: = I I �I � w ,,(y r� ' 1 J 1 19 7-Oc I .I -- .rID= .,..3 .Y GP I1%S. il�H�EEl Il fl ! 1 1 iil ' T N MI �. 121 v; d ki II ;l ► CI `9.4 ND, . i 1 I 11i 11 ` KEY PLAN 122 hSOLC:RCM •li S1 SEC.MLZRRCU. W i 11I L1/��1i.t 1I LE,11UI N 70,800 I '--�-----I- I. -r g 12 3 _1 _ ! •v1'1, y`, \'. N 70.900 8Y.1'd rY11 CIVIL. INC. 0 ®!]WO HL CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS W.2.11.97 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND39 CLEARING PLAN GRID anon@J.J.S. ma 11.24.96 rom nuOm SFP00187 mom J.G.S. ,nu or4mAS SHOWN no. RIM= WI OM UTa urmrm _ EMT ,a ...e JCS/12.17.95 • • N 70,800 I II \ g \ k\ N]OJ700: I $' _ - �; ' a-n \ : I- I ; W W 5 .1 i o \ \ \_____________ ___ i, POND \ N12 5 a „; `'\: CUTLET \FSTRUCTURE \ \\\i 1a' i \I i 1 ilp 68 • 127 1 R i V Sfr:f:T.?�n,K 1 12 V ' i L� ="JSov9: l N..{\ �D_ 1`._p 20' 40' 129 �,s':E I i, � � -I 3' 130 tie u I : ! ,pip p1.E ^. fY PIPE 131 O. o 7GB 41' � _..__ - 132 ; 1 , • a. 133! ' . ---- - - 1. /• I . r.: :1 3 4i "P„dilt/ ; . .: , . . 135 ,m� / , ; N 70,600 C: ' li, • a /,v 1 SS. : 1 'ram I N 70,800 1 1 I 1 11 I ' i s P\' /- r 1-- I / I i"r / / 133, ifs.;/ ,:s�1. _ -----' ice \ III1 :i % . El '--.' '- 1 ' - 1T I 2 ..,.,:' ''..' . D 4,41 Altilk:/117.1W.41,1141:II. T.1 1:4:-6,1 : • �. --' 1 -- -.-___ __ 1 �Rn5 \` / -� — - .'' / \ I/ �V: 1 KEY PLAN WALL NONE -�' / `\ i II n / I _ ter - = / [ I R 'I R1ASEC25 .3.RE,U Sr!rdlrcup . E i`ua_mm CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS I W.2.11.87 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 I TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 44 m OBSJ.J.S. NM 11.24.96 ma SOS 5EPA0188 Mum J.G.S. •..m Mannrum.SHOWN IN moron W BM MN urmnm ................... morn NI JGS/12.17.96 • :,. i, / . '. - -- „� I ° > i a I 14 9 !� `,aw' ' ' N 13 • 1 N]OAOfI/ /' I •L; I I6 / !/45 0 lik / ,i,.. i-4, - I N 70A00 56, 1II 151 17 ` -10 ,....„.„,:.,... .,... ,.: ,,,,. I / „ i!: i 15 9 ; ., ;;• 15�° ,�� , ' ;16 0 ' !161 153 I ' f2 / I, . " ;763 / ° C: L' ORR f lJ�-I' -.a e,e Q�"eli Jr ,; L1r 165 Ey 166 ar4-:_�E gar , it 7 1 I : I 16 7 �fr 'I 1 7 ; . R �'' 17 ' 1' 11�L1�- 1U N 70,200 :] T, is 1$lJ II� ' , N 70.200 1 15 \I I. 17 16 I 1 75 •iIi, 1, ' 1 74 , 22 �, 2 . 22 2 T5 I a. rit , i. 79 5. II P I$ '� 1 I / I B1 '? -_-- „ 'li ? i j'- KEYWA PLAN ,�,, f' I �- WALL:NOW s �...,.: i I g SIASE.KLIXRE.RJI 2 , I \ ` 1 I .. 1 W R1/t,Sli�LlIRE.11l J Sv.rdN up °°° . N.1: CIVIL. �i:e2-emo CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1 000 2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 49 SIBLLJ.J.S. um 11.24.96 nu urn SEPA0189 J.C.S. 17o m BuLAS SHOWN w ..• JCS/12.17.96 • T\ — it I/ i x W 3 ` X •I11 • N III ; . 182 --__ • • • Ott ';' --x/. T `✓\r •._; -._ -�lfT :Jt 4f 64::011 : '— d : ;. ___._..__._.__.___. , :9 c. 187. i JG'sr:ROLLI.aI y %___._ _�X y'•� ___ .__._ _ 11\ j- l sneaz n;. �--"-.tee.:�u::r�re;<:m --n-_._ -� — ---- - - -'[ r 6 id -'----'-- T P 5 j / r I: �t-a \ II 11 9 1 \ ; a 1 \ .1 it 'I \ • • • �' j, 8gCri ;: Ty II ,' I I v' \ 'I I II I 1 / 190 . II 1 i f. ! '7 l0 :I 'x 1\Is I o I 1 I] laiiii. 20" j f �, f2 20 S N;69,600 r /1 ,� II 11 vp N 69,600 I �'� / .� I I j' sa x x i ; I 1 3 is 1 f /r I 11 j� j;; KEY PLAN r-✓ d scar.:mac 0 i 0 0 0 2 r P. ecor W / —_ I W Lt � t7l4R �1L Sverdrup we D M N. CIVIL, INC Sa- CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT Or PUBLIC WORKS 6STD 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 54 Tram:RJ.J.S. oar„ 11.24.96 rIla am SFPP0190 J.C.S. HN.d cues OSLLAS SHOWN A R>taON sr Y]L UTZ YY®fR ....................... wan Of: JCS/12.17.96 f- ..ii I 1J}1 u i I 1'il!J i 1I nr::ry Ex:..._.__._.__._9 A _. I ' . ... .,,.. 1 ,;l':l' ' ....----- : !' .. 'I I^ I r : . n I ;; It I }. I li I I 1�1 it-__ r;. I'I I; N 69,600 ,1 .•Y . I 1: `\ , N 69,600 ' '0 `�; : I , '1 :;I _ I . ' 1: i I------, a --- I i+ ! �/ 10 -- ill,::'U_EhE1T 1 , ,5 6,05< •I 196 I : n 5 •-.-.9:,C::N4iJ'7 NB: ---__ 7....�.,__:�.-"-'_ _' `N,F,1:Y�':i:^N.,: 1� -75i.NON-IA:Yi: F'; l] ] REC.^RO N0 M.:60M., X+...._...._ - --._ . N.I 1 1 C..'.Pc. _ lL _. o I ..o ._._._______.,yam_. ._ _ _-_ KEY PLAN I _. v E•mac }1 I ' 1 � -�-- - N 69,400 - L i- .-._.! H.• N 69:406 Srardrup . - vn A' CIVIL. INC. 1:66) CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET ; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 0.67E:2.11.97 I BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/LAND CLEARING PLAN GRID 59 mmlm,J.J.S. w1n 11.24.96 nu 6Nm 5EPA0191 J.C.S. i.... r.,.AC SHOWN JCS/12.17.96 • N 69,400 ti § _-...__.-_ _..._... _ ___.__..._-__ 1_}! _.- ___. _ -_---- _-----__ J7fII _._-_._—__N 6_MO ..._ _ I RECORD NO.C4^;°:;S4v N. •`\; ' i I . \• I f I4� 01-9 6!91Y O�'S \ .\\ , I j 197 I ' ,.. .? =20' '0E12 '\• j a i y I I I `` E 'viT%G SfvlCfi I 1 i I N 89,200 I —I} I III 11i ' N 69,200 I} 1 + s; y, l I I i i - 10 :: 1 fi I 1;� 17 1616 2 � � 2�,:22 23 5 lIlrt z'. .. . IL._ ,J. la I i 7:I I. .v..,>..c::W7:1.:.:—: 1111 ii I` , KEY PLAN II i NCAu:IOC s s 1 i ; I s S I/& 24 t 1*R.f.ull a a t ' 'ti i i i x ILI/LRa.LS.Ll�L(.0 Sv rup .•.. J I d iCIVL. iNC.rd . fml ;,_e000"-' CITY OF RENTON PERMIT SET I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE 2.11.97 ; BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 TREE CUTTING/CRID 6LND 4CLEARING PLAN mmt®r..J.J.S. MTa 11.24.96 "um SFPA0192 J.G.S. uou - rus,AS SNOWN JCS/12.17.96 J Q n m N 7. o kl rn u e3,^�, Z O NN zo ioLL 8:' O ; o !N x 2g Q g F- OJ y ¢aby $ 2 U J(J C 6 Blz W m m0� ZZ wom^3 wqiro a om� Q W i (Qj ryo on 8r w wooW yo O t Sww OaW e e Z �o o m is cc 5 � « Ili sss s k g IMMIHMIMMIHMIHMHEHMIMMIMIMMIIMEN b b k b ti b b 1 n b b b b:4 L b h L b b 6 6 1_b b n L 6 b b k'n n 1 .. a n b n 1O%W4 n h b b b b b b M1_F.h aaAAARA..13;'4 .21 ; a2ae9aR;. P., e02a284am5;;1aaffi z T aaaanR .c„x„RRooaaaaosaaaaaaaa oaRaaeaaaasa"-""" "R;R „.,gw.R; 11111111/11/1111111111111111111111111111111 Q a gg 6 gg§§ ssss Hiss gggg q�gggg 5 �e 5555 5555555555 5s�g5g 5k 5 5g5 gggg 5 gg5 5 2g1 ZEE b n bib 1=4•b b b b b b�b b b 6 b b 6 b 6 6_6 b b'�n'n'n b=b b n n b b S k b n b h b b a�b�=6�n�6 b L b b 6 1.b'�.b 6 aaaaa BARanaaa 0 ; I BEFORE THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS 1 • • OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER IN THE MATTER I OF THE APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN I APPROVAL FOR THE HEADQUARTERS THE BOEING COMPANY'S 1 FOR BOEING COMMERCIAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF AIRPLANE GROUP, SITE PLAN APPROVAL FILE NO. LUA-096-162, SA, ECF 1 - f - • • yl L i [03003-0143/SB970320.012] 2/17/97 • CONTENTS e' I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 III. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS 2 A. CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2 1. General Land Use Goals 2 2. Specific Land Use Goals 3 3. Employment Area--Valley Goals 6 B. ZONING; SITE PLAN REVIEW 7 1. Site Plan Approval 7 2. Setbacks 7 r 3. Building Height 8 4. Lot Area 8 5. Lot Coverage 8 6. Parking 9 fl 7. Signs 9 8. . Sensitive Areas 9 9. Landscaping 10 0 " IV. CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 12 [a.] General Criteria 12 ti [b.] Specific Criteria 0 13 r , 1 P, _ I,_, [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -11- 2/17/97 1 V. STAFF REPORT 16 VI. CONCLUSION 17 EXHIBIT A: Letter dated January 31, 1997 from James Nelson, Vice President, Facilities Asset Management, Boeing Commercial Airplane Group to Gregg Zimmerman, Administrative Planning/Building/Public Works, City of Renton, Re: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Project EXHIBIT B: Space usage and required parking space calculation } I I e II l f 1 [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -111- 2/17/97 I . • y { I. INTRODUCTION The Boeing Company proposes to develop a five-story office building to serve as the headquarters office building for The Boeing Commercial Airplane Group at _ Longacres Park. The Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Headquarters office is presently located on the Boeing Renton Manufacturing Plant facility, also in Renton. . . The new office building will be occupied by the BCAG President and the associated support groups and staff. 4J' This memorandum first examines (1)the applicable Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") sections, (2) the applicable Renton Comprehensive Plan sections, (3) the . Renton Staff Report, including the mitigation measures required by the city, and then. crt I illustrates the proposed BCAG Headquarters compliance with the applicable code sections, plan sections, and staff report and recommendations. a " II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The new Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Headquarters ("BCAG Headquarters") building site will consist of approximately 12 acres, located on the easterly side of the property known as Longacres Park just south of the existing ' I Customer Service Training Center ("CSTC"). Surface parking for approximately 562 vehicles will be provided south of the building. Access to the building will be by the future Oakesdale Avenue from S.W. 27th Street on the south, and from S.W. 16th Street on the north and by extension of the private road-now serving the CSTC site to S.W. 16th. Development of the building site and construction of the building will not impact any wetlands. Surface water will be treated and managed through a staged ti system discharging into a two-stage detention pond located west of the new building. Treated water will be discharged to the east, into existing wetlands, preserving, as nearly as possible, existing surface water drainage patterns. The building site will be extensively landscaped, emphasizing the use of naturally occurring trees, shrubs and plantings. The landscape plan will continue the theme of the CSTC. . iThe building will have a footprint of approximately 68,000 square feet, and a . total office floor space of approximately 300,000 square feet. Approximately 800 employees will occupy the building. The building entrance will be oriented toward the northwest, and will be visible upon entry from the northwest corner of the site. Design of the building and exterior treatment and materials will continue the theme ; r established in the CSTC. 1 [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -1- 2/17/97 • • l !' i INTRODUCTION The Boeing Company proposes to develop a five-story office building to serve as the headquarters office building for The Boeing Commercial Airplane Group at Longacres Park. The Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Headquarters office is presently located on the Boeing Renton Manufacturing Plant facility, also in Renton. The new office building will be occupied bythe BCAG President and the associated support groups and staff This memorandum first examines (1)the applicable Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") sections, (2) the applicable Renton Comprehensive Plan sections, (3) the Renton Staff Report, including the mitigation measures required by the city, and then illustrates the proposed BCAG Headquarters compliance with the applicable code sections, plan sections, and staff report and recommendations. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The new Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Headquarters ("BCAG Headquarters") building site will consist of approximately 12 acres, located on the easterly side of the property known as Longacres Park just south of the existing Customer Service Training Center ("CSTC"). Surface parking for approximately 562 vehicles will be provided south of the building. Access to the building will be by the future Oakesdale Avenue from S.W. 27th Street on the south, and from t l S.W. 16th Street on the north and by extension of the private road now serving the CSTC site to S.W. 16th. I; Development of the building site and construction of the building will not impact any wetlands. Surface water will be treated and managed through a staged system discharging into a two-stage detention pond located west of the new building. Treated water will be discharged to the east, into existing wetlands, preserving, as nearly as possible, existing surface water drainage patterns. The building site will be extensively landscaped, emphasizing the use of naturally occurring trees, shrubs and plantings. The landscape plan will continue the theme of the CSTC. The building will have a footprint of approximately 68,000 square feet, and a total office floor space of approximately 300,000 square feet. Approximately 800 employees will occupy the building. The building entrance will be oriented toward the northwest, and will be visible upon entry from the northwest corner of the site. Design of the building and exterior treatment and materials will continue the theme established in the CSTC. [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -1- 2/17/97 The CSTC was constructed in 1993 on the northerly 55 acres of the 215 acre Longacres Park property. In 1994 and 1995, a draft and fmal environmental impact !� statement was prepared for the development of the remaining 160 acres, known as the Longacres Office Park. While this proposed BCAG office building is consistent with the land uses examined in that EIS for the construction of office buildings on the property, the Longacres Office Park Master Plan has not been submitted to the City. for approval. As a result, this proposed BCAG office building is being proposed as a • stand-alone project. Nevertheless, the surface water drainage system, internal circulation, access, landscaping, and architectural treatment and design of this project will all be consistent with, and integrated into, the CSTC development. It is not known at this time when, or even if, the Company will proceed with seeking approval of the overall Master Plan for the balance of the property. U w III. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS � A. CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan ("Comprehensive Plan"), adopted in 1995 and revised in 1996, sets planning, development and land use goals which are relevant to the proposed new BCAG Headquarters. The relevant goals include certain of the general land use goals, as well as specific goals for commercial development. The BCAG Headquarters conforms to or exceeds each of the relevant goals discussed in the Comprehensive Plan. 1. General Land Use Goals Two of the city's general land use element goals that are relevant to the proposed BCAG Headquarters are: h (1) to provide well-balanced, compatible, attractive, convenient, and robust commercial, office and residential development within designated Centers which serve the needs of the area. (2) to promote a distinctive community identity and an aesthetically pleasing city image. _ Comprehensive Plan at I-1. �{ The BCAG Headquarters will meet both of these goals. First, the BCAG Headquarters will be situated within an area designated by the city as a commercial office area, making the BCAG Headquarters compatible with surrounding uses and contributing to the robust commercial growth that the city desires and is planning for. t ' The BCAG Headquarters is convenient because Longacres Office Park is located [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -2- 2/17/97 • surface water and minimize runoff from the site. Policy LU-288. (5) beautification and screening of parking lots should be encouraged through appropriate landscaping, fencing and I_ berms. Policy LU-291. (6) lighting fixtures should be attractively designed to • complement the architecture of a development and the site, • and adjacent buildings. Policy LU-303. (7) lighting within commercial areas should be designed to enhance security and located to encourage nighttime use of areas by pedestrians. Policy LU-304. (8) the design of buildings and surrounding environment should be compatible with surrounding recent urban designs. Policy LU-305. (9) ensure that development relates, connects, and continues design quality and site functions from parcel to parcel. Policy LU-307. (10) roof tops should be designed to be visually attractive where they are visible from adjacent buildings or roadways. Policy LU-308. (11) landscaping is encouraged to improve appearances and provide drainage control in all parking areas in the street side of the.building. . . . Policy LU-314. • (12) establish a system of private urban open spaces which provide relief from the built environment, contribute to the amenities of the street, or provide amenities for the residents of a development project or employees and customers of commercial and industrial projects. Objective LU-DDD. The BCAG Headquarters meet or exceeds each of these general employment area objectives and policies. Even though the BCAG Headquarters is not in close proximity to other non-Boeing uses, the site and structure of the BCAG Headquarters have been designed to mitigate any potential adverse impacts on adjacent uses. For example, the BCAG Headquarters facade will be constructed with non-reflective glass, eliminating the potential that glare from the BCAG Headquarters might [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -4- 2/17/97 � I • ' r interfere with adjacent uses. The park-like design of the landscaping exceeds the goal of mitigating adverse impacts by creating an open, pleasing and visible landscape. The BCAG landscaping will contain numerous varieties of trees, flowers and other vegetation, thereby attracting birds and other wildlife, creating pleasant views for neighboring uses. The grounds of the BCAG Headquarters, in conjunction with the grounds of the CSTC building, create a large open space with walking trails along waterways and landscaped areas which emphasize the native plant species and the . natural contours of the land. Recreational opportunities are provided through the system of walking trails begun on the CSTC site. Lighting on the exterior of the BCAG Headquarters and within the parking lot is designed to enhance security but will be internally directed; the BCAG Headquarters meets the design objective of compatibility with surrounding sites because the BCAG Headquarters site is designed to be consistent with the CSTC building; and all rooftop equipment will be enclosed in mechanical penthouses. Infrastructure: lei (1) objective: make efficient use of infrastructure. LU-X. (2) policy: adequate infrastructure (e.g. roads, utilities, public services) should be in place prior to occupancy. LU-153 The BCAG Headquarters will make efficient use of infrastructure by using and r., improving existing arterial access points to Longacres Office Park and extending CSTC's heating and cooling system. Under the BCAG construction and design schedule, and with the City's construction of Oakesdale, all necessary roads, utilities and public services are scheduled to be in place prior to occupancy. The Boeing Company has made a commitment to the City to share in the costs. of the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. arterial project. See attached, Exhibit A, Letter from The Boeing Company to the City, January 31, 1997. Pursuant to this commitment, The Boeing Company will dedicate 5 lanes of right-of-way required on Boeing property, and enter into a City Local Improvement District ("LID") Agreement to fund up to an additional $ 2,512,000, plus costs of the LID formation. The City has agreed that the portion of Oakesdale Avenue from the BCAG Headquarters to S.W. 27th Street will be completed by October 1998 when the BCAG Headquarters is available for occupancy. The Boeing Company and the city will coordinate construction activities, since the BCAG Headquarters and Oakesdale Avenue will be constructed simultaneously. [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -5- 2/17/97 1 , 3. Employment Area--Valley Goals In addition to general employment area goals, the Comprehensive Plan has created categories of employment areas, assigning specific policies to each of these specific employment area designations. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the proposed BCAG Headquarters is Employment Area-Valley. The objective of the Employment Area-Valley designation is to ensure quality • '—' development and to "provide for a mix of employment-based uses, including, commercial, office and industrial development to support the economic development of the City of Renton." LU-EEa. The following policies, which are intended to implement these objectives, are relevant to the proposed BCAG Headquarters. P P P q (1) compatible and related land uses should be encouraged to locate in proximity to one another. LU-212.2 (2) multi-story office uses should be located in areas most likely to be served by future multi-modal transportation opportunities. A greater emphasis on public amenities is appropriate for this type of use. LU-212.5 (3) developments should be encouraged to achieve greater efficiency in site utilization and result in benefits to users with techniques including: r j a. shared facilities such as parking and site access, recreation facilities and amenities; b. an improved ability to serve development with • transit by centralizing transit stops; and c. an opportunity to provide support services (e.g. copy center, coffee shop or lunch facilities, express mail services) for nearby development that otherwise might not exist. LU-212.6. (4) street trees and landscaping should be required for new L' development within the Valley to provide an attractive streetscaping areas subjected to a transition of land uses. LU-212.19 (5) vehicular connections between adjacent parking areas are encouraged. Incentives should be offered to encourage shared parking. LU-212-21. f 03003-0143/SB970320.012) -6- 2/17/97 (y, (6) site design for office uses should consider ways of improving transit ridership through siting, locating of pedestrian amenities, walkways, parking, etc. LU-212.23. As is evident from the six policies listed above, the Comprehensive Plan favors shared facilities services and access points. In particular, the Comprehensive Plan encourages shared access to and use of transportation. The BCAG Headquarters and the CSTC building will share recreational facilities, access to the public roadways, and access to public transportation. The new portion of Oakesdale Avenue which will be constructed through the cooperation of the Company and the City will provide public access from S.W. 16th Street to SW 27th Street. The CSTC and BCAG Headquarters will share access points to public transportation. Metro routes 163, 240, 280 and 340 provide service at a distance of 0.5 miles from the project site. The sidewalks and boulevard style landscaping that will border the sidewalks at the BCAG Headquarters, in conjunction with the sidewalks already constructed for CSTC, will provide safe, pleasant, and easy access to public transportation. Shared ridership through van pools and car pools will be encouraged at the BCAG Headquarters through provision of drop-off points at the building, dedicated carpool and vanpool parking spaces, and kiosks in the building providing information on ridesharing. B. ZONING; SITE PLAN REVIEW Longacres Office Park, including the portion on which the BCAG Headquarters will be located, is zoned Commercial Office (CO). One of the primary permitted uses in CO Zones is office headquarters. RMC 4-31-16(B)(1). The applicable development standards are: 1. Site Plan Approval Site_Plan Approval is required for all developments within the CO Zone. RMC 4-31-16(D). 2. Setbacks a. Front Street: a minimum of fifteen feet. RMC 4-31- 16(D)(3)(a). b. Street Setback's depend on the height of the building. For buildings that are between 25 feet and 80 feet high, the range that the BCAG Headquarters (excluding the 15' penthouse) falls within, the minimum required street set back is 20 feet. RMC 4-31-16(D)(3)(b). [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -7- 2/17/97 The proposed street setback for the BCAG building is approximately 100 feet, thus meeting both the front street and general street setback standards. 3. Building Height The maximum building height in CO zones is 250 feet, although there are special height allowances that may be granted by the Hearing Examiner provided certain conditions are met. • _ - RMC 4-31-16(D)(4)(a)-(b). The height of the BCAG Headquarters will be approximately 80 feet, excluding mechanical penthouses, elevator shafts or other appurtenances. Therefore, the height of the BCAG Headquarters is well within the CO zone height limit. 4. Lot Area A minimum lot size of 25,000 square feet is required in CO Zones. RMC 4-31-16(D)(5). The site for the BCAG Headquarters, parking and landscape areas is approximately 12 acres, thus exceeding the required minimum in CO zones. 5. Lot Coverage In general, lot coverage for buildings may not exceed 65% percent of the total lot area. RMC 4-31-16(D)(6)(a). "Lot coverage" is defined as the horizontal area measured with the outside walls of all principal and accessory buildings on a lot including all covered decks and porches. RMC 4-31-2. "Lot" is defined as "a specifically described parcel of land with boundary lines defining the extent of the lot in a given direction." RMC 4-31-2. According to both a literal interpretation of the lot coverage code sections, and an interpretation in keeping with the apparent intent of this code section, the BCAG Headquarters is well below the 65% coverage maximum lot coverage. The lot coverage of the BCAG Headquarters Building is approximately 68,000 sq. ft. (1.5 acres). Following the code's definition of"lot", a specifically described parcel, the lot that the BCAG Headquarters will be situated on is a 72,830 acre tax parcel. The lot coverage area of the BCAG Headquarters, using the "specifically described parcel", is' 0.2%. Since this code section is probably intended to prevent construction of • [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -8- 2/17/97 buildings that are too large for their sites, using the approximately 12 acre site on which the BCAG Headquarters is situated is more in keeping with the intent of the code. Using the 12 acre site as the lot, the lot area coverage for the BCAG Headquarters is 13%. The BCAG Headquarters is well within the maximum lot area coverage whether the tax parcel or building site is designated as the "lot." 6. Parking • I� Detailed parking requirements and standards are set forth at Chapter 4-14 RMC. The number of parking spaces required for a particular development is a function of the building use. See, L RMC 4-14-8. Generally, parking requirements for offices are a minimum of 3 parking spaces per each 1,000 feet of gross floor area and not more than a maximum of 4.5 parking spaces per each 1,000 square feet of"gross floor area." Gross floor area is defmed in the code as "the main areas of the building that are occupied...and does not include accessory areas ordinarily used by the occupant such as rest rooms, stairs shafts, wall thickness, corridors, lobbies and mechanical rooms. RMC 4-14-2. Since the "gross floor area" of the BCAG Headquarters, as that term is defmed by the RMC, will be approximately 163,900 square feet (see Exhibit B for calculations), the range of required parking spaces for the BCAG Headquarters is a minimum of 492 to a maximum of 738. The site plan includes 562 parking spaces, within the permitted range. 7. Signs Chapter 20, section 4 of the RMC contains detailed requirements for signs. Specific requirements for CO Zones are contained in RMC 4-20-12(C), including the requirement that a wall sign may not cover 20% of the building facade. The Boeing Company has not yet determined what type of sign will be used at the BCAG Headquarters, but will adhere to all applicable code sections and obtain the required sign permit. 8. Sensitive Areas The RMC defines several different types of sensitive areas including wetlands, steep slopes, flood hazard areas and shorelines. The RMC has promulgated development regulations for each of these sensitive areas. I^� 4_ I [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -9- 2/17/97 r A portion of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain. Some fill will be required to replace excavated material and to raise the elevation of buildings, roads and parking lots, so as to be above the 100 year flood plain elevations. Aside from portions of the site being located in the 100 year flood plan, The BCAG Headquarters is not located in any other sensitive area. A small amount of utility and stormwater drainage work will be done in the wetland buffers: a portion of the utilidor will be in a wetland buffer on the north east section of the site in order to keep this portion of the utilidor out of Oakesdale • Avenue; there will be two ducts in a wetland buffer at the south end of the site, though only a manhole cover will be visible; and the stormwater drainage plan calls for using the existing stormwater discharge area that is in a wetland buffer east of the building. Additionally, because a large portion of this site is bounded by wetlands, a limited amount of construction staging will need to take place in some buffer areas. No vehicles will be permitted in wetland buffers. Each of the wetland buffers will be restored and replanted as required by the Environmental Review Committee's mitigation condition #1. No other sensitive area regulations are implicated by this project. 9. Landscaping RMC 4-31-34 contains detailed landscaping requirements. To ensure that the landscaping requirements are implemented, the city requires that all property users, except single and two family residences, submit a landscape plan to the city when a user applies for building permits. RMC 4-31-34(B). All approved landscaping must be completed on site before the issuance of an occupancy permit. RMC 4-31-34(C). In addition, the RMC contains landscape provisions that apply only to sites -, within certain geographical areas or certain zones. Developments in the Green River h' Valley, which includes the BCAG Headquarters site, must provide a minimum of 2% of the total site for landscaping suitable for wildlife habitat. RMC 4-31-34 (F)(2). { RMC includes the following specific landscaping requirements for CO Zones requirements. a. Landscaping along areas abutting public streets shall have a minimum landscaping strip of ten feet. RMC 4-31-16(D)(10). r The Boeing Company has retained a landscape architect to design and implement a landscaping plan for the BCAG Headquarters. The BCAG Headquarters site landscape plan calls for landscaping that abuts the future Oakesdale Avenue to [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -10- 2/17/97 ' have a landscaped stripof at least.ten fee with a combination of shrubbery, trees and P � rY� • - lawn. The landscape architect's design integrates the BCAG Headquarters landscaping with the landscaping of the CSTC. The landscaping plan is not finalized at this time but will address specific treatment styles and plant types for the following areas: parking lots, building perimeter, Oakesdale Avenue, and entry court areas. The entry court area is proposed to be landscaped in a plaza style, creating a garden effect in the visitor parking area. Within both of the parking areas, the landscape plan proposes that trees be planted in an "orchard" style, which would include the use of deciduous shade trees (e.g. red oak, Norway maple), flowering trees (e.g. crabapples, flowering dogwood, flowering cherry) and coniferous trees (e.g. Deodar cedar, ; Monterey pine). The perimeter of the parking lot is proposed to be lined with Lombardi Poplars which will act as a wind break and which are consistent with the existing trees on the site. Parking lot access walkways are proposed to be lined with hedges such as English laurel and huckleberry. Diverse ornamental tree, shrub and ground cover plantings are proposed for the building perimeter and entry court so that loading docks and parking bays will be screened by vegetation in addition to other appropriate screening. On the west side of the building the landscape plan calls for rows of alder and black cottonwood, trees that are excellent perch habitat for raptors. The placement of the trees will lead one's eye toward the view of Mt. Rainier. The l-_ landscaping at the far north end of the site is planned to continue the forest effect begun with the landscaping of the CSTC. The newly planted shrubs and trees will provide nesting habitat for birds. In , total, about 4 acres of the 12 acre site, or about 33%, will be landscaped with trees or shrubbery, more than the 2%required by RMC 4-31-34(F)(2) for wildlife habitat. (About 1 acre of this landscaping is in the south parking lot; removing that amount as "habitat," still leaves about 25% of the site as suitable for wildlife habitat.) b. Pedestrian Connection: a pedestrian connection shall be provided from a public entrance to the • street unless the Hearing Examiner determines that the requirement would unduly endanger the h pedestrian. RMC 4-31-16(D) Pedestrian connections are provided from all abutting streets and parking areas at the BCAG Headquarters Building. c. All on-site surface mounted utility and mechanical ' equipment shall be screened from public view. RMC 4-31-16(D)(11). [03003-0143/SB970320.012) -1 1- 2/17/97 i • • All roof top mechanical equipment will be housed within mechanical penthouses. The building design calls for the placement of transformers within the building itself. d. All operating equipment located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from • view, except for telecommunication equipment. RMC 4-31-16(D)(12). All rooftop equipment on the BCAG Headquarters will be enclosed in • mechanical penthouses. e. All garbage, refuse or dumpsters shall be screened, except for access points, by a sight obscuring fence or landscaping or some combination thereof. RMC j 4-31-16(D)(13). A trash compactor will be located in the loading dock area and will be screened with vegetation. - IV. CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW The RMC lists a number of site plan review criteria that are characterized as "objectives of good site plans to be aimed for in development with the city of Renton." 4-31-33(D). The RMC is careful to note that, although conformance with _ the criteria is generally desirable, strict compliance is not required: Strict compliance with any one or more particular criterion may not be necessary or reasonable. These criteria . . . provide a 1-- frame of reference for the applicant in developing a site, but are not intended to be inflexible standards or to discourage creativity and innovation. RMC, 4-31-33(D). Site Plan Review criteria relevant to the development of BCAG Headquarters include: . [a.] General Criteria [1.] Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements ( ; and policies; • [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -12- 2/17/97 [2.] Conformance with existing land use regulations; [3.] Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses; [4.] Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan for the site; [5.] Conservation of area-wide property values; • [6.] Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; - _ r [7.] Provision of adequate light and air; [8.] Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions; [9.] Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; and [10.] Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight. RMC, 4-31-3 3(D). [b.] Specific Criteria As discussed above in Sections IIIA and IIIB, the site plan for the BCAG Headquarters meets or exceeds the relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the applicable land use regulations. Incorporated in this memorandum's discussion of how the BCAG Headquarters conforms'with the Comprehensive Plan and land use code, is how site plan review criteria [3] through [10] are met. In addition to the general criteria listed above, the RMC sets forth a number of II specific site plan criteria that are relevant to developments such as the BCAG. For example, the RMC sets forth a number of specific requirements for mitigating development impacts on surrounding properties and on the project site itself. Criteria that are relevant to mitigating the impacts of the BCAG Headquarters on surrounding properties include: [a.] Provision of a desirable transition and linkage between uses and to the street, utility, walkway, and trail systems in the surrounding areas by the arrangement of landscaping, fencing and/or other buffering techniques, in order to prevent conflicts . and to promote coordinated and planned benefit from, and access to, such elements; 4 _! [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -1 3- 2/17/97 [b.] Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over-concentration of structures on a particular portion of a site such that they create a perception of greater height or bulk than intended under the spirit of the Zoning Code; • [c.] Effective location, design and screening of parking and service • areas in order to promote efficient function of such facilities, to provide integrated facilities between uses when beneficial; to promote "campus-like" or "park-like" layouts in appropriate zones, and to prevent unnecessary repetition and conflict between uses and service areas and facilities . . . recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visible accessibility to attractive natural features and of promoting "campus-like" or "park-like" settings in appropriate zones; [d.] Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over-concentration or the impression of oversized structures; [e.] Use of existing topography to reduce undue cutting, filling and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary stormwater runoff, and to preserve stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation; and [f.] Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movement. 4-31-33(D)(2). As discussed in detail supra, the BCAG Headquarters site has been carefully ' designed to create not only a signature building, but also to be consistent with the CSTC site. The CSTC and BCAG buildings share similar design features such as the predominance of green glass supported by a white structure. The BCAG Headquarters site landscaping plan continues the themes of geometry, contrasts between manicured and forested areas and accessibility through park-like layouts begun with the CSTC landscaping design. As a result of the ample spacing between CSTC and the BCAG Headquarters, the BCAG site design has avoided an over- concentration of structures on the combined sites. • [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -14- 2/17/97 I f I ' P Several of the site plan review criteria are designed to mitigate impacts of the proposed project to the site itself. [a.] Building placement and spacing to provide for privacy and noise reduction; orientation to views and vistas and to site amenities, to sunlight and prevailing winds and to pedestrian and vehicle • needs; Li [b.] Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in - relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over concentration or impression of oversized structures; [c.] Preservation of the desirable natural landscape through retention of existing vegetation and limited soil removal insofar as the natural characteristics will enhance the proposed development; [d.] Use of existing topography to reduce undue cutting, filing and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary storm water runoff and to preserve stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation; [e.] Limitation of paved or impervious surfaces, where feasible, to reduce runoff and increase natural infiltration; [f.] Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements; [g.] Consideration of building form and placement and landscaping to enhance year-round conditions of sun and shade both on site and on adjacent properties and to promote energy conservation. 4-3 1-33(D)(3). The Boeing Company has considered and incorporated these criteria into the design of the site plan. For example, the BCAG Headquarters is situated so that scenic vistas of-Mt. Rainier and the Cascade Mountains will be visible from the building. Existing vegetation on the site consists of over-mature Poplar trees and unmaintained vegetation between the old barn foundations that will be removed and landscaped to enhance the development. Where feasible, existing topography will be used as the landscape plan calls for following the natural slopes of the terrain. Careful consideration has been given to developing human spaces, e.g. walking trials, outdoor eating areas, and vehicle spaces, and using landscaping to visually direct vehicles to vehicle areas in the landscape plan. Impervious surfaces will be reduced [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -15- 2/17/97 • in vehicle areas where it is necessary to have impervious surfaces by creating landscaped areas both within the parking lots and the loading dock area. Finally, site plans must meet a number of criteria relating to circulation and access. Among the criteria that are particularly relevant to the BCAG are: [a.] Provision of adequate and safe vehicular access to and from all property; [b.] Arrangement of the circulation pattern so that all ingress and egress movements may occur at as few points as possible along the public street, the points being capable of channelization for turning movement; [c.] Promotion of the safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways; [d.] Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and. pedestrian areas; [e.] Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas; and [£] Provision for safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. RMC 4-31-33(D)(4). • Each of these access and circulation criteria are reflected in the BCAG site plan in the following ways: only four curb cuts are planned along Oakesdale Avenue for the entire BCAG Headquarters site; turn arounds and pedestrian walkways are central features of both the north and south parking lots; and fmally, the site plan was revised to separate the loading/delivery areas from pedestrian and employee parking areas. V. STAFF REPORT The City of Renton issued a Staff Report on February 11, 1997, which recommends that the BCAG Headquarters project be approved and which recommends six mandatory mitigation measures. The Boeing Company is satisfied [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -16- 2/17/97 • that the Staff Report is thoroughin its analysis and conclusions. Therefore, The P Y Boeing Company supports the staffs recommendation for the project's approval and does not object to the recommended mitigation measures. Additionally, The Boeing Company will comply with the two additional concerns identified in the staff report: (1) the applicant shall designate pedestrian pathways that cross over vehicle roadways • by either painting crosswalks on the pavement or by using a different paving material in these areas; (2) the applicant shall submit a report identifying the probable source of any fill material and the probable site for deposition of export material, the primary route trucks will use to access the site, the expected time of operation of the trucks and the expected hours in which the trucks will operate. There a few minor clarifications to the report, however, to be made. First, on page four of the staff report, the report states that surface water will be discharged to the north of the site into the CSTC site. The surface water discharge system will actually discharge storm water to the east, as it does now, and as is correctly described on page 11 of the staff report. Second, the entry road will not encroach into any wetlands or wetland buffer area. No use of existing "credits," as described on page 10, is necessary. The number of parking spaces at the BCAG Headquarters will be 562, not 560. Finally, some of the numbers for the building dimensions, listed on page 6, do not reflect revisions made and approved by the City: the height of the - building will be 80 feet, not 75 feet; the building height with the penthouses will be 95 feet, not 90 feet; and the building footprint is actually 68,000, not 71,000 feet. VI. CONCLUSION The proposed BCAG Headquarters conforms to the RMC's criteria for site plan review. In particular, the BCAG Headquarters conforms to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and to the City's zoning requirements; will meet all conditions of the MDNS designed to mitigate impacts of the BCAG Headquarters; will be landscaped to integrate the landscaping of the CSTC so as to enlarge the "park-like" setting; and will provide a system of road:, walkways and trails to ensure the safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation. We respectfully urge the Hearing Examiner to approve the site plan for the — BCAG Headquarters. [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -17- 2/17/97 DATED: February 17, 1997. Respectfully submitted, • PERKINS COIE • Attorneys for The Boeing Company • By &LI Richard E. McCann By l� Adrienne E. Qu• • [03003-0143/SB970320.012] -18- 2/17/97 James J.Nelson Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Vice President P.O.Box 3707.#MS 2R-70 Facilities Asset Management Seattle.WA 98124-2207 January 31, 1997 6-8W 1 H-97-RJF-001 le") • • Mr. Gregg Zimmerman ' Administrator BO /NG Planning/Building/Public Works City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Proje Phase I- - S.W. 16`h Street t Street 41` Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Sul g 7 This letter is confirmation of Boeing's commitment to share in the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. arterial project. -- i 1) During the design phase of this project, Boeing will enter into an LID agreement created by the City of Renton for the purpose of providing the private sector share of the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. project. Boeing's share g shall not exceed $2,512,000 plus costs of formation of the LID, and the fair market value of dedicated right-of-way. 2) At such time during the design plan phase when legal descriptions can be Boeingwill execute a document of understandingwith the City ty and will dedicate to the City the right-of-ways required on Boeing property for the full five lanes from 16th Street to 27th Street. This property is now conservatively valued at approximately $1,300,00 and will be appraised. O L. • • • January 31, 1997 6-8W 1H-97-RJF-001 • 3) LID bonds will be sold to pay the cost of the interim LID financing and to _ . pay the private share of the project costs, or the bonds will be issued prior to construction to fix the private sector share and eliminate interim financing costs. Based on current estimates for the project and band on the current City funding the estimated TIB shares, the total principcosts that will be financed through the LID is estimated at $2,512,000 plus the costs of ID - BOE/NG formation. Boeing's LID payments will include interest on principn d will be amortized over a time period acceptable to Boeing. Boeing's cost share of this project is based on parameters established in item number 2A of the Longacres Office Park EIS Mitigation Document. Boeing hereby authorizes the use of this letter by the City of Renton for transmittal to the State Transportation Improvement Board as a means of documenting Boeing's commitment to the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Project. Sincerely, • • J.J. Nelson Li cc: Jay Covington Lee Haro • Bob Mahn Sandra Meyer i Larry Warren • BCAG Headquarters Office Building Program Area Summary TOTAL DEPT. GROSS FLR. DEPT. CIRCULA- LOBBIES& AREA FOR DEPARTMENT ACCESSORY PROGRAM TION& PARKING AREA WALLS AREAS COUNT • EXECUTIVE COMPLEX 47,310 sf 15,770 sf 0 sf 31,540 sf • SALES FINANCIAL CONTROLS 614 sf 134 sf 0 sf 480 sf CUSTOMER FOCUS TEAMS: _ COMMON AREAS 1,859 sf 407 sf 0 sf 1,452 sf AMERICAS 18,318 sf 3,946 sf 1,280 sf 13,092 sf ASIA/PACIFIC 23,160 sf 4,982 sf 1,280 sf 16,898 sf 1 SA/PAC,AFRICA MIDDLE EAST 16,729 sf 3,597 sf 1,280 sf 11,852 sf EUROPE 11,968 sf 2,556 sf 1,280 sf 8,132 sf 1 CONTRACTS/PRICING 13,430 sf 2,938 sf 0 sf 10,492 sf MARKETING 13,928 sf 3,047 sf 0 sf 10,881 sf SALES OPERATIONS 2,214 sf 484 sf 0 sf 1,730 sf CUSTOMER AFFAIRS 6,705 sf 1,467 sf 123 sf 5,115 sf LEGAL 3,328 sf 728 sf 0 sf 2,600 sf COMMUNICATIONS 5,898 sf 1,290 sf 0 sf 4,608 sf PRODUCT STRATEGY 3,062 sf 670 sf 0 sf 2,392 sf CORPORATE TREASURY 3,878 sf 848 sf 0 sf 3,030 sf BUSINESS STRATEGY 1,966 sf 430 sf 0 sf 1,536 sf PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 399 sf 87 sf 0 sf 312 sf HUMAN RESOURCES 5,322 sf 1,164 sf 0 sf 4,158 sf PRODUCT MARKETING 2,529 sf 553 sf 0 sf 1,976 sf GRAPHICS 3,331 sf 729 sf 0 sf 2,602 sf FINANCE 10,496 sf 2,296 sf 0 sf 8,200 sf ETHICS&PROCESS MANAGEMENT 1,055 sf 231 sf 0 sf 824 sf BUSINESS RESOURCES-PRODUCE 812 sf 178 sf 0 sf 634 sf BUSINESS RESOURCES Q&P 1,892 sf 414 sf 0 sf 1,478 sf CAFETERIA 9,500 sf 1,070 sf 0 sf 8,430 sf LOBBY/ATRIUM 10,200 sf 0 sf 10,200 sf 0 sf BUILDING CORE: 1 LOADING DOCK 4,025 sf 0 sf 4,025 sf 0 sf JANITOR/MAIL/STORAGE 3,334 sf 0 sf 3,334 sf 0 sf MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL 10,559 sf 0 sf 10,559 sf 0 sf STAIRS/ELEVATORS 11,000 sf 0 sf 11,000 sf 0 sf RESTROOMS 5,000 sf 0 sf 5,000 sf 0 sf CONFERENCE ROOMS 9,456 sf 0 sf 0 sf 9,456 sf BUILDING CORRIDORS(OUTSIDE OF DEPTS.) 38,723 sf 38,723 sf 0 sf 0 sf TOTALS 302,000 sf 88,739 sf 49,361 sf 163,900 sf L•ItN-( 13 1t 13 • NOTES: __ L 1. SEDIMENT TRAP DESIGN SURFACE AREA AT • BOTTOM OF SPILLWAY = 2,650 SF (MIN). STAFF GAUGE SPILLWAY 2. SEE NOTE 11, SHEET 9L80 FOR AREA RESTRICTIONS. • �9L8J 19L81 3 /STAFF GAUGE POST SHALL X WOODEN4 DRIVEN 24" INTO TRAP BOTTOM WITH A PROMINENT MARK 1 FOOT ABOVE THE t TRAP BOTTOM TO AID IN DETERMINING SEDIMENT DEPTH. SEDIMENT SHALL BE `' REMOVED FROM THE TRAP WHEN IT REACHES •In C • 1 FOOT IN DEPTH. ' 9.819L'1 • EXISTING —_ ADJACENT EXISTING 9 GRADE Q I GRADE 9L819L81 tD - 3y'�� aI 3N:\V =1! it / \_ _ II 1—t;\ I—; i—t 12" TESL -1 1 —I =1 =!I I=. = _ 1 1=1 I -' DRAIN -17_ — —I — — —i I „ a L` ' SECTION SEDIMENT TRAP - 13.5' 69' SCALE: NONE 9 81 9L811 13.5' 4' 13.5' 5' 13.5' • DETAIL SEDIMENT TRAP / I \ SCALE: NONE PLAN 91_1��1 • BOTTOM OF SPILLWAY 2"-4" ROCK 3/4" - 1 1/2" MINUS ADJACENT EXISTING WASHED GRAVEL z 6' GRADE OR MOUNDED AS NECESSARY ADJACENT EXISTING GRADE EXISTING STAFF GAUGE N. 'IN GRADE 7 _ N N 12" TESC DRAIN 1 -!I I— 3H• T 1V T. _— ,- r—- 2„-4" ROCK 11t�.it l It 1V HIV ^tip 3H� �� 3N' —!11=III -,1i_: —II'- :I 1 —! — II= 1 —1 I— .-- LEVEL BOTTOM 3_ —i :, •,.I:_ V M 1—i _I —I _ 12" THICK =1 —i i- ' =i I' — 1 —I t — — '1—� — —I ='i 1 — — — — — — 111 I I 1 ,11 1.^ 11 I= _ 11 1=111=111= 1I 111=!11 i-1 I 11=1 II —i 1�'_ III— I- ,I ! 1! —I I 1—i 1=' —1 1 I' - — — T l —I —I _l —, I-1 —III—: !— I —I 1=I I1 I. 1 1 I I —1 1! 1 ! —i I I=1 I 1 I- -i 1 I_1=!I I-III_' I I-! 1 , I 1 I i 11 I i i=1 I-1,1=1 I I 'I'� i I-1 I '! —I 1 1=�1 1=1 I;- I 1 1 I I _ I—I —I , -I I=i 1-�i t-!I I-! =1 .I=i I I=' _1 I I1!11 11i 1 -�i 1 ! i i i !�1111 .! I!I-�I -1 I I-1 I i ;I!=1 1 �---- i �i — I I I—_— =i I I—:.. i'1 I ': I'—I — — — — 1, !— — — I I I I=1' =1 I: '�I —. :=I =1 I I=111-1 1 1=1 —III-Ii1 1-I - 1 1-I!1-I l I-11 111 1 I- I- '1 IIII I- I-' -' I_1 i =1 - - -i I— -I 1=. I=1 I!-i I! 1 i i-i 11-;I -Ili -I I 11-III-1 .I I-,i! 1 i t1!I1 I I, i I I1 I I �.Ii i i1!I. I 69' 'INN 5' GEOTEXTILE 3/4" - 1 1/2" FABRIC WASHED GRAVEL, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 12' THICK I ' SECTION SEDIMENT TRAP n SECTION SPILLWAY / l SCALE: NONE 9L819181 SCALE: NONE 9L8 99L 1 S. 1/2, sEC. 24, T. 2X, It 4E, M. N. 1/2, SEC. 25, T. 23N., R. 4E,WY --- --------- ----------- ------- ---- - ----- -------- vil-di ea r N!l.�q 600 t08th Avenue N.E. JD ZI Bellevue, 2 80004 c I V I L_ N c_ (206) 452-8000 ! CITY OF RENTON '- DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 'WORKS • BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DETAILS - SHEET _ -- DESIGNED: DATE: 11.27.96 FILE NAME: JGS00001 DRAWN: S.F.D. DWG RD. CHECKED: NOTED • NO. REVISION BY APPR. DATE APPROVES SHEET: 0F: JGS00001.DWG SFD/11.27.96 1 A GENERAL TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES: y. THESE NOTES APPLY TO TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) PLAN DRAWINGS 9L7 TO 9L125. 1. BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OCCURS. A PRECONSTRUCTION 21.FOR ALL TESC PONDS WHERE THE DEAD STORAGE EXCEEDS 6 INCHES, A FENCE, A MEETING MUST BE HELD WITH THE CITY OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION. MINIMUM OF 3 FEET HIGH IS REQUIRED WITH 3:1 SIDESLOPES EXTENDING FROM THE POND PLAN REVIEW PROJECT MANAGER. TO THE CHAIN LINK FENCE. THE FENCE TYPE SHALL BE AS DESCRIBED IN SPECIFICATIONS 2. ALL LIMITS OF CLEARING (PROJECT LIMITS) AND AREAS OF VEGETATION PRESERVATION SECTION 02771 WITHOUT THE FILTER FABRIC AND WOOD POSTS. AS PRESCRIBED ON THE PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY FLAGGED (WITH FENCING) IN THE FIELD 22. CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE EXISTING ROADS FOR CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC WHEREVER AND OBSERVED DURING CONSTRUCTION. THE FLAGGING (FENCING) SHALL BE MAINTAINED POSSIBLE. ANY POTHOLES OR MUDHOLES SHALL BE FILLED WITH COARSE ROCK TO BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. PREVENT EROSION/SEDIMENTATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 3. THE TESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED A COARSE ROCK OVERLAY FOR ANY ROADING REQUIRED OFF OF EXISTING ESTABLISHED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THEIR CONTINUED PROPER FUNCTIONING. TRAFFIC AREAS. 4. THE TESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A 23.A TEMPORARY STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, 24' X 100' X 8" OF 4 TO 8 INCH MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT QUARRY SPALLS SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL POINTS OF VEHICULAR INGRESS AND (EXCEEDING 1" IN 24 HOURS). EGRESS TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, SEE DETAIL 2, SHEET 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT A PORTION OF POND "A" TO ACT AS A TESC THESE ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINING OF CONSTRUCTION AND POND PRIOR TO ANY SURFACE DISTURBANCE OR SITE WORK ACTIVITIES. THE INITIAL PORTION MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURES. SUCH AS SHALL CONNECT TO EXISTING OUTLET TO SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND CONTAIN AN WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE. THE REPLACEMENT OF THE CULVERT CONNECTION TO FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. SPRINGBROOK CREEK SHALL OCCUR DURING LOW FLOW ON SPRINGBROOK CREEK, AND 24. WETLAND BOUNDARIES SHOWN WERE DETERMINED BY SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. THE DISTURBED AREA SHALL DRAIN TOWARD POND "A'. A TEMPORARY DAM SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH METHODS SUGGESTED IN THE "FEDERAL MANUAL FOR CONSTRUCTED TO PREVENT WATERS FROM SPRINGBROOK CREEK FROM ENTERING IDENTIFYING AND DELINEATING JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS" (FEDERAL INTERAGENCY THE EXCAVATION. COMMITTEE FOR WETLAND DELINEATION, 1987). 6. THE TESC CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE COMPLETED AS DEFINED IN THE CONSTRUCTION 25.ACCEPTABLE TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DRAINAGE PIPE SPECIFICATIONS. MATERIALS FOR TESC USE: 7. INTERIM STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM PROTECTION FROM SEDIMENTATION SHALL BE -POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) SEWER PIPE PROVIDED WITH EXISTING CATCH BASIN PROTECTION AS DETAILED ON SHEET ASTM D3034 SDR 35 BY TESC POND "A". ALL EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEMS WILL PASS THROUGH THIS POND -POLYETHYLENE CORRUGATED PIPE WITH AN INTEGRALLY FORMED SMOOTH INTERIOR PRIOR TO DISCHARGE INTO SPRINGBROOK CREEK. AASHTO M252 & M-294 8. APPROVAL OF THIS TESC PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN APPROVAL OF PERMANENT ROAD -REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE (RCP) OR STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN, SIZE NOR LOCATION OF PIPES. RESTRICTORS, CHANNELS OR ASTM C76, CLASS IV . RETENTION FACILITIES. -DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) 9. THIS TESC PLAN REPRESENTS MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. CLASS 50 THE CONTRACTOR MAY PROPOSE A DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENT OR MAY MOVE PONDS -CORRUGATED METAL PIPE (CMP) AND TRAPS PER CHAPTER 5 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN GALVAVIZED STEEL PER AASHTO M36 TYPE I WITH HELICAL LOCK SEAM MANUAL. ANY CHANGE REQUIRES A COMPLETE SUBMITTAL BY THE CONTRACTOR LONGITUDINAL JOINTS; COATED INSIDE AND OUT WITH BITUMINOUS COATING AS WELL AS REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND THE TREATMENT 1. CITY OF RENTON. COUPLING BANDS: GALVANIZED STEEL WITH CORRUGATIONS MATCHING THE PIPE, 10. ALL REQUIRED TESC FACILITIES MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND IN OPERATION PRIOR TO 0.052 INCH THICKNESS BY 10 INCHES WIDE: WITH NEOPRENE GASKET. LAND CLEARING AND/OR OTHER CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT-LADEN 26. MINIMUM COVER FOR PIPE SHALL BE 1 FOOT MINIMUM OR AS REQUIRED FOR WATER DOES NOT ENTER THE NATURAL DRAINAGE SYSTEM. ALL FACILITIES SHALL BE ANTICIPATED LOADS. -- MAINTAINED IN A SATISFACTORY CONDITION UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT CLEARING 27. AT NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE FOOT OF SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO AND/OR CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AND POTENTIAL FOR ON-SITE EROSION HAS ACCUMULATE WITHIN AN EXISTING CATCH BASIN. ALL EXISTING CATCH BASINS PASSED. THE IMPLEMENTATION, MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT AND ADDITIONS TO AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING TESC SYSTEMS SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. UNTIL ALL OPERATION SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM CONSTRUCTION IS APPROVED. AS MAY BE NEEDED TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES SYSTEM. AND WATER QUALITY OF THE RECEIVING DRAINAGE SYSTEM. 28. ALL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 SHALL RECEIVE SPECIAL TREATMENT INCLUDING 11. TESC SUBCATCHMENT AREAS DELINEATE SUGGESTED CONTRIBUTING AREAS FOR TESC JUTE MATTING, MULCHING AND SEEDING, OR ROCK LINING WITH BIOENGINEERING _ PONDS AND TRAPS. IN NO CASE SHALL TESC SUBCATCHMENT AREAS BOUNDARIES SLOPE PROTECTION PLANTINGS. BE ALTERED OR GRADING COMPLETED IN SUCH A WAY THAT MORE THAN 3 ACRES 29. FOR SURVEY CONTROL SEE SHEET G5. OF DISTURBED. UNCOVERED AREA WILL CONTRIBUTE TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR MORE THAN 10 ACRES TO A TESC POND. 12. ALL PONDS AND TRAPS SHALL HAVE 3:1 SIDESLOPES. ALL PONDS SHALL HAVE 10 FOOT WIDE, 5:1 (MAX) MAINTENANCE RAMPS. ANY PERMANENT DETENTION FACILITY USED AS A TEMPORARY SETTLING BASIN SHALL BE MODIFIED WITH THE NECESSARY TESC MEASURES AND SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY. 13. PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. THIS TESC PLAN IS DESIGNED FOR EXISTING, PRE-GRADING CONDITIONS. AS GRADING COMMENCES, CHANGES IN THE TESC SYSTEM, INCLUDING POND AND SEDIMENT TRAP LOCATION, WILL BE REQUIRED. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING WHEN CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE, WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED AND HOW TO IMPLEMENT THEM. TESC FACILITIES SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN THE THE FOOTPRINT OF PLANNED BUILDINGS. 14. NO TESC FACILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN WITHIN THE WETLAND AREA OF THE MAIN RACING TRACK. CONSTRUCTION OF POND "A" WILL INITIALLY SERVE TESC PURPOSES FOR THIS AREA, WITH NO MORE THAN 10 ACRES OF CONTRIBUTING AREA BEING DISTURBED WITHOUT INSTALLATION OF ADDITIONAL TESC MEASURES, OR THE INITIAL AREAS CAN I • BE HYDROSEEDED, OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED TO ALLOW DISTURBANCE OF ADDITIONAL AREA. 15. PROPOSED ROADWAYS, PARKING LOTS AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT SHOWN, THEREFORE SOME PROPOSED CONTOUR LINES DO NOT APPEAR CONTINUOUS. 16. EXISTING UTILITIES AND OTHER SUBSURFACE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE PLANS IS NOT i GUARANTEED TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND PROTECT ANY SUBSURFACE OBJECTS THAT MAY AFFECT OR CONFLICT WITH THE WORK OF THIS CONTRACT. 17. THE EXISTING BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN REMOVED TO FOUNDATION LEVEL. THESE FEATURES ARE SHOWN TO INDICATE POSSIBLE ENCOUNTERS WITH UTILITIES PREVIOUSLY SERVING THEM. S. 1/2, SEC. 24,T. 23N., R. 4E, WY 18. ALL ROUGH GRADING SLOPES SHALL BE GRADED TO DRAIN TOWARD A TESC POND OR • N. 1/2, SEC. 25,T. 21., R. 4E,N.Y. TRAP. ANY STOCKPILES OF EARTHEN MATERIALS (INCLUDING PRELOAD MATERIALS) SHALL BE COVERED WITH 6 MIL POLYVINYL SHEETING TO PREVENT EROSION. - 19. DURING THE TIME PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 1 THROUGH MARCH 31, ALL PROJECT DISTURBED Burmrc°m yu 600 108th Avenue N.E. SOIL AREAS GREATER THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET THAT ARE TO BE LEFT UNWORKED FOR c,.., . NC- (206)C'45z 8000 I MORE THAN TWELVE (12) HOURS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY COVERED WITH 6 MIL POLYVINYL CITY OF RENTON SHEETING, MULCH, OR SODDING. SHEETING SHALL BE "TOED-IN" AT THE TOP OF SLOPES 2 FEET IN ORDER TO PREVENT SURFACE WATER FLOW BENEATH THE SHEETS. WHERE STRAW • DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MULCH FOR TESC IS REQUIRED, IT SHALL BE APPLIED AT A MINIMUM THICKNESS. 20. IN ANY AREA WHICH HAS BEEN STRIPPED OF VEGETATION AND WHERE NO FURTHER WORK BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 IS ANTICIPATED FOR A PERIOD OF 30 DAYS OR MORE, ALL DISTURBED AREAS MUST BE EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH MULCHING, GRASS PLANTING OR OTHER APPROVED EROSION DETAILS - SHEET _ CONTROL TREATMENT APPLICABLE TO THE TIME OF YEAR IN QUESTION. GRASS SEEDING DESIGNED: DATE: FILE NAME: JCS00004 ALONE WILL BE ACCEPTABLE ONLY DURING THE MONTHS OF APRIL THROUGH SEPTEMBER DRA11N: S.F.D. ,.0 NO. INCLUSIVE. SEEDING MAY PROCEED, BUT MUST BE AUGMENTED WITH MULCHING. NETTING, SCALE: NONE CHECKED: OR OTHER TREATMENT APPROVED BY THE CITY OF RENTON, OUTSIDE THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIOD. NO. REVISION BY APPR. DATE APPROVED: SHEET: OF: SFD/11.2596 11/21/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HQ BLDG 25-20 TESC DESIGN BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: TESC2 NAME: TYPICAL SEDIMENT POND DESIGN SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 10 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .00 inches AREA. . : 10 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 95 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 5. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 . 24 cfs VOL: 1.24 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min BASIN ID: TESC3 NAME: TYPICAL SEDIMENT POND DESIGN SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 10 .00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 .00 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 .00 min CN • 95.00 TIME OF CONC • 5 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 . 77 cfs VOL: 1 . 96 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min 0/3 7417 ZZl o oval- Oo/. �/ Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2210 JJS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SITE DEVELOPMENT DATE CHECKED TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OF 11/21/96 TYPICAL SEDIMENT POND PROCEDURE Determine required surface area at the topof the riser pipe: � P P 1 Per KCSWDM 5 .4 . 5 . 2-2, the surface area measured at the top of the riser pipe is : SA2 = 2*Q2/0 . 00096 where, SA2 = surface area required for 2-year 24-hour storm Q2 = peak design inflow from a 2-year 24-hour storm Q2 = 4 .24 cfs (see attached hydrologic calculations) therefore, SA2 = 2*4 .24/0 . 00096 SA2 = 8834 ft2 similarly, SA3.0 = 2*6 . 77/0 . 00096 SA30 = 14, 105 ft2 Page 5 .4 .5 .2-2 of the KCSWDM details additional pond geometry requirements. See Drawing (attached) for details. P:\job\013747\2210\engr\JSCALC08.DOC • Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2210 JJS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SITE DEVELOPMENT DATE CHECKED TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OF 11/21/96 TYPICAL SEDIMENT POND SCOPE Design a typical sediment pond. REFERENCES • City of Renton Building Regulation, Chapter 22 "Storm and Surface Water Drainage" , Part 9 • City of Renton Drafting Standards - Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control • King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Section 5 ASSUMPTIONS Maximum contributing area will be 10 acres, and design of the pond assumes that no sediment traps are functioning. In reality, 3 or 4 traps will collect and treat nearly all of the site runoff, and then drain to the sediment pond. The KCSWDM implies that sediment ponds can reduce turbidity that sediment traps cannot accomplish. General design of the sediment pond shall be in accordance with KCSWDM Figure 5 .4 . 5 . 2A, 2B and 2C. The pond will be located in the general area of the permanent storm drainage ponds, if possible. For hydrologic analysis, assume that cover conditions are cultivated land, winter condition, hydrologic soil group "D" (Urban disturbed) . Both the 2- and 10-year 24-hour peak runoff rates will be determined and utilized, since this project drains to the existing CSTC Main Pond and Delta System, which we desire to carefully protect from sediment loads. III 1 11/21/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 _ BCAG HQ BLDG 25-20 TESC DESIGN BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: TESC1 NAME: TYPICAL SEDIMENT TRAP DESIGN SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 3 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 3 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 95 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 5 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 1 .27 cfs VOL: 0 . 37 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min 0137 VZ er`'6 do�. BS� T Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2510 JJS LONGACRES OFFICE PARK - BUILDING 25-20 DATE CHECKED TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OF 10/25/96 TYPICAL SEDIMENT TRAP SCOPE Design a typical sediment trap. REFERENCES • City of Renton Building Regulation, Chapter 22 "Storm and Surface Water Drainage" , Part 9 • City of Renton Drafting Standards - Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control • King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Section 5 ASSUMPTIONS Maximum contributing area will be 3 acres . Overall depth of the trap will be 3 . 5 to 5 feet deep, per Figure 5 .4 . 5 . 1A of the KCSWDM. For hydrologic analysis, assume that cover conditions are cultivated land, winter condition, hydrologic soil group "D" (Urban disturbed) . PROCEDURE Determine Required Trap Surface Area: Per KCSWDM 5 .4 . 5 . 1, the trap surface area measured at the invert of the weir is: SA = 2*Q2/0 . 00096 where, SA = surface area required Q2 = peak design inflow from a 2-year 24-hour storm Q2 = 1 .27 cfs (see attached hydrologic calculations) therefore, SA = 2*1.27/0 . 00096 SA = 2650 ft2 See Drawing (attached) for details. P:\job\013747\2210\engr\JSCALC01.DOC 0/2 0 .0,0 • R O2 ,€t1/1:3tH 'Ill.,/ ,--, BOEING LO. NGACRES PARK ,-,, WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS 1,/a `l`\,, 18 rri ra = —i l- 0 16 MW-4 c>, a) 14- �� — +— cn z MW-11 O ta p 12- �� Q W 10- - MW-1 2 J W - a -----_ W ---- MW-16 > m 1-1-1 6- X Q CC 2.2 C ,-- � 4 �— m r Q • co mm Note: MW-31 < 2- Monitor wells MW-4, MW-11, MW-12, MW-16, MW-30 and MW-31 situated across the south half of the site (excluding racetrack infield). z 0 0 01/04/91 04/05/91 04/1�8/91 05/16/91 06/1�1/91 07/22/91 08/1�3/91 09/04/91 09/25/91 10/1�4/91 11/06/91 DATE WATER LEVELS WERE READ APPENDIX I TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) This appendix contains information related to the TESC system and is organized as follows: Typical Sediment Trap Calculations Typical Sediment Pond Calculations TESC Detail Sheet 1 Construction Drawing TESC Sediment Trap Construction Drawing TESC Sediment Pond Construction Drawing (to be developed) Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0137d7/2210/dmrpt01.doc Appendix I- 1 12/19/96 O/20 • 090 • 2o2 R/"ICI'L31,1( /1./1 91 c-, BOEING LONGACRES PARK rD 0 WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS A// `l`\: 18 tai ►= —■— ' a 16 MW-23 cD CD CD • CA z 14- p MW-27 F_ 12- >K w 10_ ,�• MW-29 —J w E w 8— o l� MW-36 W K S Xm g- Xi J ■ MW-37� M CC CRI W 4- ■ :�_ --�-- . 22 m r Q Note: N Q 2- Monitor wells MW-23, MW-27, MW-29 and MW-37 are situated in the infield and extend to „af depths ranging from 5 to 10 feet. Monitor well MW-36 situated at south end of proposed lake and 0 extends to a depth of 20 feet. Z co0 08/13/91 09/04/91 09/25/91 10/1�4/91 11/06/91 DATE WATER LEVELS WERE READ 0/00.0.2 0 Roz_ Akin,8PH 7/70/ ........ alMINUMINIMMr ,., BOEING LONGACRES PARK CD WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS I ' WI 18 til = —IN-- CiC? --..- .. )--,• 4--, 16- = a) MW-20 CD --t .......... ---I--- ci) 14- Z 0 MW-21 F_- 12- - )K MW-22 • Lu 10-- in 0 __.1 8- x 4: MW-24 * LL1 > > --x- _J -------B-----E) MW-26 -n r CC a Q c m in 4- ---A----- m m < Notes: MW-28 4 m 2- • 1. The circled data point was estimated for graphing purposes. 51 2. Monitor wells MW-20, MW-21, MW-22, MW-24, MW-26 and MW-28 are situated in infield and -I 0 extend to depths ranging from 15 to 25 feet. Z 0 1 i I I CO 08/13/91 09/04/91 09/25/91 10/14/91 11/06/91 DATE WATER LEVELS WERE READ , 1 CVO•0,0RoZ 111:604( /I.//. •/ ...............w ,--, BOEING LONGACRES PARK (r) 0 WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS 1/4 IV, 18 til = -16- —II— CM .----. 4--, = a) MW-1 (-D CD CD —F-- 14- cA Z 0 MW-3 F-_- 12- > MW-32 Ljj 10- _1 LLJ , 1 a- MW-33 * LLI > IL -I X— m W 6- 0 33 —1 Rarlismi-= ei mi I' CC ini, tuor X X X X MW-34 0 m W 4- c r H Notes: MI m < m r co Q 2_ 1. Circled data points were estimated for graphing purposes. 2. Monitor wells MW-1, MW-3, MW-32, MW-33 and MW-34 located across north third of site O (excluding racetrack infield). Z O 0 , 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 i 01/04/91 04/05/91 04/18/91 05/16/91 06/11/91 07/22/91 08/13/91 09/04/91 09/25/91 10/14/91 11/06/91 DATE WATER LEVELS WERE READ i I GENERAL MONITOR WELL INFORMATION Depth of Depth of Depth of Monitor General Well/Boring Screen Pack Well Location (feet) (feet) (feet) MW-1 Northwest of track 48.5 20 3 to 20 MW-3 Maintenance barn-east wing of CTSC Bldg. 44.0 15 4 to 15 MW-4 South end of site,south of 25-40 83.5 20 3 to 20 MW-11 In southeast portion of site,east of tracks 68.5 20 3 to 20 MW-12 About 150 feet southwest of club house 79.0 15 4 to 15 MW-16 Southwest portion of site in grass parking area 73.5 20 3 to 20 MW-20 Infield,south of Teat take 19.0 18 12 to 18 MW-21 Infield,south of Test Lake 19.0 18 12 to 18 MW-22 Infield,southeast of Test Lake 25.0 25 15 to 25 MW-23 Infield,east edge of lake 10.0 10 5 to 10 MW-24 Infield,east edge of take 19.0 18 11 to 18 MW-25 Infield,east edge of lake 5.0 5 2 to 5 MW-26 Northeast edge of lake 15.0 15 8 to 15 MW-27 Northwest edge of lake 8.0 8 3 to 8 MW-28 Northwest edge of lake 19.0 18 11 to 18 MW-29 Northwest edge of lake 8.0 8 3 to 8 MW-30 South of track,in second stage small pond 20.0 20 8 to 20 MW-31 South of track,in third stage small pond 40.0 40 28 to 40 MW-32 North barn area,in west second stage pond _ 20.0 20 8 to 20 MW-33 Southwest corner of field,in west second stage pond 20.0 20 8 to 20 MW-34 East end of field by P-1 channel,In east third stage pond 20.0 20 8 to 20 MW-36 Infield,south end of lake 20.0 20 13 to 20 MW37 Infield,south end of lake 8.0 8 3 to 8 1 TABLE 1 (Page 3 of 3) Water Level Water Level Monitor Well Date (Depth) Elevation MW-26 OB/13/91 5.11 6.09 Elevation 1120 09/04/91 624 4.96 09/25/91 6.98 422 _ ' 10114/91 7.55 3.65 MW-27 08/13/91 5.32 6.07 Elevation 11.39 09/04/91 6.59 4.80 -09/25/91 7.37 4.02 10/14/91 8.02 3.37 - _ MW-28 08/13/91 4.88 7.16 Elevation 12.04 09/04/91 4.89 7.15 09/25/91 4.96 7.08 10/14/91 5.04 7.00 MW-29 08/13/91 5.60 6.37 11 Elevation 11.97 09104/91 5.67 6.30 09/25/91 5.68 629 "4( W 10/14/91 6.19 5.78 MW-30 08/13/91 8.95 924 Elevation 18.19 09In4/91 9.14 9.05 09/25/91 9.38 8.81 10/14/91 9.50 8.69 MW-31 08/13/91 11.66 929 Elevation 20.95 09/04/91 11.89 9.06 09/25/91 12.16 8.79 10/14/91 12.33 8.62 MW32 08113/91 6.56 9.07 Elevation 15.63 09104/91 6.45 9.18 09/25/91 6.62 9.01 10/14/91 6.84 8.79 MW-33 08/13/91 9.56 821 Elevation 17.77 09/04/91 9.42 8.35 09/25/91 9.40 8.37 10/14/91 9.47 8.30 MW-34 08/13/91 12.45 4.76 Elevation 1721 09/04/91 1226 4.95 09/25/91 12.18 5.03 10/14/91 12.23 4.98 MW36 08113/91 7.84 8.43 I Elevation 1627 09104/91 7.96 8.31 09/25/91 8.12 8.15 i 10/14/91 826 8.01 MW37 08/13/91 5.47 10.66 Elevation 16.13 09/04(91 528 10.85 1 - 09125 91 5.91 10.22 10/14/91 6.18 9.95 Nti;e:::$‘iAiti kaMV.1F»2f1:.. t Wf.4gsu:::.. ....;pei0.O i!evioussunreyed.*.1. f*. .*Miea tl 6.i.ia ±IF.:..6 >`:v TABLE 1 2 of 3 (Page ) Water Level Water Level Monitor Well Date (Depth) Elevation MW-12 01/04/91 4.12 11.94 Elevation 16.06 04/05/91 2.49 13.57 04/18/91 2.53 13.53 05/16/91 3.88 12.18 06/11/91 4.44 11.62 0722/91 5.79 10.27 08/13/91 6.01 10.05 09/04/91 5.56 10.50 09/25/91 5.92 10.14 10/14/91 6.08 9.98 MW-16 01/04/91 7.15 12.39 Elevation 19.54 04/05/91 2.07 17.47 04/18/91 528 1426 05/16/91 7.70 11.84 ' 06/11/91 8.90 10.64 0722/91 10.14 9.40 08/13/91 9.96 9.58 09/04/91 10.40 9.14 09/25/91 10.79 8.75 10/14/91 10.93 8.61 MW-20 08/13/91 5.55 7.01 Elevation 12.56 09/04/91 N/A N/A - 09/25/91 5.98 6.58 10/14/91 6.03 6.53 MW-21 C8/13/91 3.69 7.49 Elevation 11.18 09/04/91 3.72 7.46 0925/91 3.83 7.35 10/14/91 3.93 725 MW-22 08/13/91 3.61 7.75 Elevation 11.36 09/04/91 3.62 7.74 0825/91 3.73 7.63 ' 10/14/91 3.84 7.52 MW-23 09/13/91 6.10 5227 Elevation 11.37 09/04/91 6.92 4.45 ' 09/25/91 7.52 3.85 10/14/91 I 7.93 3.44 MW 24 08/13/91 4.00 7.88 1 Elevation 11.88 09/04/91 3.98 7.90 0925/91 4.11 7.77 10/14/91 425 7.63 MW-25 08/13/91 Dry - Elevation 12.15 09/04/91 Dry Dry 09/25/91 Dry Dry 10/14/91 Dry Dry v1 mII C) 0 L 0 Q > Rf o RR g � w w wwow U 3 H O W Cr! p N _WC.,'"",--A � H m -pp N ip to _ T — of • m m w m N m m N m m m m .. � � co`, , 2 �� N .� mlA m aoa, O r- m o O,ONC)as) 0 2 O ap0is NN ; NN N NN11 0. �NNNN a 00 NON , i i 2illi � 22 mI 3&I ) Existing Ground Surface ? . 20 20 • �� Silt with occasional w } layers of silty' -- —? w Z — —=t_ L }_ _—== = = Z • J Q CU — Proposed Lake al • w Fine to medium sand with occasional thin layers of silt w — —20- • --20 Horizontal Scale: 1' = 200' EXPLANATION: Vertical Scale: 1' = 20' Vertical Exaggeration: 10X ,o o Notes: 1.Cross section location shown on Figure 1. 0° I BORING LOCATION AND NUMBER 2. Subsurface conditions shown are based - on interpolation between widely spaced a _ explorations and should be considered approximate. 3 C.) MONITOR WELL LOCATION AND NUMBER 3. See Table 1 for summary of ground water elevations. 4. Location and depth of lake based on preliminary T information provided by STO Design Group. a ~ TEST PIT LOCATION AND NUMBER 5. Ground surface elevation interpreted from T aerial topographic map, dated 11/11/79, o prepared by Walker&Associates. Elevations __ - o of explorations surveyed by GeoEngineers using —- -- = APPROXIMATE PROPOSED LOCATION AND DEPTH OF LAKE previous boring monitor well datum. O N O \j CROSS SECTION A—A' GeoEngineers _ FIGURE 2 1 3) WATERTABLE LEVEL M(PageEASUREM1ofENTS BOEING LONGACRES PARK Water Level Water Level Monitor Well Date (Depth) Elevation MW-1 01/04/91 4.73 7.83 Elevation 12.56 04/05/91 1.84 10.72 04/18/91 3.12 9.44 05/16/91 4.34 822 06/11/91 5.45 7.11 0722/91 6.10 6.46 08/13/91 5.93 6.63 09/04/91 5.94 6.62 0925/91 6.08 6.48 10/14/91 627 629 MW-3 01/04/91 - - Elevation 14.28 04/05/91 5.23 9.05 04/18/91 8.00 628 05/16/91 8.74 5.54 06/11/91 9.20 5.08 07/22/91 NA NA 08/13/91 9.18 5.10 09/04/91 8.98 5.30 ' 09/25/91 8.89 5.39 10/14/91 N/A N/A • MW-4 01/04/91 6.54 12.04 Elevation 18.58 04/05/91 7.52 11.06 04/18/91 5.05 13.53 05/16/91 7.03 11.53 06/11/91 8.08 10.50 07/22/91 8.45 10.13 08/13/91 9.69 8.89 09/04/91 9.74 8.80 0925/91 9.76 8.82 10/14/91 Dry Dry MW 11 01/04/91 6.79 9.61 Elevation 16.40 04/05/91 4.33 12.07 04/18/91 5.73 10.67 05/16/91 7.03 9.46 06/11/91 7.68 8.81 0722191 8.39 8.10 08/13/91 8.18 8.22 09/04/91 824 8.16 09/25/91 8.43 7.97 10/14/91 8.55 7.85 1,1•0:0440.0.-N w..........--- ,-- -•, ' ' ' - ' L_______;. Li----1•••1 - 1 : L.---1-••••-; L"'''''''''"; L.;=;,..-0.3 ""'"` •este-zieo2 1/2 7...Z./D 8/21/9/ Re-M. AILT:KI(Z "16615/ . . • . • . . • , ••'it:4'0,', li .,. ...i . 33 j .,..• • ..a...1....,...I.:1)..,i...!.:,,1 11;1.,. . ii!, .,'•1.---------1 !,..W.”:.9,3 1 •'!;• •! ;z71-0:: ` -..t • ............ .. 10 • .. !! - sw liVili !;1... . ,••. "7117-;.\ . M ....... Z .......•- ......•••,..,. 2.,....,....,,,,,..;,,; ;,,y',"'"•••••''''''42.....,.:.: • . ••• ' • .' -',r'.4.--- -;,•• ,.tk•,••,,, 1 R ..-- ••....:,......--. .••••••••••• •••••••••-• . ....:a..757..:7.7..7.C..44:...„.:.„,..71t.:!...H.L!.;,,,,,,,,.....,,.....--1. ,,,,I... . i :.....,.,.\ •-'''.... / -,,'; t...- 1•••: • .:........ti ', ,, : , •,..;;•,,,x, . . ••••••••..•''':". --' • ;1.'.1.. ii'.14.463=,:.=:',',,,:,=,:',:w.,...,t:•,.....„1.1.,,x, • CO C •t:•i-1:'.:„„1„''..''.,, • '': • • •' ' '•• = ......•.-... •..•:.f.• .:.•,....: ... •.•: ......:.. (I4 i'.:I. 1 • , 0 1 , \ 1 cf:i..:.:!!:!•.t•r.•.,•i:••,:.:..'.::••.•..;",:.,.;.,..,:.•,::,.;‘i;,4.5!:%,4:.:,:'r,:.‘.:,:'f'•'.1,1,').l:':,' '•I/.:•!?1..:11I1 1•1:'.:•1\%'..!:•\•N, . . • ," . ...., ..„.• •.. •""• -L--44'. 11111. ../.1/..e...;,' .: 'T,'‘..... , ...' .1 : I.it114;.:,.:1;,:' '',•, ‘‘,.• . ;,, ..,i . ::.:11.1,..., ../....,••• . -8 6) . •. '. . 1 13-I ' . , .1 1 -""1 : •.'' 1: • . •, s. • ' • •• • - •- • •.................... ... • h) .-*---- S %‘'•\•''' ...•11 - .... '. ••:. :: '.'''''''; l''''1,;,11/.'‘'...'".-,--1.:.• ,•\ :• •,1 • c) • ...a- • ....,:\. 1 ..... •ss • •::::::::::::::,...:i • ...:...-...:: . ,.. ...,•:;....:.........• .•:,.,po'• l."7•?•:-.,;•..)!,1,17: -.-qr- ,;.;.. '-...i.' I:. -:.4.11;;Ii!'.TM , • "s,,', . •... m •d '. ,,.: H 1 i . •:, •., 1 itt:• •I I. '1 .....\‘.....1 "4. ;•••,•,',,;:,..."*:rif..:1„, ....":•-.•::::•:::\\n'•. •//':-.:1.! -- • • ••• 33 re • ,,,7, C 0 I Z ' • ., .„.„.„.. „.......... . :,\• i I ••' •• •••;;'• . k•.\ .. PO..! IF: / f4I,0 4 ., ....• .......,........- .\,..,. .. „,...,.. ....,..:::,;.„..,.., .: ....?„1 .„..,.,.,•,.. . . , • ii '.-1.•-•,:.--1'. , ",....• .1 A 0. ..., I / li.,,/•.•..'....,,.',.! -:'...••••• . `':.;,:;7,1'...i,.,..,,,,:,,,c4 .:',......,.1.:•,. ,:::!::: .,.../...; ....'.."•,.' ', . . ... •• •„ li ., \\ *II 1‘.1 ,.1./..,.,0,,,. ;,:::•,.(.4.;:.:.........._.,rd_... . .., ,, ,, ..._ . .,.4,.;. , • ; ,.;:.-1L: ; 1'. i d \ I; •, 1 • I :„ . , .._......., • • I Ili\11 'av"'''''"' vi '-'''''••••::::;....................................' 1................i d • : II. ; . *••••••:................. • 1 ii 11 i; .• '.....':.;:;6' 1: I" I ,,'-' '/".".•:,'.. U) '11 1 i'..: : ' 11 ri ;0 . ///,, • ' •. ...1 4 ., 7.f.'...,:tt't) . '01. ';1 ii:1:1• : I 1 11 ‘•••• I ,ii f 1 I ,,,, ////'• .i.:...:....:::::...1 i . 'i I /.•/• 1'III . t":'-^ .' •'•• •• •••••• . ‘' • 'rl • si ( 6 ofi.... .„,,, ., i,1 1H ,'''••••••••1';•7 'crill-1`".1-4:Jr,n- ...Is. , 1-,:r.-.......-:..,0.4:,1,1,....,,.,,,, .,, ! 7 i I 1,-.11 .1..?:-t.II', 1.--;•;;;; --1 • ../ j_ •.. • M • It:! '•:-.?•::.;::::.•;. r• • ' : : :,L-.,...-4-...--01;'..., ...../.•." ..:..: i 1. , ; .. 1, V;i r i ;wit , ; 1 El.• • 2 1 I ....„:„.::••:. i . ••• r-1 . , ,,............ 'A 1 '.;1 .\• I I • i 4,1.!1 , I I 1 , , i ' II:1'' I, li I II 1'1 ' •••,' U) I i I''•••,":." • I I • I ''•' I • 0) I 1 .r; I I' , I I,.I ..,..,„ ,,•••.'"!..71) :,I. 1!'-:."I '.; 1-;:"--J7L-1 --I: ' :L•iil. I '1 i I I 11: i•-• : • ‘ 1., , i ....r4L,.....,;,„:;:,•••:,..,,..,1.....,:•1.,.•::•••::•,...;•„••, ,...ii.1 O i-..) p.1 i.:i 1 i • •. . qd....„•••,..,k i.., ,.., • .::,•,.,,, 1 .: . . . i • • ,L i r:Trii n!...9,,. ,;.,4 . . :I .1"i i it t •- •• i i.. il Ott I •;.. / \ i LL-'••••••-•••••:1 •••::••'.••••••: :•.:-..'....: ' '..::::•.',..2.7:":::::41'......1-: (!•-1 :•• . i I 41:'' 111 I. •!:: !'I: ,! ! 'I - ''l ..•'[..,-,..-Lar:,..." 43-.41:13,,:1- • .. '-•-7:1''''" "",..1•-•••f'1" ' i ,,,•,-,1 . : 1 I.;., ' 1 •,, I, "111 ' i t • ..•- .' t T.- i ...... t......... % ., ........„-n!:.",.......::::.r....,,-,...,..,., 6 • 1 11:••• . . . i il,,,,y • i , i•, .,1 f ' ' •'.. i•• it ‘.. . ••' :ST : ; '. / It .;11.7...i.rillit !..t."nr1"tip'.."..!4., i•-•r•••,,•••,^,- :. I I, 1. , :t ,, k y...i;• .'. ------ ) ,:ki ri p L'I i 1.1 :II:.1!..fr 1.." .•:?' A,1:11:' ,':,! : :', :I, 9° ; 1 ..,....t,•••0:if .; ..... . .- 0 ••• I ;•'', O (• 1 „, :: • 1! • • •:.•1. •'• '. .•:- •11.& •,!3.-.1.1 ,............./........1-:- li,;•'''''i .. '7. ........i.:.:",, '...S .. . , ... . 1: Ill 1 li H .1111 11 ; I '11 • NA '.1 • . Lin' 1 i . :; 7. t!!! I 'il i : •' I • : , . , .....:-....•••••••••••• '. .,. 7 i": \'‘ • A,...-, •:..• • " • • i .4........,I 1, t,tlw,I, t, 4 I . 0 t. I t I ' -' ' ' 4'..•••'.....i.t•:.1 t ... t.'': ' ••••••'•••••.•,........':;,,::::::..--•-,n...... ,i 4,,-Irlri" r 1: -..; li,... .1-.--.1---1 .. : s,ibm ALI mi M , I, 1 I 1- • ; .., ' - 1.--1--......1; -Iv ;•;.,--• , ' ••• • ;' ' e. 4 '4,. !...;•.i... .1,'• ••• ;••;;;•: 1,•• -•;• •1 , • , 1 , ,. z.,44::::t ; 1'8 ill ; I I, 't l%11: ); i 1 ' 'aulrtvtVvr•::...: i. P:14 stI•J '..'•••••••••,, `.'x . ..••,:.'t.',.••- 'll ir,.._.t..r.t . .• • •\ '''''•• :. O. "1•",i l't W : 1 14''''''''''''.. :. ..k/i i ..,...(.1 qi.P.:•.:1•; . '•,‘•'''...\..•;.',... .' . '••' i ' 1 silt t • ? 1 •• .• . . • . ,$•••-•-••••••1.- . • , ::,. ; 1 . 1.,_,..., ... :;. • .:, ! 11. 'I NI 1 tl../........ .. . i l, tki...,,,.... z-.. .. 'kl l• .., , 1,. •..., ,..i. ,, , ,,, 4 ,i, ., , -.. , i• 4 : . ............. '0 •; 1 ;, 1, . .• • I 1..„\\::;.;.,':•:•:,.:.'.1:...''.:•::•,;..,••'. .••••••••. . '. '..s'... I •11.,-;.,.; 11 . •, •• •• .; . 1 • ,• 1 ' t • t' 1,i..'•*1 : • '•• ‘; • ."' • ,-.:: . ; •; ; li; r.•;;;;g,••••-•;•,-,-..---,.. I tp, _ t.,...,„,.„.,.,.....J.14,..:. ..s....L•L:,::m...L- ..L.: L. L.. _1 1......,•"... ',Lir,.'All- '''''' " .Y.'•L':.'• •., 1..4.,-ir,i(z.1:Ln,•",:L .,- " ,.1,,..:_..., .s. •,....,. . ... \,...,.:1_...=:,..., • ,it•-!-,Li.:,..t71!..,,,,,,,,i.....:!,7.:;.•.:..:,n7.t..:••:,.:!.!, i i,-,t ..:7s.L!!!!'.,.L.+..,.::.L.:LL.L.L:,,..., L...i ' ,' . `.7..... ... "L". ..‘1. 1,:„:!•....'iffias;.:::::•:::::.::.,...„4-,.±.-:•:::,...,:,..4:.::.,„...,....,-,i-,:........ .." , ;....„............ ,, , .., ,., .... .. I' P..77'.i"::'11':' .'-.S'..T-1 15) 1 .2:,...r.,Z %,'1J- ,1,"1 1+ 1.:::,......, 't 1.1..4"',,71".;.1,. .:'I • "i . 1.- ••.I. ,q3-:.1` , ,-• • . . , I I,i t.g-. 1 . • 12 ' •• • ..,' 1!1 i I I \ it Fr•t. ;"••• "I" I. ' ' t '•• 'jt•t••• •0.11 s .'• • I s.I' '‘ •• •:. . i , :• , ..t. \ •• . 1.116 i t • • : t ' I i; ..1 .t.: 1 '; . ; . l' .4,'' ,-..,. !":". :. ,..2.• ',. • i, ' - •• 4..) I ,; ; • (1;) I ii.• ii I: C) , ., 1 .. • • • •': 's '..."-' 1 • l'• r-.1. d ;' i'••, I • ;•':•:: i• , 1 , • , II • . - .......... # \ ... \ , ,,, „.,,,, •••• •, ,,,, ,L.. . . _ ,„ , .• .. ....•.....• : 1 :,:......„, , . , , • 1 ,..• ... • , . t-ri It, :„ •••,. . •'1. •, , t ,,,•„.. : , • , ...,„ , ,.. . . i. . • . cro ....,.....„.:,... . .. ..,„ . , Immi• . . • ..,,....,..,,,t,i ION g 1 . , CVP '.• • • • '• ...qi; . .•..; .....7.:.•'..... . ..., .. .I • . " ..01.1.1,,e(10. . a) ,ii,....--."." " - • • • .: ‘.. +.,. ......:.;....,., .---." ... 1 . ...... -„i::...........;,...e ........,. -.N.% . . . • ,.....,....,o . . . .. .. 0 , ••,..... , , . ,...,i.........=......................„...,........ ,.. .. " . . 1.......• •••.. 1 .... 1 • • . , • di., .., 4., ....._.._..,...i. • . „, . . . . I ( . . . ., .; . ,. . . ,.. • . , • . . , . 0 e 1.'t,:i.:i:................ . :I . . •• . .. ., .,. . • . . .• ., ., , • ... . > • . 1 , 03 1 > * + • ••-tt-0 M 0) ers. M co 0 -1 6 2 g§ c ri co 33 .0 ....i 2 Z q u) "0 =I 0 • -4 Z nr i2 P , O › • VJ 0 9 . • O z w • (.0 > w z 1 M 0 0 50 0 Z Z § C co Z C -§ M CO M APPENDIX H GROUNDWATER INFORMATION This appendix contains information related to the Longacres Office Park groundwater conditions. This information was produced by GeoEngineers, Inc., and is taken from Report of Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeological Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington for Boeing Support Services, dated December 9, 1991. Information included consists of: Monitor Well Location Site Plan Cross Section of Site Monitor Well Water Level Measurements, tabulated information Monitor Well Water Level Measurements, graphic information Additional information related to the CSTC Main Pond was produced by GeoEngineers, Inc., and reported in Geotechnical Consultation Potential Lake Impacts, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington for Boeing Support Services, dated December 9, 1991. The full text of this report follows. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc Appendix H- 1 12/19/96 APPENDIX G CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN This appendix contains calculations detailing the design of the project conveyance systems. This information is not required for the Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan, but will be provided in the final drainage report. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt01.doe Appendix G-1 12/19/96 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SOUTH POND EAST OF OAKSDALE ALIGNMENT BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: SP100 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 .18 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L:1060 . 00 kc:27 . 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 1. 99 cfs VOL: 0 . 67 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: SP107 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 . 18 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 60 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns: 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L:1060 . 00 kc:27 . 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 0 . 95 cfs VOL: 1 . 70 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SOUTH POND EAST OF OAKSDALE ALIGNMENT BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: SP-10 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 .18 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L:1060 . 00 kc :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 1 .47 cfs VOL: 0 .48 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: SP-2 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 . 18 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s:0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L:1060 . 00 kc :27 . 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 0 . 99 cfs VOL: 0 . 32 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: SP-25 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 . 18 Acres BASEFLOWS,: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s: 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L:1060 . 00 kc:27 . 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 1. 73 cfs VOL: 0 . 58 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SOUTH POND EAST OF OAKSDALE ALIGNMENT BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: SP-5 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 . 18 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 2 .18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L: 1060 . 00 kc :27. 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 1. 20 cfs VOL: 0 .39 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: SP-50 NAME: SOUTHEAST POND, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 . 18 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC _ • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 2 . 18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L: 1060 . 00 kc:27 . 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 1. 76 cfs VOL: 0 . 58 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: SP-WQ NAME : SOUTHEAST POND, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 2 . 18 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 9 . 99 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 .18 Acres CN • 98 . 00 TcReach - Sheet L: 40 . 00 ns: 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 0200 TcReach - Channel L: 1060 . 00 kc :27. 00 s : 0 . 0050 PEAK RATE: 0 . 27 cfs VOL: 0 .09 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2210 JJS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 - SITE DEVELOPMENT DATE CHECKED STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN OF 12/17/96 SPECIAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS 1. Determine. Parkway Loop Road Extension Required Wetpond/Wetvault Surface Area: SA = 0 . 01*Aimp SA = 0 . 01*44, 431 SA = 445 f2 Cell 1 Area = 0 . 10* 445 = 45 f2 Cell 2 Area = 0 .45* 310 = 200 f2 (provided by Pond "A") Cell 3 Area = 0 .45* 310 = 200 f 2 (provided by Main Pond) 2 . Determine Parkway Loop Road Extension Required Wetpond/Wetvault Volume: Water quality storm volume = 2, 178 f3 Required Volume = 2, 178 f3 (provided by Main Pond) Part 3 Private Roadway Site 1. Determine Private Roadway Site Required Wetpond/Wetvault Surface Area: SA = 0 . 01*Aimp SA = 0 . 01*94, 960 SA = 950 f2 Cell 1 Area = 0 . 10* 950 = 95 f2 Cell 2 Area =. 0 .45* 589 = 428 f2 Cell 3 Area = 0 .45* 589 = 428 f2 2 . Determine Private Roadway Site Required Wetpond/Wetvault Volume: Water quality storm volume = 3, 920 f3 Required Volume = 3, 920 f3 P:\job\013747\2210\engr\JSCALCO2.DOC Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2210 JJS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 - SITE DEVELOPMENT DATE CHECKED STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN OF 12/17/96 SPECIAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS As stated previously, the existing CSTC Main Pond will serve as this project' s third cell pond. Original CSTC storm drainage design calculations allowed additional areas to be added at later dates, such as this site development . Alone, Cell 3 of the CSTC site provides at least 182, 675 f2. of surface area, which is sufficient to treat 18, 267, 500 f2 (419 acres) of impervious surface according to the preceding formula. Therefore, the Main Pond can accommodate the requirement for design surface area due to the development of the 25-20 site. 2 . Determine Building 25-20 Required Wetpond/Wetvault Volume: Per KCSWDM page 1.3 .5-1, the required design volume shall be a minimum of the total volume of runoff from the tributary subbasin proposed development conditions using a water quality design storm event (P2/3) . The design volume calculations detailed in Appendix A are summarized as follows : Water quality storm volume = 26, 000 f3 Required Volume = 26, 000 f3 (provided by Main Pond) Part 2 Parkway Loop Road Extension A small portion of the roadway extension will drain directly to the Pond "A" diversion manhole since it cannot cross the existing storm drainage pipes . The remainder of the loop road will drain to a wetvault prior to discharge to CSTC Pond "A" and then to the CSTC Main Pond. The following Aimp and water quality storm volumes represent the entire northwest roadway. Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2210 JETS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 - SITE DEVELOPMENT DATE CHECKED STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN OF 12/17/96 SPECIAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS PROCEDURE Three separate areas of this project will create more than 1 acre of new impervious surface subject to vehicular use, therefore per Special Requirement #5 of the KCSWDM, this project must provide Special Water Quality Controls . Part 1 25-20 Building Site 1. Determine Building 25-20 Site Required Wetpond/Wetvault Surface Area: Per KCSWDM page 1 . 3 . 5-1, the required design water surface area shall be 1% of the impervious surface area in the drainage subbasin contributing to the facility: SA = 0 . 01*Aimp where, SA = surface area required Aimp = impervious contributing area Aimp = 304 , 920f2 (see Appendix A, Hydrologic Analysis) therefore, SA = 0 . 01*304, 920 SA = 3049 f2 This surface area must be divided among the three cells of a wet pond system per KCSWDM Section 4 . 6 .2 . The first cell must contain 1096 of the design surface area, and the second and third cells must each contain about 45% of the design surface area: Cell 1 Area = 0 . 10* 3049 = 305 f2 Cell 2 Area = 0 .45* 3049 = 1, 372 f 2 (provided by Main Pond) Cell 3 Area = 0 .45* 3049 = 1, 372 f2 (provided by Main Pond) Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 013747 2210 JJS BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 - SITE DEVELOPMENT DATE CHECKED STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN OF 12/17/96 SPECIAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS SCOPE Determine storm drainage water quality system requirements, and design appropriate measures to meet these requirements . REFERENCES • City of Renton Building Regulation, Chapter 22 "Storm and Surface Water Drainage" • City of Renton Drafting Standards - Drainage Report Content List • King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) • Technical Information Report on the Floodplain/Stormwater System for Customer Services Training Center, Sverdrup Corporation, October 1992 . ASSUMPTIONS • This project is interdependent with the previously constructed CSTC project adjacent to the northern property line of this project, and is part of a storm drainage masterplan created for the 212 acre Longacres Office Park. Nearly all of the runoff leaving this site will be directed to the Main Pond and the Delta system created for the CSTC site. Several aspects of the CSTC stormwater system vary from the standard requirements of the KCSWDM. These variances were approved by the City of Renton for construction of the CSTC site . The drainage masterplan is centered around the facilities constructed as part of the CSTC development, and therefore, drainage facilities for the remainder of the Longacres project will require similar variance allowances . Similar to the drainage system developed for the CSTC site, wetvaults will been used as the first "cell" of the water quality system rather than using swales, due to lack of vertical relief . The second and third stage cells will be combination wetpond/detention ponds . APPENDIX F WETPOND DESIGN This appendix contains calculations completed for design of the project water quality wetpond adjacent to the proposed private road. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt01.doc Appendix F-1 12/19/96 Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring - Storm Event Monitoring Laboratory and Field Testing Report , March 31,1992 Field Data ' Air Temp Water Temp C.Cond. Site 1 Date Time Gage Elev. (°C) (°C) pH DO(mg/I) (umhos/cm) Comments Springbrook 12/05/91 14:50 6.10 9 9.7 7.35 8.9 124 Storm event 1 North Infield Creek 12/05/91 15:40 - 9 10.1 7.06 9.8 47 Storm event 1 South Marsh Inlet 12/05/91 16:25 12.03 9 9.1 6.44 6.3 44 Storm event 1 (Site#7) Springbrook 01/29/92 12:40 6.65 10 10.0 6.90 8.7 84 Storm event 2 North Infield Creek 01/29/92 13:10 - 10 10.0 6.60 ..9.6 71 Storm event 2 South Marsh Inlet 01/29/92 13:30 12.09 10 10.5 6.60 5.1 85 Storm event 2 (Site#7) Lab Analysis Biochemical Chemical Nitrate T-Org Total Total Oil Total Total Total Oxygen Oxygen +Nitrite Halogens Kjeldahl &Grease Organic Phosphate Suspended Demand Demand as N (SW 9020) Nitrogen (413.1) Carbon as P Solids Site Date Time" (mg/1) (mg/I) (mg/1) (mg/1) N(mg/I) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) Comments Springbrook 12/05/91 14:50 10 12 0.15 0.02 0.53 5 5.6 0.33 87 Storm event 1 North Infield Creek 12/05/91 15:40 10 20 0.22 0.11 0.65 5 12 0.38 92 Storm event 1 South Marsh Inlet 12/05/91 16:25 10 16 0.03 0.02 0.50 5 11 0.17 4 Storm event 1 (Site#7) Springbrook 01/29/92 13:10 10 24 0.78 0.02 0.66 9 4.8 0.18 67 Storm event 2 North Infield Creek 01/29/92 12:40 10 31 0.31 0.02 0.88 5 7.7 0.26 100 Storm event 2 South Marsh Inlet 01/29/92 13:45 10 34 0.11 0.02 0.71 8 8.8 0.16 3 Storm event 2 (Site#7) Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory Analysis North Infield Creek At Abandoned Pumphouse March 31, 1992 Date Time TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/1) Comments 09/30/91 N/A 36.0 91 Very low flow 11/04/91 12:30 13.0 49 11/11/91 14:50 13.0 120 first flush rain 11/18/91 11:40 8.0 73 Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory Analysis South Marsh Outlet (Site #6) Date Time TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/I) I Comments 11/11/91 08:30 14.0 9 first flush rain 11/18/91 12:15 14.0 15 11/25/91 17:00 20 4 Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality_Monitoring Laboratory Analysis and Field Testing Report Site #3 March 31, 1992 Field Data Lab Analysis N Samples Stage Gage Air Temp Water Temp C.Cond. Composited Date Time Reading (°C) (°C) pH DO(mg/1) (umhos/cm) TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/1) Comments 1 06/18/91 10:50 N/A 18 15.9 6.94 0.55 613 20.0 240 init.baseline,no rain 06/24/91 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 07/01/91 11:50 N/A 24 20.3 7.31 0.58 542 07/08/91 10:45 N/A 24 17.6 7.62 1.33 448 07/15/91 10:45 6.33 15 16.9 7.04 0.83 467 07/23/91 11:05 6.29 22 18.4 7.23 1.60 468 30.0 1300 Very high TSS 1 07/29/91 15:20 6.25 25 21.8 7.62 3.13 456 08/05/91 14:30 6.25 24 21.2 7.49 0.87 522 1 08/12/91 14:50 6.25 28 20.4 7.70 1.97 74 30.0 32 08/19/91 10:25 6.21 24 19.5 7.74 1.69 70 08/26/91 11:05 6.29 17 15.0 7.38 1.53 326 29.0 100 09/02/91 11:15 6.29 22 18.5 7.89 1.40 332 18.0 84 09/10/91 14:05 6.33 23 16.2 7.64 0.82 489 09/16/91 11:10 6.42 23 13.5 7.30 1.36 327 09/23/91 12:10 6.33 22 14.0 7.23 0.08 13 Suspect C.Cond. 09/30/91 12:45 6 20 18.8 6.43 3.00 392 10/07/91 N/A 6.00 15 10.9 7.45 3.23 358 37 days no rain 10/15/91 ) 09:30 5.92 15 18.4 7.21 2.91 397 1 10/21/91 16:30 5.67 10 11.8 6.81 4.12 342 24.0 20 2 10/28/91 11:15 5.67 7 6.6 7.14 1.08 268 20.0 40 11/04/91 12:50 6.58 7 9.3 6.82 7.05 195 4 11/11/91 13:55 7.10 12 12.8 7.01 10.06 98 10.0 110 first flush rain 11/18/91 11:10 6.42 7 8.7 7.12 6.51 171 11.0 230 2 11/25/91 13:00 6.42 8 10.2 7.21 5.57 185 11.0 95 2 12/02/91 11:25 6.42 6 7.3 7.27 2.77 312 9.6 68 Heavy sedimentation 9 12/09/91 11:10 6.85 10 8.6 7.27 8.61 149 12.0 50 12/16/91 11:00 6.42 0 4.4 7.15 1.62 565 21.0 110 12/22/91 11:00 6.50 5 6.9 7.11 3.85 542 23.0 60 12/30/91 12:30 6.50 10 7.8 7.58 8.79 211 7.4 150 01/06/92 N/A 6.42 N/A 5.3 7.64 4.68 • 649 01/14/92 12:20 6.42 7 8.3 7.49 2.80 552 01/20/92 10:50 6.42 4 4.1 7.61 3.35 556 2 01/27/92 12:40 7.20 9 8.1 7.42 8.53 108 18.0 120 2 02/02/92 15:15 7.04 10 8.6 6.80 7.99 173 25.0 3600 very high TSS 4 02/10/92 12:30 6.67 9 9.8 7.00 1.50 830 26.0 41 DO&Cond from lab 02/17/92 10:15 6.60 6 8.3 7.17 4.20 779 4 02/24/92 11:50 6.68 8 9.8 7.32 4.58 392 28.0 200 03/02/92 12:20 6.50 10 11.5 7.31 N/A 673 Bad DO reading 03/09/92 13:10 6.50 13 11.4 7.70 2.08 650 4 03/16/92 11:15 6.30 10 9.7 7.27 3.52 463 Lab analyses N/A Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring - Laboratory Analysis and Field Testing Report Springbrook Creek March 31, 1992 Field Data Lab Analysis Stage Gage Air Temp Water C.Cond. Date Time Reading* (°C) Temp(°C) pH DO(mg/I) (umhos/cm) TOC(mg/I) TSS(mg/I) Comments 06/18/91 N/A N/A 18 15.0 6.97 2.80 350 8.5 10 06/24/91 16:00 3.86 29 17.9 7.10 2.68 335 7.5 13 07/01/91 11:15 3.85 24 19.0 7.16 2.28 374 8.2 18 07/08/91 11:10 3.77 24 16.5 7.49 3.59 319 6.5 13 07/15/91 10:00 3.79 15 16.2 6.63 3.52 364 5.4 14 07/23/91 11:05 3.77 22 16.9 7.26 2.97 343 7.4 15 07/29/91 15:00 3.76 25 20.1 7.26 3.25 389 7.9 11 08/05/91 14:10 3.71 24 19.3 7.00 1.68 404 8.5 12 08/12/91 14:30 3.81 26 19.7 7.25 4.26 61 13.0 11 08/19/91 10:00 3.81 23 18.2 7.45 2.70 57 7.8 12 08/26/91 10:35 3.87 17 14.5 7.14 4.25 271 7.2 7 09/02/91 10:30 3.81 22 18.2 7.32 5.42 212 7.2 7 09/10/91 13:30 3.91 23 15.6 7.14 5.48 290 5.3 8 - 09/16/91 10:20 4.06 23 13.4 7.19 4.90 322 6.5 9 09/23/91 11:30 4.51 22 14.6 7.16 5.44 3 5.2 4 Suspect C.Cond. 09/30/91 10:00 4.56 20 17.8 6.28 5.20 345 4.7 9 10/07/91 10:20 4.55 15 12.7 7.02 5.76 316 3.7 8 37 days no rain 10/15/91 08:40 4.51 13 11.1 6.93 5.05 344 4.6 8 10/21/91 17:20 4.41 10 12.5 7.06 4.42 347 5.8 6 10/28/91 10:30 4.32 7 8.4 7.25 4.21 272 6.2 11 11/04/91 13:25 4.96 7 8.9 6.99 6.98 159 5.4 18 11/11/91 13:15 5.31 12 11.9 6.68 8.40 129 6.3 42 first flush rain 11/18/91 10:30 4.81 7 9.4 6.69 6.75 156 15.0 9 11/25/91 12:30 4.71 8 10.5 7.20 6.51 134 5.1 14 12/02/91 10:40 3.96 6 8.3 7.18 5.14 287 10.0 15 12/09/91 10:25 4.62 10 8.8 6.75 7.56 139 5.8 28 12/16/91 10:05 3.92 0 4.9 7.07 4.84 307 8.0 19 12/22/91 10:00 4.13 5 7.0 7.10 6.52 230 6.0 8 12/30/91 11:45 4.36 10 8.7 7.12 6.75 272 5.6 17 01/06/92 N/A 4.07 N/A 5.8 7.39 7.51 287 6.7 10 01/14/92 11:40 3.89 7 7.7 7.65 5.14 335 7.9 10 01/20/92 10:20 3.96 4 5.0 7.29 5.91 315 7.0 23 01/27/92 12:00 5.41 9 8.1 7.01 6.98 177 6.7 35 02/02/92 14:30 6.59 10 8.3 6.75 7.32 139 7.5 50 02/10/92 12:00 4.26 9 8.9 6.80 6.00 300 7.9 13 DO&Cond from lab 02/17/92 09:30 4.19 6 8.0 7.24 9.09 346 78.0 19 02/24/92 11:05 4.55 8 9.2 7.41 6.24 176 7.4 8 03/02/92 11:40 4.09 10 9.8 7.51 N/A 327 7.1 18 bad DO reading 03/09/92 12:25 4.01 13 10.3 8.01 5.18 332 6.9 13 03/16/92 10:30 4.25 10 9.6 6.78 6.18 234 •Springbrook Creek water surface elevation=Stage Gage Reading+0.71 feet • , ,-_-___,_______,j • • I EXISTING \- -7 -1 -'---------------------gP • ' 4r1:33' • 0 4. \ \ 36.0 CMP r \ \ t: • q 6 • %1 I ..,......,,.v...-:. .wa,V.4•Q'z'zP4z,2'.'',.i.4 '.."4:-"s" . r% 41 :SCALE: NONE SPRINGBROOK CREEK , ..,:„,.•,,,•:•;:w44-Fi•-..;-,li,, ,, , „ ••AL ....,,I;;*",:;Z:f .:.::Wat.-cf::,,,Vi:,:tip4Wit'7,',:' ne '•- - .,, ... PROJECT LIMITS ..-. ••:,:.,,,,i,:',;v_v*,:p:;. : \IIIkt, N . •-,---,. \ .....774Cc.V. '. 4./A,%, s %,,.0:0" • LL2 _c11---:_-. 1 • 0 a •''''' *.i:i.,":.; ;:::.? it...2:,., • EXISTING -.• iii;;.,;'; .i::::,7,:,'Atht 6. li• 11.!:1 ri r ' • -.• D. ...0:1"A ..,,,;.:N..'3( ..:rn .:k..15.-*N...-i AkS,k.'..',e«, 12] . -, - i Z III) 48.0 CMP , _ .z,:zz•,.1:',-;••-••,--', •m;:•••4 '''P •b,' 0 - • \ ktv • s. ,, _ .: -.A: Loivazzay \,,,,-*,,,,••••.* • SOUTHEAST ; I= , --::::,,-„,',....,,,,... .",•:-.4;m1.:•ffm•A:- •:,;g:..ainer4'. •'''..i*---'2k2" :Vi:- •:-:.?4 "4------. .41--_. ith'• ----,•:::,:„.,..;:., ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, •,,,,,, __.-. .'''''''''•:'''''''Q 'Al-Qatg,::. -;•'' .1"-Z--___,- :•.,-N, ..... .. : ,0:0::::o•fi::,,.-0,v:4,*:::fiii:;, . , • WETLANDS *X Z .:„..,.4.ep„., ,,.„,.........Z.V-•::•,,:•• '"•:'5Q:402-tV•i:-tz,,o1.,,,- 1,--:'.--:':"-:::---wf- AO:`.:105' 1— ,.,.,!...ii. ',5:i:.:1; 7, r '-, ,Fimimme milepr--- -. ..- ,.. — ;.;;0.;5,..4.10,;,11!".4?wa' - - .-.',Moir Air •-••••-• * -7- , • : Cl) it -...6.1. 7 litillitilla la 1)111 • • . < 11, 4.t, • .,. :d flit :....„. _ _ ...,.... 111 co I r* i-i,:ti 'TA--*.- N,4‘......_ )- r.:--- -----z-_-5- -7.41.us7--- --:' - ---- •• • , T.,t„,.., . ..w oi z_ii t....r. - - - - . - - I :ASI ti".'.1-11;;; .. . libIIIICIDICTI-1 ' w I: . A . , z le__ ,.•‘1111:f.'2 A ,S., p 41 1.11. *1:1 - , , co EXISTING IS ''• t•": ha Z -= - . -1-- - ',lila . ......1 4,0 d d k .,itn,Li,. ' MI 14 '' illiginrigia... tWi 0 i-iirlipIAputtirif 0 ti - ! ° .. • I I iiiiii01114 112NIESVitiii / .1 * . • MI DETENTION \ " •,-,, , ,___?---7. .1 ..,-,,./.! - -_l_l_t_! if wii 1, ,I. • , . , 1:: . 681r4,7--- --•z: I i Z .. CC POND • 1 ., ,., kV PIN.% - ::,--_-••:-:: I- . • r,--.... . -:!.• de im., a-• a, i . - o 1 V17-141A': 1.' in . li PlillOWA 645 ----- • \40" •••••111=10 ik-: 1 Mr I SW 27TH ST. Iit-z-1- _ - :•''.,.! u)1F, - , Y -J EXISTING \ ' ',:-.v.ii R. I. W , 0 ° ' 1%1911r1:111411--- " 'fit'aMq : W 0 CO 7 iii - 0 DRAINAGE 1 ,,,'',A.:;3 -,0 , cv •-•:.• .:, :•;••,• .:5.1.%;:•; JECT LI cc ii --m ,:•-, .: qr ., .,-,\we.=I 1 !. ..;' i 0 BASIN 1 _ - c.5 .,,,,,,•111 „ a BASIN 1- -J LU \V10 I I Z \'\, '''':i'14;3 4, .01 2 , E CI i BASIN --- . Fr \ , \:- vi ,•,,? m 0 1 2 cc ._. _ - - 0 , a • . •••,iek. :,. _ \ .?: SITE SOIL GROUPS . , crj PROJECT UM I TS ' i i,•,,., Li., -..w.l.t . ' 6 --- SW 16TH ST. • " -Ni;.1. :iti t.; . I- Iiik • ' • • II 1 , Ili 1 1 1:.I 7.:1:7.-.11._ r------------ ' --::: -,---,,- Nor 4414•M UR - URBAN LAND ,;Y.. . 1: irkl• Q. • • CI 2 , __..._ . ::t- I Hill-:-_ - 1 --\ ,., .,y, ,::::14. ;;:, 11•1 0 .111. • . i _ ._ •-......, \ 's.'-\\,\,\',..tt -- . . ,..:!..,...!.;::„ i 1 III- iliElillei:,,E1,--„_-:__:- 1-405 \ ,! ,, I ..-_-__-_- .‘‘‘N WO WOODINVILLE SILT LOAM . 0001 \\• \A''••••"'":--:'::•':-•'' EXISTING reqiii.171111111 7---‘ --r- i-• ,•••••:„....:.......:„......,... I I ''- i!ili!!!I.ill-1..1-r.-.!___-___-_ _ -_---: \ , PY - PUYALLUP FINE SANDY LOAM I • • ,...„.. •-••,•,,,, .. .. .. I -- \ ' 24.0,RC'41111,eit-•' - le.-1 1,' •,•- - - ..... ., . ...;.:.,.1.:.iz.:;..-:,:•:.:1•:.-:.:::::..0".- :i::::*.- -- - - '::::::•::' NG - NEWBERG SILT LOAM -- -7:4. .4.-:•ii•• !iM:------- ' C3 --- ,.,..,.„.,,,,i,,,,,vn, „,...... ..,...N.-,,,,mtvoamm.,41.. .- • • •••••. . _ . . \ , Vi..044. ..,...•,-.4 ,'-zV.ni:;:t4 0. .,. ...'' .,‘,.,,,,w•srfaz.4,.?c.: . x;,:-. ume.i.:,..,?z-zviii:4At.mt:;. .:,,,,,„.,,..... :: i - —• — . ,. .-. , . • \.t 4-5,N.4 , f'•:tli:..:::' . •' -,,:,-.,'"':"`'''''''''''""'"'. •• -• : :: •:: : _—_-- I - . ::::::!::•::::: • 4:0•'•'''.-._ - _ — • _ __ _ _ _ _ .::]:::i:i- i s G ENRR - - ,:::•:':: : 0 '' :•••:%-- S.158th ST. _ . , ,.. ....... ... • • , . ....,„...., ,, •„:„.„--,.,,..,•...„,•:.,•,..,...„.„,„,„„,..,,,,,.„:„...4„,„...„,.:,„,,,,44:411.RTHEF47,5,747-7 - EXISTING • . • • • , ,,„0,,N:•41., \ •.•-•,,,,,,,,,A,:om*::K!:••• ,,it>":-..,••• ••••v•vnu.:::,.................:•,:,,•„.„..,-,,,,:z.: f,,„04..., -. , , : -ECNS-1114ANN77:- -----$111,..: i 2 x5 Box UPRR - - :ii]i -- -•-' • I ..4..!;,7•!1 - - CULVERT '7.1-.'----- . ,. -,;:4=!.4j:::*••• - 'f '''' 'f. \\N\ ,%:" * ir. ...., ..,„,„___dee , • . • • ,,,,,,,w,. , I I • , . , ,„„.,,,,,•„:„..,...„.... ' \\\\ 1,-, --.., 0,„ ,_ go . riwo, ....- ______1. — - r -- c__________J-N___ -.. . __. _. . . • . -, i • , „.„.........„ .r.". . h I i 1 ' - CO., • \ . ,. . .... . , , ..._ ....7 -• • .•• .____..:•::::.. 'mem is& LC" - .. .. • _.......lit I....ea 0,11---jo ' 0.1•=milill 9Ep :.t11-74:f.'J 1:':::': —1: 1.:. ' \ . ,44,,,,T.,., • .. . _,,,..?•,:.-r!I :!,...!7•.-1/..,.ir-Te1;7'11 k____-:: [,L;.I MOP- • ":11: 11... ... . . .• ,: • • . ...%)1. 11 1 _. . . •hr,___4 1 . .-:--,.-7::: :- Al.., --- .. •• . I ! 1 .„.-.. • ,.. ..., . _.. :• Ni.t.v:t.,:•:. ,. I all 2 •,1 11- I i r•-.) -----.. !;ii Vi.1:. tl'== :5 viwt----- - , ill 'WI- ''''::. • 1.1--E1 G1- -11--Th t. 7 pirlith. ':f•-• - - Tagil", ,---, -.•••- -,. ,t* - - • . , , . . . . 4'..7:k':'-!•!•,--'..•:A.,„... ‘ ...w' ... 1.:.,. 1011 GREEN RI VF_R •,• , . • _ . . . . •,„,„- -.,,,,,,,:•7,:.:.%•;.....:,, ••••••'''...1 vrr-------7 ,------- nre •, •• .• .,.,...,,, ,. .... - • . _. ......,•:„..........,....,... ‘. •.•....„..._.• '•' . . . .. ••.. .. . . ._ .._.• • • • , . . 4111.1,31.4,,,1014 , ..- R 111117410 MI RI MOM R MOO f MI 0 AUBthriN., WA.99002 Kurvany - l*:A:ar, 15741 M."WATER QUALITY MONITORING POINTS lir ig".21 — " 1 AFASEAING ammo rr arn. Dm .111k:i.., 4,11.07.01: II" 9 EvEBELieyr..ir7, LA:38802001 wag=Zap NO.' (Fr 4 ---' ' • , FACIMES DEPARTMENT 1:3 KENT, WA.98031 CSTC SITE DEVELOPMENT,..., . 0 PORTLAND, OR. 97220 1 _ M REN7C.X,, WA.98055 ';° ' DOI NO. , . 0 SEA i; I T11-'t, WA.98124 I 25.YD LAP 4.,. ...,,,,,,,:-..-_,------- zi.,,,,,..... ...ozm-• Am.. csxnatss 011R: JP/0117 07 Mr. J. David Benson February 29, 1992 Page 5 Your design proposes eliminating the coalescing plate oil/water separators required by the code. I believe that there will be no loss of protection from oil pollution for the following reasons. The proposed system does include T-section separators in catch basins and baffling in wet vaults for oil separation. These devices will serve as protection against accidental spills and pretreatment ahead of the wet pond/biofilter system in much the same way as coalescing plate separators would. In either situation most of the oil captured from routine runoff would occur in the biofilter. While a coalescing plate separator is more effective than the proposed devices, its capabilities are rarely needed at this type of site. The huge capacity of the pond system will provide further buffering of the receiving water from the effects of oil releases. I will provide my assessments of Catchment B and SW 16th by letter as soon as I receive your proposed designs. I will also forward the list of references cited in both letters at that time. Meanwhile, do not hesitate to call if you need anything additional. Sincerely, Richard R. Horner Mr. J. David Benson February 29, 1992 Page 4 are capable of reducing oil and grease concentration to 15 mg/L (Horner and Wonacott 1985) . General urban and even highway runoff usually contains lower concentrations than this performance limit. A small amount of data (Horner 1988) indicate that biofilters can reduce the usual runoff concentrations to a much lower level (< 5 mg/L) . Therefore, a coalescing plate separator would serve mainly as a pretreatment device and a trap for accidental spills in a system also containing a biofilter. Proposed System The stormwater system proposed for Catchment C consists of four wet vaults, two second-stage ponds, a third-stage pond (the _ large lake) , and an outlet channel. The two stages of ponds will provide a very large capacity and long water residence time to treat entering stormwater. Based on the volume ratio represented by the second- and third-stage ponds (24.7) and the two assumptions for the efficiency penalty for the outlet biofiltration channel, I estimate that the following treatment efficiencies, substantially higher than expected for a system meeting minimum code requirements, can be attained if the system is installed as designed and maintained in the same condition during operation: TSS--99% TP--61% Pb--95 - 96% Cu and Zn--65 - 73% Additional comparisons with the system required by the code involve the area ratio and overflow rate. While the minimum requirement for pond surface area is 1 percent of the contributing impervious area, the proposed pond system will occupy an area equal to 21.2 percent of the Catchment C impervious area and 8.8 percent of the total 76.36 acres in the current project. Overflow rates for the proposed system will be only about one-tenth of those that would occur in a system designed according to minimum code requirements. Even within the period of maximum overflow during storms, the proposed system will have rates below the NURP recommendation most of the time. Only with storms greater than about the 2-year, 24-hour event will the short-term overflow rate exceed that recommendation. In contrast, the minimum system would have rates above that level during most storms. The analysis described is based on the runoff contributions expected from Catchment C itself. On occasion drainage will also enter the third-stage Catchment C pond from Catchment A. At a maximum rate of 18 cfs, this contribution will not even begin until an event sized somewhere between the 50- and 100-year, 24- hour level. With the very large capacity of the proposed system and the relative rarity of this extra flow, I do not consider it to detract significantly from the expected performance of the system. Mr. J. David Benson February 29, 1992 Page 3 at the same level as if it were alone, because the pollutants that are easiest to remove will have already been captured. The available research provides no basis to establish the loss in efficiency of the second element. To compare on the same basis a treatment system required by the code with the system proposed, the analysis assumed two "penalty" levels for the second device: 25 and 50 percent. Therefore, the overall efficiency of the series (Es, as a fraction) was estimated as: Es = 1 - (1 - El) (1 - xE2) ; where E1 = efficiency of element 1 (as a fraction) , E2 = efficiency of element 2 (as a fraction) , and x = the efficiency remaining after imposition of the "penalty" (0.75 or 0.50) . Efficiency as a percentage is 100 times the fractional efficiency. ANALYSIS OF CATCHMENT C Code Requirements From the water quality standpoint, the characteristics of Catchment C make it subject to Core Requirement #1 and Special Requirements #5 and #6 in the King County Surface Water Design Manual. Core Requirement #1 mandates peak runoff Kate control, plus biofiltration as a result of having > 5000 ft4 of impervious area subject to vehicle use. Special Requirement #5 specifies a wet pond for treatment based on > 1 acre of impervious area subject to vehicle use and discharge to a Type 1 or 2 stream within 1 mile. The requirement further stipulates that the pond surface area be no less than 1 percent of the contributing impervious area and have a volume that is at least equal to the mean annual runoff volume (i. e. , the volume ratio should be at least 1) . Special Requirement #6 mandates a coalescing plate oil/water separator because of the anticipated > 2500 vehicle trips per day. Therefore, the code requires a biofilter and a wet pond (in either order) and a coalescing plate oil/water separator. I based the estimated treatment efficiencies for the wet pond according to the minimum code requirement (a volume ratio of 1) . The efficiencies differ somewhat depending on which element is assumed to be first and the efficiency penalty assumed for the second element. I calculated them for both sequences and for penalty assumptions of 25 and 50 percent and estimate them to be in the following ranges: TSS and Pb--67 - 87% TP--32% Cu and Zn--48 - 68% Coalescing plate oil/water separators are meant for industrial applications where influent oil concentrations are consistently larger than generally found in urban runoff. They Mr. J. David Benson February 29, 1992 Pagar storms, when the live storage zone of the pond is filled. The recommended maximum overflow rate is 10 cm/hour. I combined the volumes and surface areas provided by second- and third-stage ponds for the analysis. Initially, I took no account of wet vaults, because their overall water quality benefits are very limited as a result of short residence time and excluding light and atmospheric interactions. It should be noted, however, that vaults are useful to increase water storage for release rate control, as presettling chambers to catch the largest particles, as oil/water separators when fitted with appropriate baffling and skimming equipment, and as potential locations for advanced oil/water separators should they ever be needed. I regarded the outlet channel, which is to be at least partially vegetated, as a biofilter and evaluated its performance by using results from the Washington State Highway Runoff Water Quality project (Mar et al. 1982; Horner and Mar 1982; Horner 1988) . Approximations were required because of current uncertainty concerning the final configuration of the channel. I reasoned that it should be at least equivalent in performance to the designs recommended by the references cited and required by the Renton code based on the King County Surface Water Design Manual (King County Surface Water Management Division 1990) . The basis for my reasoning is that the channel will have greater size, and therefore water residence time, than biofilters designed strictly according to the requirements, although some of the cross section may not be vegetated. I recommend that the design include native hydrophytic vegetation over the full width and length of the channel for the maximum water quality benefits. I analyzed performance in terms of the expected removal efficiencies for the following pollutants: total suspended solids (TSS) ; total phosphorus (TP) ; and the metals lead (Pb) , copper (Cu) , and zinc (Zn) . The NURP data suggest that removals of total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) in a wet pond are similar to those of Cu and Zn, but no basis exists to evaluate trapping of those pollutants in a biofilter. TP removal by biofiltration is seasonally variable because of the annual cycling of vegetation through a growth period, when nutrient uptake occurs, and a death and decay phase, when stored nutrients are released. Although these losses through release could partially be avoided by a fall harvesting program, it is most prudent to consider biofiltration to provide no net TP capture over a full annual period for the current analysis. The applicable Renton code requirements and the proposed design for Catchment C involve a wet pond and biofilter in series. Data are available in the references cited earlier to estimate the performance of the two elements in the sequence separately. It is reasonable to assume that in a series arrangement, however, the second device in line will not perform Richard R. Horner, Ph.D. Environmental Engineering and Science 230 N.W. 55th Street Seattle, Washington 98107 (206)782 7401 February 29, 1992 • Mr. J. David Benson Sverdrup Corporation 3300 Carillon Point P. O. Box 97062 Kirkland, WA 98083-9762 Dear Dave: This letter provides my evaluation of a portion of the stormwater management system proposed for the Boeing Longacres site. I have performed the evaluation as requested by Randall Parsons of the City of Renton; i. e. , by comparing the estimated water quality improvement performance of the proposed system and the system required by the Renton code. This letter covers my analysis and findings for Catchment C (including the occasional drainage from Catchment A that will enter the Catchment C system) . I will provide similar evaluations after you finish your proposed designs for the Catchment B and SW 16th systems. METHODS I estimated the stormwater treatment performance of wet ponds using the methods developed by Driscoll (1983) from data collected on numerous such systems during the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) . These methods relate long-term effectiveness (the average over numerous runoff events) to the "volume ratio" (pond dead storage volume to mean storm runoff volume) . The latter term is calculated from mean precipitation quantity, a regional climatological statistic. This ratio has been found to govern the capture of pollutants during the quiescent period between runoff events. The NURP methods also recommend pond surface area in relation to contributing catchment area (the "area ratio") and overflow rate for good performance. The larger the surface area is in relation to the watershed, the better is the operation of pollutant removal mechanisms relying on light and interaction with the atmosphere. Minimizing overflow rate improves short- term removals of the larger solids during and immediately after Appendix A. (Cont.) NO3+NO2-N Oil and Sampling TSS TP Grease -- ' Date Point Type of Sample (mg/1 ) .(ug/1 ) , (ugjl ) (mg/1 ) 4/21/85 2 Discrete - 25 hr 10 70 27 5 25 13 80 43 3' Discrete - 25 hr 6.2 61 30 4 25 6.2 61 27 5/5/85 1 Discrete - 0 4.4 80 117 2 5 min 3.0 76 95 10 6.0 80 83 15 8.4 86 86 Composite - 30 - 120 16 113 105 4 (60 min) 2 Discrete - 9.5 hr 7.8 116 8 1 95 7.8 - - 3 Discrete - �' 9.5 hr 4.2 101 51 2 9.5 4.4 - - • 5/18/85 1 Discrete - 0 7.4 1086 1050 6 5 min 104 1186 603 10 90 503 381 15 60 355 321 Composite 30 - 120 41 144 127 3 (60 min) 2 Discrete - 4.5 hr 11 130 2 7 4.5 12 - - 3 Discrete - 4.5 hr 11 218 39 1 4.5 11 - - t ' Appendix A. (Cont.) NO3+NO2-N Oil and • Sampling TSS TP Grease Date Point Type of Sample ,(mg/1) Clig/1) (64/1 ) (mg/1 ) 2 Discrete - 0 14 30 min 9.6 37 96 60 2 180 <1 Composite - 60 - 180 12 35 83 3 Discrete - 0 18 30 min 12 54 121 60 <1 180 <1 Composite - 60 - 180 7.8 41 102 3/30/85 1 Discrete - 0 1.8 30 min 3.2 44 228 90 1 180 <1 Composite - 60 - 180 1.8 45 270 2 Discrete - 0 2.2 30 min 3.2 36 298 90 <1 180 <1 Composite - 60 - 180 6.6 37 78 • 3 Discrete - 0 0.4 30 min 0.2 28 1134 90 <1 180 <1 Composite - 60 - 180 1.4 31 110 4/20/85 1 Discrete - Baseline 1.8 23 794 0 2.6 26 978 6 7.5 min 14 34 778 15 27 53 354 Composite - 30 - 93 28 439 138 1 I 1 Appendix A. (Cont.) NO3+NO2-N Oil and . Sampling Sampling TSS TP Grease Date Point Type of Sample (mg/1) (j,g/1) (j4/1) (mg/1 ) 270 2.5 , 300 0.5 1 Whole storm 7.0 81 composite i 2 Whole storm 4.5 63 composite ' I 3 Whole storm 2.9 62 Composite 1/26/85 1 Discrete - 0 33 7.5 min 170 15 177 330 4 30 140 Composite - 45, 60, 75 76 105, 135 55 whole storm 124 186 H . Discrete - 4 135 min <1 _ ! I 2 Discrete - 0 29 _* * 60 min 13 80 <1 Composite - 105, 135 23 Discrete - 165 21 Composite - whole storm 19 64 Discrete - 135 min 6 3 Discrete - 0 , 21 75 min 25 62 <1 Composite - 135, 165 31 whole storm 28 73 Discrete - <1 1 . 135 min _ 4 1 I . i 3/22/85 1 Discrete - 0 9.6 30 min 5.4 50 114 ii' 60 <1 180 <1 Composite - 60 - 180 5.2 32 104 Appendix A. Complete TSS, TP, NO(3)+NO(2)-N, and Oil and Grease Data NO3+NO2-N ( Oil and Sampling TSS TP Grease Date Point Type of Sample (mg/1 ) (j,g/1_) Lug/1) (mg/1 ) 11/19/84 1 Discrete - 0 26 109 2.8 15 min 15 <1 30 9.0 40 45 7.0 0.1 60 8.0 3.7 75 7.0 • 90 6.5 105 6.0 120 8.0 150 4.0 <1 180 2.5 210 . 3.5 240 1.5 270 1.0 300 0.5 • 2 Discrete - 0 6.5 55 <1 15 min 3.0 30 3.5 45 3.5 60 4.0 75 7.0 90 4.0 105 5.0 120 6.0 150 6.0 5 - 180 4.0 210 4.0 240 4.0 270 4.0 300 3.0 3 Discrete - 0 1.0 45 <1 15 min 1.5 30 0.5 45 2.0 60 2.5 75 4.5 90 4.5 105 5.0 •x 120 6.0 150 5.0 2 180 3.5 210 2.0 240 2.0 itl I I �I Ib II, i ' Ali APPENDIX • li it II I ' i ! i Portele, G.J. , B.W. Mar, R.R. Horner, and E.B. Welch. 1982. Effects of Seattle Area Highway Stormwater Runoff on Aquatic Biota, FHWA WA-RD-39.11. Report to Washington State Department of Transportation by Department of Civil Enginering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Randall , C.W. , K. Ellis, R.J. Grizzard, and W.R. Knocke. 1982. Urban runoff pollutant removal by sedimentation. Presented at Conference on Stormwater Detention Facilities, New England College, Henniker, NH, August 1982. Simmler, J. , King County Surface Water Management Division, Seattle, WA, personal communication. Sullivan, M., Boeing Computer Services Company, Bellevue, WA, personal communication. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EPA-600/4-79-020. Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati , OH. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1982. Preliminary Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, Vol . 1 . Water Planning Division, Washington, D.C. Wanielista, M.P. 1978. Stormwater Management, Quantity and Quality. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI. Wang, T.S. , D.E. Spyridakis, B.W. Mar, and R.R. Horner, 1982. Transport, Deposition and Control of Heavy Metals in Highway Runoff, FHWA • WA-RD-39.10. Report to Washington State Department of Transportation by • Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Welch, E.B., R.R. Horner, D.E. Spyridakis, and J.I. Shuster. 1985. Response of Lake Sammamish to Past and Future Phosphorus Loading. Report to Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle by Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Whipple, W. , Jr. and J.V. Hunter. 1981 . Settleability of urban runoff pollution. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 53(12): 1726-1731. Whipple, W., Jr., S.D. Faust, W. Renwick, and N.K. Wiegand. 1983. Flood Control Effectiveness of Systems of Dual Purpose Detention Basins. Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. Yrjanainen, G. and A.W. Warren. 1973. A simple method for detention basin design. Water and Sewage Works 120(12) : 35, 41-42. 4l • Horner, R.R. , J.S. Richey, and D.P. Lettenmaier. 1985. Source Control of Transit Base Runoff Pollutants. Report to Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle by Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. • • Kamedulski , G.E. and R.H. McCuen. 1979. The effect of maintenance on storm water detention basin efficiency. Water Resour. Bull . 15(4):1146-1152. Kathuria, b.V. , M.A. Nawrocki , and B.C. Becker. 1976. Effectiveness of Surface Mine Sedimentation Ponds, EPA-600/2-76-117. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati , OH. Lettenmaier, D.P. and J.S. Richey. 1985. Operational Assessment of a Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separator. Report to Municipality of � Metropolitan Seattle by Department of Civil Engineering, University of gill Washington, Seattle, WA. Linsley, R.K. , Jr., M.A. Kohler, and J.L.H. Paulus. 1975. Hydrology for Engineers,neers 9 2nd Ed. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.,p Y, New York, NY. h Little, L.M., R.R. Horner, and B.W. Mar. 1983. Assessment of Pollutant Loadings and Concentrations in Highway Stormwater Runoff, FHWA WA-RD-39.12.1. Report to Washington State Department of Transportation `I by Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Mar, B.W., R.R. Horner, J.F. Ferguson, .D.E. Spyridakis, and E.B. Welch. 1982. Summary -- Highway Runoff Water Quality Study 1977-1982, FHWA WA-RD 39.16. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Markham, D., Bremerton Navy Yard, Bremerton, WA, personal communication. Mays, L.W. and P.B. Bedient. 1982. Model for optimal size and location of detention. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. Div. ASCE 108 (NR 3): 270-285. , ! McCuen, R.H. 1980. Water quality trap efficiency of storm water management basins. Water Resour. Bull . 16(1): 15-21. National Climatic Data Center. 1985. Local Climatological Data, Monthly Summary (November, 1984, to May, 1985) , Seattle C.O. , WA. National Cooperative Highway Research Program. 1980. Design of Sedimentation Basi ns.' Transportation Res earch search Board, Washington, D.C. Olympic Associates Company. 1985. Storm Drainage System, Maintenance and Contingency Plan, Boeing Computer Services Company, Bellevue, Washington, Revision A. Olympic Associates Company, Seattle, WA. Ormsbee, L.E. , J.W. Delleur, and M.H. Houck. 1984. Development of a General qi Planning Methodology for Storm Water Management in Urban Watersheds. : Water Resources Research Center, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. 40 REFERENCES t m A erican Public Health Association. 1980. Standard Methods for the • Examination of Water and Wastewater, 15th ed. American Public Health Associat on, Was ington, D . Asplund, R.L., J.F. Ferguson, and B.W. Mar. 1982. Characterization of highway runoff in Washington State. J. Environ. Engin. Div. ASCE 108 (EE2):391-404. Bellevue Department of Public. Works. 1981. Development Standards. City of Bellevue, WA. Chui , T.W., B.W. Mar, and R.R. Horner. 1982. A pollutant loading model for highway runoff. J. Environ. Engin. Div. ASCE 108(EE6):1193-1210. Clarke, D.L., R.L. Asplund, J.F. Ferguson, and B.W. Mar. 1981. Composite sampling of highway runoff. J. Environ. Engin. Div. ASCE 107(EE5):1076-1081. Curtis, D.C. and R.H. McCuen. 1977. Design efficiency of stormwater detention basins. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage,. Div. ASCE 103(WRI):125-140. Daily, L.K., D.P. Lettenmaier, S.J. Burges, and M.M. Benjamin. 1983. Operation of Detention Facilities for Urban Stream Quality Enhancement, f Water Resources Series Technical Report No. 79. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Davis, W.J., R.H. McCuen, and G.E. Kamedulski . 1978. The effect of stormwater detention on water quality. Presented at the International Symposium on Urban Stormwater Management, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, July 1978. Diessner, D., Storm and Surface Water Utility, City of Bellevue, WA, personal communication. Driscoll , E.B. 1982. Analysis of detention basins in the EPA Nationwide Urban Runoff Program. Presented at conference on Stormwater Detention Facilities, New England College, Henniker, NH, August, 1982. Ellis, J.B. 1985. Design of Urban Detention Basins for Water Quality Control . Pres. Non-Point Pollution Abatement Sym., Milwaukee, WI , April , 1985. Farris, G.E. , et al . 1979. Urban Drainage Storm Water Monitoring Program. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA. Finger, R. N.d. Evaluation of the Performance of the Highway Department' s Grease Trap. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA. Fram Industrial Filter Corporation. N.d. Coalescing Plate Separators for Environmental Clean-up and Resource Recovery. Fram Industrial Filter Corporation, Tulsa, OK. 39 I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A useful means of studying nonpoint pollution in experimental catchments is to develop general understanding using well-controlled synthetic storms, followed by verification through natural storm monitoring. A system was designed and constructed to provide synthetic storms having characteristics similar to typical natural events. Synthetic and natural storm experiments demonstrated that a detention pond on the Boeing Computer Services Company site in Bellevue, Washington, removes the majority of the entering solids, nearly all of the lead, 1/4 to 1/3 of the phosphorus, and variable proportions of nitrogen and other metals. The pond' s performance could possibly be improved at relatively low cost by the addition of baffles. j � Oil and grease concentrations in runoff from the site were very low, and H the capacity of a coalescing plate oil/water separator was not utilized. Further, materials in the separator added substantial quantities of zinc to the runoff. Additional work is recommended to identify the exact source of zinc. Although such oil/water separators are necessary at sites with more j heavy equipment and automobile traffic, their use could be limited to areas prone to oil spills at light-industrial sites like BCS. As an alternative, land treatment of detention pond effluent is recommended. Data have shown that land treatment could achieve greater nutrient and metal reductions than an oil/water separator and equivalent oil and grease removal , as long as oil and grease concentrations are low (< 20 mg/1) . Also, both the initial and annual operating costs for land treatment would be significantly lower at a site with sufficient land. • II .. 1 38 • The clearest result of this study was the introduction of zinc to the flow downstream of the detention pond. Lettenmaier and Richey (1985) observed a very similar phenomenon in their investigation of the performance of a Fran coalescing plate separator at the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle transit base in Bellevue, which was coincident with this work. Because of their • independent observation in another system, it has been concluded that the separator itself, rather than some other component of the BCS system, was responsible for the Zn increase. However, the exact source within the separator has not been traced. It is recommended that a review of the Fram design be undertaken to determine potential zinc sources and the implications of redesigning and replacing parts in existing systems. It should be noted that use of land treatment instead of the structural device where possible would have the additional advantage of avoiding this zinc source. It appeared that the maintenance schedule followed by Boeing contributes materially to the levels of performance achieved by the stormwater treatment system. It is recommended that other similar installations adopt an equivalent schedule, which involves routine cleaning of catch basins and other solids collection areas four times per year and complete maintenance of the oil/water separator once a year. • 37 1- determine the exact water travel and residence times in the pond . With the results of that study, a system of baffles should be designed, installed, and evaluated concerning its effect on treatment performance. During the period of study, the Boeing site did not produce oil and • grease concentrations even as high as the claimed effluent quality of. the Fram coalescing plate oil/water separator (15 mg/1 ) . Therefore, it appears that the separator is not serving a purpose under routine conditions. It must be emphasized that this conclusion applies only to the site studied under the prevailing conditions. Other types of urban land use (e.g. , heavy equipment yards and shopping center parking lots) are known to produce higher oil and grease concentrations, and a coalescing plate or other relatively advanced separator may be needed for water quality protection even under routine conditions. On a site such as BCS, however, with little heavy equipment and automobile movement other than in the morning and afternoon, other strategies may be appropriate in future installations. It may be best to serve with a separator only the delivery portion of the site, where an oil spill could occur. This separator could be smaller and require less maintenance than one serving the whole site, therefore saving on installation and operating costs. _. Instead of the protection offered by a separator to the remainder of the site, it is recommended that the detention pond be supplemented with some form of land treatment. , I The general forms of land treatment that may be considered for a light industrial park are overland flow through vegetation, flow through a natural li or artificial wetland, or soil infiltration. The characteristics and use of these systems in the Bellevue area was reviewed in detail -elsewhere (Welch et ; I i . al ., 1985) . All can provide effective removal of nutrients, metals, and oil and grease, in addition to any solids escaping the detention pond. For example, a'vegetated channel 180 ft (55 m) in length receiving freeway runoff near Seattle achieved consistent TSS and Pb reductions of 80 percent and Zn and Cu removals of 60 percent (Wang et al . , 1982) . More limited data on other contaminants indicated > 50 percent reduction of N and P, except in the winter when vegetation died back, and 67-93 percent removal of oil and grease with influent concentrations < 20 mg/1 (Little et al ., 1983) . Such a system has much lower maintenance requirements than an oil/water separator, and original installation would be much less costly, if the land were available. 36 The only pollutants sometimes present in the effluent from the BCS site in relatively high concentration were Total P and Zn, (maximums of 218 and 588 ug/l , respectively) . P concentrations of that order could be a significant factor in the Phantom Lake trophic state. The aquatic life protection standard for Zn in receiving waters with total hardness of 50 mg/1 as CaCO3 (typical Of Western Washington) is 180 ug/1 (Federal Register 45 FR 79318-79379, November 18, 1980) . It is likely that dilution of the BCS runoff would be sufficient to protect aquatic life in Phantom Lake. Nevertheless, the occasional occurrence of these elevated concentrations encourages consideration of alternative means of managing stormwater at this and similar sites. The detention pond treatment efficiencies estimated from the data collected during this study agree rather well with those reported previously (see section on Related Research, above) . It appears that the BCS pond is capable of consistently removing the majority of elevated influent TSS. Phosphorus reductions were variable, as observed elsewhere, but reliably were approximately 1/4 to 1/3, near the consensus of the literature. Lead removal appeared to be consistently higher than reported elsewhere, although zinc reduction by the detention pond was not as high on a sustained basis. Other metals and nitrogen were not consistently affected by the detention pond or by conditions preceding and during the storm. It was noted previously that the residence time of the BCS pond may not'be long enough to achieve the maximum benefits of the technique. The residence time apparently is not detracting from its performance in TSS, TP, and Pb reduction. It is uncertain whether a longer residence time would achieve higher Zn removals or more consistency with respect to the nutrients. The dissolved phase constitutes a significant proportion of all of these quantities, and detention ponds serve best in solids removal . Other work, especially that by Ellis (1985) , has identified design features that could improve detention pond performance. They include designing a rectangular shape, locating the inlet and outlet far apart, avoiding short-circuiting from inlet to outlet by baffling, and breaking one pond into a series of two or more. The BCS pond did not incorporate any of these features. Only'baffle installation would be a relatively easy modification, although it nay be possible to relocate the inlet or the outlet for greater separation. It is recommended that a dye study be undertaken to 35 i DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS1 . , jl ii This study was not directly concerned with the sources of pollutants in Ili stormwater runoff from the BCS site. Potential sources are routine deposition from moving and parked vehicles, accidental spills, atmospheric deposition, and site maintenance. It has been documented that vehicles traveling on Washington State highways primarily deposit pollutants when subjected to the spray from wet roads during and justaft er storms and that pollutant concentrations in runoff from these highways are generally lower than in drainage from commercial and industrial areas (Mar et al ., 1982) . On the basis of these findings, it is hypothesized that parked vehicles are greater contaminant contributors than vehicles moving slowly on intermittently wet pavement at a site such as BCS. It has also been shown that atmospheric deposition is an important additional source of various pollutants entering Washington State highway runoff (Mar et al ., 1982) . It is believed that the atmosphere is also a significant source of parking lot contamination, but the relative contributions of vehicles and the atmosphere could not be determined I from the BCS data. There is no record of any accidental spills during or shortly before the sampling program, but sand was applied to the parking lot on several occasions during the winter (Sullivan, personal communication) . Although the lot was swept, sanding was probably responsible for the • relatively high TSS measured at the beginning of the January 26, 1985 event. There has been a debate regarding how strongly stormwater runoff in the maritime Pacific Northwest depends on the antecedent dry period and whether or not an initial flush of relatively high pollutant concentrations occurs very early in the runoff period. There has been some evidence that urban (Dally et al ., 1983) and highway (Mar et al ., 1982) runoff water quality in the Northwest does not depend strongly on the length of the antecedent dry period. There have also been indications that Northwest urban (Farris et al ., 1979) and highway (Mar et al ., 1982) runoff exhibits first-flush characteristics to a lesser extent than elsewhere, possibly because of the general lighter intensities of rainfall in the region. Daily et al . (1983) , however, did observe an obvious first flush for some contaminants. The results of the present study suggest that the water quality of storm runoff from a Northwest light industrial site both depends on the antecedent meteorological conditions and exhibits a relatively highly concentrated initial flush with precipitation intensities ranging from 0.03 to 0.33 inch/hr (0.8-8.4 inm/hr) . 34 i 1 ' v • � . . • ' • Table 7. Estimated Treatment Efficiencies of the BCS Detention Pond and Overall Treatment System. Treatment Efficiency (Z)c TSS Tp Pb Zn Casea Systemb Range Average . Range Average Range Average Range Average 1 Pond -267 to 97d 26 -9 to 76 68 56 to 99+ >86 -7 to 54 26 Overall -122 to 99+d 33 -28 to 81 32 75 to 99+ >92 -420 to 19 -129 2 Pond 51 to 71 60 -3 to 83 30 94 to 99 >97 -37 to -15 -23 Overall 73 to 78 75 -58 to 86 15 98 to 99+ >99 -1000 to -574 -156 a Case 1 compares essentially simultaneous flows into and out of the treatment system. Case 2 compares inflows at one time to later outflows after a period of residence in the pond. b Overall represents total treatment efficiency in the entire system, including catch basins, pond, grit chamber, and oil/water separator. Efficiency was calculated in terms of concentration as [(inflow-outlfow)/inflow] x .100. A negative efficiency indicates outflow concentration greater than inflow concentration. c1 The results reported represent all of the available data. If cases where pond inflow TSS was < 7 mg/1 are eliminated, all remaining concentrations are > 124 mg/1. For this latter subset of the data, the pond efficiency range and average were 85 to 97 and 91, respectively. For the overall system the range and average were 77 to 99+ and 88, respectively. I ' Using all of the available data to estimate TSS removal efficiencies produced misleading results in the first case considered. When the TSS concentrations were already at very low levels, the pond resulted in little reduction or even an increase in solids. Eliminating those data demonstrated • that the pond and the overall treatment system were achieving very high TSS removal efficiencies when influent concentrations were high (see Table 7, note --' d) . All of the available evidence indicates that the treatment system captures the majority of the suspended solids when they are elevated, and it is important for water quality protection that large reductions be realized. The remaining results presented in Table 7 provide documentary evidence of some general trends noted earlier. Total phosphorus removals were very variable in the pond and the treatment system as a whole. That variation does not follow a'discernible pattern, and its cause is not apparent. Over a span of time encompassing a number of storms, it appears that cumulative TP reduction, reliably, isno more than 1/4 to 1/3 of the influent quantity. On the other hand, lead removal efficiencies were consistently high, always over 50 percent and often approaching 100 percent. The tabulated zinc removal efficiencies clearly show the augmentation of Zn occurring downstream of the X detention pond, as discussed above. - I - I 32 6. All of the metals were present primarily in the dissolved form, except for relatively insoluble Pb, which usually was undetectable in • the dissolved phase. 7. Pb tended to be reduced effectively by treatment (total extractable Pb in the site effluent ranged from undetectable in most samples to 8.1 ug/1 ) • Most of the reduction occurred in the detention pond. 8. The detention pond often, but not always, reduced Zn, but with less efficiency than in the case of Pb. However, the treatment system downstream of the pond (piping, catch basin, grit chamber, or separator) contributed large concentrations of Zn to the flow. These concentrations were almost always higher than those upstream and ranged up to 588 µg/1 . This zinc increase was the most consistent result of the study. The water quality results were compared qualitatively with the antecedent, meteorological , and hydrological conditions tabulated in Tables 2 and 3 in order to note any associations. The clearest apparent association was that TSS, TP, NO3 + NO2 - N, Pb, and Zn concentrations in runoff flowing off the site to the pond appeared to be highest when the period preceding the storm was dry. For example, TSS in discrete samples collected within the first 30 min of the 1/25/85 and 5/18/85 storms (dry > 48 hr before event) averaged 88 mg/1 , compared to 25 mg/1 in the remaining storms, which were preceded by precipitation within the previous 24 hr. There appeared to be no association between effluent concentrations and the length of time since treatment system maintenance. It seems that the maintenance schedule is effective in keeping the system functioning as well as its design prenits. There was also no obvious relationship between pollutant concentrations and the total volume or rate of application of natural or synthetic precipitation. It must be emphasized, however, that the monitoring did not occur during any relatively large or intense events, and the relationship between runoff water quality and meteorological conditions may differ substantially in such events. Because of lag time in the system depending on storm volume and intensity and pond storage capacity, calculation of meaningful treatment efficiencies is difficult. In order to get some idea of removal efficiencies for the constituents most affected by the treatment system, some calculations were performed for two different cases: (1) a comparison of essentially simultaneous flows into and out of the treatment system, and (2) a comparison of inflow to later outflow, after a period of residence in the pond. Table 7 summarizes the results of this analysis. 31 in a 11/19/85 discrete sample; see Appendix A) . Therefore, the full capability of the coalescing plate device to separate oil and grease from runoff could not be evaluated. It is clear that the BCS site yielded little I1 oil and grease to stonnwater runoff under the conditions prevalent during the project. On the basis of the evidence gathered during the sampling program, it is believed that the observed oil and grease concentrations would be typical of most runoff events at the site. No difference in concentration was apparent with differences in precipitation intensity or total volume in the ranges occurring during the program. It appears that only an event exceeding the design capacity of the separator, a change in vehicular usage, or an accidental spill of a petroleum product could lead to the release of oil and grease from the site. in substantially higher concentrations than those observed. r Except for oil and grease, substantial variability is apparent in the results. This variability is characteristic of storm runoff water quality and is due to variations in numerous antecedent and storm conditions. Some patterns are evident, however: j ' . 1. Except when TSS was very low already, the detention pond tended to reduce its concentration; however, further reduction was not always achieved in flowing through the grit chamber and oil/water separator. 2. Pond and separator effluent P concentrations were usually, but not always, less than those in the influent and tended to reflect the level of influent P; i .e., relatively high effluent values usually followed relatively high yields from the site and vice versa. This trend was not evident for N, however. 3. The TP range in the separator effluent leaving the site was 28-218 ug/l , and the NO1 4. NO2 - N range was 29-1134 ug/1 . The settling provided by the pond apparently prevented comparably high concentrations of TSS in the site effluent, which exhibited a range of 0.2-28 mg/l . 4. Dissolved and total extractable As , Cd, Cu, and Ni tended to fluctuate relatively little with differing conditions and to be minimally. affected by the treatment system. 5. Dissolved and total extractable Pb and Zn exhibited much greater fluctuation. Total extractable Pb in the pond influent ranged from below detection in a number of samples in different storms to 154 ug/1 . It tended to reflect the TSS concentration. The total extractable Zn range was less (41-223 ug/1 ) . ln Table 6. (Cont.) Total Extractable Metals Dissolved Metals (ug/1 ) (u9/1 ) As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn • Date - 5/18/85 Sampling Point - 1 Type of Sample a - Discrete (0 min) 60 2.2 6.8 35 3.1 <.1 86 42 2.1 6.4 35 3.1 <.1 84 (5 min) 61 2.0 9.4 39 6.9 92 108 47 1.3 6.9 26 5.3 <.1 74 (10 min) 49 2.4 7.0 30 8.8 91 84 41 1.8 5.4 20 3.9 <.1 46 (15 min) 54 2.3 7.1 27 8.8 46 71 27 1.7 5.2 20 4.7 <.1 46 Composite (30 - 47 1.8 5.2 20 6.8 45 35 36 1.6 4.6 16 3.1 <.1 25 120 min) Sampling Point - 2 Type of Sample a - Discrete (4.5 hr) 50 2.2 6.1 18 4.8 <.1 48 24 <1.0 4.5 15 4.0 <.1 31 Sampling Point - 3 Type of Sample a - • Discrete (4.5 hr) 62 2.4 5.1 17 5.6 <.1 588 39 1.7 5.0 15 4.0 <.1 32 t a0 min was the beginning of runoff for storms of 4/23/85, 5/5/85, and 5/18/85, and the initial sampling occasion for the storm of 11/19/84 (runoff had already begun) . Baseline represents continuing runoff from a natural storm preceding the synthetic storm of 4/20/85. • 29 , fi Table 6. (Cont.) Total Extractable Metals Dissolved Metals (u9/l ) ( 4/l ) As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn Date - 4/20/85 Sampling Point - 1 Type of Sample a - Discrete (base- line) 32 2.1 5.7 24 1.6 <.1 99 <10 2.0 5.0 23 2.6 <.1 125 (0 min) 31 1.9 4.5 24 1.5 <.1 99 28 1.4 4.5 22 <1.0 <.1 100 (7.5 min) 28 1.8 4.5 18 2.8 <.1 52 <10 1..8 4.2 16 <1.0 <.1 53 (15 min) 44 3.3 6.4 21 8.0 95 . 41 18 2.0 3.8 14 2.0 <.1 40 Composite (30 - 55 2.3 5.6 19 6.8 44 27 19 1.4 4.1 13 1.6 <.1 24 93 min) Date - 4/21/85 Sampling Point - 2 Type of Sample a - Discrete (25 hr) 35 1.8 6.3 17 4.2 2.6 32 22 1.6 4.5 14 <1.0 <.1 26 Sampling Point - 3 • Type of Sample a - Discrete (25 hr) 21 1.7 5.9 18 5.9 <.1 214 30 1.6 4.4 16 1.5 <.1 203 • Date - 5/5/85 • Sampling Point - 1 Type of Sample a - Discrete (0 min) 41 1.6 7.6 22 3.7 <.1 81 26 1.7 6.7 22 3.5 <.1 85 (5 min) 28 2.2 6.4 21 5.2 <.1 62 28 1.6 6.2 20 7.3 <.1 70 (10 min) 37 1.6 5.8 19 4.7 <.1 50 37 1.7 5.2 17 3.4 <.1 48 (15 min) 43 1.8 5.5 18 4.0 <.1 41 <10 1.6 4.2 16 4.6 <.1 37 Composite (30 - 48 1.9 6.1 19 4.7 5.1 34 27 1.7 4.3 15 1.6 <.1 24 120 min) Sampling Point - 2 Type of Sample a - Discrete (9.5 hr) 19 2.1 6.0 19 6.2 <.1 39 36 1.5 5.5 16 3.0 <.1 38 Sampling Point - 3 Type of Sample a - Discrete (9.5 hr) 41 2.0 5.9 19 3.8 <.1 229 33 1.1 5.0 18 1 .8 <.1 219 28 Table 6. (Cont.) Total Extractable Metals Dissolved Metals (ug/1 ) (ug/l ) • As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn As Cd Cr Cu ' Ni Pb Zn Date - 3/22/85 Sampling Point - 1 Type of Sample a - Discrete (30 min) <10 2.3 6.5 34 <1.0 <.1 100 18 1.5 6.4 70 1.0 <.1 298 Composite (60 - <10 1.9 7.4 33 <1.0 <.1 108 <10 2.2 7.3 31 <1 .0 <.1 105 180 min) Sampling Point - 2 Type of Sample a - Discrete (30 min) 21 1.7 6.3 23 0.9 <.1 56 <10 2.6 5.7 21 0.5 <.1 52 Composite (60 - 10 1.4 6.7 23 <1.0 <.1 50 <10 1.8 5.3 21 <1.0 <.1 47 • 180 min) Sampling Point - 3 Type of Sample a - . Discrete (30 min) 20 1 .8 6.0 23 1.1 <.1 99 15 2.3 5.5 22 <1.0 <.1 94 • Composite (60 - 12 1.7 6.0 23 2.6 <.1 87 <10 1.7 5.4 21 <1 .0 <.1 81 180 min) • Date - 3/30/85 Sampling Point - 1 Type of Sample a - Discrete (30 min) 12 2.3 6.3 26 2.2 <.1 59 <10 2.0 5.3 23 <1.0 <.1 57 Composite (60 - 20 2.1 6.8 27 2.9 0.4 65 10 1.8 7.0 25 0.3 <.1 66 180 min) Sampling Point - 2 Type of Sample a - Discrete (30 min) 14 2.3 6.0 21 1.1 <.1 49 <10 1.9 4.9 21 3.1 <.1 49 Composite (60 - 28 2.3 5.8 20 2.9 <.1 41 17 1.9 6.2 19 1.0 <.1 42 -- 180 min) Sampling Point - 3 Type of Sample a - Discrete (30 min) 15 2.0 6.6 20 0.5 <.1 85 19 2.4 5.7 23 2.2 <.1 251 • Composite (60 - 25 2.3 6.2 21 4.1 <.1 86 22 1 .9 6.4 20 3.4 <.1 89 180 min) 27 Table 6. Complete Discrete and Composite Sampling Results for Total - • Extractable and Dissolved Metals Total Extractable Metals Dissolved Metals (u9/1 ) (ug/1 ) As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn As Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn Date - 11/19/84 Sampling Point-1 Type P Discrete (0 min) 23 2.4 8.2 23 3.5 26 60 32 2.7 6.0 19 1.6 <.1 48 ' Composite (whole 20 2.2 7.2 25 2.4 7.1 78 17 2.2 6:6 24 3.4 <.1 76 storm) Sampling Point-2 Type of Sample a - Discrete (0 min) 23 2.3 7.1 22 4.1 <.1 64 19 2.5 7.2 19 2.9 <.1 42 Composite (whole 18 2.2 6.6 25 2.4 3.1 79 11 1.8 6.2 23 3.2 2.7 59 storm) • Sampling Point-3 Type of Sample a 't Discrete (0 min) 24 2.3 6.4 26 3.4 <.1 218 17 2.1 6.4 22 1 .5 <.1 187 Composite (whole 11 2.4 5.6 27 4.1 <.1 184 19 2.2 6.5 24 2.2 <.1 149 • storm) Date - 1/26/85 Sampling Point - 1 Type of Sample a - Discrete (15 min) 89 2.5 13.8 37 10.7 154 108 23 2.0 5.8 19 2.2 2.7 109 Composite (whole 57 2.7 10.7 34 7.8 124 223 20 2.4 5.7 24 3.9 4.4 178 storm) Sampling Point - 2 Type of Sample a - I Discrete (60 min) 35 2.0 6.8 18 4.2 <.1 73 27 2.1 6.5 18 4.0 <.1 305 Composite (whole 29 2.5 7.1 23 3.5 4.1 155 26 2.2 6.7 24 5.4 8.5 214 storm) Sampling Point - 3 Type of Sample a - Discrete (75 min) 36 2.6 7.4 21 5.5 8.1 562 27 2.1 6.3 19 3.8 1.0 502 Composite (whole 21 2.3 6.6 23 5.4 7.3 569 11 2.5 6.3 23 3.9 7.8 546 storm) 26 • Table 5. (Cont.) NO3+NO2-N Oil and • Sampling TSS TP Grease Date Point Type of Sample a (mg/1) �,g(1) , (pg/11 (mg/1 ) • Composite (60-180 6. ( 37 78 min) 3 Discrete (30 or 0.2 28 1134 <1 90 min) Composite (60-180 1.4 31 110 min) 4/20/85 1 Discrete (Base- 1.8 23 794 6 line) (0 min) 2.6 26 978 (7.5 min) 14 34 778 (15 min) 27 53 354 Composite (30-93 28 439 138 min) 4/21/85 2 Discrete (25 hr) 12 75 35 5 • 3 Discrete (25 hr) 6.2 61• 29 4 • 5/5/85 1 Discrete (0 min) 4.4 80 117 2 (5 min) 3.0 76 95 (10 min) 6.0 80 83 • (15 min) 8.4 86 86 Composite (30-120 16 113 105 min) 2 Discrete (9.5 hr) 7.8 116 8 1 3 Discrete (9.5 hr) 4.2 101 51 2 5/18/85 1 Discrete (0 min) 7.4 1086 1050 6 (5 min) 104 1186 603 (10 min) 90 503 381 (15 min) 60 355 321 Composite (30-120 41 144 127 min) 2 Discrete (4.5 hr) 12 130 2 7 3 Discrete (4.5 hr) 11 _ 218 39 1 aO min. was the beginning of runoff for storms of 4/20/85, 5/5/85, and 5/18/85, and the initial sampling occasion for the storm of 11/19/84 (runoff had already begun) . Baseline represents continuing runoff from a natural storm preceding the synthetic storm of 4/20/85. Where two times are given for a discrete sample, the second indicates when the oil and grease sample was taken, and the first indicates when the sample for the other constituents was collected. 25 k i i Table 5. Summary of Discrete and Composite Sampling Results for TSS, TP , NO(3)+NO(2)-N, and Oil and Grease I NO3+NO2-N Oil and Sampling TSS TP Grease Date Point Type of Sample a (mg/1 ) (ug/1) (ug/1) (mg/1 ) 1 11/19/84 1 Discrete (0 min) 206 109 NA 3 Composite (whole 7.0 81 NA storm) ' 2 Discrete (0 min) 6.5 55 ' NA <1 Composite (whole 4.5 63 NA - storm) 3 Discrete (0 min) 1.0 45 NA <1 Composite (whole 2.9 62 NA storm) 1 1/26/85 1 Discrete (15 min) 177 330 NA 4 Composite (whole 124 186 NA 1 I storm) i 2 Discrete (60 min) 13 80 NA <1 Composite (whole 19 64 NA storm) . . - �t 3 Discrete (75 min) 25 62 NA <1 • Composite (whole 28 73 NA storm) 3/22/85 1 Discrete ,(30 or . 5.4 50 114 <1 60 minutes) Composite (60-180 5.2 32 104 min) I 2 Discrete (30 or 9.6 37 96 2 60 min) ; Composite (60-180 12 35 83 min) . 3 Discrete (30 or 12 54 121 <1 i 60 min) Composite (60-180 7.8 41 102 min) 3/30/85 1 Discrete (30 or 3.2 44 228 1 90 min) Composite (60-180 1.8 45 270 min) • 2 Discrete (30 or 3.2 36 298 <1 i 90 min) 1 4 Z 1 • ♦ • •♦ • . . • ' . • ' 200 150 N 101 'ond Influent U) U H 50 Se.arator Effluent • Pond Effluent 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Time Since Beginning of Runoff (min) Figure 5. TSS Versus Time Since Beginning of Runoff for Synthetic Storm of January 26, 1985 estimates were based on a pond surface area of approximately 0.75 acre (0.30 ha) (Table 4) . Typical storage depths observed in the winter and spring of 1984-85 were 9-12 inches (22.9-30.5 cm) . Therefore, theoretical water residence times for the approximately 0.20-1.0 cfs (0.006-0.028 m3/s) water application rates observed during the project ranged from about 7-92 hr. Short residence time detracts from the treatment efficiency of detention ponds. Studies cited earlier determined that retention times of the order of 32-48 hr are necessar• y to remove the majority of solids (Whipple and Hunter, 1981 ; Randall et al ., 1982) . This pond would provide that much retention time at the 1984-85 water level only for smaller storms (< 0.25 cfs, which is equivalent to 0.014 in/hr precipitation distributed over the whole 18 acres draining to the pond) . In wetter years less available storage capacity would cut theoretical retention time further. The times estimated in Table 4 are theoretical because short-circuiting from inlet to outlet could reduce the actual period of retention of a given parcel of water. Water Quality 1 . Discrete samples were collected at SP1 at a number of points during the storms of 11/19/84, 1/26/85, 4/20/85, 5/5/85, and 5/18/85 to study the variability in pollutant concentrations during storms. A similar sampling strategy was applied at SP2 and SP3 on 11/19/84 and 1/26/85. The runoff usually exhibited elevated TSS concentrations during the first flush just after the beginning of runoff. The degree of elevation and the exact pattern depended on conditions, such as storm intensity and characteristics of the antecedent period. Figure 5 presents the variation in TSS concentrations at the three sampling points over the course of the 1/26/85 synthetic storm. The it elevated peak seen at SP1 (pond inlet) was attenuated at the two downstream stations by the settling action in the pond. Tables 5 and 6 summarize storm composite data, along with characteristic measurements at discrete points for the seven storms and three sampling points . Table 6 presents metal data, and Table 5 provides the data for the other contaminants. Appendix A contains additional data not summarized in Table 5. • All oil and grease concentrations reported in the tables were under 10 mg/1 , and only one value in the entire program was above that level (40 mg/1 2L I I! Table 4. Estimated KS Detention Pond Theoretical Water Residence Times for Different Influent Rates and Pre-storm Storage Depths Theoretical Retention Time Lhr) Influent Rate (cfs): 0.10 0.20 0.25 0.33 0.50 1.0 Storage Depth (inches) 6 45 23 18 14 9.0 4.5 9 64 35 28 21 14 7.0 12 92 46 37 28 18 9.0 18 136 68 54 41 27 14 24 181 90 72 55 36 18 a 1 cfs = 0.028 m3/s; 1 inch = 2.54 cm. • • • 21 — . A. Table 3. Summary of Meteorological and hydrological Data for Each Storm Total Average Water Type of Water Application Water Volume Application Rate Flow Measur nt Date Storm Sampling Period Pattern Cu ft inch cfs in/hr Cu ft Period cfs 11/19/84 Natural 16:10-21:10 Precipitation for 13,720a 0.21 0.64 0.035 4,131 5 hr 0.21 4 hr preceding and 2 hr during sampling 1/26/85 Synthetic 13:47-16:32 Uniform for 125 min 2,461 0.68b 0.33 0.33 1,382 24.5 hr 0.016 3/22/85 Natural 07:00-10:00 Precipitation for, 24,180a 0.37 0.96 0.053 2,510 3 hr 0.23 7 hr preceding sampling 3/30/85 Natural 09:15-12:15 Precipitation for 15,680a 0.24 0.54 0.030 1,095 3 hr 0.10 8 hr preceding sampling 0 4/20/85 Synthetic SP1: 09:47-11:40 Uniform for 120 min 2,049 0•56b 0.28 0.28 5,107 25 hr 0.06 SP2/3: 11:00, 4/21 5/5/85 Synthetic SP1: 11:12-13:12 'Uniform for 157 min 2,008 0.55b 0.21 0.21 1,213 10.5 hr 0.03 SP2/3: 20:30 5/18/85 Synthetic SP1: 10:14-12:14 Uniform for 125 min 2,299 0.63b 0.31 0.30 136 4.5 hr 0.008 SP2/3: 14:45 .) a Calculated for a total site area of 18 acres (7 ha). • b Calculated for an area of 1.0 acre (0.4 ha) served by the sprinkler system. c Flow was recorded for various lengths of time as the detention pond drained. The flow rate (cfs) is the average over the period of time that flow was recorded. d1 ft3 = 0.028 m3; 1 inch 25.4 mn; 1 cfs = 0.028 m3/s. Table 2. Summary of Antecedent Conditions for Each Storm Type of Antecedent Precipitation (inch)a Date Storm 24 Hr 48 Hr 1 Wk Antecedent Maintenanceb 11/19/84 Natural 0.17 0.17 1.42 Full maintenance 7/3/84 Routine maintenance 9/28/84 1/26/85 Synthetic 0 0 0.37 Routine maintenance 1/7/85 3/22/85 Natural 0.37 0.61 0.61 None since 1/7/85 3/30/85 Natural 0.24 0.44 1.25 None since 1/7/85 4/20/85 Synthetic 0.30 0.72 0.87 Routine maintenance 4/1/85 5/5/85 Synthetic 0.06 0.12 0.34 None since 4/1/85 5/18/85 Synthetic 0 0 0.71 None since 4/1/85 a Precipitation in period preceding beginning of sampling as measured at the Seattle urban station on Portage Bay (National Climatic Data Center, 1985). 1 inch = 25.4 mm. • b From Boeing Computer Service Company records (Sullivan, personal communication). Routine maintenance consists of catch basin cleaning and removal of solids from the grit chamber and oil/water separator. Full maintenance includes cleaning the separator plates plus routine maintenance. • 19 RESULTS • ' Characteristics of Storms and Antecedent Periods Table 2 summarizes the antecedent conditions for each storm. Sampling of natural storm runoff generally did not begin until after several hours of precipitation. Two of the four synthetic storms followed relatively long antecedent dry periods, while some light precipitation preceded the other two synthetic storms. Full maintenance, including cleaning the oil/water separator plates, predated the first sampling occasion by about 4 1/2 months. The interval I between more routine maintenance (catch basin cleaning and solids removal from the grit chamber and separator) and a sampling occasion ranged from 19 days (1/26/85 and 4/20/85) to 82 days (3/30/85) . Table 3 summarizes the meteorological and hydrological measurements for each storm. Natural storms for which samples were collected represented total precipitation volume ranging from 0.21-0.37 inch (5.3-9.4 mm) and average intensity ranging from 0.030-0.053 in hr (0.8-1.3 mm/hr Synthetic events were more intense, ranging from approximately 0.21-0.33 in/hr (5.3-8.4 mm/hr) • on the 1.0-acre (0.4 ha) catchment served by the sprinklers, representing total synthetic precipitation of 0.55-0.68 inch (14.0-17.3 mm) . These events were equivalent to storms of 2-2 1/2 hr duration having return periods of 2-5 years in the Seattle area. They were regarded as relatively heavy events, having the capability of effectively removing pollutants from the pavement, that also occur with some frequency in actuality. The rate at which the detention pond filled and drained depended on the precipitation volume and intensity and the antecedent water level . All but the first sampling date occurred during a long period deficient in ; I precipitation relative to long-term monthly averages. Consequently, the pond had more storage volume than would be the case in most years. In no situation observed did the pond effluent rate approach the maximum allowable rate of influent to the separator. To illustrate the' effect of pond storage volume on water retention time, estimates of theoretical retention time were made for different influent rates and storage depths available at the beginning of a runoff event. The 18 Table 1. Summary of Analytical Methods References (Method No.) American Public Health U.S. EPA Constituent Type Sample Preservation Method Association (1980) (1979) Total Suspended. Solids Unfiltered 4°C Refrigeration Gravimetric 209C 160.2 (TSS) Metals (As , Cd, Cr, Filtered and HNO3 to pH < 2 Inductively Section 300 Section 200 Cu, Ni , Pb, Zn) Unfiltered Coupled Plasma Spectrometry Total Phosphorus (TP) Unfiltered None Ascorbic Acid 424F 365.2 following Persulfate Digestion Nitrate + Nitrite - Filtered 4°C Refrigeration Automated Cadmium 418F 353.2 Nitrogen Reduction (NO3+NO2-N) Oil and Grease Unfiltered, HC1 to pH < 2 Partition- 503A 413.1 collected gravimetric specially entering the pond on a previous date, however. Therefore, the effluents were - sampled at different times, ranging up to approximately 24 hours after the cessation of influent, in the last several storms. Sample Handling and Analysis All water samples were collected in acid-washed containers and were held at 4°C until processing. Sample handling and preservation techniques were according to the guidelines of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1979) . Table 1 presents the analytical methods employed. - . 1 • • 16 outlet, along with synthetic or natural precipitation data, was adequate to • characterize the hydrology of the system. The synthetic storm distribution system and weir constructed for this project will be available for use elsewhere in future work, with appropriate adaptation. The ability to study storm runoff water quality from experimental catchments, economically and under a relatively high degree of control , is a major addition to our capability to perform nonpoint water pollution research. Sampling Procedures Samples were collected by a manual grab method at the three sampling points (SP1, 2, and 3 in Figure 2) . SP1 represents the detention pond influent, SP2 the pond outlet and grit chamber inlet, and SP3 the oil/water separator effluent. Manual sampling was used in preference to automatic sampling because of the need to sample at three points at roughly the same time and the unavailability of three automatic samplers. The collection was made using a long-handled sample bottle holder constructed to order for the • project. The device could hold either a glass bottle for collection of an oil and grease sample or a polypropylene container for other constituents. It had a hinged lid to permit capture of a sample at a selected depth. Samples generally were taken at approximately 2/3 of full depth. Turbulence at each sampling point ensured a high degree of homogeneity with depth, so that floatable and settleable material tended to be retained in the water column. In the first several storms, samples were collected frequently (i .e., at 7.5 or 15 minute intervals) for the first hour of events and less frequently thereafter. After the pollutant flushing pattern of the site became apparent, some samples were composited on a time-proportional basis, in order to represent a relatively homogeneous portion of the storm with a single sample. Because the flow was uniform throughout synthetic storms, time-proportional compositing was also usually flow-proportional . Detention pond and oil/water separator effluents were sampled on different schedules in order to investigate the pattern of pollutant removal . In early storms these effluents were sampled as described above, beginning just after the pond began to drain. Pond drainage generally lagged the beginning of inflow to the pond by less than an hour. This drainage did not represent the water applied to the parking lot on the same day but water 15 2"r 2 BRAcF borrf 64 m e.E. — (rYP z) 4w,M • <6. ex z. --"-- BLOCx A T—/ (TVP 2) / I i 8- I FIELD r ( u A L36 r C uT c, I / 30 is ...1 , —T_ ( Fa R' ' 1 .L� T� tiD mTIGHT ► I G.8.44f SIT •• �\ IV BJ ' I . t f / I 1 E 1' 0- 4" { M.N. ��1 GrROrJT �D A M I I (REF) I A&W E ___I_I I LADDER 2` r V"nig. Rtl8(3ER ASCET y8"THK I e I in PLAN AI. miNum ( BevEL s et s I -0 FL— owe 13i PLY- -- i' • ALUM. . .• • SE T o N 8-8 °R 34" MARINE N S.S PLYWOOD T • i Z,xZ" i (.....- • • gPP_RX 0 r TRASH RACK • II. In wEriz • I�z = 1 - 30" -. 1 NV EL. NoT[M 30°.o ___\c a_ _... YTER 1 scene -4 4%9# ,, WNEr� 8°0 GRTpu_L Z„z2u m ICi-smis z iNr,EtGHAJ Gi.wJrt..14 CULL HIN4E zr4• -- (1.23�t ) a-Cs) 6° PLYWOOD DR�►1N VROtlT Iv "x _ _ FLAP If PVG 41ZrT 2ii° HOLE GHA►rEeR rN1,E1- i • 1 DRIa1n► ptTAIL SEGTIoN1 A-A i • Figure 4. V-Notch Weir Design 14 I 1 . • • ' LEGEND .DATA 0 CATCH BASIN INLET SF.sI .EO AREA I_0 A(rj HEAD SPACING qp' SPRINS LER THROW wA. 65• DIIEHARGi Pot HEAD III CP0•1 • SPRINKLlR HEAD y ►--, PvC PIPE SCALE: /~=410 r—" GARDEN HOSE — n REDUCER r f"\ I �•� i SW SIDEWALK - � ❑ PARKING AREA, .1 ,),„ 1 . . , 4 , ;:,...--i. , , 1 ) i ..., \.,1 _>4 . . • .. •K• ---\ -- % ( 1 , _1 )--. ( �,1 , ,--- 1 -\ i ) , 2 j S N-- 4' 4' S SW 21''� REMOVABLE Z.• 'i' J REMOVABLE 2V FIRE NOSE 2 PIPE SECTION i s )- • wvc sfcrloN so c4• r •-- ACCESS RD.--+w (� 55 �LL� ��PLANT! AREA 4. SW . (TIP.) 1 6 t PH•ATCM „., - N I I } • FLOW METER .I THROTTLE VALVE — - 1 L�T ` -FIRE HYDRANT E0..'D I DE1ENTION DRAhuC1 ; FLND /dUNwAI� LE F16. 2 I e-WOODED AREA/• SkEINKLEO•j\ AREA / \\v •ti�' • r Ci LOCATION C AT I O N + � sari tr;) i3O / v PLAN =,G 5 ; `.� FQ u` /COMPUTER BLDG. r i Figure 3. Distribution System for Synthetic Storms ,I Boeing inspects and maintains the stormwater drainage and treatment system according to a regular schedule. This schedule calls for cleaning catch basins 40, 41 , 41A, and 416 monthly and upstream catch basins and the II grit chamber semi-annually. The oil separator maintenance schedule is as follows: Inspection -- Weekly 0i1 Removal -- When 50% full Solids Removal -- Semi-annually Cleaning Plates -- Annually Detention pond cleaning is on an as-needed basis. General Experimental Setup It was desired to study the stormwater treatment system performance under both the tightly controlled conditions of synthetic storms and during natural storms, for verification of trends noted in results from the synthetic events. 1 To produce the synthetic storms, a system was designed and constructed for distributing water from a fire hydrant to a portion of the parking lot. This area is approximately 1.0 acre (0.4 ha) in size and is located in the • southwestern portion of the complex. Figure 3 illustrates the system. It consists principally of PVC pipe of 1 1/2 - 4 inches (3.8-10 cm) diameter, hose, and irrigation sprinklers. The use of sprinklers permitted the creation of a synthetic storm condition without applying water at artifically high pressures from hoses. Sprinklers were placed to produce nearly complete coverage of the area with spray while minimizing delivery outside of the parking lot area. This placement and a flow meter at the hydrant outlet allowed a relatively accurate estimation of the synthetic precipitation volume. A throttle valve permitted control of the hydrant' flow rate. The maximum discharge capacity of the system was approximately 0.5 cfs (0.014 m3/s) . For flow measurement a V-notch weir was designed and constructed and installed in C.B. 41B, along with a Stevens Model A-71 water level recorder (see Figure 2) . Figure 4 depicts details of the weir design. During the November, 1984-May, 1985 period of sampling, the pond remained wet and the lag between inflow and outflow was brief. Therefore, flow measurement at the pond 12 into the pond bypass line. Water held in the pond is discharged through C.B. 41 at the rate of approximately 0.035 m3/s into the baffle type grit chamber for removal of floating debris and any large sediment particles that escape the pond or subsequently enter the flow. The grit chamber has an orifice that limits flow into the oil/water separator to 0.035 m3/s, from where effluent discharges via a 12-inch (30.5 cm) line to Phantom lake. If any excess occurs, it will overflow automatically into C.B. 41. An orifice system in this catch basin controls the pond level and any flow diversions that may be necessary. Above a certain level , pond overflow bypasses the grit chamber and separator, controlled by the orifice system to increase incrementally as the pond fills. The maximum flow rate allowed by the restrictor orifices is 3.54 cfs (0.100 m3/s) , in conformance with the design limitation. For very severe storms, an additional grit chamber and separator bypass line to C.B. 42 is also provided. The pond is sized to contain runoff from a 100-year storm of four hours duration, approximately 165,000 ft3 (4,676 m3) . It generally retains some water between storms during the wet season but often dries completely in the summer. • The oil/water separator is a coalescing plate type manufactured by the Fram Industrial Filter Corporation. This device is an enhanced gravity separator, utilizing the differences in specific gravity between immiscible components of a liquid. It contains an inlet chamber to separate heavy solids and non-emulsified oil . The remaining oil-water mixture flows through the closely spaced, corrugated polypropylene plates, where smaller oil droplets and fine solids are progressively separated. The plate arrangement induces a sinusoidal laminar flow pattern, a condition under which buoyancy forces and , droplet collision cause oil droplets to rise until they adhere to the plates. These droplets coalesce into sheets on the undersides of the plates, and the agglomerated oil rises toward the surface through weep holes. Skimmers and drains are provided for oil and solids removal , respectively. It has 125 gal (473 1) of oil storage capacity. The device is capable of removing oil droplets of 23 micrometer diameter or smaller, compared to 60 micrometer for tilted plate separators and 120 micrometer for standard API tanks (Fram Industrial Filter Corporation, n.d.) . The separator is sized to produce an • effluent having less than 15 mg/1 oil with influent concentrations up to 600 mg/1 and maximum flow rate of 0.035 m3/s (Olympic Associates Company, 1984) . 11 -----.11 N SALE: AFrgOX. l'- 20'•o• .-,\ FROM C.t. 40 C.E..4!A C•6. "4l C.0 "42 FROM a . El MC 21• POND BIPASS 21' /B' /2• 10 I ARIA / t*/�AA114M i AC 6. arlic N,C• 12' SP LAKE I B' ,) AIN'T 30. OIL WAffR SEPARATOR 21' cNA2+raER N.o POND INLEJ WEIR WITHB' •�� C.B. rEIB rt. fLGW RECORDER30' 21'POND OVERFLOW 1 sp POND m N • r • ALP RAP TRASH (i O RACK • H :1 DETENTION POND FGR LOCATION PLAN SEE FIG. I. LEGEND `.......... 0 CATCH BASIN SLIDE GATE VALVE NO NORMALLY OPEN �N.C. NORM4Ltr CLOSED 0 SAMPLE POINT • • Figure 2. BCS Stormwater Drainage System in the Detention Pond Vicinity P1441J17704 LAK� I 2. j( Z4 W 577 $ E Z5 TM 5T. pf FWD ••.".••.... •1 Y► a 1 'b.,,,....' 6E ZY.7w ST. , / w AR T �J' ^ems �' .• Cam,,... ..„, ii,> ,ri ... t --� a j .•1,..... Pow°sir N.,,,/ ' DRa►ua6E �:, --_ ----- • l P z)co'w ` ./ air ear • /4. . etcnisce. . 7. 40 :.%%.• • PHASE Z ••• (r. el I> fol. •...• . .. • (- r de fe 40 • - Figure 1. Location and Layout of Boeing Computer Services Company Site (from Olympic Associates Company, 1984) 9 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Site Description • The research was conducted at the Boeing Computer Services Company (BCS) 1 ' in Bellevue, Washington. Figure 1 shows the location and layout of the site. The developed portion of the catchment totals approximately 18 acres (7 ha) in area and drains via a storm sewer system to Pond B. Most of this portion is covered by buildings, roadways, and parking lots and is impervious. Lawns around buildings and planting areas dividing parking lots represent a small fraction of the total developed plot. The Phase II development area was wooded during the study and was not served by the storm sewer system. The catchment is isolated from any offsite drainage and offers the opportunity for a high degree of experimental control . The Boeing site is in the Phantom Lake watershed and is situated close to the lake. Phantom Lake has been identified as a eutrophic water body and is currently the subject of a limnological study in preparation for restoration • activities. Because of the potential sensitivity of Phantom Lake to uncontrolled stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces, the BCS drainage system was designed to detain runoff on the site, control its release to the lake, and reduce oil and grease in the effluent. In accordance with the Bellevue Development Standards, the drainage detention system is designed to limit the rate of stormwater discharge from the site in conformance with the natural conditions that existed prior to development (based on a 100-year storm of 19 minutes duration) . The maximum designated rate in this case is acre cfs/a cre.0 (0.0023 m3/s-ha) (Bellevue Department of Public Works, 1981) . The stormwater collection system consists of roof drains and curb inlets feeding into catch basins. The collected stormwater is conveyed to catch basin number 38 (C.B. 38; see Figure 1); from there it enters a 21-inch (53.3 cm) line and flows in a northward direction toward Pond B. The conveyance system is hydraulically sized to transport the runoff from a 10-year storm of four hours duration without backing up (Olympic Associates Company, 1984) . Figure 2 depicts details of the drainage system in the vicinity of Pond B. All stormwater is 'normally directed into the Y pondat C.B. 40, although a slide gate valve at that point can be set to divert up to 550 gpm (0.035 m3/s) 8 maximum of 104 mg/1 to 17 mg/1 by the coalescing plate separator (Markham, personal communication) . Lettermaier and Richey (1985) studied a Fram coalescing plate separator serving the storm drainage system at the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle transit base in Bellevue. Relatively heavy motor oil leakage from diesel buses stored and maintained at the site created generally higher oil and grease concentrations in this runoff than drainage from highways and automotive parking lots (Horner et al ., 1985) . 7 1 . Minimum 10-hr detention time for design storm • 2. Maximum 2 x 10-5 m/s overflow.velocity 3. Maximize basin surface area to the extent possible 4. Install trash barriers., velocity checks at the inlet, and non-perforated risers Ellis (1985) presented additional R/D design guidelines, including the following: 1 . Length/width ratio of at least 3 (5 optimum) 2. Locate the inlet and outlet on opposite sides of the basin 3. Install baffles to guide flow in a manner that prevents short-circuiting from inlet to outlet 4. Consider installing more than one basin in a series arrangement Assuming proper design for service conditions, R/D performance depends to a large extent on maintenance. Kathuria et al . (1976) provided maintenance recommendations, including regular sediment removal , cleaning of outflow pipes, and repair of spillways and embankments when necessary. Kamedulski and McCuen (1979) added cutting of vegetation in the spillway as a concern. • Although the performance characteristics of oil separators in industrial service are well-known, they have not been widely and thoroughly tested in stormwater applications, where influent concentrations tend to be lower. The Washington State Department of Transportation has installed a number of oil and grease traps on state highways. Finger (n.d.) evaluated the performance of such a device and measured an effluent concentration of 18 mg/l . However, this concentration approximated that in the influent runoff, and little removal occurred in the trap. Parking lot runoff tends to contain somewhat higher oil and grease concentrations than highway drainage due to the contributions of stationary vehicles. The manufacturer of the coalescing plate separator in use at the study site claims it can produce an effluent oil content of 15 mg/1 or less (Fram Industrial Filter Corporation, n.d.) . A test of a separator of this type in a system draining a diesel fuel tank area was performed at the Bremerton, Washington, Navy Yard. iil and grease concentration was reduced from a 6 Service and Colorado Urban Hydrograph methods for larger catchments. These procedures generally employ the Rational Method to estimate runoff volume from the smallest watersheds (less than 50 acres) and the Unit Hydrograph for larger watersheds. Relative to dual-purpose R/D facilities, Whipple et al , (1983) found that the addition of a requirement. to detain the runoff from small storms for 24-36 hr in order to settle particulates results in only a small addition to the storage required to control peak flows from either 2, 10, or 100-year events. R/D design based on water quality considerations is. less standardized. Those procedures available fall into two broad categories: (1) theoretically based methods, generally relying on particle settlement according to Stokes Law, and (2) mechanistic models or statistical treatments derived from empirical data. Methods of the first type are usually based on textbook treatments (e.g., Linsley et al ., 1975) but have not been widely checked for 4 accuracy in actual use. The National Cooperative Highway Research Program (1980)' produced a design manual for construction site sedimentation basins that bases hydrologic design on the Rational Method and sediment trapping on Stokes Law. Empirical treatments include that of Driscoll (1982), who proposed an equation relating detention basin solids removal with particle settling velocity, flow rate, basin area, and turbulence. Mays and Bedient (1982) constructed a model using a dynamic programming scheme that optimizes cost, size, and location of a detention basin in urban watersheds. Davis et al . (1978) developed a model that illustrates the difference in R/D design criteria for flow rate control versus water quality control and aids a user in finding a design best suited to achieving selected objectives. 0rmsbee et al . (1984) developed a methodology for use in the planning of dual-purpose detention basins in urban watersheds. It employs continuous simulation, statistical analysis, and a general design heuristic to obtain an integrated system of detention basins. In addition to devising formal design procedures, some investigators have published design guidelines based on observation of operating R/0 facilities. • For example, Kathuria et al . (1976) recommended the following, based on study of surface mine sedimentation ponds: 5 discrete sampling during storms and the economies of storm composite sampling - (Clark et al . , 1981) . The highway runoff research also involved modeling of pollutant loadings and concentrations (Asplund et al ., 1982; Chui et al . , 1982; Little et al ., 1983) , developing means for assessing aquatic impacts of all operating highways (Portele et al . , 1982) , and mitigation of those impacts (Wang et al ., 1982). The use of R/D facilities as treatment devices has been supported by both laboratory and field research, although an insufficient record is available to predict performance over a wide range of conditions or to serve as a strong foundation for design and operating criteria. Whipple and Hunter (1981) quantified pollutant settleability in laboratory water columns and applied the data to estimate detention basin pollutant removal capabilities. They concluded that a 32-hr residence time in an undisturbed pond six ft deep would reduce various stormwater constituents as follows: total suspended solids (TSS)--70%; lead (Pb)--60%; zinc (Zn)--17-36%; hydrocarbons--75%; biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) , copper (Cu) , and nickel (Ni)--20-50%. In a similar study Randall et al . (1982) found that a. 48-hr settling period removed 90, 86, and 64% of the TSS, Pb, and BOD, respectively, from parking lot runoff. Driscoll (1982) proposed an equation relating detention basin solids removal with particle settling velocity, flow rate, basin area, and turbulence. Basing their work on field data, Davis et al . (1978) analyzed treatment efficiency of detention processes by a series of regression analyses. Curtis and McCuen (1977) , through the same process, identified storage volume, basin length, and detention time as significant predictor variables of pollutant removal . Employing the same data as Davis et al . (1978) , McCuen (1980) found sediment_ removal efficiency to vary between 2 and 98% over different storms, with the highest efficiencies associated with the smallest storms and longest detention times. One aspect of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency' s (1982) Nationwide Urban Runoff Program involved detention basin effectiveness. This study established the following typical pollutant removal efficiencies for detention: TSS--65%; Pb--19%;• Cu--41%; total phosphorus (TP)--25%. Dally IA • et al . (1983) investigated the performance of two urban detention facilities and documented negative efficiences due to resuspension of sediment. Various protocols exist to design R/D facilities with respect to hydrologic considerations. Common methods include that of Yrjanainen and Warren (1973) for watersheds under 200 acres in size and the Soil Conservation 1' 4 distribution system. Synthetic events can remove much of the variability and unpredictability accompanying natural storms but may introduce other undesirable artificialities, principally excessive intensity from high pressure sprays, without special equipment. It was the initial objective of this project to design and construct a system to produce synthetic events without this drawback. It was intended that the system be suited for immediate application at the site selected for this investigation but be adaptable for use elsewhere in future studies. Summary of Objectives 1. To design and construct a system to produce synthetic precipitation events having essentially natural characteristics. 2. To investigate the performance of a detention pond and a coalescing plate oil separator in urban runoff service over a range of service conditions, using both synthetic (for control) and natural (for verification) storm events. 3. To apply the resulting data to formulate cost-effective design, operating, and maintenance recommendations for systems of this type. 4. To apply the data to establish appropriate strategies for handling the effluent of such systems and managing the receiving water. Related Research Many studies have been performed to characterize the water quality of runoff from surfaces in various urban and other land uses. Thus, runoff quality is well-defined. Wanielista (1978) has summarized the general character of stormwater runoff. A Our research team conducted a large, comprehensive investigation on highway runoff water quality in Washington State and made several advances that are relevant to the work reported here (i•lar et al . , 1982) . This study characterized highway runoff thoroughly statewide by making use of both 3 j storm runoff water quality under the anticipated service conditions. Even • general performance data usually were very sparse and unrepresentative of a range of possible operating conditions. Thus, there was no real basis on which to design the facilities, specify operating and maintenance procedures, II • or manage receiving waters. Only now is some history of operation becoming available to provide a partial foundation upon which to make these decisions. The City of Bellevue,. Washington, has been a leader in attacking problems in aquatic ecosystems caused by stormwater runoff, establishing the first drainage utility in the United States. The city has adopted ordinances that require developers to install R/D and other control measures and has constructed regional structural and wetland R/D systems for common use among properties. Today Bellevue has more than 500 R/D facilities in operation, most under private control (Diessner, personal communication) . The area under King County, Washington, jurisdiction, outside incorporated cities, has some 2700 R/D installations (Simpler, personal communication) . Bellevue also makes use of most of the other common types of runoff treatment devices. However, these jurisdictions have not been able to conduct sufficient studies of the facilities in place to develop operating and maintenance guidelines or to design criteria for future installations with confidence. The general goal of this research was to investigate the performance of a detention basin/oil separator treatment system in sufficient detail to provide a basis both for local purposes and for design and operation of similar facilities elsewhere. The research approach involved the study of a storm runoff treatment system serving a well-defined, self-contained drainage basin in light- industrial use in Bellevue. The system includes a detention pond followed by a coalescing plate oil separator. This particular type of separator originally was developed for industrial applications and has not received extensive use in stormwater treatment. However, its operating characteristics suggest it should perform better than alternative separators in this service, and one outcome of the proposed research was an evaluation of its applicability. Study of the water quality of runoff from natural precipitation events lacks the usual experimental control that produces the most definitive results in scientific research. Events vary widely in their pattern, frequency, duration, and intensity and occur with only limited predictability. An alternative is to produce synthetic events using a piped water source and 2 INTRODUCTION • Background The passage of federal and state legislation in the past 15 years, especially the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 1972 Amendments and 1977 Clean Water Act, has spurred widespread actions to improve surface water quality in the United States. For much of this period the majority of the attention has been directed toward control of point sources of water pollution, e.g. municipal sewage treatment plant and industrial effluents. Continuing water pollution problems in cases where some success has been achieved in reducing point source contributions has suggested, more recently, that diffuse sources of water pollution also are major factors in surface water quality. These diffuse contributors have been termed nonpoint sources and are associated with stormwater runoff from land surfaces put to various uses. The recognition of nonpoint sources as major pollutant contributors to lakes and streams raised the need to consider means of treating storm runoff to reduce contamination. Clearly, conventional wastewater treatment technology could not be applied with any affordable investment to the very large volumes of water collected intermittently during and after storms. Preceding the concern with runoff water quality, the problem of runoff quantity and receiving stream peak flow increase had begun to receive attention. Retention and detention of stormwater in holding basins, followed by release at relatively slow rates, was prescribed as the .solution to the quantity problem, and numerous new retention/detention (R/D) facilities were installed throughout the nation. Recognizing the particulate settling potential offered by such devices, public works personnel soon began to regard them as at least a partial solution to runoff quality problems as well . In most cases R/D facilities represented the only effort at runoff water quality treatment. However, in a significant minority of cases, other devices, such as oil separators, fabric or gravel filters, or natural media (land or wetland ". treatment) , were installed either separately or in series with R/D facilities. Almost without exception, R/D and other measures have been specified and built with little knowledge of how they would actually perform in improving ABSTRACT Stormwater runoff from land surfaces put to various uses has been • identified as a major factor in the degradation of receiving water bodies. Detention devices and oil/water separators are two of the runoff treatment measures being used to alleviate this problem. However, there has been little basis on which to design and operate these facilities in order to obtain maximum treatment effectiveness. The general goal of this project was to contribute to defining the needed basis by collecting and analyzing operating data on a detention basin/coalescing plate oil separator treatment system installed at Boeing Computer Services Company, a light-industrial site in Bellevue, Washington. Three natural and four synthetic storms were monitored at the site between November, 1984 and May, 1985. The synthetic storms were produced by applying measured quantities of city water to a portion of the parking lot by means of irrigation sprinklers. Site runoff was sampled at the inlet and outlet of the detention pond and the separator discharge and analyzed for suspended solids, seven metals (total extractable and dissolved) , total phosphorus, nitrate + nitrite - nitrogen, and oil and grease. Removal efficiencies of the treatment devices were computed and evaluated with reference to antecedent and storm conditions. The experiments demonstrated that the detention pond removes the majority of the entering solids, nearly all of the lead, 1/4 to 1/3 of the phosphorus, , and variable proportions of nitrogen and other metals. The pond's performance ' could possibly be improved at relatively low cost by the addition of baffles. Oil and grease concentrations in the runoff from the site were very low, and the capacity of the coalescing plate oil/water separator was not utilized. Further, unidentified materials in the separator added substantial quantities of zinc to the runoff. Although such oil/water separators are necessary at sites with more heavy equipment and automobile traffic, their use could be limited to areas prone to oil spills at light-industrial sites like the one investigated. Land treatment of detention pond effluent appears to be a more cost-effective' alternative for such applications.. t 4 Key words: Urban storm runoff, water quality, detention basin, oil separator. iv 1 LIST OF TABLES • Page 1 . Sumnary of Analytical Methods 17 2. Summary of Antecedent Conditions for Each Storm 19 3. Summary of Meteorological and Hydrological Data for Each Storm 20 4. Estimated BCS Detention Pond Theoretical Water Residence Times for Different Influent Rates and Pre-Storm Storage Depths 21 5. Summary of Discrete and Composite Sampling Results for TSS, TP, NO3 + NO2 - N, and Oil and Grease 24 6. Complete Discrete and Composite Sampling Results • for Total Extractable and Dissolved Metals 26 7. Estimated Treatment Efficiencies of the BCS Detention Pond and Overall Treatment System 33 iii LIST OF FIGURES Page 1 . Location and Layout of Boeing Computer Services Company Site 9 • 1 2. BCS Stormwater Drainage System in the Detention Pond Vicinity 10 3. Distribution System for Synthetic Storms 13 4. V-Notch Weir Design 14 5. TSS Versus Time Since Beginning of Runoff for Synthetic Storm of January 26, 1985 23 -77 • • • • • • -- 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES ii LIST OF TABLES ABSTRACT iv INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Summary of Objectives 3 Related Research 3 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN 8 Site Description 8 General Experimental Setup 12 Sampling Procedures 15 Sample Handling and Analysis 16 RESULTS 18 Characteristics of Storms and Antecedent Periods 18 Water Quality 22 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 34 • SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS y 38 REFERENCES 39 APPENDIX 42 - i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research on which this report is based was financed in part by the United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, through the State Water Resources Research Institute. A number of organizations and individuals provided encouragement and material support to this project that made it possible. The City of Bellevue offered both matching support and the expertise of Storm and Surface Water Utility personnel . Dave Renstrom was extremely helpful in making the necessary arrangements to conduct the study and in outfitting the study site. Damon Diessner .and Pam Bissonnette were supportive of the idea and helped get the project underway. The Boeing Computer Services Company was very generous in permitting the use of their facilities and in assisting with the purchase of supplies to build the water distribution system. Mike Sullivan reflected that generosity. in his devotion of time to the project, and Stu Holdridge and Kirk Thomson assisted in the coordination. The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle provided equipment for performing oil and grease analyses and initial support to acquire the grant. The efforts of Ray Dalseg, Bob Schwarz, and Joanne Davis of Metro are greatly appreciated. We are also grateful to Joe Simmler of the King County Department of Public Works and Tom Murdock of the Snohomish County Department of Public Works for their support of the initial grant application. DISCLAIMER Contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the United States Department of the Interior, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute their endorsement by the United States Government. n � I • PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF A DETENTION BASIN AND COALESCING PLATE OIL SEPARATOR FOR TREATING URBAN STORMWATER RUNOFF by Richard R. Horner and Steven R. Wonacott Environmental Engineering and Science Program Department of Civil Engineering University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 Project Completion Report Submitted to " The State of Washington Water Research Center and The U.S. Department of the Interior Geological Survey Grant No. 14-08-0001-G940 Project No. G940-08 Washington Water Research Center Project No. A-130-WASH • • Project Period: July 5, 1984 - June 30, 1985 { June, 1985 r: WhUnversity ofasington i. Department of Civil Engineerin;; It Environmental Engineering and Science 3. %�•i1 1'1.' PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF A DETENTION BASIN . AND COALESCING PLATE OIL SEPARATOR FOR TREATING URBAN STORMWATER RUNOFF d R. R. HORNER AND S. R. WONACOTT r, :,—Y.:'r_ -5 -.4,:• -^� ':-._ s• - r r,i5:;i• L,;•:'.Jr.. 'til.Sw. :•♦ -, r.r:` :,-t, _ -'- �--. 7 r� '. Li o' f': - '..�7','� � t•k: '^'A�r.�r}i� � � �� e_ 4• _ _ i LT ,x,?— ) �r 3 / -rya `'Y 'aa:J�'r ) • ' . • -- +, _ { r.y it .t...- • _ ,a. Seattle, Washington ,- 98195 ?:gyp:` yw y irl ` ; APPENDIX E WATER QUALITY EVALUATIONS �I This appendix contains information related to water quality at both the Longacres Office Park Site and the CSTC Site. Information included consists of: . Horner, R.R., S.R. Wonacott. 1985. Performance Evaluation of a Detention Basin and Coalescing Plate Oil Separator for Treating Urban Stormwater Runoff Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. . Evaluation of CSTC stormwater system by Richard R. Horner, Ph.D., dated February 29, 1992 . Site Map of Water Quality Collection Points • Laboratory Analysis of Springbrook Creek Water • Laboratory Analysis of Site#3 Water . Laboratory Analysis of North Infield Creek Water • Laboratory Analysis of South Marsh Outlet Water 11 Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0 1 3 74 7/22 1 0/dmrpt0l.doc Appendix E-1 12/19/96 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C-50 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 78 cfs VOL: 3 .44 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C-WQ NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION .COEFF: 0 .20 AREA.. : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 0 . 72 cfs VOL: 0 . 32 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C-2 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 . 73 cfs VOL: 1 . 71 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C-25 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 60 cfs VOL: 3 . 38 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: .C-5 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 . 10 cfs VOL: 2 . 17 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT i BASIN C BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C-10 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 7 . 84 cfs VOL: 2 . 77 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min li BASIN ID: C-100 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 .50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 11 . 37 cfs VOL: 3 . 99 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C-107 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 100YR 7D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 5 . 93 cfs VOL: 10 .55 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min 12 19 96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 Ii BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C ROUTING STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. PONDS Description: POND5 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 13.50 0.0000 14.50 5.1000 15.50 14.700 16.50 23.200 14.00 1.7000 15.00 9.7000 16.00 19.500 • 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C ROUTING STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 3 Description: POND5 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 13.00 0.0000 0.0000 14.50 1.8080 0.0000 16.00 7.8650 0.0002 16.50 10.665 0.0002 13.50 0.0810 0.0000 15.00 3.3740 0.0001 16.50 10.665 0.0002 14.00 0.6500 0.0000 15.50 5.3830 0.0001 16.50 10.665 0.0002 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C ROUTING LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE < DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- c-STAGE> id VOL (cf). WQ, POST 25-20, C 0.00 0.72 3 PONDS 13.71 9 0.32 2YR, POST 25-20, C 0.00 4.73 3 PONDS 14.45 10 1.68 5YR, POST 25-20, C 0.00 6.10 3 PONDS 14.54 11 1.93 10YR, POST 25-20, C 0.00 7.84 3 PONDS 14.76 12 2.63 25YR, POST 25-20, C 0.00 9.60 3 PONDS 14.99 13 3.34 50YR, POST 25-20, C 0.00 9.78 3 PONDS 14.88 14 3.00 100YR, POST 25-20,C 0.00 11.37 3 PONDS 15.07 15 3.66 100-7, POST 25-20,C 0.00 5.93 3 PONDS 14.59 16 2.09 File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; 3eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee; o ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE ° o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT ° o DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° O 0 °WQ, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 0 . 72 3 POND5 13 . 71 0 . 72 9 ° °2YR, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 4 . 73 3 POND5 14 .45 4 . 73 10 ° °5YR, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 6 . 10 3 POND5 14 . 54 6 . 10 11 0 °10YR, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 7 . 84 3 POND5 14 . 76 7 . 84 12 0 °25YR, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 9 . 60 3 POND5 14 . 99 9 . 60 13 ° °50YR, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 9 .78 3 POND5 14 . 88 9 . 78 14 0 °100YR, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 11 .37 3 POND5 15 . 07 11 . 37 15 0 °100-7, POST 25-20, C 0 . 00 5 . 93 3 POND5 14 . 59 5 . 93 16 ° O 0 O 0 O 0 o >Done< Press any key to exit 0 Aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Available Memory remaining: 156456 bytes Current Data Set Name : P: \JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\POST2520 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B-50 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 11.40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA li ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 . 36 cfs VOL: 2 .49 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-WQ NAME : BASIN B, POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 0 . 16 cfs VOL: 0 . 15 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B-2 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 2 . 73 cfs VOL: 1 . 15 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-25 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 . 23 cfs VOL: 2 .44 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-5 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 3 . 70 cfs VOL: 1 . 50 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B-10 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 11 . 40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 . 95 cfs VOL: 1. 97 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-100 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 11 . 40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE : 7 . 53 cfs VOL: 2 . 92 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-107 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 100YR 7D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 .35 cfs VOL: 7 . 91 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. POND4 Description: POND4 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 6.00 0.0000 9.00 26.300 12.00 60.500 15.00 79.700 6.50 0.1000 9.50 33.800 12.50 64.100 15.50 82.500 7.00 2.5000 10.00 41.000 13.00 67.500 16.00 85.300 7.50 6.9000 10.50 47.500 13.50 70.800 16.50 87.800 8.00 12.600 11.00 52.500 14.00 73.800 8.50 19.500 11.50 56.600 14.50 76.900 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 2 Description: POND4 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 6.00 0.0000 0.0000 9.00 0.2730 0.0000 12.00 2.3100 0.0001 15.00 35.111 0.0008 6.50 0.0050 0.0000 9.50 0.3350 0.0000 12.50 4.1610 0.0001 15.50 49.777 0.0011 7.00 0.0380 0.0000 10.00 0.3980 0.0000 13.00 6.9630 0.0002 16.00 68.640 0.0016 7.50 0.0960 0.0000 10.50 0.5060 0.0000 13.50 10.968 0.0003 16.50 90.115 0.0021 -8_00 0.1550 0.0000 11.00 0.7260 0.0000 14.00 16.448 0.0004 16.50 90.115 0.0021 8.50 0.2140 0.0000 11.50 1.2310 0.0000 14.50 24.167 0.0006 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B ROUTING LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAG E E G DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) WQ, POST 25-20, B 0.00 0.16 2 POND4 6.51 9 0.01 2YR, POST 25-20, B 0.00 2.73 2 POND4 7.13 10 0.05 5YR, POST 25-20, B 0.00 3.70 2 POND4 7.21 11 0.06 10YR, POST 25-20, B 0.00 4.95 2 POND4 7.33 12 0.08 25YR, POST 25-20, B 0.00 6.23 2 POND4 7.44 13 0.09 50YR, POST 25-20, B 0.00 6.36 2 POND4 7.45 14 0.09 100YR, POST 25-20,B 0.00 7.53 2 POND4 7.63 15 0.11 100-7, POST 25-20,B 0.00 4.35 2 POND4 7.21 16 0.06 File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee1 I 3eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep - ° ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE ° o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 0 ° DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° _ ' ° 0 °WQ, POST 25-20, B 0 . 00 0 . 16 2 POND4 6 . 51 0 . 16 9 0 °2YR, POST 25-20, B 0 . 00 2 . 73 2 POND4 7 . 13 2 . 73 10 0 °5YR, POST 25-20, B 0 . 00 3 . 70 2 POND4 7 . 21 3 . 70 11 0 °10YR, POST 25-20, B 0 . 00 4 . 95 2 POND4 7 .33 4 . 95 12 0 °25YR, POST 25-20, B 0 . 00 6 . 23 2 POND4 7 .44 6 .23 13 0 °50YR, POST 25-20, B 0 . 00 6 . 36 2 POND4 7 .45 6 .36 14 0 °100YR, POST 25-20,B 0 . 00 7 . 53 2 POND4 7 . 63 7 . 53 15 ° - °100-7, POST 25-20,B 0 . 00 4 . 35 2 POND4 7 . 21 4 .35 16 ° O 0 - 0 0 O 0 ° >Done< Press any key to exit 0 aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Available Memory remaining: 166576 bytes Current Data Set Name : P:\JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\POST2520 1 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-50 NAME : BASIN A, POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 .25 PEAK RATE: 99 .56 cfs VOL: 32 . 96 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A-WQ NAME : BASIN A, POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 6 .26 cfs VOL: 2 . 83 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I- - 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-2 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 21 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 46 .75 cfs VOL: 16 . 03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min l BASIN ID: A-25 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 97 . 70 cfs VOL: 32 . 36 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A-5 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 .25 PEAK RATE: 60 . 96 cfs VOL: 20 . 57 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-10 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 .25 PEAK RATE: 79 . 18 cfs VOL: 26 .41 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A-100 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 116 .37 cfs VOL: 38 .40 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: A-107 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 100YR 7D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 58 . 80 cfs VOL: 102 .32 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. PONDA Description: POND STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 8.50 0.0000 9.40 14.967 10.30 23.500 11.20 37.400 8.80 4.3333 9.70 16.600 10.60 27.833 9.10 10.600 10.00 19.633 10.90 32.500 li 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 1 Description: POND 1 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 8.10 44.000 0.0010 10.50 815313 18.717 12.90 2362564 54.237 15.30 4347724 99.810 8.40 218.00 0.0050 10.80 977574 22.442 13.20 2585242 59.349 15.60 4628903 106.26 8.70 49223 1.1300 11.10 1148677 26.370 13.50 2814368 64.609 15.90 4915441 112.84 9.00 143879 3.3030 11.40 1329495 30.521 13.80 3050158 70.022 16.20 5209253 119.59 9.30 257483 5.9110 11.70 1520549 34.907 14.10 3292831 75.593 16.40 5412417 124.25 9.60 381455 8.7570 12.00 1722188 39.536 14.40 3543737 81.353 9.90 516230 11.851 12.30 1931276 44.336 14.70 3803398 87.314 10.20 661546 15.187 12.60 2144720 49.236 15.00 4071989 93.480 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A ROUTING LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) WQ, POST 25-20, A 0.00 6.26 1 PONDA 8.58 9 30359.73 2YR, POST 25-20, A 0.00 46.75 1 PONDA 9.13 10 192345 5YR, POST 25-20, A 0.00 60.96 1 PONDA 9.30 11 256842 10YR, POST 25-20, A 0.00 79.18 1 PONDA 9.55 12 362555 25YR, POST 25-20, A 0.00 97.70 1 PONDA 9.81 13 477356 50YR, POST 25-20, A 0.00 99.56 1 PONDA 9.84 14 489110 100YR, POST 25-20,A 0.00 116.37 1 PONDA 10.06 15 592848 100-7, POST 25-20,A 0.00 58.80 1 PONDA 10.08 16 601404 I ' File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei 3eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; o ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE 0 o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 0 o DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° O 0 °WQ, POST 25-20, A 0 . 00 6 . 26 1 • PONDA 8 . 58 1 . 78 9 ° °2YR, POST 25-20, A 0 . 00 46 . 75 1 PONDA, 9 . 13 10 . 64 10 ° °5YR, POST 25-20, A 0 . 00 60 . 96 1 PONDA 9 . 30 13 .48 11 ° °10YR, POST 25-20, A 0 . 00 79 . 18 1 PONDA 9 . 55 15 . 67 12 ° °25YR, POST 25-20, A 0 . 00 97 . 70 1 PONDA 9 . 81 17 . 88 13 ° °50YR, POST 25-20, A 0 . 00 99 . 56 1 PONDA 9 . 84 18 . 11 14 ° °100YR, POST 25-20,A 0 . 00 116 . 37 1 PONDA 10 . 06 20 . 51 15 ° - °100-7, POST 25-20,A 0 . 00 58 . 80 1 PONDA 10 . 08 20 . 73 16 ° O 0 - ° 0 O 0 o >Done< Press any key to exit ° aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Available Memory remaining: 166576 bytes Current Data Set Name: P:\JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\POST2520 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 6 BASIN SUMMARY , BASIN ID: C6100 NAME: BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 . 30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 2 .20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 22 .31 cfs VOL: 8 . 63 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C6107 NAME: BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 . 30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 2 .20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 12 . 89 cfs VOL: 23 .42 Ac-ft TIME : 3300 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 6 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C6-5 NAME: BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37. 00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 . 30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 2 .20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 10 .77 cfs VOL: 4 .40 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • BASIN ID: C6-50 NAME : BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 18 . 78 cfs VOL: 7 . 33 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C6-WQ NAME: BASIN 6, POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 2 . 20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 0 .42 cfs VOL: 0 .43 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 6 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C6-10 NAME: BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 . 30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 .20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 14 . 53 cfs VOL: 5 . 78 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C6-2 NAME : BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 . 20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 7 . 89 cfs VOL: 3 . 35 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C6-25 NAME : BASIN 6, POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 37 . 00 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 34 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 00 TIME OF CONC • 20 .30 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 2 .20 Acres CN • 100 . 00 PEAK RATE: 18 . 39 cfs VOL: 7 . 19 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 6 ROUTING STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 3 Description: POND6 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 10.00 0.0000 0.0000 12.00 2.2070 0.0001 14.00 16.410 0.0004 16.00 36.488 0.0008 10.50 0.0090 0.0000 12.50 5.0490 0.0001 14.50 20.841 0.0005 16.50 42.610 0.0010 11.00 0.0700 0.0000 13.00 8.4480 0.0002 15.00 25.592 0.0006 16.50 42.610 0.0010 11.50 0.5200 0.0000 13.50 12.284 0.0003 15.50 30.768 0.0007 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 6 ROUTING STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. POND6 Description: POND6 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 11.00 0.0000 12.50 15.600 14.00 50.400 15.50 88.400 11.50 2.3000 13.00 25.900 14.50 63.300 16.00 107.60 12.00 7.6000 13.50 37.800 15.00 75.900 16.50 118.60 I ' � I 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 6 ROUTING LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) WQ, POST CSTC, BN6 0.00 0.42 3 POND6 11.09 9 0.15 2YR, POST CSTC, BN6 0.00 7.89 3 POND6 12.02 10 2.30 5YR, POST CSTC, BN6 0.00 10.77 3 POND6 12.20 11 3.33 10YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0.00 14.53 3 POND6 12.43 12 4.66 25YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0.00 18.39 3 POND6 12.63 13 5.96 50YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0.00 18.78 3 POND6 12.65 14 6.09 100YR,POST CSTC,BN6 0.00 22.31 3 POND6 12.82 15 7.25 100-7,POST CSTC,BN6 0.00 12.89 3 POND6 12.34 16 4.16 - File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; 3eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; o ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE ° o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT ° o DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° O 0 °WQ, POST CSTC, BN6 0 . 00 0 .42 3 POND6 11 . 09 0 .42 9 0 °2YR, POST CSTC, BN6 0 . 00 7 . 89 3 POND6 12 . 02 7 . 87 10 ° °SYR, POST CSTC, BN6 0 . 00 10 . 77 3 POND6 12 . 20 10 . 75 11 ° °10YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0 . 00 14 . 53 3 POND6 12 .43 14 . 51 12 ° °25YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0 . 00 18 . 39 3 POND6 12 . 63 18 .36 13 ° °50YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0 . 00 18 . 78 3 POND6 12 . 65 18 . 75 14 0 °100YR, POST CSTC,BN6 0 . 00 22 . 31 3 POND6 12 . 82 22 . 27 15 0 °100-7, POST CSTC,BN6 0 . 00 12 . 89 3 POND6 12 . 34 12 . 89 16 ° O 0 O 0 O 0 O >Done< Press any key to exit 0 Aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Available Memory remaining: 149368 bytes Current Data Set Name: P:\JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\PRE-2520 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C5-5 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 5 . 86 cfs VOL: 2 . 10 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C5-50 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 53 cfs VOL: 3 . 35 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C5-WQ NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres • TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 0 .59 cfs VOL: 0 .29 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3- BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C5100 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA, PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 .39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 11 . 13 cfs VOL: 3 . 90 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C5107 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 .39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 5 . 84 cfs VOL: 10 .36 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C5-10 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 7 . 60 cfs VOL: 2 . 69 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C5-2 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 .39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 . 50 cfs VOL: 1 . 64 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C5-25 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 .39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 .36 cfs VOL: 3 .29 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 ROUTING STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. PONDS Description: POND5 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 13.50 0.0000 14.50 5.1000 15.50 14.700 16.50 23.200 14.00 1.7000 15.00 9.7000 16.00 19.500 ti 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS. BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 ROUTING STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 2 Description: PONDS STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 13.00 0.0000 0.0000 14.50 1.8080 0.0000 16.00 7.8650 0.0002 16.50 10.665 0.0002 13.50 0.0810 0.0000 15.00 3.3740 0.0001 16.50 10.665 0.0002 14.00 0.6500 0.0000 15.50 5.3830 0.0001 16.50 10.665 0.0002 1 1 � • 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 ROUTING LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) WQ, POST CSTC, BN5 0.00 0.59 2 PONDS 13.67 9 0.27 2YR, POST CSTC, BN5 0.00 4.50 2 PONDS 14.41 10 1.60 SYR, POST CSTC, BN5 0.00 5.86 2 PONDS 14.51 11 1.83 10YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0.00 7.60 2 PONDS 14.73 12 2.53 25YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0.00 9.36 2 PONDS 14.96 13 3.24 50YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0.00 9.53 2 PONDS 14.98 14 3.31 100YR,POST CSTC,BN5 0.00 11.13 2 PONDS 15.04 15 3.54 100-7,POST CSTC,BN5 0.00 5.84 2 PONDS 14.58 16 2.06 1 File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - 'Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; , 3eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei o ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE ° o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT ° ° DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° ° 0 °WQ, POST CSTC, BN5 0 . 00 0 .59 2 POND5 13 . 67 0 . 59 9 ° - °2YR, POST CSTC, BN5 0 . 00 4 . 50 2 POND5 14 .41 4 .50 10 0 °SYR, POST CSTC, BN5 0 . 00 5 . 86 2 POND5 14 . 51 5 . 86 11 ° °10YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0 . 00 7 . 60 2 POND5 14 . 73 7 . 60 12 0 °25YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0 . 00 9 .36 2 POND5 14 . 96 9 . 36 13 0 °50YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0 . 00 9 . 53 2 POND5 14 . 98 9 . 53 14 0 °100YR, POST CSTC,BN5 0 . 00 11 . 13 2 POND5 15 . 04 11 . 13 15 0 °100-7, POST CSTC,BN5 0 . 00 5 . 84 2 POND5 14 . 58 5 . 84 16 ° ° 0 i o ° - 0 0 o >Done< Press any key to exit 0 Aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Available Memory remaining: 156200 bytes Current Data Set Name: P:\JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\PRE-2520 I '. 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C4100 NAME : BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA i PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : . 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 62 .49 cfs VOL: 20 .44 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C4107 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 31 . 93 cfs VOL: 55 . 01 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min ii 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C4-5 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 . 27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 72 .15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA • ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 31 . 65 cfs VOL: 10 . 67 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min i ' BASIN ID: C4-50 NAME: BASIN 4 , POST CSTC, 50YR • SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 53 . 12 cfs VOL: 17 .46 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C4-WQ NAME: BASIN 4 , POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 i1 PEAK RATE: 2 . 05 cfs VOL: 1 .20 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C4-10 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 41 . 77 cfs VOL: 13 . 86 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C4-2 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 23 . 78 cfs VOL: 8 . 20 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C4-25 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 72 .15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 52 . 09 cfs VOL: 17 . 13 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 ROUTING STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. POND4 Description: POND4 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 6.00 0.0000 9.00 26.300 12.00 60.500 15.00 79.700 6.50 0.1000 9.50 33.800 12.50 64.100 15.50 82.500 7.00 2.5000 10.00 41.000 13.00 67.500 16.00 85.300 7.50 6.9000 10.50 47.500 13.50 70.800 16.50 87.800 8.00 12.600 11.00 52.500 14.00 73.800 8.50 19.500 11.50 56.600 14.50 76.900 I �� 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 ROUTING STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 1 Description: POND4 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 6.00 0.0000 0.0000 9.00 0.2730 0.0000 12.00 2.3100 0.0001 15.00 35.111 0.0008 6.50 0.0050 0.0000 9.50 0.3350 0.0000 12.50 4.1610 0.0001 15.50 49.777 0.0011 7.00 0.0380 0.0000 10.00 0.3980 0.0000 13.00 6.9630 0.0002 16.00 68.640 0.0016 7.50 0.0960 0.0000 10.50 0.5060 0.0000 13.50 10.968 0.0003 16.50 90.115 0.0021 8.00 0.1550 0.0000 11.00 0.7260 0.0000 14.00 16.448 0.0004 16.50 90.115 0.0021 8.50 0.2140 0.0000 11.50 1.2310 0.0000 14.50 24.167 0.0006 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 ROUTING LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) WQ, POST CSTC, BN4 0.00 2.05 1 POND4 6.91 9 0.03 2YR, POST CSTC, BN4 0.00 23.78 1 POND4 8.82 10 0.25 5YR, POST CSTC, BN4 0.00 31.65 1 POND4 9.35 11 0.32 10YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0.00 41.77 1 POND4 9.78 12 0.37 25YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0.00 52.09 1 POND4 10.96 13 0.71 50YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0.00 53.12 1 POND4 11.08 14 0.80 100YR,POST CSTC,BN4 0.00 62.49 1 POND4 12.28 15 3.33 100-7,POST CSTC,BN4 0.00 31.93 1 POND4 9.38 16 0.32 • File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; 3eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei o ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE ° o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 0 O DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° 0 0 °WQ, POST CSTC, BN4 0 . 00 2 . 05 1 POND4 6 . 91 2 . 05 9 0 -- °2YR, POST CSTC, BN4 0 . 00 23 . 78 1 POND4 8 . 82 23 .78 10 0 °5YR, POST CSTC, BN4 0 . 00 31 . 65 1 POND4 9 . 35 31 . 65 11 0 °10YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0 . 00 41 . 77 1 POND4 9 . 78 : 41 .77 12 0 °25YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0 . 00 52 . 09 1 POND4 10 . 96 52 . 09 13 0 °50YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0 . 00 53 . 12 1 POND4 11 . 08 53 . 12, 14 0 °100YR, POST CSTC,BN4 0 . 00 62 .49 1 POND4 12 . 28 62 .49 15 0 °100-7, POST CSTC,BN4 0 . 00 31 . 93 1 POND4 9 . 38 31 . 93 16 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 o >Done< Press any key to exit ° aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef ', 'Available Memory remaining: 156144 bytes Current Data Set Name: P:\JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\PRE-2520 II, H. 1 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C3100 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE: 64 . 73 cfs VOL: 20 . 82 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C3107 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE: 31 . 75 cfs VOL: 55 . 00 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C3-5 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH- METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE: 34 . 97 cfs VOL: 11 .40 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C3-50 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA • PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 840 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE: 55 . 72 cfs VOL: 17 . 96 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, BASIN ID: C3-WQ NAME: WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 45 .78 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE: 4 . 72 cfs VOL: 1 . 81 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1_ BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 BASIN SUMMARY jl BASIN ID: C3-10 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: . 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE : 44 . 78 cfs VOL: 14 .50 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C3-2 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE: 27 . 29 cfs VOL: 8 . 99 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C3-25 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 I '. PEAK RATE: 54 . 72 cfs VOL: 17 . 64 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. PONDA Description: POND STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 8.50 0.0000 9.40 14.967 10.30 23.500 11.20 37.400 8.80 4.3333 9.70 16.600 10.60 27.833 9.10 10.600 10.00 19.633 10.90 32.500 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 1 Description: 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- 8.10 44.000 0.0010 10.50 815313 18.717 12.90 2362564 54.237 15.30 4347724 99.810 8.40 218.00 0.0050 10.80 977574 22.442 13.20 2585242 59.349 15.60 4628903 106.26 8.70 49223 1.1300 11.10 1148677 26.370 13.50 2814368 64.609 15.90 4915441 112.84 9.00 143879 3.3030 11.40 1329495 30.521 13.80 3050158 70.022 16.20 5209253 119.59 9.30 257483 5.9110 11.70 1520549 34.907 14.10 3292831 75.593 16.40 5412417 124.25 9.60 381455 8.7570 12.00 1722188 39.536 14.40 3543737 81.353 9.90 516230 11.851 12.30 1931276 44.336 14.70 3803398 87.314 10.20 661546 15.187 12.60 2144720 49.236 15.00 4071989 93.480 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 i BASIN 3 LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY I 'I MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE < DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) WQ, POST CSTC, BN3 0.00 4.72 1 PONDA 8.52 9 20204.41 2YR, POST CSTC, BN3 0.00 27.29 1 PONDA 8.88 10 107262 5YR, POST CSTC, BN3 0.00 34.97 1 PONDA 8.98 11 137621 10YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0.00 44.78 1 PONDA 9.10 12 180286 25YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0.00 54.72 1 PONDA 9.21 13 225223 50YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0.00 55.72 1 PONDA 9.23 14 229760 100YR,POST CSTC,BN3 0.00 64.73 1 PONDA 9.34 15 272565 100-7,POST CSTC,BN3 0.00 31.75 1 PONDA 9.36 16 281281 1 File Basin Hydrograph Storage Discharge Level pool Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland 2eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; it 3eee6eeeeeeeee6eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee; ° ROUTING COMPARISON TABLE ° 0 MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 0 ° DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No. No. STG OUT HYD ° 0 0 °WQ, POST CSTC, BN3 0 . 00 4 . 72 1 PONDA 8 . 52 1 . 18 9 ° °2YR, POST CSTC, BN3 0 . 00 27.29 1 PONDA 8 . 88 6 . 34 10 ° °SYR, POST CSTC, BN3 0 . 00 34 . 97 1 PONDA 8 . 98 8 . 14 11 0 °10YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0 . 00 44 . 78 1 PONDA 9 . 10 10 . 11 12 0 °25YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0 . 00 54 . 72 1 PONDA 9 .21 12 . 09 13 ° °50YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0 . 00 55 . 72 1 PONDA 9 . 23 12 .29 14 ° °100YR, POST CSTC,BN3 0 . 00 64 . 73 1 PONDA 9 .34 13 . 82 15 0 °100-7, POST CSTC,BN3 0 . 00 31 . 75 1 PONDA 9 .36 14 . 00 16 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O >Done< Press any key to exit 0 Aeee66eeeeeee6eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee6eeeeee6eeeeeeef Available Memory remaining: 165672 bytes Current Data Set Name : P:\JOB\013747\2210\ENGR\PRE-2520 Basin 5/Basin C Discharge vs Recurrence Event for Pre-and Post-Development 12.00 • -♦—Post-Development —o—Pre-Development 10.00 • 8.00 • co 6.00 • `e co a) a • 4.00 100-Year 7-Day Event 2.00 - 0.00 1 2 5 25 10 50 100 Recurrence Interval for 24-Hour Storms (years) 013747/2210/engr-KBCALCO2.XLS[Chart D.4] Drainage Report- Figure D.4 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. , - - - - -- - - - - I 1 1 Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Pre-Development Basin 5 Existing Site Outflow Under Existing Conditions ''''1;1#4k.itifititOr t:,:: ' '.. peal(POitit ..i:: iiNcreq0,fir 1 .01,60010-(?:: '::: 9410:1001offp*: .'',,.,:*'•?, '#1::44.*44i: ',:: :',--,:-',:;:.;';444 ,,Z., ;: ;':!'',:''• (ei4),:.-" ..' ::::• 4.:'!i''','' ,'"::::'-'::::*,#:iii'::',:::tI,Q',:::': ::',,i':;riiiiesiiiiti, ' ':;:'-;''' :f:Y'Z',,::eliiiivilionY.:',:: :::, Water Quality 0.59 0.59 0.00 100% 13.67 2-Year 24-Hour 4.50 4.50 0.00 100% 14.41 5-Year 24-Hour 5.86 5.86 0.00 100% 14.51 10-Year 24-Hour 7.60 7.60 0.00 100% 14.73. 25-Year 24-Hour 9.36 9.36 0.00 100% 14.96 50-Year 24-Hour 9.53 9.53 0.00 100% 14.98 100-Year 24-Hour 11.13 11.13 0.00 100% 15.04 100-Year 7-Day 5.84 5.84 0.00 100% 14.58 Post-Development Basin C Developed Site Outflow Under Proposed Conditions „, POpk9000*.;::..:':pptp,00:10.,:p4#400306 i :.,:, POttlq#M#10tv i ;f ::::.;P011Sta40. : 0*1401:10 '':::'7:!:;:::i:!:,:''1";. (64.)::,:::: -:-' ::::.-':,:. ' :':. ;NO) :;':-' l. : 1 ::!- -: ': 7:: (ct4) ' , ' ' ' :':: :::': ::;:':6401:014-:'":':'''S.'S I-: :;::•:!.(06404017) Water Quality 0.72 0.72 0.00 100% 13.71 2-Year 24-Hour 4.73 4.73 0.00 100% 14.45 5-Year 24-Hour 6.10 6.10 0.00 100% 14.54 10-Year 24-Hour 7.84 7.84 0.00 100% 14.76 25-Year 24-Hour 9.60 9.60 0.00 100% 14.99 50-Year 24-Hour 9.78 9.78 0.00 100% 14.88 100-Year 24-Hour 11.37 11.37 0.00 100% 15.07 100-Year 7-Day 5.93 5.93 0.00 100% 14.59 013747\2210\engr\KBCALCO2.XLS-Table D.4 Drainage Report-Table D.4 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. • Basin 4/Basin B Discharge vs Recurrence Event for Pre-and Post-Development 70.00 - ---- - - - -- -o-Pre-Development • 60.00 _ --•-Post-Development • •50.00 ,N • 40.00 CD CIE Co • • 30.00 ca a) a • 20.00 100-Year 7-Day Event 10.00 • — 0.00 ---- -- - --- - - - 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 1000 Recurrence Interval for 24-Hour Storms (years) 013747/2210/engr-KBCALCO2.XLS[Chart D.3] Drainage Report-Figure D.3 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. , . Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Pre-Development Basin 4 Existing Site Outflow Under Existing Conditions Storm Peak:!;)H'e**(1,2fl910(:::; ;,::'',P.001t.00.#0,10 ; :' ID01-610401*ROlia0f31300 .,:,.!:Outflow/inflow: ',.,';-:'P0aki40.:' 600:0iiei;:,),,;i'-,'''„:2=::!,:':(*):''':„;:: Y:, ,,..:!:! -'-', '‘ (.0*):::!':,' '''' : '::1:::;ii4-": :„(*.` '! .! :: !'!!. ;, :' 1,::!:IP:O.tcOltr ': '::: '''''''r(fik.00.00,''::::''','": Water Quality 2.05 2.05 0.00 100% 6.91 2-Year 24-Hour 23.78 23.78 0.00 100% 8.82 5-Year 24-Hour 31.65 31.65 0.00 100% 9.35 10-Year 24-Hour 41.77 41.77 0.00 100% 9.78 25-Year 24-Hour 52.09 52.09 0.00 100% 10.96 50-Year 24-Hour 53.12 53.12 0.00 100% 11.08 100-Year 24-Hour 62.49 62.49 0.00 100% 12.28 100-Year 7-Day 31.93 31.93 0.00 100% 9.38 Post-Development Basin B Developed Site Outflow Under Proposed Conditions F riiciti4ijait ;!:!: :,:1•: ,, -',,;:'?Ofs),,"-:',, ::':: ::-;' " :-(oN ''.,,,-..,,,,,:''::' '.,: :,'::- „,'' ':-,-,:Td41: : .., f--,-' : . ,,,,:::(Oliceilt): --,,: : .:-!::(000160,:<,:.‘'!'‘:' Water Quality 0.16 0.16 0.00 100% 6.51 2-Year 24-Hour 2.73 2.73 0.00 100% 7.13 5-Year 24-Hour 3.70 3.70 0.00 100% 7.21 10-Year 24-Hour 4.95 4.95 0.00 100% 7.33 25-Year 24-Hour 6.23 6.23 0.00 100% 7.44 50-Year 24-Hour 6.36 6.36 0.00 100% 7.45 100-Year 24-Hour 7.53 7.53 0.00 100% 7.63 100-Year 7-Day 4.35 4.35 0.00 100% 7.21 013747\2210\engr\KBCALCO2.XLS-Table D.3 Drainage Report-Table D.3 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Basin 3/Basin A Discharge vs Recurrence Event for Pre-and Post-Development 14.00 rr. pp! r�— elopmet JP- i 12.00 Pp ores Post-Dev 10.00 8.00 • 100-Year 7-Day Event as N • �C 6.00 N a 4.00 2.00 • 0.00 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 1000 Recurrence Interval for 24-Hour Storms (years) 013747/2210/engr-KBCALCO2.XLS[Chart D.2] Drainage Report-Figure D.2 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. , Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Pre-Development Basin 3 Existing Site Outflow Under Existing Conditions : i.# ; , 77,' ':":.-'':-, ea k ,i,i't t io.-7W Frequency 06) lcfeI 'D'e,d,ita.t,Te,ll(icf,s.,e) (tpfteoi e1n147t) 4„li-(elevation)Sjage,': Water Quality 4.72 1.18 3.54 25% 8.52 2-Year 24-Hour 27.29 6.34 20.95 23% 8.88 5-Year 24-Hour 34.97 8.14 26.83 23% 8.98 10-Year 24-Hour--- 44.78 10.11 34.67 23% 9.10 25-Year 24-Hour 54.72 _ 12.09 42.63 22% 9.21 50-Year 24-Hour 55.72 12.29 43.43 22% 9.23 100-Year 24-Hour 64.73 13.82 50.91 21% 9.34 100-Year 7-Day 31.75 14.00 17.75 44% 9.36 Post-Development Basin A Developed Site Outflow Under Proposed Conditions -,-PeakitifloWs ::2,: PealWflovV, ::::' -,:'Dedivaelif:Rele4$e Rate., ': .Outfloyi lliificmr ... . - .,--- - . : :,--: . , :, , :,": . --., .,,,: : ; , , :: 1 :,..,,,-; ,:• :i, ::!,: (elevation). ;,,-.,:,,, ,,- 42y Frequency, -,' ' ': ' '''':-",:(efi),''' ' . ‘,,-. :' .: Nfit-.:Li , : ; ,. 7,. (pfs) „ , , (percent)° , , , Water Quality 10.00 2.00 8.00 20 A 8.52 2-Year 24-Hour 26.93 6.30 20.63 23% 8.88 5-Year 24-Hour 34.53 8.09 26.44 23% 8.98 10-Year 24-Hour 44.23 10.07 34.16 23% 9.09 25-Year 24-Hour 54.06 12.03 42.03 22% 9.21 50-Year 24-Hour 55.05 12.23 42.82 22% 9.22 100-Year 24-Hour 63.97 13.78 50.19 22% 9.33 100-Year 7-Day 31.51 13.97 17.54 44% 9.35 013747\2210\engr\KBCALCO2.XLS-Table D.2 Drainage Report-Table D.2 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Combined Outflow to Springbrook Creek • Discharge vs Recurrence Event 200.00 - - In, - -Baseline •A- 180.00 —o—Post CSTC Development S Post 25-20 Development - - - - --- - -o• 160.00 o• ■ 140.00 -o •o• - 120.00 mAll0 ■ rn ll 100.00 --to- p• 0 a 80.00 — . _ 60.00 100-Year 7-Day Event 40.00 20.00 0.00 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 1000 Recurrence Interval for 24-Hour Storms (years) 013747/2210/engr-KBCALC01.XLS[Chart D.1] Drainage Report-Figure D.1 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. , Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development TABLE D.1-COMPARISON OF HYDROLOGIC VALUES Pre-Development,CSTC,and Building 25-20 Pre-Development Baseline Hydrographs Pre-Development Baseline Routed Hydrographs BASIN PEAK RUNOFF STORM BASIN Combined Outflow STORM RATES(c(s) FREQUENCY 1 2 3 4 5 6 to Springbrook FREQUENCY Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Creek 1 2 3 4 5 6 (c(s) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (c(s) (NGVD) (c(s) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (c(s) Water Quality 1.37 0.20 2.02 2.05 0.59 0.42 Water Quality 0.20 Na 2.58 9.05 2.05 6.91 0.59 13.67 0.42 11.09 46.56 2-Year24-Hour 16.04 1.12 17.30 23.78 4.50 7.89 2-Year24-Hour - 1.12 Nei 22.00 10.56 23.78 8.82 4.50 14.41 7.87 12.02 105.08 5-Year24-Hour 22.12 1.42 22.88 31.65 5.86 10.77 5-Year24-Hour Upstream,off-site 1.42 Na 26.87 10.85 31.65 9.35 5.86 14.51 10.75 12.20 123.46 10-Year 24-Hour 30.14 1.80 30.09 41.77 7.60 14.53 10-Year 24-Hour basin which drains 1.80 Na 31.24 11.11 41.77 9.78 7.60 14.73 14.51 12.43 144.97 25-Year24-Hour 38.48 2.18 37.48 52.09 9.36 18.39 25-Year24-Hour to Basin 3 2.18 Na 34.64 11.33 52.09 10.96 9.36 14.96 18.36 12.63 166.51 50-Year24-Hour 39.33 2.22 38.20 53.12 9.53 18.78 50-Year24-Hour 2.22 Na 34.90 11.35 53.12 11.08 9.53 14.98 18.75 12.65 168.58 100-Year24-Hour 47.02 2.56 44.92 62.49 11.13 22.31 100-Year24-Hour 2.56 Na 37.04 11.52 62.49 12.28 11.13 15.04 22.27 12.82 187.15 100-Year7-Day - 29.73 1.25 26.72 31.93 5.84 12.89 100-Year7-Day 1.25 Na 35.64 11.41 31.93 9.38 5.84 14.58 12.89 12.34 135.26 Post-Development CSTC Hydrographs Post-Development CSTC Routed Hydrographs BASIN PEAK RUNOFF STORM BASIN Combined Outflow STORM RATES(e(s) FREQUENCY A B C 4 5 6 to Springbrook FREQUENCY Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Creek A B C _ 4 5 6 (cfs) MGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (c(s) (NOVD) (Ms) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cfs) Water Quality 1.37 0.21 4.72 2.05 0.59 0.42 Water Quality 0.21 n/a 1.18 8.52 2.05 6.91 0.59 13.67 0.42 11.09 44.64 2-Year24-Hour 16.04 1.13 27.29 23.78 4.50 7.89 2-Year24-Hour Upstream.off-site 1.13 Na 6.34 8.88 23.78 8.82 4.50 14.41 7.87 12.02 87.75 5-Year 24-Hour 22.12 1.43 34.97\ 31.65 5.86 10.77 5-Year 24-Hour basin which flows 1.43 Na 8.14 8.98 31.65 9.35 5.86 14.51 10.75 12.20 102.87 10-Year 24-Hour 30.14, 1.82 44.78 41.77 7.60 14.53 10-Year 24-Hour through Tukwila Drain 1.82 Na 10.11 9.10 41.77 9.78 7.60 14.73 14.51 12.43 121.85 25-Year24-Hour 38.48 2.20 54.72 52.09 9.36 18.39 25-Year24-Hour to Springbrook Creek 2.20 Na 12.09 9.21 ' 52.09 10.96 9.36 14.96 18.36 12.63 141.86 50-Year24-Hour 39.33 2.24 55.72 53.12 9.53 18.78 50-Year24-Hour without impacting 2.24 n/a 12.29 9.23 53.12 11.08 9.53 14.98 18.75 12.65 143.87 100-Year 24-Hour 47.02 i 2.59 64.73 62.49 11.13 22.31 100-Year 24-Hour Longacres 2.59 n/a 13.82 9.34 62.49 12.28 11.13 15.04 22.27 12.82 161.78 100-Year7-Day 29.73 1.25 31.75 31.93 5.84 12.89 100-Year7-Day 1.25 Na 14.00 9.36 31.93 9.38 5.84 14.58 12.89 12.34 111.57 Post-Development Building 25-20 Hydrographs Post-Development Building 25-20 Routed Hydrographs BASIN PEAK RUNOFF STORM BASIN Combined Outflow STORM RATES(cfs) FREQUENCY 1 2 A B C 6 to Springbrook FREQUENCY Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Creek 1 2 A B ' C 6 (e(s) (NGVD) (cfs) (NOVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (c(s) (NGVD) (cfs) (NOVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cfs) Water Quality 1.37 0.21 6.26 0.16 0.72 0.42 Water Quality 0.21 Na 1.78 8.58 0.16 6.51 0.72 13.71 0.42 11.09 43.18 2-Year24-Hour 16.04 1.13 46.75 2.73 4.73 7.89 2-Year24-Hour Upstream,off-site 1.13 Na 10.64 9.13 2.73 7.13 4.73 14.45 7.87 12.02 _ 69.83 5-Year 24-Hour 22.12 1.43 60.96 3.70 6.10 10.77 5-Year 24-Hour basin which flows 1.43 Na 13.48 9.30 3.70 7.21 6.10 14.54 10.75 12.20 78.71 10-Year24-Hour 30.14 1.82 79.18 4.95 _ 7.84 14.53 10-Year24-Hour through Tukwila Drain 1.82 Na 15.67 9.55 4.95 7.33 7.84 14.76 14.51 12.43 88.86 25-Year 24-Hour 38.48 2.20 97.70 6.23 9.60 18.39 25-Year 24-Hour to Springbrook Creek 2.20 Na 17.88 9.81 6.23 7.44 9.60 14.99 18.36 12.63 99.14 50-Year24-Hour 39.33 2.24 99.56 6.36 9.78 18.78 50-Year24-Hour without impacting 2.24 Na 18.11 9.84 6.36 7.45 9.78 14.88 18.75 12.65 100.06 100-Year24-Hour 47.02 2.59 116.37 7.53 11.37 22.31 100-Year24-Hour Longacres 2.59 Na 20.51 10.06 7.53 7.63 11.37 15.07 22.27 12.82 109.85 100-Year 7-Day 29.73 1.25 58.80 4.35 5.93 12.89 100-Year 7-Day - 1.25 Na 20.73 10.08 4.35 7.21 5.93 14.59 12.89 12.34 89.37 P:lob/013747/2210/engr-KBCALCOI.XLS[Table D.1] Drainage Report-Table D.1' 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 6. Post-Development Basin B -South Main Track Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage- Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Basin Summaries 7. Post-Development Basin C - Sales Pavilion Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Basin Summaries 8. Post-Development Basin 6 -South Meadow Basin Identical to Item 4 in this Appendix Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc Appendix D-3 12/19/96 i - This appendix also contains the following detailed information: 1. Pre-Development Basin 3 -North Main Track Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage- Storage Table Stage-Discharge Table Basin Summaries 2. Pre-Development Basin 4- South Main Track Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Basin Summaries 3. Pre-Development Basin 5 - Sales Pavilion Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Basin Summaries 4. Pre-Development Basin 6 - South Meadow Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Basin Summaries 5. Post-Development Basin A- CSTC Site Basin Routing Comparison Table Level Pool Table Summary Stage - Storage Table Stage-Discharge Table Basin Summaries Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc Appendix D-2 12/19/96 APPENDIX D RETENTION/DETENTION CALCULATIONS -- I This appendix contains all project retention/detention calculations mentioned in Section IV, Part D of this Report. The appendix contains the following summary ' I information: . Table D.1 is a comparison of hydrographic values as described in Section IV, Part D. The last column in the table is the combined outflow to Springbrook Creek, including flow from the off-site Tukwila Basin. The Tukwila Basin was included because it originally drained through the Longacres system. Comparison of the data in the last column, among the three scenarios (baseline, post-CSTC and post-25-20 project) indicates that even after completion of this project, the total outfall to Springbrook Creek is less than when Boeing purchased the property. Such a baseline can be utilized should additional work be propsed at the site. • Figure D.1 is a chart of the last column in Table D.1 graphically indicating the decrease in peak outflows to Springbrook Creek. ▪ Table D.2 summarizes the Basin 3 / Basin A values of Table D.1. It represents the pre- and post-development peak runoff rates of these basins. • Figure D.2 is a chart of Table D.2 graphically indicating the increase in peak outflows to Springbrook Creek. Note that overall peak release rates from Longacres Office Park decrease, see Figure D.1. ▪ Table D.3 summarizes the Basin 4 / Basin B values of Table D.1. It represents the pre- and post-development peak runoff rates of these basins. . Figure D.3 is a chart of Table D.3 graphically indicating the dramatic decrease in peak outflows to Springbrook Creek. . Table D.4 summarizes the Basin 5 / Basin C values of Table D.1. It represents the pre-and post-development peak runoff rates of these basins. • Figure D.4 is a chart of Table D.4 graphically indicating a nominal increase in peak outflows to Springbrook Creek. Final design of the private road will likely route all flow to Basin B, thereby actually reducing outfall from this basin compared to existing conditions. � I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 013747/2210/dmrpt01.doc Appendix D-1 12/19/96 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C-50 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 78 cfs VOL: 3 .44 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C-WQ NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: '0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 0 . 72 cfs VOL: 0 . 32 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2. BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C BASIN SUMMARY f-- BASIN ID: C-2 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 15 .30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA i PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE : 4 . 73 cfs VOL: 1 .71 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C-25 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 60 cfs VOL: 3 .38 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C-5 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 . 10 cfs VOL: 2 . 17 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min (-' 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1_ BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN C BASIN SUMMARY it BASIN ID: C-10 NAME : BASIN C, POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 7 . 84 cfs VOL: 2 . 77 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C-100 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 11 .37 cfs VOL: 3 . 99 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 ' BASIN ID: C-107 NAME: BASIN C, POST 25-20, 100YR 7D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 30 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 9 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 90 . 02 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA.. : 5 . 50 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 5 . 93 cfs VOL: 10 . 55 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development POST-DEVELOPMENT Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin C (Sales Pavilion Basin) Sheet Flow(Applicable to Tc only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0.1_s,; ° ` Y` , Flow length (L<=300'), Lsheet 0feet€:.. .: < ' 2-year,24-hour rainfall, P2 2;00.inches ::;;; Land slope, Ssheet 0020:ft/ff;, . It sheet 0.00 hours Ttsheet 0 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Lshallow Watercourse slope, Sshallow 44006.*ftlff Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vshallow 2307.4 f/s Tt shallow 0.00 hours Ttshallow 0 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, '-channel Watercourse slope, Schannel 96000.000.ft/ft Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) 20' Velocity,Vchannel 6196.8 f/s Tt channel 0.00 hours Ttchannel 0 min Results:Basin C(Post-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.24 hours Total Tc or Tt 14 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 3. Basin C Time of Concentration assumed to match that of Pre-Development Basin 5 013747/2210/engr-JSCALCO2.XLS[Basin C] Drainage Report-Appendix C 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. j Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient 1 Basin C Post-Development (Sales Pavilion Basin) Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area I Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description (sf) Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 41,500 1 6% 6.10 Ur D 98 Pavements 39,300 6% 5.78 Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 68,895 10% 9.40 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 191,950 29% 26.49 • Wo B 98 Building Roofs 25,000 4% _ 3.67 Wo B 98 Pavements 55,000 8% 8.08 Wo B 90 Lawns 77,150 12% 10.42 Py B 98 Building Roofs 40,000 6% 5.88 Py B 98 Pavements 39,000 6% 5.73 Py B 85 Landscape(fair) 88,872 1 13% 11.33 i TOTALS I I I 666,667 100% 92.89 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) = 5.51 Acres Impervious area curve number = 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) = 9.80 Acres Pervious area curve number = 90.02 Basin Composite Curve Number = 92.89 Basin Total Area = 15.30 Acres 1 I , I I . 013747/2210/engr/-JSCALC03.XLS[Basin Cl 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil.Inc. 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B-50 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 .36 cfs VOL: 2 .49 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-WQ NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 0 . 16 cfs VOL: 0 . 15 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min • t � 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B-2 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 2 . 73 cfs VOL: 1 . 15 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min , BASIN ID: B-25 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 6 .23 cfs VOL: 2 .44 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-5 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 11 . 40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 3 . 70 cfs VOL: 1 . 50 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min , 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 . BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B-10 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 . 95 cfs VOL: 1 . 97 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: B-100 NAME: BASIN B, POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC - 21. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 7 . 53 cfs VOL: 2 . 92 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B-107 NAME : BASIN B, POST 25-20, 100YR 7D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 12 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 11 .40 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 56 TIME OF CONC • 21. 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 0 . 92 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 .35 cfs VOL: 7 . 91 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min . Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development POST-DEVELOPMENT Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin B (South Main Track Basin) Sheet Flow(Applicable to T, only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) asphalt Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0 011 ',; `: :;:, .` ; ; : ' . ` Flow length (L<=300'), Lsheet 40 feet;;.:..:' 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2':00 inches: Land slope, Ssheet 0.020 ft/ft Ttsheet 0.01 hours Ttsheet 1 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) grass-lined ditch;': ; ;= Flow length, Lchannel 1660 ft Watercourse slope, Schannel a005 Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) :17 Velocity, Vthannel 1.2 f/s Ttchannel 0.24 hours Ttchannel 15 min Channel Flow, Section 2 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) grassed waterway: Flow length, Lchannel 600:0 ft. Watercourse slope, Schannel 0.016ft/ft'. :_`';':'' Factor, ke(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vthannel 1.7 f/s Ttchannel 0.10 hours Ttchannel 5.88 min Results:Basin B(Post-Development) Total T,or Tt 0.36 hours Total Tc or Tt 21 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013747/2210/engr-JSCALCO2.XLS[Basin B] Drainage Report-Appendix C 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Basin B Post-Development (South Main Track Basin) Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use I Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description (st) Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 800 0% 0.15 Ur D 98 Pavements _ 39,000 7% 7.12 Ur C 87 Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 60,000 11% 9.73 Ur D 90 Lawns 398,846 74% 66.91 Ur D 89 Meadow 37,802 7% 6.27 TOTALS I I I 536,448 100% 90.19 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) = 0.91 Acres Impervious area curve number = 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) = 11.40 Acres Pervious area curve number = 89.56 Basin Composite Curve Number = 90.19 Basin Total Area = 12.32 Acres 013747/2210/engr/-JSCALC03.XLS[Basin B] 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil.Inc. 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 - BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-50 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 99 . 56 cfs VOL: 32 . 96 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min ili • L BASIN ID: A-WQ NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL ' • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 .25 PEAK RATE: 6 .26 cfs VOL: 2 . 83 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 ' BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-2 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 46 . 75 cfs VOL: 16 . 03 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: A-25 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 . 39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 97 . 70 cfs VOL: 32 . 36 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A-5 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .21 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE : 60 . 96 cfs VOL: 20 .57 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A-10 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 108 .14 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 21 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 .25 Acres CN • 98 .25 PEAK RATE: 79 . 18 cfs VOL: 26 .41 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: A-100 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 21 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 .25 PEAK RATE: 116 . 37 cfs VOL: 38 .40 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: A-107 NAME: BASIN A, POST 25-20, 100YR 7D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 152 .39 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9.80 inches AREA. . : 108 . 14 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 21 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 44 . 25 Acres CN • 98 . 25 PEAK RATE: 58 . 80 cfs VOL: 102 .32 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min - I � Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development POST-DEVELOPMENT Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A (CSTC Site Basin) Sheet Flow(Applicable to T. only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0: Flow length (L<=300'), Lsheet 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 Land slope, Ssheet 0 020:ftlft_:' . Ttsheet 0.00 hours Ttsheet 0.00 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Lshallow 0,•ft Watercourse slope, Sshallow 44004000 r <' Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vshallow 2307.4 f/s Ttshallow 0.00 hours Tt shallow 0 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Lshallow 0 Watercourse slope, Sshallow 44000 000`f/ft .`' Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) 11.. Velocity,Vohannel 2307.4 f/s Ttchannel 0.00 hours Ttchannel 0.00 min Results:Basin A(Post-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.18 hours Total To or Tt 11 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 3. Basin A Time of Concentration assumed to match that of Pre-Development Basin 4 013747/2210/engr-JSCALCO2.XLS[Basin A] Drainage Report-Appendix C 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. i Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Basin A Post-Development (North Main Track Basin) Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight , Weighted Group Group Number Description (st) Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 572,355 9% 8.45 _ Ur D 98 Pavements 1,065,300 16% 15.73 Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 564,845 9% 7.74 Ur D 90 Landscaping(good) 1,120,465 17% 15.19 Ur D 87 Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 285,770 i 4% 3.75 Ur D 90 Lawns(good) 1,351,139 20% 18.32 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 407,250 6% 5.64 Ur D 100 Water Surfaces 220,037 3% 3.31 Ur D 89 Meadow 80,000 1% 1.07 Wo D 98 Pavements 17,730 0% 0.26 Wo D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 63,350 1% 0.87 Wo D 92 _Lawns 251,850 4% 3.49 Ng B 98 Pavements 31,650 0% 0.47 Ng B 85 Gravel Parking Lots 16,630 0% 0.21 Ng B 85 Lawns(fair) 155,850 2% 2.00 Py B 80 Landscaping(good) 151,300 2% 1.82 Py B 85 Gravel Parking Lots 103,817 2% 1.33 Py B 80 Lawns(good) 39,962 1% 0.48 Py B 78 Meadow -118,200 2% 1.39 Py B 100 Water Surfaces 20,500 0% 0.31 TOTALS I 6,638,000 I 100% I 91.84 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) = 44.25 Acres Impervious area curve number = 98.25 Pervious area(curve number<98) = 108.14 Acres Pervious area curve number = 89.21 Basin Composite Curve Number = 91.84 Basin Total Area = 152.39 Acres 013747/2210/engr/-JSCALC03.XLS[Basin A] 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. • \`‘. \ E LEVATKIN.'.,5.3 .:•::$r"- . .... : ..„-,, x:k• Ar•-• ,,,,, ;. EXISTING --.... -'-'-':,,.. .-:•••01\1.4-5,4. •\., \-----..--- ''''',1,, . 6"0 CMP SO \\\:-...--...; ..,\•,. *:::...at,.•):::..\,_. 4, -.......„ .7,-.-\. c:: ••••- . '\ ko--,.5...66••• • :::.; '-- -"s s • .\ s s s ' • -- • 4:4:zA \. . "s•-•-• SCALE: NONE SPRINGBROOK CREEK • • •• ‘,...,,,,..,,,,... ,,\_... .• .. . .. Itx,*-,,,r _---;•.,:„ -f,..MP OUT SE. \ \ ::::*,:••• •••••::. •;•,,??:-r iiiiiii.,i, -\ s.... •-:-..:•,•-,„ .--.-:--1---25_'...::::::---z.)----lk-d-nrct-::::,. •',, •-•\.••\ \...';'•_. •-• .::-e.---..:-', 4W ii;:'I ..•-•:-;"--'-',..':'-<''';',•>" •••••• •-•-• :'=-V.,"•;:------7-4;';VW2r-V%1"1-1-4--:r-=',=• :\' EXISTING 360 DI SD . 1..•••- gfo7...iliyri :,1...--:-:?..i:', . F:• .5..%41••%:••,-/,' ,..s7-.2,f- --:22--•,-"2:::- -_-_-=-1--7-i--_,.\--..,\: \''t. i Nv=1 1.54 •480 RCP SD INV = 5.00 ..;;;,., ,..40,-.`k-,_--.:.-.::::'.:_,•,%?,... ...x...t,4::::::.4-1-.;.•--,-,,,-, •••,M ./k .'" --, ---, ,,, ; !, ., .\\‘,&:‘,‘\\...........\\. /11:::.:::://:.°://31) \ ':. - .., ----' .1s-,-.5'.''r.,it .1iI!i.: . '.` . •-..14/ /./ inrCMP OUT N .s:'\,\\;,\, i 12"CMP OUT N. INV = 5.00 .. ..:..:::,n:.'.•'''Ys<_'-d- --z..-e)----;..z•-,N.,:;:ti•••-;:-:-,..:.;::-.:--:::-::_-. :••,::: •N. ii .i! •-•-•:--,• - s--- i t •.:.-...--•- • ; -,:-:-j /4er,"-":„-,..::;-„4„t,„/?..2.-iii ii s----:•:-- -,.. -: .,.'-i :: -iv;• :-, •:..,:----,, ,,t .(;‘, I?i ..- .-..i:?%; --,,,,>,:-.E.-- ,*".,,,,--,.:517N,•,: .7,- t::: •.:---s-,,,,..,... 2...„. , • ,, ,F, ,,,..\\ •:_....-, _____- / /JP iNV=i 1.79 _ . 1 \d"7 ' z ' \‘• \'s - ...;-::.., ...,,-..c. ;,kt, :,,,,,„.-.; -st •-•,,..,-:--.1:-„,\,.-7:to: i;:t pm...-.:\:::,,,,-;.-_,-,_:2:1 ••,, ,•-:,,,Itk.s....--....-:-.-2„._ • • • 7,1 EXISTING 4, .___::::,:---.....;•-...:--„,,. ........:,,,....,- ::.•,,,,.. , :::•._.\\,:i:::,,,./ i•,:-; 1 ?--\._...,_-,.. ..., • ,-,....-..„,,,:, -- ,__-_,-,--.-,,. -' A -2!' - ---L -- --3 ...:Killrmz.:.::35,.::::-../7:-:--.:‘---.:,*-.,.;. c‹...---• A\:.•-' "7-`4•.....,--. „_. ..: . ,; _\:., \....••, : ,... , A -,,_. .-,., - _____ , -- ./..- :1 -C-m-P N.,.S... , •.4.•• - 4,.4._--::•:-.--. ; ;;,--:-:---:---.-:--::;.::\•:-.:•••„-g----!!"" 14-,....:,--,:::-.•••---__;..;.,-.------- ------- •,•;•- s... ___'... ------- :n:_7.- ------- SD • .....-.74•PY.TS• . 111.771.7:1.0 I PIT,,...,:o.,-- /,, - :E ''`i‘*-'eA.EW c;-•'.;.=-:.1.1,-- 1-=:.../ i.. ,....1.,‘ ,, -- , ---,-.-..__, .,______ ____ . _ - ...... .... _.. . ... -- --- L_•LdiVz.-.-,--.-7.---::....„.„ 0,..;-.,,,.;;,,,,... -::::: :-......—. '-• "...,:t..:;,40...a. 7t.a.C7v7.., IVIA707 C.•-'.,.. %.:. •.::: .I ‘'," ': -7--11 i/ ft--1 4 :::e t, -: ••-• i 1=----- ':"'"''':""!: 4:":"L :4:4%---s.)1::4 4.'2:‘:!,,`;\ 'AN,':,:'t " '-''Y• I ':1! i," -: : :''• :INV= -'0': : (' i f: 1.:-,.1`: ) : ill r : •--' - 1!it a :4,;;;i::4 t.:1—.tV, :'•:2..::.1 ;!•,41)0s;:t•\i,'-. .---:I. •':=. ;1 ' r l' .'. r 1 . .:RPD: cYP.zi—F4'.. I /*, -• /' ---. -- -) v._--,,: :1i,.-z..r \-..•.::-:--.?---•-•-.--.-----:c- •:iv i-14-.'-4)------ - t --- ...._ 7- • --R----.T ,- •• • :.:- : I : .--....•'- " " 3:i::::::;:i•:•.' ‘. .1:EI' .• 1 , , . „ ,, •• :,-s.: -:4.1 • -. --...! ,-: I: , .:: ---: ._,.,",,...,..„ ...-v:,',...' ,: , . , . ., -. 11'. l'.1t \ BASINI :.1 kc g ---17*-5-4,11 :: :._.,,•-fi_.----.1:-',!,11ii::1,::','••:1 .;i1414,N 4.. •:';'1 [I' t.'7'''' ,v'--':_i.,;- " 11.2z:".*.. \`,....--L.,..a.-_-21'........'.-•-_-_/_--:''_..,----, .... AWN ir`1:-..„..c:•2••;•• Dk',: r-7.::-.7,_... . ',-f---. rl. \•.1 . -. . • '11 i'; : ; I 1.4.'..: :?: : 1„ -_-., . ,..„...,.,.,. .,I •, . , i r i,,.. -- .,., — .. -. --- • -.., i. -....\--...-,..,- • ,,• ti, .i,.„. t:Z"'e-r ---; ...,•••• '4: -.-'A . : .•,:. Y ,-F 14 ..gr'14: /-:. , .1—....I 1 -i,------7=-7-:-., ,.;V-,...,:',....., .).k\\,....' '" -V i : I ::::1 • :•I .. -. .: • ,4,1 ""\,`).--:=•-----') :iiii'i: 'V A •->:'7 ;':•\ - (..... '••L ,.' A ir.---•••••••,‘••••:I-•••-•... "S.:-.:7"•-.77" 7 A: 0 k 1 1:L ' ..1) /PI/), i tiS:' t:::1:• ri.; (),:. -.:; l' : •?...„-f :-/-; \i' '-.! \ •-•; ',:•-•.: /-- :-.11.--,->A.:,:...-:•...,:- ..-....-..:7..., 4/V -, s, ,.; \; ; - ....? i: : "s•-•\ -,' t: : ••,, 1 :! ::IF , :; : .-• .:://,;, ,„ 1 ....i .0\-,:, L:: :, .„„ i,j , )-: : c,-:. :- ): r_.: )... ;,, •-; - /4--::-.1:::-- .)--.-t::.7.:::i;.----•••,-!--- .:'•" : ,.., ,. . . 1,1 ', ',.t. ')i i ril,,,--, - . .1Q..//,.- il, ,"\.-w.t.7-::,. i l: . •\;r• -: -::\.: :- -• -- - ,:- ,r..„: '.. .... •r--,._---:,'t: ':•:,-,,_..,,11,-if://1-:,i .. -"-v ' - '--- ..:---:-4,--• - --,--::--__••.-.. _' :__-------------------------------- i ' 1: .: ••,,. A,• - 2.1.:we:i -......._. If _)L i. : i-4,1(,,IY-4,./._2%:: -' -----7- --• .....-.....,:,.-- _...... -.=-,• - — .;_-____ __7.,..-.-- el.- --..---:„.... .-_-•.,!../ i‘.:i--t•-,..*,' - 1----------:1 i ,..„ '... .. -,SOUTI-ciMARH --_,-.. •\ ;;., ; -.i i : ig it T.r..:::_-_=;:z.::: ::: ::-,_--,!_-,77.. 27--_-.-.---„,..,:-..\\ ,--., ,... ..._.. .... ::..._:_zz3z, _____. ‘,. •-• : •,t,‘---si i---)--"-"k•-)--<: ____,,,,s,,,,„_; .....-,- . 4L-4tkiNDS:\, '•._..-:-.-.:-c•• • •,-, . '-- .--:__,-, -..-.:::.,.,-.1_ -::) • " . . ., ‘• •- A ::i_ ; ...i ;1i • --------,---- -----%,--:,. ,.--- /i ,-..\, !i ---,. . --re:--:',.... .---------- .----- i .4., s., ••••-__N.N, V- -.7--- , .--% •-• •-;'•••••••\•-•,•;'-' •••\,--- .."7:,---A---=•-7-%-----v-7-••••-..-2•i•;•7 TTI j /•\,_ "...,-,,...,2%!-‘i,\ \ ',.% ':.:-. : g 41A - . . ....-- /.:.' -,. ;"';`.,-,- .,'„' .---, -•, :-..\i•'‘ 21 :•. .--"-,7-:::----z• :i-t----;- -1 --' 1... :••,-----71'i\ , •, •-- `.".j\.`k' ' • '•\ - •• /----- ; \-\"\ .•,,---;; ' • ..--, ...,;-..• .:',--.-:_---,... : --,. - ..,. ..‘,.. :_.., -. .55\:\• •••••• : ; \ :::\I; ! _.f./.:•:_---,5 ----- ,--/..,, i ........\\:,-,\;-,;-,.:-:, t ,, s, , 0 , 4.5,..,:?................................./ ,• / •//,..- , . ......,.\\...-.• --... .,,:,,,,,,,, ,„,,,,( r-:,,,_.: ---.....2,. ----.--7,.../y...-,,, ,---....-„(_.„.. „,,..io , 1 :‘4 ii.,„.„,„,,,,i„•,,m„.--1:i1 „,,/ , / ,/; , „,....-.„ ...--,.„...i.:.::::„.._.\ „. . . \...; ,v,c „, _______ , • •„,......___.,._ .„,„\,,, , , /..„ :: .., ,:,., n, :, , ; 1 ;i.;; i% i , -'• ,, ,, ,, \ ' . ....„-t•R:mil;,, ; f i i : / ,, / if v,I .__.--\-- ,.., ,x,',„•,\\-, ,,,, \• , FJ 3,7,::Fv...,.ig .,3i:!/r";/ 1; ,' ; : i ! 1 \.1 \ ! / BAIS(1 ft, .//..----. 1\ \\\\V\i. l--:'/./(11 11 1i\ii -iIl---11 11\‘. I .'-' -\.- '-- I , \ ‘, ,P2 (.0•,..,...1,,,...rt iiji:1 li! I : ; : i : I,: \ \\\,-,:: ..„....:".....;Al . !! : •-•:.4... :: ", •,'...:1-,:_:: :; : / •, \----"N '. D _:_:_:_:_-__); li I ! r : ; • 1 ,••: '‘,. ':,1;'' • if i' ' ,': :I --\:;-•-'' ': ''; 1,7 Pi f i ---. \ \ -• ' S' \'• ‘‘.s., V‘'.i -:: .., ,,,,-,:./;0 ; ; i : 1 1: „. • . •••,:tt , •:. .\ !h::1 ii:, .., i it : )1,,LA•;,__:•_. N :5 7,,;i i:.• --BAstu \ \, ..;, •,-r ! 111:, 'yrrizr7;p7mIrs 441!! ; i) ', ';',----,..--'' .,' ,--.i..-..N-4,'Ll).:,Y :::,• •-•:',.—,:.1__:.1_:. ;--• ••' ',.r ,',.: t...:::::1 Ali, ///' i / ,' ...:::::: --, . \ -.1, , m:,!.;.,. _,,,..,...„.„?....-- i:.. ., ... ...,, , , ,,, ,,. • ,--. \ \• \\ \-••••: IIF7 .... .... r"i'It'l . • ..••••• \ ..-- ••• ' i. ••••,',..!-*•-•. ----, _...--' • •:"2 'it•ii;,4 :; ' :: •k \,, 'SA .-_,., V.'tt.t... .:t-,1 -,',P1,‘,\,. ••7/../...7,., .,aa.„.• .1,,,,:i ..c ,...\---,..\•....\..\ , ii.• -z,..z.f___,--_-_--.---. ..,:,-..--.......,-..„::.;,,,,,.,.,.:- _,_, : .. / ,/,,,,,;/(i ...., • . : i rr_7-_,-ii<ii -ii-iT,-/_--,‘: ., • ., ----,,,,:.-,,-..- ---- •,•--,--.-.,,- .3,----- 't \‘‘ .,, " . %k•,"•:•••,-"....... :-.4i,,,'4, - r7/-Tog ,,, : -, _\ , s ,-,. 1 ____„.. .......---„,......-_,..--- ,•„:„ --,....„ .. . •1/4,1,r' t-'1 I:E-,,••;-1-1- ' "-• -::-/-Ii 1,.:- :-T-:-::','--': -;- t-, / ,-• ..- 4' .....:-.---:,v; -- :. \ ; •‘; 'crn.m.r7.n..f cijiIII\L., ...,:.,.0., ,/ //' i sr,----. \ ,, / ,--- 0 .-. ----,------17,, ,,.::,,% ,,- \ ; /4,,.,; ,i, .•.. .:: •; :i, i-',--it--::- :-,-. --::-:•-:,---•4'E,l• : ,I •-.I..\ -\.\sV.---:',.. ' SW 16th ST \ 1 M.'4-.7:---:-:: F., .:10,\ :• 4:•5 ,-7 / 'vs.•• \\\ ti ii.,\--•-;,----4--i,.._ .-N- : : ,:,:, -.. ) $ (I: i:: : :, \,., F':-i- •1 -5, --;:•-- ii- -," \ - --i• -:, _2, ‘L. - _---,',,;‘, -,\ • ,. ,-t-.7,--,-:-.,--• ' !...--,,-. '74.V., •-•••••-----....7/1 I••'' i 1•'' I 'I -\i''''"'1--I-r-11'----Zi •3:f : ''H• '7 --.? \ ‘ ‘ ,'"•••:1, ' ,. • •-• V 0 Vs i V,\i."- '• •••"• •;:•':: ''i,0.\ •<\:,°1•,;.k•• _. --,-,4,0'e...-..,..-2,--4-:') r i '...) 4:•::':;----.:: :• :: ....1'---',"• -"--, --•'', "‘;',•'.:l'•:` ----:•:-•:-:-7.,/7 I •:: •1 t 1!; 0 A\ , \,,,\ „,,,,,;;‘, ,,i:: ,03,,,,,,, . ,;,,,,..,,,;;;„vzro ___,,,,;.. _,.. ;. ,.,/ .._.,, ;; ;.. ,• _., f::,.,,..___.,._..,,,..- :, ._.. .:...,,;11 .„.--. ",./.../ ;,4., ,4 . / _zy• \, . ay.; \\\\,\ -,,,..• ---------7,..: _,--_,,_ :z,__.._: ! 1-- _ .,., ;) :(..., -,,,i ,-,t--,..., — i .--4.--* `:%-;,'bVe._---.....-%;!,..2.>:- „.) '(/: ;i '---•, p) ri,-;,E_IT..71.."'l !I;:1 ,, ;1::.: ...7.. .---` i ;lir"-, c',. ...,\:\:•.--1; ,. ‘`,.‘ \. AV: ,, ,\=-;...:.•:OM,:.77"-"---•\‘\\ --"? .,,,..-----......-•-•---'•-•7---;;;;:—."' '---•'-- --•:.-.. •:'; •',.‘...N'•:.‘,A;'‘\__i'-'1' 4\-7 : - '''' •-•••RF7'-"-•;'--••••77 7 '\ ' '''''''\•-•'••• ;,1/• I I:.-," -'4 " 1.. • I '•'''' '''• ' ' Iiir-'-•• ?), --•!•\.7 •I I—405 ., \ \\,,,, s,\\-\...---4.._--,4.--.:•.-,--,,,, N.\\ .:;•:'. ...::::-.:::::::,..:-..-----:=:---f: .. ----•-•-•-•-•-------------------------;r4--•• •r••••'-"-74...7.37— '7-?:7":7,'2•:.:::•;•;-••;:ic; . ', 1,:-.7:: i: i ..• ' ,,,•• I/ ..— i i I .. , 2 :I':. - - :: , :: • , i 1 ii ".,- — • ;,'',•.., ,I. .. I I •-..".. 1 ' ‘2 \ t ('''-' 7E'r•'' . .,*. -------- ----- ,,.._ ----- __;,....:_.,-...--,.- (_, - .......72.z.,_.; -,..,.. :-...,F.i_ _ .......,..,....._......._•---------A-. r:-.--.--------f-,-;;;—„;........---1-...:.z.i..,:r..ii..........ii:,?::: --i !I ‘, ----- - //171;•\•,••/;;;;;:k.:,;:' ,, \ :,,,. • , , ,;, ). s•;•,\\\.' 1 7: r ' .:' s. i C..-• EXISTING:. ...?;/-5 ;,.: ------------ -- ---------- - ------------ f I :-...,,.::-- ''''., •-•.:7---\,----"-----S, -TI-I-- --1,1-.!,...,'--c.......; ii .--,:-...-.. .,' -I/; ',1'..N`, ; '`----•'::-.!; ' 2 SITE SOIL GROUPS .% -\ -v.';\— \. , \,..., , .. v ,.. ._24"0 ROI'?- R-,. , ----r-...,.., s__..., • -••• •‘-': • ,____.---- --- ; ,: .7•••f I , ::, ;: I "s•I i• ,-- '"------- ../. :, i 4:1, ,... •--, • -,i - - - 2',/ ::: ... .• i , -,-- ., /. , _ - f_1-_ •<:,. 5 ••• ---------— ..._ -- •,:-,::I': I i... - ••: f • - \'' \ '11 , •r- ' ' • CD• -- .., <7-7.- ._ :"•:---- ----..--L- -----.. .;.: ..... •:5 -----•-- 1! :7 N\ : ::• 1 I ....... .---(7----.2.1,2 ••:'....-''-'-'''.,,,...,,_- _-;?.-'' ': ",--,"•-•-,"--J;L_Z 5 ; ' ------/ ‘‘•\ \ ‘:: f : . \---. \- • .• . UR - URBAN LAND --,i:::-_-3, ).„•••••_, \ : -c-------• \s",, `" ...,- ..---'N....N.-- r's•z_,.`.:7,-L-t-:-- ---..x,../Pz;,:-..,:-..::..1:::•::::.;.-..!.--'<=-.,---X---3---_-_,:,..:___//_•;-,-.:„..:-....-----L.,- ...--,-:---- 21,-- .,---- -..-•:1;-: ..,-;-., .;;:,------ -• ...•----7."--. :::,;•-•.- -- '.-._--.'L... ;,-:-.:,'--\_.7. :...,..,.-;-,,-,------ ' -----.j • :- --r----: -----. ---p- - , ...-.,,_-------- / ,...,...S._.---.7„.--2-;„ •----• ------.---7,-.-_—_-:=-.7:.-- ; ---- .....•'• - - ":'"w7-4s-7::-,:s::,:-..:•:-:::inim:•:. . ..:.„- --..„.;:.„,..,,,..------- ,......._____ 7-;-:--:_:„.„-• ...----5,i.tr-.:.:-:---'----•-•-,-I\..:\ --- - - , ____ --- ---- WO - WOODINVILLE SILT LOAM ''" \ \ • . ' ...•••••:••,•'-'':'::•-----=---\----7: - -- -------- . .. I ---------- --- - •••••••.: PY - PUYALLUP FINE SANDY LOAR \ "1 ----- - -- -- EXISTING EARTHEN CHANNEL '--... -.NJ ETN-RR _ _ - - ::: S 158th ST : N G , . \,. ._. .NG - NEWBERG SILT LOAM , v, .. .. .. EXISTING - , _ _ -r UPRR -- - :----: • —-------------- 2 x5 BOX ____..------------•..._ .0. ‘• ,S. -----------------------:227-7.--=--•-•-•-•••••`-----\-J-V----. CU LVERT i -- 3--r .----. .......— , , ___ -, -. ----------------_---.:- _L--------------— ----------------- \\,, ' s ; ..-, , ; . _:. c.-1 ::li- .. --,:—., _ _ --------- . „.„ %.:,', . , , , , , I ;:.i.: t.i; 11,ifft:;_i :': :; :-....-W 01; \ii i:._....... . . 0, \:2; ,::\ \s, „-;::::-,".:--7-----:--- ... • U ., ,.,, , , ___ \‘‘‘‘ % , '.,..--..--- • \\„-„, ,‘ - ---,,,--\ ,... .,.._ ----_ _ ' . . -, rr-'•=•'--t 4 - •:.7,. 1,-..1-r..7:. :.;“--,...: ' :: : :Y.:: :: - V. V, ",\ ). •:.„,-.: .--.:.--.•:---, r•- .-.1.-y , T,, r, 1_, ..-..... ,.. t. _.i..iii ,, .:, ,..„:,.....-,; s, ,-- 1.- . ___,:i 0.,- --- --_,- .....,--r- 7 ...._ ___ '''.* '''....,,c...v.9` . .,. ,..S> *.\ 1 ..:---7.- 7--"--- n it.4 1-- P. .. _. .-4-_-) -- --.1 - --2:--1-r_H\NA ._ ---,----, (r . - ..;. i,:_, .:!K....;.;---.:.: .-- -- ...,. ... ‘ ‘ - ..,-(' ,-, s.,..--z,' •.. ---r---- -- r---1 ----f-,--------y HI, -,F:r,-----...,: ! s‘• ' \-•• ,4'....•, „4., - : :-- : : , : :t ::-,- -^,::- •:-_--Fr.•,-,----,-- ...-1,-,:----\-N--,- -1- \I pa._ „..,_,...„ :±:.,,,'-...... . ‘,, .` \ .,..,- •,: ? -,: ---.,> : s i - ..... ;; •;s--. .-,,-) •,-----,-- ,--,--r"-i- 'L..1.,------r':i\-% --',FI' • .;_,_,_,„ L...'-;:f; .-,--'---...,.- __ - GREEN RIVER - . ..-.-; i.lf.-...,:.--- : ,-- -1 r::- •-• ___ _,.... • ' - . ----',e-:-------- \;•-- .: ,,‘. ,, _,,,,, . „ :„-.•-/,,,;,-,••=•:"--''''''''--- ,\ ;, -.\-- " %, :'=' \';,---4-- . Sverdrup — 1000 Ulk. SLEMILE UST RENSON STROM DAM SRI RENSON BY APFROWD BATE SYS RENSION BY APPROVED OAlt EI AUBURN, WA. 98002 ACCEPTABIUTY er" 12.19.96 — --• 0 BELLEVUE, WA. 98007 RFS DESIGN ANDMI SPECIFICATION IS APPROVED ECRU) POST-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE BASINS .E.E, OF '? AVASFEJTAr.G 0 EVERETT, WA. 98201 APPROVED EIT DEPT. DATE nu FIG. BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 FACILITIES DEPARTMENT 0 KENT, WA. 98031 '1ECT7ED JOS NO.CI PORTLAND, OR. 97220 _ -,... DRAINAGE REPORT II RENTON, WA. 98055 APPROVED CI SEATTLE, WA. 98124 POSTWLND.DWG 5ED/12-19-96 3. Basin C - Sales Pavilion Basin Figure - Developed Site Conditions. This figure indicates proposed flow travel path information for use in determining Time of Concentration and existing conditions used to complete Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table, below. Table -Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, proposed land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table -Post-Development Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed post-development hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0 1 3 747/22 1 0/dmrpt01.doc Appendix C-2 12/19/96 APPENDIX C DEVELOPED SITE HYDROLOGY This appendix contains information related to Section IV, Part "D eveloped B Site Hydrology" and is organized as follows: 1. Basin A- CSTC Site Basin Figure - Developed Site Conditions. This figure indicates proposed flow travel path information for use in determining Time of Concentration and existing conditions used to complete Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table, below. Table -Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, proposed land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table - Post-Development Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed post-development hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. 2. Basin B - South Main Track Basin Figure - Developed Site Conditions. This figure indicates proposed flow travel path information for use in determining time of concentration and existing conditions used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Table, below. Table - Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, proposed land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table - Post-Development Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed pre-development hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0 1 3 747/22 1 0/dmrpt0l.doc Appendix C-1 12/19/96 ' II 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 - BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C5100 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 100YR i SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 ' TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 11 . 13 cfs VOL: 3 . 90 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • I BASIN ID: C5107 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, ' 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs , RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA ' PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 ' PEAK RATE: 5 . 84 cfs VOL: 10 . 36 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min iI -ll 1 12/19/96 • Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 - BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 5 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C5-5 NAME : BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 5 . 86 cfs VOL: 2 . 10 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C5-50 NAME : BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA ' PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 53 cfs VOL: 3 . 35 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C5-WQ NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 . 28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres II TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 i PEAK RATE: 0 . 59 cfs VOL: 0 . 29 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 i BASIN 5 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C5-10 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 i TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 .39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 7 . 60 cfs VOL: 2 . 69 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min � I BASIN ID: C5-2 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 . 39 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 4 . 50 cfs VOL: 1 . 64 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C5-25 NAME: BASIN 5, POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 15 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 . 89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 90 ji TIME OF CONC • 14 .40 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 4 .39 Acres CN. . . ..: 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 9 . 36 cfs VOL: 3 .29 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 , � Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 5 (Sales Pavilion Basin) Sheet Flow(Applicable to Tc only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet Flow length (L<=300'), Lsheet Ofeet 2-year,24-hour rainfall, P2 2.00:inches :;: Land slope, Ssheet , •%02 -f fk Tt sheet 0.00 hours Tt sheet 0 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Lshallow Watercourse slope, Sshallow 440p0:000ft/ft° Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) 11•fi Velocity,Vshallow 2307.4 f/s Tt shallow 0.00 hours Tt shallow 0 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Lchannel 0 ft. Watercourse slope, Schannel 96000000 Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) 2U _ Velocity,Vchannel 6196.8 f/s Tt channel 0.00 hours Tt channel0 min Results:Basin 4(Pre-Development) Total Tc or It 0.24 hours Total Tc or Tt 14 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 3. Basin 5 Time of Concentration parameters are from Appendix G of the Floodplain&Stormwater Report, dated April, 1991 P:/job/013747/2210/engr-JSCALCO2.XLS[Basin 5] Drainage Report-Appendix B 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. i , Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development __ Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Basin 5 Pre-Development (Sales Pavilion Basin) Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description (sf) I Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 33,270 5% 4.90 Ur D 98 Pavements 30,465 5% 4.49 - Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 68,942 10% 9.43 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 191,920 29% 26.53 Wo B 98 Building Roofs 20,040 3% 2.95 Wo B 98 Pavements 44,090 7% 6.49 Wo B 90 Lawns 113,425 17% 15.34 Py B 98 Building Roofs 32,065 5% 4.72 Py B 98 Pavements 31,265 5% 4.60 Py B 85 Landscape(fair) 99,930 15% 12.77 I TOTALS I I I 665,412 I 100% 92.23 Notes: I ' 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 - 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) = 4.39 Acres Impervious area curve number = 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) = 10.89 Acres Pervious area curve number = 89.90 Basin Composite Curve Number = 92.23 Basin Total Area = 15.28 Acres 013747/22101engr/-JSCALC03.XLS[Basin 5] 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C4100 NAME : BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE : 62 .49 cfs VOL: 20 .44 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C4107 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 . 27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 . 80 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 60 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 31 . 93 cfs VOL: 55 . 01 Ac-ft TIME : 3300 min II li 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 4 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C4-5 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 . 27 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres i CN - 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 31. 65 cfs VOL: 10 . 67 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C4-50 NAME: BASIN 4 , POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE - USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 .50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 53 . 12 cfs VOL: 17 .46 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C4-WQ NAME: BASIN 4 , POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 84 . 27 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC - 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 2 . 05 cfs VOL: 1 .20 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 - ( , BASIN 4 BASIN SUMMARY 1 BASIN ID: C4-10 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 89 .58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 41 .77 cfs VOL: 13 . 86 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C4-2 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 2YR ( 1 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 .27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 23 .78 cfs VOL: 8 .20 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C4-25 NAME: BASIN 4, POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 84 . 27 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs L_i RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 72 . 15 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 89 . 58 TIME OF CONC • 10 . 50 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 12 . 12 Acres CN • 98 . 00 PEAK RATE: 52 . 09 cfs VOL: 17 . 13 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 i Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 (South Main Track Basin) Sheet Flow(Applicable to Tc only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) , „ , • Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet Flow length (L<=300'), Lsheet 0-feef 2-year,24-hour rainfall, P2 2:00'inches :; :,;`` ;. ,. Land slope, Ssheet 0.020"ft/ft_ Ttsheet 0.00 hours Ttsheet 0 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) -W Flow length, Lshallow U.-ft " • : ._ . Watercourse slope, Sshalow 44000,000 ft/ff .';.`i""' ' y ,. Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) 11., Velocity,Vshallow 2307.4 f/s Tt shallow 0.00 hours Tt shallow 0 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) i Flow length, Lct,annel '. Watercourse slope, Schannel 96000.00.0ftlft:: Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vchannel 6196.8 f/s Tt channel 0.00 hours Tt channel 0 min Results:Basin 4(Pre-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.18 hours Total Te or Tt 111 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 3. Basin 4 Time of Concentration parameters are from Appendix G of the Floodplain&Stormwater Report, dated April, 1991 P:/job/013747/2210/engr-JSCALCO2.XLS[Basin 4] Drainage Report-Appendix B 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. , i _ Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Basin 4 Pre-Development (South Main Track Basin) r Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight 1 Weighted Group Group Number Description (sf) I Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 208,370 6% 5.56 Ur D 98 Pavements 270,230 7% 7.21 Ur D I 91 Gravel Parking Lots 400,730 11% 9.93 - Ur C 87 Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 255,800 7% 6.06 Ur D 90 Lawns 1,343,050 37% 32.93 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 390,430 11% 9.78 Ur D 89 Meadow 107,700 3% 2.61 Wo D 98 Pavements 17,750 0% 0.47 Wo D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 63,350 2% 1.57 Wo D 92 Lawns 251,850 7% 6.31 I Ng B 98 Pavements 31,670 1% 0.85 Ng B 85 Gravel Parking Lots 16,630 0% 0.39 Ng B 85 Lawns(fair) 155,850 4% 3.61 Py B 85 Gravel Parking Lots 80,787 2% 1.87 Py B 78 Meadow 76,800 2% 1.63 TOTALS I I I 3,670,997 I 100% I 90.79 i Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) = 12.12 Acres Impervious area curve number = 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) = 72.15 Acres Pervious area curve number = 89.58 Basin Composite Curve Number = 90.79 Basin Total Area = 84.27 Acres , • I__ ' • 013747/2210/engr/-JSCALC03.XLS[Basin 41 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 BASIN SUMMARY i BASIN ID: C3100 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 .74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE : 64 . 73 cfs VOL: 20 . 82 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C3107 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 100YR 7DAY SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 .82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC7 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 9 .80 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 60 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE: 31 .75 cfs VOL: 55 . 00 Ac-ft TIME: 3300 min iI I I L. 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 2 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C3-5 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE: 34 . 97 cfs VOL: 11 .40 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C3-50 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE: 55 . 72 cfs VOL: 17 . 96 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C3-WQ NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE: 4 . 72 cfs VOL: 1 . 81 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min 12/19/96 Sverdrup Corp - Kirkland page 1_ BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 PRE-DEV. BUILDING 25-20 BASIN 3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: C3-10 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE : 44 . 78 cfs VOL: 14 .50 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: C3-2 NAME : BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 .32 PEAK RATE: 27 . 29 cfs VOL: 8 . 99 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: C3-25 NAME: BASIN 3 , POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 79 . 82 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION - 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 45 . 78 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN • 88 . 74 TIME OF CONC • 8 . 00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 AREA. . : 34 . 04 Acres CN • 98 . 32 PEAK RATE: 54 . 72 cfs VOL: 17 . 64 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development PRE-DEVELOPMENT Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 3 (North Main Track Basin) Sheet Flow(Applicable to Tc only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0:01=1;.: : ; ';; ; : " = Flow length (L<=300'), Lsneet 70 feet;: ,;. :.. 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2 00:nches Land slope, Ssheet Ttsheet 0.02 hours Ttsheet 1.15 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Lchannel 1220`ft. . Watercourse slope, S 0 5=ftlft, p � channel 00 Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) 42. Velocity, Vchannel 3.0 f/s Tchannel 0.11 hours Ttchannel 6.85 min Results:Basin 3(Pre-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.13 hours Total Tc or Tt 8.00 min Notes: - 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 3. Basin 3 Time of Concentration parameters are from Appendix I of the CSTC Site Development T1R, dated October, 1992 013747/2210/engr-JSCALCO2.XLS[Basin 3] Drainage Report-Appendix B 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I 1 Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Basin 3 Pre-Development (North Main Track Basin) i Soil Hydrologic Curve I Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number I Description (sf) Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 383,965 11% 10.82 Ur D 98 Pavements 858,482 25% 24.20 Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 164,095 5% 4.29 Ur D 90 Landscaping(good) 1,073,213 31% 27.78 Ur D 87 Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 59,970 2% 1.50 Ur D 90 Lawns(good) 424,185 12% 10.98 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 16,800 0% 0.44 Ur D 100 Water Surfaces 220,037 6% 6.33 Py B 80 Landscaping(good) 151,300 4% 3.48 Py B 85 Gravel Parking Lots 23,050 1% 0.56 Py B 80 Lawns(good) 39,962 1% 0.92 Py B 78 Meadow 41,400 1% 0.93 Py B 100 Water Surfaces 20,500 1% 0.59 • TOTALS I I I 3,476,959 100% I 92.83 Notes: _ 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) = 34.04 Acres Impervious area curve number = 98.32 Pervious area(curve number<98) = 45.78 Acres Pervious area curve number = 88.74 • Basin Composite Curve Number = 92.83 Basin Total Area = 79.82 Acres 01374712210/engr/-JSCALC03.XLS[Basin 3] 12/19/96 Sverdrup Civil.Inc. t•C- \ A ELEV��R7N,5.3 .�/- EXISTING - \•' 5 4. sa q ,,' >'� : '_.`-4_ • \6..,, CMP 1 \ O '.. =.1 +F.- - Nk \, • SCALE: NONE SPRINGBROOK CREEK �Y °`h« ' ® � " ''' S_ EXISTING XI DTI RCP SD 3NV0=DI5 00 \"II / �`" j s ;: _\ a• ;ti ' '=_ \ _;'\ INV = 5.00 r • '�•••-4,:e0-7--,-:,-,-N: ./,ill, :• •.7,1..'•--0.y r , o;. V 0 �}E•, \i. 2"C�Ip OUT N. �j � .^c ;/. ,\`�� > �i ;t' CivrP �:. � XI :; Cy • ';.y.,..,,w ... 4,. _:.';�!,/-, . .;„..„--•..._ -____:„._ a' ';LrV g-e - [ES1]NG 8 0 CMP SD • -J ` ( — - � -- ' \C + _,_- z f m t \r.t T tt �'.rl.rl.m.a /F.\s, \•'\I , ! - _ _ - :..7 ME. _. a••-. - _ ,J - �. r • I. I I a ftjti ,l .. y � ,�� t;�_.g• - ,f �./ ~-'. ;r •y.s,_�:Is. ` 5 •-RBASIN: : or. �W/�. : x _,.,: :,, � •Gf li t, L' ......:1:_i:C: _ 3 --• ;i i /�' g 1 - \ :...'isli. t y---i 7I .st r• -� ,..,, ;i /c. _ � �=-:vi !+ 1/,y �'• __✓=• i .:/i' 3`__ Imo' ;::! —t- `i `i+ ,: 5 _cF-•:-,-/ .._,_-:T• . - _ - f. -.--. ': . �i � � __.-_' � - •` •:/-- .. s_ ----- —�';....----- ...r�__ �-:,,t_ _ _ -= x .• �• ; { r -.S�OUThf�MAR H - i‘f 1:: ,;, 1. -:-.1 111 •i£ / :/ /'i' .-�\ - � cam`7. .�-.-� ��;,!''�`= _�- ,� -�j?S. s.� -Y� ` `! _' _O 1`, '€ +Ti ::. o-\_�i! /i / / /' \ 1 ?i( `, 7 'i�;,� \\\ .i i / ''i '{ `.i:I_ii :> : `N -� /\ i- ..,-%\ ,. gc.. n K k : , / • i ! >. I. I -' �16 •\'." 1-.- ....•..,...J.. \ -i •+: iy- ;i• -:I i '`• :__-- .. ._. ``U q �j}am� ` f:( 7�'�I � f'. �� a,i /•1: i �-�-II `',y I 1 \\ \ �``•� Y\ ^`�_-_tiC r7777l / ? � `� .liE i^:m:m:- .1, f :,I ' \\ 'i/ /j. •R J/' ii ,'•i.`^^ii t,': \ BASIN \ ` I?E 1.•, ,-- yl;, % /:' j , / ( i,,':,-i.!"`% T y j:a-L__, i- `�`,\ V� E W�u.w•w:u:w:( ; ,1. J' j R \` \ �" `: {� i ' 1. .'i -::f S:'''-'t'--"1- .....•_ J - _ t `` 1 1;\�tm:m:m:^__( �a• % // /. •\ % ///!�•• / �,.. ( - t-. �i: i _.aS:____T -.\\ ___d SW 1 6th ST s 1 1\1c l \� /✓ \,• \ J .' �>._.1. w / i f/ i :Lr.; i '� `'�` ry -• ` ,\G •' `.� ,% � ..._`•?`' ` - /i t'`�,/' • _ ,j j. S . \. \ \ .fir/=:. )„'„,\ Ii!.:, \ '4,,,V444A -4:4 \,\`,,-•,0itseN-.e..---7---4-. .:•.__:• __„,_..4! :;'-' '‘, ,';)!..„ „ --;- ..\ ;,..--. • .... .-- '7\?;,'..V.._...--""*.-',„;‹,1/'....'; '..??L', EIN.i.„ ;: . ::•',..F..11,HI ill) .• , ;1 1 ...7.:..--' % ;ll'f'--- -.. --\ - Z \. ry _ _ __/ . EXISTI ,.;\4,>F' '' . ..- -. _•- - ----�--a-� - _,.,f yi f "• SITE SOIL GROUPS `;\: ' ' y - 24 R. •.---.- � _ -r - " �` _' r , - ; !% ": z . UR - URBAN LAND r W - W I -- - - � - t _0 OODINV LLE SILT LOAM \ M - '\ T PY - PUYALLUP FINE SANDY LOAIJ�, `, ` .- __- -- -- EXISTING EARTHEN CHANNEL BNRR - • -- .. 1 ii S 158th ST .-. �� NG - NEWBERG SILT LOAM ,`;`.'`;�. ___.:. - • • 1- EXISTING lG s `\ ` UPRR - ‘,' c - --._ --____ _. : _: CULVERT X — i i ' -- — - i 1T f - i \ �`..\. Y_t^ _ _ ;}_; �.-- ,...'s-''' GREEN RIVER ` \ " --- ' 9w.srtisr 1p _ 00.00 .00 AMN By DATE 4Tb➢E- sw eEYAPPROVEDAvvnD, DATE AU AEM90„ a. AcvrtrniD DATE ❑AUBURN, WA. 98002 ACCEPiABIUTY S ORFD 12.18.96 LAST AL\WOT STe0. DATE ❑BELLEVUE, WA. 98007 ENS Des D,AW;a1 b,ECITED PRE-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE BASINS STAaT A BOE//VG 0 EVERETT, WA.98201 �"� "1p1$APPROVED APPROVED °°°`° °�` PC. BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 FIG. 5 °` • FACILITIES DEPARTMENT 0 KENT, WA.98031 a,E«Eo 0 PORTLAND, OR. 97220 - APAR/IWO DRAINAGE REPORT .,oe�a - ■RENTON, WA. 98055 MD DO. l I 0 SEATTLE, WA. 98124 APPREDED GARY3.DWG SFD/12-18-96 3. Basin 5 -Sales Pavilion Basin Figure - Basin 2 Existing Conditions. This figure indicates existing flow travel path information for use in determining Time of Concentration and existing conditions used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table, below. Table - Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table-Pre-Development Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed pre-development hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, ' 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc Appendix B-2 12/19/96 APPENDIX B EXISTING SITE HYDROLOGY This appendix contains information related to Section IV, Part A "Existing Site Hydrology" and is organized as follows: 1. Basin 3 -North Main Track Basin Figure - Pre-Development Drainage Basins. This figure indicates existing flow travel path information for use in determining time of concentration and existing conditions used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table, below. Table -Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table - Pre-Development Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed pre-development hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. 2. Basin 4 - South Main Track Basin Figure - Pre-Development Drainage Basins. This figure indicates existing flow travel path information for use in determining Time of Concentration and existing conditions used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table, below. Table -Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table - Pre-Development Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed pre-development hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0 1 3747/22 1 0/dmrpt0l.doc_ Appendix B- 1 12/19/96 ir •� G� •` III I i CSTC PROPERTY LI1V1 \ N� /a' i Ig • al ! , LONGACRES OFFICE "� r- 0:l 011 PARK "°f ;vi o ,so soo eao I Ij 1 i PROPERTY LINE:y/7; �r 4 LINE ;;%rf :•f ;�-' GRAPH: SCALE t1llil.7 II " ��v /111 gII v1`-'11111/ 1 4 s</ 1 I:'''__"�-�_--:` _-- y,{. //001:is':IT!,i111■111I1 Il ping ii ill iii 1 1 II It R",«uup`II :1£ (` .:;�; { I;1«1„a�.l11 iii E i i ;-` _ 'Ilit/,',il10 Thal Illoi'ilalll::.111ll111 li 11 NI:II iijlllj Illiii�li 1 II - � t I II y; ,' I ,, _ / ,! 4r11 t IIII) !i Ili. it 1 I ill illfl GCE :i, I..III I' Ilfi i!I !I I! I' ' __ ._ '11111i1 III lljil 1 { I I PRIVATEROAD �}-- - 'i, f i I li IIIII 1 - I IIII II I I IIII Ili! •i 1111' i 1 t J', , 'Ali I P IIII II Ili I' I( I 1 1�. o :> ' { „ Ill ,. 3;,1; 2 I uilIIIII I,I t I I I f �c10 � : ,--- ,•II CIS.11'1 .1...PEA:i n';, iih IIII �I `•-i_- -• .: IIl'dd1 P;IIIII i �- G %�`` 'II I ;loco d f;lll IIII I IIII i!'LJI$IIi - ■ I I.::-� '• :(;t•,' 1.1v -�I ;IIII —,�- ,.t I,i;lll,,,11 ! _ ----� '% 11 I 1,,q III, I, -_=-/ IIII I I- 'I IIII I I I / �' CROPERTY OF /^ r�- ;L_- I ,.:2,1; J !: , p n ul n 1 'II ,I r _ OF SEATTLE I:' Ii I. Iq .,: :fll. ,:; l;t: 1<.!!I!! ill.. II it I - L, f - i,il l I I CEDAR EL'fNE LOP II (l I l I 'I /- RISER PIA +9I II Il Ili I II 111II Ii�ll1 Illlll IIIIIIIM_ I I 1— Y 111 'i'liii I III l4� 1 - II li Iliii�ll I IIII III II,f, aip I" li I I Ilp. _ _ ___- __ II IIII III III IIII III i III Iall!!I III I :l I ' -r u �. _,r,i _ _ I 11111111r14,110111 1 IIII 11IiiI�.. III., l- —_ III a Intl. ! •ll lit: 1, - — — 16 . 'li£IIR�II 1,i1,D,4�-'4 -:/.- _,� 'IIII II III II IIII Iltl IIII ii.• 1.1 1. 11'A - 1 siAtei � , _.1 !.. - -__: :_„Ili! ._,1. ! 111 IIII tlllll •,_ '�11t �I I _�..-�.1. : "F"`,❑ au,ul a u1�111:u w n u.tlwu 1ul' IIIII 1114Zti._ �"!nF t _ �r�r-� I \,E - �.,-- n u.3 III 4 r- • -4 ;//�, {:1,: i?i 1 �, �-; li: \ 1' // I !l II t '1 C` ii__ n1111I1 r .. :� , a:r-:,:,g f : t` 1 . .. III `,L - - ; _ J:i It ' I t Q, i iI::_ ; t a. r II III I I • a , ,/ , , e,, tie l . I, �: jlr I R �� k • s: I Ii I t / _ 4 - i !j � i :: I; `I` •' III I�I III �: _ � _---_. --- � s. . _ - , 1 CSTC ; I.I l i �': ,::•`_;' ''1 t C: r'i,j -- .....-`•' F'�=' - If Lil I i� r _ �— _ I fll Ilil I ' I — c n ;: IIIII i PROPERTY ° ii=: :TTr,' : `�' �_/';ai'A I .. ��i l 1 Illlllllr: ! 4lilli d ' - — t: _ if I 1 i ;i; 7. LINE ::: •_ e' :_ ! �_._- ll _ - b / a ,r%` T _� I Illlll�a y.. �•� , iii. : .k `l I ' 1 " _ ,SZ'-ti� '7 .{ -_ ; Al it / -N\ 1`( __ \`,-_ I i 1.., V a•... ..-J . .. . 25-01 f : ►j <c� il "I II \,` ! • _� `=- Y •fi/ ~\ 25-02 ;: •a= CSTC i! :„ „ .d ,: f\ `1 I ll BUILDING -: `:: = C:f 7-1: .. - "'a r-I .:/� ' I,�Illlllis�*11�1� i. --- - -- - _ _ -' -'e / • rem �--%.r lrivomm 1 .; ;: _..:; /.!, Ilin, IIII 1 ;_ - - P T L1 { : ;` ,1 - II • !1 9 !lfll _ . 1 II ,1 ::. R Q.\-4r t ( } __ l- ` 1 :, ti, ;:'7 , lo 1 i \.1 `� -- 'L� ,\ IIII i t II 1 II I I I IIIII ---- ;�, , I F. II I _ $ T• 1:; :� •/it/ 1 III IIIII ll� I I i ! II II ll \\''max A - _ Y `\ r�r%/ I s i II I l u n it II Ill' l Ili \ i i .> \i ''---- ---'--- ., .1 7 ( I .L 11 IIIII , I I ii�IiIII, `'v'- r '/ /. r -'': ' (� ,:� /� , i li , I� IIIII IIII I I I, 1'III IIIIIIi A.; - --- �.• ^; £••"----:------ji?'.'81`?a, ii !1 •1 �i I I �� I 11I1 I •i.�j" ji: i ., ;•1 g •:r" ▪ f r, 13 1' I I ° I ( III iII LONGACRES --\`\\�..rill 4l; $:..»» s t'I Ii I III y 1 I I I III ( III !`;}':ln i i. (! \\ - i 2�=UA (,' ?"'= rI III iI t i, i'• ii OFFICE FYARIC - c ito„' \ tw ' 1 l,. 11 111i I I I 11sill I I I ,r — / -,, -' !I I, , .III 1 :r� _£ I:I� ,. IIII I li IIII I ,-; r ..:,:: \; I �' , ;:u ( I { I i tlllllh III III I i I I ,, { :�, y`' ; - .r■ 1,111L1111 II1111'I > i r. i 1 a ,\ , 1 .IIII I,It 1I 1'_y - �. .. r.t,,,,...£ tl, r I. ' :Il.:v-,,.IIII �` 1. ;, ;\ 9 �..`\• s_IR ! `ao. • i i•i9• ;,i .� ,.I 1I 11.. .t .11lt1' `' ` -II I.i t„` Y ! ' I 1 I I I '•! '_\ tlll• It Lr'I III 1II R.;i1 �./ �_� 'l\ I J-` : \�\\ I I 1 Ep`'' : \\ :.: ; , I II r I I !it > \ l 1 (�! iR' /^ �; t ' '\\ i! _ I.s:�::,t £ I; I I I 'iI . lI :. : 11► l!';III % I _- c _ I►1 ^` ` vpR 1 i III �, t .1 11ill i7-7-f27.:" --\;/;:' I I'Ii iIII1I j • i ( \ • \, ' I ' 14 .i.• I,I ' I y IIIitd''I / \ 1 1 ! \'� `;\ ` � -1 P' \ '•�. IlI III i II 1�l ,,. I .,,1� _\ IIIli 1 Eiji jIIIIII lilt /- / / :•'-'' / �_ %2"--/ �r61 \ I ,.�-ii%:• �,\ Ii S f I • I lltrlli ' , 4.11 _ I _ :-.:.'. ....1 '. _ u. I..••il II � `,, ,\.`, \ s, - 1 1I ,1 Inll ■ I ■ ■1 gill 1 emu -. - .: -a 1..=s-•s., ..pl n u'i I I II II i r -- r I I •, \ _ \ ,\` \ ,�. ::\Z _ :iII ;3. ; ,nt�itlt �.1 t'! 1 I - - _ 'Ill' - ^- ' _ III ulnllllllIIII-.�.. u �'' j y i�i�; \ :''i,, ` • , \`.s tr \\ - ---_— r;, =S I1 III I IIIII Ilrl�I U�{WIII �I ; — - I1 _.._ - I IIIIIll111' 'b IIi _re 1 i r':-- I - ti :,.- I _.. it - I - -� III! -I •;, \, ----,n I r - ,I .I-..„.1._.,___;,. "'' I I` _ _ __ -r-t =- it - .,P;.� __-c ,, :l s��-,...---� !.\, :. ::--- --� \`\ / '`'/• �.%<: I,r- ,\, ,", i,: .� - I it I •;�T~= -I ; - - :_ , % I . `,./11"‘„ ',. '`--' = r - IIIllluul y ., , _ 1 �' ►IIII II i , II I u i I I,, . IIII! i;l I -' - _ _ _ �U' I lb i iI I r 11 iI iu Ili11: `=' - I1 II 11 III III � rl IL .,rll I I I -�,.. � _ r III in i 1illi11Illi III I, . It111! II I . yiill . il - .._o I Ii'I { i I I I — 1 1I IllIIII::•.i f II Iii I I ' _.tI II,.. l .. ,» II �II II ullllgl . _-- IP I ..:........,.,,, . I,0 „l - 1 f II it ii I -. --!II „ I I II- ..:.. Ilmt::c.. ..IiI _ „ ,.,i ,:.---: 1 ..,..,�. ..at Fa,t}:y. .-#`. _ n1 -R-T !II I II � � ^-- -._- _ `n - \ � _. --I III ..t ..• [ w - g,: - `-f�-_^ '' ; il I• II .R;•• "- IIIIR ! - -.._. ,tR. ro•-v •t1a11. � .Y - --_ ._ ,- __-,- .._-..__. .....57.7.., "^.�:♦ � - �..F :7� m . �1,._ 1,I� ,:o: �:,,.,,1. lm1 g {i'it.. s —:::___::?::;:r,�n+a�::_,,,_{.> ��a--rs�_ 2i ' r- ��:._ . -- LOP PROPERTY - ,..,;: a •,,. - -------- — -------= - — - _ ' ``';��;, __,.. ___ -- — � o PRIVATE ROAD >. \Y`.� >;,,.. - - _ — _ — - ' .'"� LINE `" ___ ,1 , PROJECT LIMIT BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD TRACKS — a^^' — } ., i$r�e•ll�up� I m REv19ON 1 a, APPROVED °�¢ rn • aE,+s,on APPRO./a) a¢ ❑AUBURN, WA. 98002 ACCEPi11BTutt UST REv,sou Is.real DATE gnw ar a: �,anrs ❑BELLEW E. WA. 98007 'HS DE9[N AND/OR � 1 •SST-PE �P �1' FL �/^) r SPETSICADOR,s urRrnm a I I 1 I ®®4E,A0 ❑EVERETT, WA. 98201WIZ '°"ROAD°' °0'T °rE BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 FACILITIES DEPARTMENT ❑KENT, WA. 98031 «2n _ I I ❑PORTLAND, OR. 97220 II RENTON, WA. 98055 1 I "°°ROWED I pfZ/1/NAC�C TZCPT D/< OAMQ 0 SEATTLE, WA. 98124 I I ,"'°0.0vED I °� rARY2 ,.. £ .� Iry g:. I Wi t,0 v�. ' III : ,• Orii- '•I .,. € I ;` CSTC PROPERTY UI \ ....\:‘"4-e'-• c'lli ''....7 ? . ., PONGACRES OFFICE ff I —' FLOODPLAIN AREAS ' RK (LOP) a: BELOW. ATI N 1 0 150 300 600 ELEVATION 6.4' 1; �\ r PROPERTY LINE 4 .q i^ f GRAPHIC SCALE it a ' ,,_ ti" • • Iiii... ! : � _ �4, Ill it �. r if! t, �,1,,; I __ :fir IIII,IG�� - fir �I"4 � ! • I I jl/'III j�l� _ PRIVATE ROAD ��0 ✓ji/ ii �' • »I!` Ih 'Cr£ •,` ` •✓� `i IIII I I _ - - ` I _7 ,!!I,..;:,�; I' 'i a \� 1' ' 'i III "--•_ .__'� TY _• . ,~'. L � ��`S = \ I I :�\` 11' II I111 • III ------•--- £ TY • I i1`I l'I _ III.. 1111 .. 1111IIc: JI!ffT 1;;;;:2_,I.\:!11.1.)11....A..1.7:_.\ ,! 'i :nWul!111111�I --1-,.i. i •—•-•N- . i-* �— III I� CSTC I fr. ! /> 4 • - . PROPERTY \ .., . IIIf a _I - s LINE I I ix: � U ry -� 25 0 I€,111 I /,Ci ( ri ! 7 i i ` : ` — _ ! �M�°JRS- I.:::, 1i :: .e<:E 8U1 DINGr/ __ —..._ _' _— iI'-•:.. / - — _ .---- .mod., ce._ �-•it 5_03 ila ;�� :,: 'iiiliarmrrdm }, f £ "�.. rt .. • Lr r ��..,[....1... ..---1 /._....._ : • _r ,' E .ti. <:\---.\-N...---N,\,.....„j: ilri, 11 i 1 r N -)") ,,..... .�'iiva11 �= jI u .lull • OJECT LIMIT � I' a 7f /� :111111''' III R! 1 1 III II / �.�i - . # ! _• `:i:1 �' I N. t t" sl 7 ► r / '! p {� I '� ' / 1; i� is_ �`- mmt:r��-.::: I II ', is il EE T^^rrr r r II r " II :` NGaCR $ i iI :7:::. s eli' ( ;1 jj ij E ,:, `,;, ;. !if" E P14 K :,..: i • ; :i 1 I‘c‘,, .:‘,,,, .,‘. ts. : 1 iii,:„, , .,u„, Illii. ;/ II r ��SLTE, - • ;, s 11 `tom I \• Y\ i7E t! I\�\ la I, i i !.::11::_....L.._.......... ...../: • <. • , ,�\. \�.. ...;1:"x =�\,1 F` ''' —1 a II'` II £ ::. IIh — — III ' III IIIIIIIIj. 111,1 y y \\\ `::, III;, II _ IIIIIIP ilill,111117.111!" %'�' i;li ! .L I1 I11i — III i I `�� i I _ _ I 1111 I _ _f I�� ` _ �il III — I i\ — • \, ,; Irr...ss, III II • i ,,�„ : ; iiiII �I� N I IIII 111 __ _ LOP PROPERTY 1 ] . RTY LINE — — — — — —... -•--•_ �� . J IIIIe"Is+ "" — - - - - �� " imam err PRIVATE ROAD --•---••- - - — - PROJECT LIMIT— — _ — — — — ;\ \�,= BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD TRACKS — vsi�T�M TM I WASS. a wnr� - Ay AEH9cv I „ .aa.om °.a• -"um a. LAW WIZ 0 AUBURN, WA.98002 ACCfPTA8rJ1Y y\wsr.cusv,yM5.mn °.re ❑BELLEVUE, WA.98007 nas acsai uoAA -A...., PRC--t r /Zar G4fAis,a, T svtrnu,la a arvavtn BOE/AI ❑EVERE T WA.98201 MIL — ,w.aom BY ocr,. o.n: FACILITIES DEPARTMENT ❑KENT, WA.98031 b.= BCAG HEADQUARTERS BLDG 25-20 .�»I • II RENTONNO WA. 98055 "`°"0"0 — DWA./NA4C RER'72T 0 SEATTLE. WA-98124 APPROYED °""CI ELEVATION (FEET NGVD) 01 O Ui O U1 0 �___ - _• _—_ LHTflLLr4 -�--_. . ---- LV! i , -. - - -�-•�-.. .. ._ ; -I-it ; j I i ( • . •• : 1 •itlil l- , . ' ' , ' i • I - : • • • h Ii,.1 . j 1 1.i.,. . . I • • I I I ! I(. i ! tI • • • • . 1 , , ;.. .1 • ; II , ',..I !. J r I• i i• . 1 } , l i• t.. J • 4 ' .{..i- • -{• j. ' ; 1 1 : ; : I• : : : I , ' � : fit ; I`. . . ' . � ' • : • : . . . : ' I '1 ! • t t .• I -1--J• _':.. • , I•! , 1 i 1 I.1. : `-+' ,• • ! ' • ; : ; i 1 , 1I r • • t •-1-,- -=• _ ,,. �. �.{• t l i ;.i I- �UTH EST4 '.: : .; f ® EN. 1t ; ' w r� 1...•. r {_:..•_ ». TRfET T+.i.a-�__ _�.�. ' I. I I i ! • �1 I. 1 '_ p1F ENfi ; ,_i.. 4.. .. .-1 ,.•, : i .. ) + } I F .. 1. I N • • ; . , : . j ; : . . : I•j• Ii. 1• - _ .1-• T .; 1 MILL' REEK K . I'rY: K , � , • 1 - • • , , I 1 I. -1.1 1 _ ..1 t--- 1.. .T I- ..r ; , I ' , I • 1- •r r 1 I t• 1.• ' • ; , , ,. , • I.: ..-1_.i .• 1 W ; . ®. 1 . i . . • i 1.1 i I_ t ;- I • I.-- I.. -'--..._.....I • '.' : . I. _I... I, I ; I I- •• I . , I. r I I•.. I 1 I 1 Cj .... .1+ , .,. ' + I. I. .. _. . I• • i I r 1. y i 1 11 + • I i • . (• 1 1 I I ; i• I ' •. _� ! • • I I l t I ' •• •, 7 ' ; ' t ! t •I 1. } I _ I • _..__ I I I.. ! • ! I I 1- t 1•, 1 I I• 1 } I• I I I' 11 • t [II I ,...I • 1 -' 1..11 I 1 : , ,-i... . 1 1 I • • ,• i I I ' 1 ( • L.i• ( ' �.. �'.' .�. , . -- .I. , , ! { I I I.�-..i 1. i } I. (..• 1 •••I • I I I. - I I. 1.t -1 ,...' I I I J. , I , . •1 • • • • I i j I I,._ t..._ - t I• I ;• 1..1. j t I • • i I• i II I . • i l•i j I { ( I , — i t T•f i - � + t-i ' IA • • 1r , I ! i ll I I • J., _y. I_1_... .. • .-I . I I.. ' ' I ,_ I .. t 1 I .. - - i I 1-1---1 - _ 1 ,_: • . I I t_r.. L..: • • ,. J- I • t i • ' I I _1 ' • i 1. . . . . , I . 1 I 1 1 L. . - 1 + + ; _;.._ 'I I + - 1 I .8IDTH A ENUE•SO TM: ' . C). ' I i ..r. t I 1 J • `.. i , ! • t : , • J r. , 1 . - • ' {- , • 1 , . : I , i.; •• 1... • • ii_,._ 1I. ;• ,I 1 �-I I I : I ; i i IIPRI ATE BRIDE • .i • . ,...r. ! 1.. •• • I ' t- I . I , I • I • . j . • • • . , 1 • • I • i t {{tt I • t I-. ,�,• I. I • . I 1 I. • • ' ; I • •• . , • i , • • • I • D � . . i_1 �� + I I ... ...... . . . . .• I ' I • • •m .. . ' • I •• ; I • I - - i- 1•I--4- � ; •--i- • • I Ii , i , • , m I I. �_1 ; I i.t i j...-+ 1-: -t : I•11 1-`-1; I I *�f �- .. __ , I, � ,...; 1.. , RAILROAD SPUR ? r . o W I • ® • • . • ' • I ; • , 1 , 1 ;.,j.I • .1 i I , i 1 . . . • < I . . . . . , . . . . • ! . t I. . ' .. ._l,t•i ,+1-4 1 :..�» . .. _ . .1 ,._- • . . ._-SOUTH 188TH•STREET • w-•.. •.._•,• m . ; • . . • • • • j• , ' • -f •• ._1 ' •._ r . . , •• . . • : i ! . • , . , • p 1 ; .1..1 • 1 I jI i • • t , L � • i. • • 1 i j t. 1•• I • • . I • 1 • • , • • Z. , , , , . • I.,I - ,• ...I . . • i• I' • • • II I j , I o : _ . . . . .�_ , ,-,--. • I • .fi _ .1. I _._. __..., • _..� • • • • F-; t 1 ' • 1 1 I. y ! • • 84TH AVENUE SOUTH : . . . . • I . 00 . . , . ••1•-: t--- I-. • i. I• .. +• • • . . , ., I I. i.: . , ; (EAST VALLEY • , • • . • •.r..; . , _. .. . . I. II ROAD I 1 ,... I I I 1 I•I i 1 • • 1--I- I -..--1--. -T' • -•--j--j-+ i-4_ . -.«.•, . ...... . • . • «.,___ t • i ..:._.. �._. 1 : • • . ! '• ; I. •I I—--; i - • _.�_ I 1-I-.I_.}••1--_. ; ± , , . . i 1 .I• t • :' •• • �.:_ I I y i_. I..__I_111 1..1 I 1 • j • I. , • _i. , , • • 1. • • • 1...1 , • , , ; . ; , • • • I } 1._l_ .,.. i_• t . .1 .I,,._---_,. ; . i .; ; , • • i . 1 , : . • 1 ; , -1 ;. , i r Io I 1 --1.. i { + r 1 I' +' '' I r, I' 1 t r. ; . t • J l - I..�-+- I .:{ , 1 • . , ,t. 11 I.i • • _t-: :i ; : , : 1 •r + I--1 • - • i-"'_ -}.-.-., • .i._,. , I i I !• • j• ! i , • I J 1 , , 1 I I ' .I..,. . . `..• •I.. ,. 1. t , I , ' •• • • + � I A T.EB OG P IVA cn I I I r --. ! 1'- -+ - •.I_ ..,.__. .flh + i : • i....l.. •1 I ' 1 i , : , i 1 m • T } 1 I j }} i • I , i . L I•I I . o �' S S O I !-'_� • I t i . `. i • l : I RIVATBRIbGt: - : , : • : • ; J • + D y 3 D D m m '1 . i-a- • 1 ... I , ..._I_.i..._.. I I i I ; ' -I m xi 70 D D 21 MII -1 • 1 _I• 1 1.-1-1-1- , • I . • • . , , ` • ; I Z p • ++ I J -I A i I ! G O O Q 1-11 ..-, - . _...: • I-11' • I j • I I._ I I. i 1 1 i : M i ,. • I _ 1 _ i i ..-- 1-__ !_`:_.' I ...• i ; •. : _ : • . O N N �.Cd 0 _ 0 01 0 VI FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY , FLOOD PROFILES • 4.cn KING COUNTY, WA AND INCORPORATED AREAS: SPRINGBROOK CREEK 411-- - • • • ELEVATION (FEET NGVD) . N cn I I - -- _ _ 0 _ , f I I I I • I. 1 i -_- ! .• • • • • 1 I 1 1 . i . I. { --.. 1 - _ 1 1-• • t . i . i 1 , . ; . ; • . itH b11! .. • + 1 � , 1 � NFI UF�110E V(1 I o • i ' t - i. l ,_.• +i-i_I :. I .� I !..: :. , : :_ 1 i-1 h ( j_ I ;._ ° ST( RAGE POND •, i I I • 1 ! I I 1 f I ,1 . • r Hi . • • . ,0 ,•i , I I III _. 1 -----. I _._ L._ 1. 1 ! . I • ;.: ._ . , I::�::i 1.. unnivE6T • __ o ! 1 .__. -. ; I . 1. ;. i. :' : 7°HS RE T ` I. .1 I 1 • I i f 1 •i ; i - . . _•s _... ,_. .�_�. • : 1 1 I [ 'I i j 1_1 1 ; f ;..___. _l_ . I. ! _1_ 1 I.:1 . ki., I .... -.• . + 1 •, j jII 1 , ; I_ !• _ _.._ _ .! ._ j. i ' ; •, I ... .: . . ; _ I : -}:.�: ...d.:1:l i , 1 . t Iz.,.: I 1 , ; I I. —_- . 1. • 1 # • 1 4�1 'DY WAY..... .-_ ;D_ • 1-••( I • — , I ' - �. -• ■-• - \ , I • INTERSTATE; • t. -_... . 1...-- i.: , . --. . ��. 1 I-I : ! _- f/. . - 1. _ ' I 1 ■ -- • : ' HIGHWAy 406 -'-- • t I • I • 1 t . •! i I ;• it I . • -It • .+ I 'I \■I' .f —^_..II- i 1. _ _1 !. !I ..._,I _^ . _ .�. �.1�i 1 „1ETHSTREET :.: ! 1 _ . ! f ; 1 —i : I • o l • t t i . . ; : ; I 1 1 , !_ I- .I id 1.-_. _ . _i._�4_: : I..: . I_: 1.. .11 —. $ co 1 ; 1 1 I I 1 ;-I f'_' I • ` i - • ! ; ! ; I • ! t I I , 1.1. —t j ; I ; •1 I v , I ! I I I I . . I I I I '> I I I i I , } i I 1 I I I I I ' I I t I I W I • . 1 , . 1 • ,�;, , I 1' , { - • I 1 1 t , . ; I . , , I. I + I 1 , � I -I . ; I , f ; ; j I ; i . .I ; I I . . I..1. i i . . . I ! - I r t • • . . ( I ! . 1 + , : I II D . . ; t I . , . . •. I ; , f . ---• 11 r t • • I i • I t : t , I i 1 1 t Z , • , i . . I . : ; •. •.1 �• . --_. I , • i ' . , . - I . I I , r I. I I i , I i 1 t I I I 1 J . 1 e) I • i • I ; . 1 i . , 1 I .. I ''" •.-- I•I -I I I--_ : ; -1 • I , 1 ; I I . . 1 . I ; • ' "'I' 'I. , , I . ; : ; . . + ! m ! t l I ; ; • , 1 1 ; 1� - I j _.. -.1 i ., �. . I i i II I . . . 1• I I . . I •f- • . 1 , L ; t ; . 1 J i I . i , 4-i- i 1 ;.� ; 1 iff F 1 ! i . I _ I.. .I 1.:._.1 _;- ..._ . ! .._ , I . +.; . ; I. ► I i. I 1 I + 1. ' t _ 1 i--i-il : j •I-I. ' '' '• l• - I •t-• 1us _ 1 1 1 , I I 1 I I 1 -. -- 1 '_ .. _1 I I 03 ,. I I 111 _ , I L. ,li i I I I ..I.I J r • • ., i..., i I.. i (. t c • l i • ' 1 • ! t , , .. 1 -I -- 1 I I1 • ' ; . I i.1 i ' 1 1 ' t j • I , lit ! ! • i J 1 I t - 1 I. t I. I 1 + 1 • Ii I . • ; _ .. i ,.. HWLJ1ti . I.1 , 1 N. 1 ' f , { i-! -!-* i r�--1 _ - i . . 1.-- } 1 ! , I1_- ..- i �s.. t., i. I 1 I } it iH 4 . ! 1 . , + ; I I !• I • I j .1 :• I 1 _•_• I i.— +. _-� f _ I. ._I , I ..{.I.! i :1-. . Rld• r 1 T. ; E,UNtidii 1-. ▪ ' .-t. : ��I;•.. .. -+ ,. { , , , • _. � -'_ I : .. ; 1 i . ^.t_, ,. ; c0 JSTRUCT10h, i -, li — ; t • - I I I;ti_ .1 ' ... .I , ii. , Ili , It I t ,1 ; , . • 1 1.. I- __ I 1 i -1 ! f•-•• - , i-_-j { •• • i-IH •i ;_._ . . • ,..1..1 I i + ..__ •t ;. 'I-,.,I, I , +_.L. F ! 114.1 { I i i f r I 1 ll` ' ▪ I . - - . -+ 1 1 ..-...,.I _ :1 j: I. 1 .,..;... . .I• ► ! 1.--' , ,ft11:.tlj I 1 II• I- •• - -- -1 1'i ! -.1- ' . . , i. • • • • I. ---- - 1 — —. _. ;; . _i - 1 _... _ _ • i • _. .. .=■■I.::, : I • I � :,..!.... + 1. : 1• -1: • Itj } •::+ L. i 1 I -i I I .._ ! 1 +'. NAMED RO• D 1 I . ' 1 II I ; , I o • r I I .- ■■.: -`l + r i• T I i t.. r i • • • n y m .. . , i ... .. I ._■.. ; —,.. f ; r + + i...,.. • • • I. .._.I I r I • r 8 C _. —. ; 11. ..__.,..t . ! .. I. ! -I I , L I . I : . 1'- N oy m m ! H HI 3 ,.� � II11:y47. I 1.- . - - • I : _ • m — - I O O r r i — t - I , . .. . 11 .I 1 I I t ir . O O j J I I t -�_..I 1 1 . .. .._ , l I p BA BONED • 11 + ! • I v v v v _ ! .' . i j ..._l ! .:_ _I i - 1 I _}•l 1AILROAD • 1 i.j , : A o �^ O m 0 m O • FEDERAL EMERGENCYENCYMANAGEMENTAGENCY • FLOOD ' PROFILES • KING COUNTY, WA AND INCORPORATED AREAS •, : . SPRINGBROOK CREEK 7.:•' , . - • • ' . * . ., . --; • •'.,•:1 . 11.1.11.11111.1111.11.11.111111111.11. ' • I r I-I $ • ; , ' I • 1 i $ .._._;_ ; .T..14‘41i 4:ail Et 1 Ju t :14 i : . : INEMAM ' • • • - - ! . • - • ; i MUM. •1111111111111ThlilIMIIMIIIMMIIIIIEREIMiliall•MOOMMIE11111111E111EIHNIA 1 . , : • , Mail . . I • i 0111•••1111IMIHIENZEMEMIIIIIMMIINIIIMMINI•1•11111111111EMIIIMMESIMEN ' • . : - - MffilinSaiiMiiiMMEeili , • • .:-• • - ' ' 111111M1111•• i ' C I ' •••111_111••••••••1111•111•IIRRENNIIIIM•••••••••••1111•11••••••• --_- . : ' . . •••••••••in : •' ! ! ' . MillnIRMIUMMIENERSIIINWI IMI =1111M•MMIMIIIIIIMI IIIIIIIMMUMM•110111.1•111111••MIMI • __. • ' . _' 111M•fillinilli= , . ! • - : . • MillissillE•11111•11111M11111111M•IIISEIMIMMINIIMIIIIMIIMMUI , .• • • : : __LH_ _, 1 •_• MMINIIIMMINNIMMINIIMS1•1111•WIIIIMMIMMIIIIIIIIIMENIIMINNIIIIIIMMUM•1111111111.111EMIMIIIIIIIIIIIII UNE -M w- ' ;441---:-' ' • - • ' • ' ' • " 1 ' 1 ' - ' ' ' • mommmonsum••••111,11111••••••111111M1111111MIIIIMMIIMEMIIIIIIMINIIIIIMENIIMMI111111111•11MMINIIIIMIIMMEMIIIMMIIIMIE . ..t.. ._1 . ; • 4,fcct- .•04.---HO--' MI1111111111E11111111111111MMIIIIIIMMIIIIIMMIIIIIII _ • , .. • • ; • - • ; EIBIIISMIENINIIIIII 1--; 1=16111•11MIIMMIBIBWIIIIIIIR1111IIIIIMEIBEEINIMINIIIINERMIMIlaill=M i•Y1 . - !--' , :•11 ----"la lucc . -..tc-cc cc.i_. -;_mit,__ I -__ ' ' • ! - • • - • ; ' • • .L____, • : , ! ' ! BilEMENNIEMIEEMINIMIIIIIIIIMIBIMIIIIIIMEMINIIIIMOIMMIOrn111011111M11111161•11•1•111111 . . . . - -•- - - -- .0 •-- ..a 0 0 ---ci,z- - - -----__ . ______ _...._ _____.______. .__ ..___ _LI__.._.' .__L ' • ! . IINIMIIIIIMIIMIIN MIIIIIMEIMII■111 • -> • - 61-rt,z 7-o_ca< . .; ,I..;.__... .......________. 3 oz . . .. . _ _ , .__ . . . . .. ....- _.... • - -- . lu cc 7-7-1021,erL - -,---7--,--,-t -- , , -' : - • • • . . , Ellail11101MEMIlliii11-illiM._1111111 mmumnumumumimummass . 'c. 1 m. -7-!---...-ui0ira I II . • i . ly • . . -!--4--1L)uj •1.... - ; ; ' ' ! : • 4 ; - • • . ; •••••••••••••••■•■•■••=imummomma•smaniummusamionimmin l-4-'1-1r,.,_ ___. ___- • _,_, Minsminon. :._ • . i ! EIMIEM11111111E11•1111=11111111MIIRIIIIIN ' , • ; ' .1111BEENEMOMIIIIMMIC.4+1311 ; r Z„_ cc • - I,z 5- - w._. _ _ _ - ca ----:----- --_____ - • • , I • • . • . , ..11.0 -7,--------7.- = ! ; ::._. _....._____ ,__.....Z.- - H.- 4C- • ' a• - • __ CO, 251 • . : ' LI : 7"i-7 1111.11ilt • • I CL"" . . . . . , : ili- . •. . ` , • - ' I1 , 1 ! . ri-r-r-r--1 ! : . , . . I 0111101- . 1 t : i 1 ! , MR . , . . i i 1 1 i I i ,y- 1 ? -r-7--i-1- ; i . -r I , -,-1---; ;- 25 I , ; • ____;__.... • ;___i__,.... .. . ; _..,,...,.. ! 111. ,_02__i_l_....- • " ! ! t ; ! • 1 •• 1 . • • :_. . , , • : ; i : : ; . 11 ; i : LI 11. ! ili . .. i I I • I i I '. I ' 4-1:1' ___..._ . ' • •_L • • • •- 1 . ol , • !• 1 • • • il ' il , 1 • , 1 . _i I L ; , • • . i • , ! , 1 t . ! • ; i Ci:sc I -----.---L --..-------1_ w... '._..7,-..‹ i • - • .----- ------- . . , - . I . : , : : . • : : : , . . . : , • : , - 11 , , • •, : • : • - • . ; : : • . go.. .., a . ________ _ ___ - I ' . • - ' : . . • . , • . - ,•, , . ! Li LiJ • . . 1 . .--- ,_ 0 ...., F---.--:--. ----7-77----_F-7 :. i ' - . i i .: -i F 1 H -----77--r. -77-----. ---1-- -.1--,___=_---7.----7.-____-_-__--: . • i • • . , . , . . • , . • : , . , . . . : , , . . _ • . , , : , 1 , • ,. . , 1 , . •-- I , I CIC :' :_ iiiinniNinaii i ' ' ilIMIIMMII- . ...11. 1 • ; 1.- ' _ ! : 1 11111 :H±--. . , 11 CL. ?il : , . , . • : • , i NEM= - ._. II I . . - ; • ; I : t ; ; • 1 hiC - . -t . i-• - . I . . - : - .-...-..._+____,_,..___,._i LI . , _,___ { . - . • _ . . * • • • -i-H--- .---; . . , , 201- . • , . i . . . , . • - - • • . ' : 20 • t • : 1 • : ! ..; : , : ; , :, , • , , , : , , , ,,A ' • ; ! I ! • , ' - I-'- . ..____i_._ _._L___- ! _____...•___...._._ _ ..... . _____, . , . • , : -7-1 . . . __ _.... . ____ _ ._ - _ : ___ NOWFRO.W.REPRESENTS 1 0: - 1 . . . ' • • . - • , . •. , • . . . • [ i • • ' ,1 ., - , -,__;_..._ - --i AND1 : I , • . . • • i • - . ' i ! .1 I ' I ; t ; -, .. - • • - -1.00--YEAR FREQUENCY • - .i.---- -- - ' • ---- ---• -- , : ! i • ! • - • , _ , . , E • FLOODS AS REGULATED BY ' -4---------------. . --7-,---_,. . . „ . . . . - .--,-- .1______ ___ __ ___ ___ • f . I . • , . . . 1 ; : 11 , , , ! t ! • : t . t it • : T . : , , u • : , ; . u ; u ! I . . .15 ZCD 15 i - -. ...._.‘. __,_ _ _ _._,_ _ .• ; ! • , solimitia•imumuuremesammie : ---•-•-•--1----•--! - ! ' . " ; 1 ! 'f-! • , 1 . - 1 • ' i L ' ' • L. ---7.r .-.- -:+7-r-rt-t-1"17.7 lima -•••••■••••••eammsuainismosuffams .0. _-_, , ._,_-_,__,_........,.._._ ___, , , ,.1___,••_ . s . 11/111MIIMMIN 111111•11•1111111MR2111111111111R MINIM, • tu _ _ _ . _:___ !._._ . • . • _ „ . . •, , , . i • Z ...-;-;- . • , : ._____;___ : ' ' : ' ' • " ; ; ; • i ------,---,;.-•------4------.• T----7 ---T 7 "7-'.--7-1--- , ;--1---1: ---t-,--'--/-4---.--i-i- - immu__&..a.-_,.... ... _ _ ....i..... ....up r-u..., _ . . , • , 19M. 0 : • g : •••11111=t1 ! : • ! '-' ; •III _._4_,;_k_i_.L____1_-...-:--:-:-4--*--1--... -.1-4--L-' u ••-I- -1•11rnitiM- 1• 11111111111111M IN IIIIIMII INEMINIIIIIIME IIIMIIMIIII•••• i , ----"--;--!---L-L--- -n ----:-- -,---•---•-•.1-•--1-Z-2--:-i-.1 ' 2--I---' :. 1 i onsimmumissmummosmosmounammasummmussinsommummammo - . -r-i-i-,,--,-,-!---.--1-!-Li--. • . • . . .______ . • , . - , • . 1 • mimumsamommumums•usiummummulowsnommuniumms > 1 o . • . i . : ! . : ' alisMilim , , . - , , , ; ' . 1 • animinisininunumismminnumanimumummummitimmommossossomumumm 10 ; • gu __ __..__,.......__L______ , . . . , . ,_!. . , , nommilum. . , . - • . . . : •••••••=• ,„ . • mmuiniumammuiss••••••••••••immumssammiimiii ..., • • I , •., , : . , • ,....,. i ; IIMMAIMMEIMIIIIIEMENIMIIIM•MENEM i ! MIIIIIMM• --; : 7-7-7- -7.-- r---.:. -•.-• . • - : y: 1=111111011113= . 1 . . _ .. • •. . , t , ; , • : t •_ • • ! " • + - ---i • 1-L- • ' ---' • • ! • • • • . . • . i • , • • I I • i ; 1 • • I • _._ -____________ . . . . . . - .-.- . 1 I ! 1 I ; ; i , ! • , , • ! i MIME ' , , ! , • !, -; , , . t I t ' t . ' t t ; 1111M11111=1101E.111.1.1111......10111. • _.____L • • • - . . i . i , 1 7-1-. ' • I ` . t ! - • • . . ! - . ' _ • I : : : ' : 1 • • ._'..7.7._i_._.'._ 1 : MiKilininanininnii.LEEN ininin . Main= . -- ---.-----.-..--- . . t •11 • , . . . . -1-77----,.f _ _ -- -,-,--a•_________ _,._______ _.. _..._., , ,_ , • • 4_ _ • • • • • • , . : . ; • : i • i . . , , . .- El= 1111111••••••IMAM ,,- . • r-,-1-. 1 : I i , ' ; ! ' i , EMZEIM1101MINIMIIIIMMIUM•1111111MIIMMIII••••••■••111Ell >c j I 6 I . ' • . . -. , ; , : • . =M. _ ; . ,_;_ , _ • • , t-r-i- . • . Mil 1 ; ' ' I d. ' I ' • - • ' ' ! ; ' ' ! 1111611161MMEM111111111116111111111111111/111MEMEMINIIIMIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII5 1 ..• : : . , , - - • ' - • ---i---•- , - • ' •----i--4-1---I--I.- IMIIIIMIIIMIIEIIEIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIOIWIIIIIIIINIIIMI Z vi. , - - - - - ! • ---i---7-71- ' ' : ----72,....____ . _,_:_.4 ____,..:Moan - ' , .%." ,*-. .'ANP.-------"'"-....i ' ' • ._i_l__:_ EPIIIIMEM11111=111111WIIIIIIMEMUNIM LI1 ; --.----- ------I --- .-- 1-I : 1 I I I ; , 1-7--i--t-t-t-t-+. ! 1, • ! ; . . .4-1.-:-......-,1. , • ' 1 I lagb::: ails _., : ounimssumeto sus7. 7777smummoss 0 ot„ __ . ..._ ...._ .... . 1.... _.. . ..........-...., ____L_.!._.,.,._:_ ____,_ _......i..4_,.4._,__:._ • , .--',..-L-i-;._ ' ' • ' ; iiiR NI • IMENE _SEEM iiN. . IIIIIIHIM -.'t ..__i : inliiiii'"?...F-171.1111.....Martiii....i......... et iii _ I . . , :.. . .. . _ _ • _•_ - t _........ -. . . . . _ . . . . . . . . ..-,----__ _-2--I--I. - MIMI ' ..;_,..i...' _.i 1 : I .IIIIIIIE,11.10 i 1 • J "-'. : . . , • . . . , 4._.!_t_: i' = • , -.--r.--- --••••1-r-• --•!--*---.--r-•*"- . 2 ICC 44C --;.-.---.-.,. • • + 1 , , ; • • • . r t , 1-- - 1 • ' : • ; i , . • . . i - 0..--.,.._-__.7,-+_;.___ : - • . L._4.. t ' • • ! r ! ! r • I -r-t-'-:-Hr- . ---4-4-4-- - --t.----..- I . ; .......i_ 11M . 1 - usunammummmos- ii .- ' i . i 1 u al „ , slim= , , , , ounimm•••••••••••• I 1 i , 0 -w i • . . • i ..._____. : . • LEGEND - ------ ... ---4---,-,----,--... , 1 . . ,--4-,-.- --,-- Mall , 1 , . . .. __ _t__;______ < = . . . . . . . . . . . . •• • . • 1.... .. - • • .. _______ . . . , . . , . 500-YEAR F. LOOD 0 C2 • - • - CL, ' . . . _.. . . . : . . . _ . . . • . . .._.---...-- . ;.- - -- -- - - --- - . > CI cg _ 1 i ----- -.----------i- -------- 100-YEAR FLOOD C..) I_ ! . _.,_____. --- --- ___1... - ' i .---;__;_i__ •...i_ . • ' • , ! . I. 2 CM 0 • • • 1 , us Z C3 4 • ' - - - --!-,--- --- • --'-.-- 50---YEAR-FLOOD -0- -=- , l -0 ...I " • . . • • ' ' . , . • • • 10-YEAR FLOOD --,---- .---• . - r . • . - . -; 1 • 4- , 11 , • , taJ = : - 4-1-'------ , . . • - i -L-,-+----;-i--.--i-' --H-4- i- STREAM BED -1 liele _ I , , . • • . , , . • , , . ' ' ( ' : . , a . ec : . CROSS SECTION UJ • .------- 7-- -..' • . 1 . 1 0 1 77_•.7,- 2-• - ' • _---.--- H-•--7- •---4--i-1-4.-: . . . I- 1 ; • ' : I • 1 ' : -!----.• -1 . IIII I LOCATION 0 ui - , ; ! • , , ! . • ; • _, . . 0 • 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 . , Si, . STREAM DISTANCE IN THOUSANDS OF FEET ABOVE MOUTH • 44P , . . .... .. . • . ., • .. ., . . ____ - ---• • • - - • • • • • BCAG_HEADQUARTERS_BUILDING . 25-20 - . SITErr.DEVELOPMENT:- -. - 5( 5 vr 'i'," IW- - PISOUTHWE- . -- - S - ?k3"€?�, mot'' _! . i r ;�il• �.t°F �r`-nwi } 1;- O DWAY. - FLO __ !.,41i. ;-c;i'�'",*!;.4, f4-4-41_ wp- ra s„ ,,; s'•143`..ai.�. c ;'c'. X.r,ir..G j"i5ti-'a r .,alr,-Zl ,^�"""ciwc`6,-l•� i of.:•t, ,-1,triatAw.,4•J`H-,."-:.,F4'. ,- _ - '>+^;''}*,,,'.f.Z,i.i- `T,-i .k C.,= yJ.' ,{_ t•'�"•`' 'T.,_?Y:;35,>.: b 11 • 33 is w^:=:_yt D • a .;• -� --- .... '4''r'i�:. IQj I. • 'St' v, r'j • 1 ,'�' d, ,i _ F"t"' l :l` P.:t<<' ry l �-.:-,. a`f S3C � ;V. sl)•.�t,` c� yit j`y`j��'�k- " t�, ti •" 2 t-•?"-;:'� v. ,'L��F%�4t;� - 11; k Y•. _ 1-�".. r�'.K',1�,,{e. 3A-IR'--sty,,.' 'ie,- --;-_.::-..,..;;;,.A.-„- - .� C .r Y, -,-ram •,-'4..v'a + - - - •1, •iy y>r..@ a "'•-�F w 12`Y9"."• ..,, /:, Ci' + i 1� - -M 17. ."-4,%•• -` }- l`oic'; � L y.Ys£.', . ,`.;,-41-"P'e%2'4 3'_4 1#��' `-`�. ` ,"`=' N `,:.`IJi' ~4,` .!, f,�' 2j •. �-.,:1,13"- 4 ',r�'TM` �.,,+y t :t• . - _ - ,ear t,�`' '1 `?.i:' - tti k'� L a5 '�,�,s,n.'i �, ; , ^: :war, : *•,'':.• �a i': .g., ;F:�' c ,,r-+% •"Yfar r t-t'y,,�.•x,1: ,Z^': 9',-•.:^ �af�°'�e.,�..,_ i -3.�.• �`Cit'�*,--y`^'" '' -,l•. t -S: S2 Y. f l�^.r �,p� R'�e �.�t .f,, �r•5„ � �r `,:i i, �1 :�� ,�' ,.ra• .ii ,_ 14•- - t r• '%� r� �ti. .r•t" �f � s r .}SF�. �s._J _ - Ct `i;.?"... .f S..>7:'iJ't•'._ ,,:f i,,, '•1 Qi,�i"r``na�,.''i d ,„ 1, ',.'b-'4•,'`•.., y� _ 'Yt,`v;. '° ..is 1 V.(.:.4-`t`�� w.3 i'l�i' dJ l -;� .. _ �a-_.u- - L •r4 ;.c =.:�t;::.c'• �''�n :l.'i�';'1::7.�:fF!','`` -dt�kz'r, - �,, 1 _ ; . `'Y4`- •f':,,.t 4,'t; .ti_ ;t;: Hr<•, c e. t ''rs� , ^', `t �`!e$k �5 Ys,t :r,, ,s ,,�•,- ,-.,,' .'flv: } r•', €- ��`�.. ,tom. , . rx- -▪ Y., .. .may„,�t.S': �- � .. j =�� •4� :�'- ';y -,;,-(.N', .,,,,t:_ t.. -t" e" • - * =r r•.,," .-. ! . 'may�y I �4;-,'"'?-a:`L'...'u -.-�"-:� .:.Yr�:•�.' sl� ... .:.F�. - 9Yi✓'�•, _ dtr's�,y�▪- -_ - s, )it-Su $$ 'ic:� - . :B {i'•�^ F r a _ - ... :' � .$.?.'4i ' 'l!I'-R z-'� t;.,;tip.i-. -se L�'r.� 4X6�a' `�l•, .• ,:e, ,#„• {4y `�•-'`' - 2 �v4• , .. j{F cs.,. n:;E � ,��' t '�R,....:=� ..r.a.,.. k▪'":.i•ri �r`� ::5. L .,`�,..•f.,. - - (� qqyy,p� 1 'iits7;C 'i�'C: i:•.:. zF"✓;....�.,,.b:4o-: .t?:jJ(t/r � ,�,� ' s: _ .. .. ��i,"Y`. `t; :�s s. i<: lqit�,g��p` -a�t y,;"j: '•;_ :•4:Ja: _ j`,: 4 ti il;, �;' T- S,- ,YK: ..;,;2 ,, ` _ - :s, .. _ _ • •}•ir �: i { ' FF,,/.11u:d: ,�," 1-`''✓''r,�..'r_ :ay»#>�.r,. G:..,rS;�, .•lr^�l:t {� :�.,-' ,:Pi ;�,d.°��'��^r^di�.+., - _ _ y �. Iwre: _ :•,. „t'4 il::Xi:p:sas":--'k:+,.., v•.?A"'"ni rt^. :?t-Ir. -"vA ,,.i: '-1a[..{ - c `4 :i:''V .. Oiii,;,!',„;_z_-,`,.E.,-.4,);t,:,t I t'."•z y '�':^: :;W r -_ '' � ''' .1..'i' /rt',:,.%'%'--: I',r M�.. ::. I 4r ,i•; ,:.,t.,; ^;7.:4•rr,.,:,t-A• - . -£a 1-,,*,'•` ;i't :.,,41, .S 4�� +a"4ti}`E,.' 7-i,' 5. -FtiIrye, ej 'ir,:s,s,' ,s.': - ,;. ^-r �,�e'n r' rt t' si r.4• .•4,.L' :r,- .:4 +ti` _ -I dam • it,...X,a ...„;" .'- t I .e r _ry• ,' + e:r m,.i;:'_•:t.; :,fit s!i"•a` tZ r i<;' '': 1 }mot! 4 '1 � i.fi, 1 .a ` -c, ,-.wa:N .•r,,"'-.=,.-,;'' 3- '`wr ' "h '°r-' '''"---s c fi :r., r,• F I .l I i t.? �`,1- P rg,',1`1'A Py•f:i' - .f!;i t ii. ''ai sD• •? f.t-n..._ • ~Y' ::N j'�x - >`', 1 Li:� '„ �'f.- "'SS'" mil.1%" _i:.,.,. .l:.i>aAty•J'i' ",i:: ',4▪':: . J.'.. n i,,�Pf,, t:_5 :`�i.` - ,: i: nid•J_a t" 4 v ^.'t• 4' ',i- il`{"yt y�'!i:i ,'u},). �.. :.<FN` :I'Y'.. .$",:'Y. � `.J' : s.'h•t. ..Y_• _ 7',.1 -i -f 1-.r t .6• .Sy:. '.`' • ',. .•'' �_4 _ . .X'-V :z° -.t i-11 • :}�rwF '.7,%'t'h:. �', •, " . ... . ,;.'; . - 'y' ;-,V'. 1�,r.::t-7 ^'1. _ , 't'. :..q, �. ...,r.' _ +7.'. - ',i'• w,_. r{•-:{- •Ir._ ;-.. . f .-.t.Q n it+� *trl• :r" jrt( :i!` - - Jl�,_°:- _ - / w:•. '71'�_ \irdF rf mar' a'�%Q 'w•' C•rs- Igo 1�t-,•.� �;. ,-yt. ;�r�" � - ^+ ��_ �-�'+°"='=- A. • •�-, .,7'�".,= � ��^�7, 3i '�s, ,rrs`�4• •`.•eJ fir'-x. ,r� '�/'�.. {. :'{t':: M L. �'�`•:'•`-' 1; •a'ai r'_:�C `i!`.- - �rT.:;'S.�r. zi ,` • ..-1;.. .�� -•s e�.. . .. ,1 :;',...„ n.,::,ayr. -•_..-1 v .n.; .* fl _ ;d:,:': .�qi..;,( 'v. .rt^ ..6:>�+;;I=' _ .er�y3, -;f;ai:.t"th!�vfs - �•r .t,tL - _ `•e.• ! r•.• _ ar �, :'� I;,, - .i• - r�`,''.,;,.'-tef':.l�r+r..(r'- St.," �+ = _ •�x Je, `• -<d- ^i ''•*•. =; _ -;'XN-e. ,.)v-v =,s. .'."'^'.'i• , ,.„, e.' .r:;.,,i'., _ .,„.-J,. ,4 =,., _ c, � !^'►', -,^A... �.tm.. ,'?, �4r'` ..,�.: .d. ) jl -_;;s,.a-.,frrrr y11- .:.. fir.-,a„•!-.1...I(� > ��s{� \%i::r.� C.).:tr�.r 4 .-i.� a;V,'•tt'i,�t''%'`Z ;:,S' �.�_ .. d•.;=i - ';�if,'�a, sG:.`'c .J, - .:ti• 4>,- - 4..' Ys'.;::Y .u`�`--"' -,„....re .. -- ��yr.� -� ,.t� =y kz '.`' ,.f a;; :�ta> .• '�: :;,.,• ,-'• rr.,.'^ :v��:-r.y�r ''=1�'ri�:ti:; r,�:p,,., i • _ _. , -.�.}}. .$$rr,.""' _ �.k:, ,:�'"'..�k�:. _• - ;.4.g' :`:f',;.� w`.�' : L��. _i _4� .'."T,- .. f.,-'' t.Z .,..� 4"4-:p`!,''V'ta"•Y qr. .P'• 0.,--�, rt".,t:.aji.�..n. - _S .ylii; ,x4 's::, yy.• •i.+.��a�; -,,'ys?,,z,c:{. ;a-..,,�� :�•- -tti,s.,-,..' e.,e'• �_u;tim;...,.5;....:�,y.,� •` F>'�•,1'�'�r -�,a�''.. i,:' • r •'',;h`;,IA1, I'm ^µ :�. +q`+�,:'t*!; -.5':_y�,.,?r-C '',., _ .�';,t`.+.: 4 ,,33JJ }} ' . {� t�'�i' r '�^,', L I. •.p....- .,4tv..6','.,..r.c`'i1 r`; F,i P^k. 'l,' �' tr_„T....,+'.i ±2 `F. . " 7.-�'�•-'i, 'Cj;?..cep t ..k�a[„ ,: -. - _ b'N,*1f .3:i`t 7^�3 fi s:,f .f' L 2- - :� f V T9nt,;.. , �, t, _ ., 3 ".- i"'" �''.•- ▪ l,1^ K"may �j '- _,r`, _•:fn'�,, .,- t,'Ve,-t?..._.^ ¢ :atp a..,` ,.4..4 Irv• .KIE Aa ` �v .� yet, •) _ T_'i-,•'-'< ry'.1 r'''• {:.:/, 'r.:: }t'er.,:,f.'..}Pr..'F•'i .4SG ''.0 - - :L 16) - PROJECT SITE - " . 1�.:;,. .,•- �� _ - . - _ ' - • i'T r Y,•7:: sa . � ;d: ,;9•, „I _ _ •OITY OF RENTON/ , . 'P.:r.. s,t: . :,'_. s • / -- FLOO_D HAZARD-AREA. :. BRI[JGE.UIVD CONSTRUCTION • • 1 . - '.. . • . . - . . .. . , , .. . . / r - ..- : -. - , . • • • .. . . - -- / . . . . .. S U H . - - - ,. ,.3 L=�1.4 } _.,1„. x:� , _P, a Sr1• F`'-,< 1, .J:=,r"-:e,s". ,"s;.:.;r_•,�. _ • FEMA-FLOODPLAIN MAP 1. Source:_ Federal Emergency Management.Agency(FEMA) FIGURE-A.1 - . • • Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage-Plan : - Sverdrup civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt,doc -- - - ::-_- ---: Appendix A-2 . : 12/18/96 APPENDIX A FLOODPLAIN INFORMATION This appendix contains floodway and floodplain information related to the project site. The information included consists of FEMA mapping and floodway profiles as well as topographic survey of the site shaded to indicate areas at or below FEMA floodplain elevation 16.4. Portion of FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map from Panel 328 of 650, 9/29/89 FEMA Flood Profile: Black river, Profile 44P FEMA Flood Profile: Springbrook Creek, Profile 45P FEMA Flood Profile: Springbrook Creek, Profile 46P Pre-Development Floodplain Post-Development Floodplain Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc Appendix A-1 12/19/96 APPENDICES Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0 1 3 747/22 1 0/dmrpt0l.doc Appendices-1 12/19/96 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SITE DEVELOPMENT Li=.-----....... _ f.....1.1 / : a ':'-14"°!. ' i' ' ---'-- — — --- 1 __,r 1„.. . , . , \ / Black 'iue 1 r 3 �_��s,.._,' . ,`,. " , _- BO 3 4 ;a 1 `�' Pumping Sta 1 r IL-----'----'-111L12 j �,; • g:_ ? 1.r ' *I r..,_) • •01 ,.,\..." 1 A-:‘',\",7\,,0,,-.'."N1/\_-_•\ -i•t't.A•".r.l.,b;':.\.,-,i;,-\1\.'-NV. p-I_a.rr1.e Power, 1 7 , `' 49 c If-'7'-'.4.-‘-_1 11i6.',;---i.-,.-,1,_4-i-'''.''.__-N_._-_..,,',i..„—.-.,--.-7.,,-1 t Plant 1 /a,'\ rv,1..50°...•\--. 9 r-..q....-i,,•a,),,S'n._,.,,.. ..Q-u's.,'\:.A' i..,:,,•.,,_,i4._...,,.-!_0..-.1.-.-i(_,-e;-,.-wi_.i..,-,,--,-;'.,;;I‘'I,,I P,(.P, \� tt wage -••sa f: ... — -t ,.•,::` �^. _"_ , °\ .jam..•--—' , 's'e- '`- _-- . .— 8 .szlf--J,..t, li .*.... ......4.... .....1Ln • :1;71'7. 1 ', '7 ,1-4---- -------4-1:-?, — 1 \ ,,_,., ,•6 �-, beta® , 1 t 1, .r L r67 �� .. '0`1 Si 1 ' s, , _ , , ._ �� 'Virr •liklini . ......„..,....„ A. lulu , '41 OJE T , , .. ( ■, l it 46 Mril 1 st - -- ' 'I i II � , ~ 1 111 -:, - - ,' _ T -. 114 it al'Iot 0. — '1 ak •'::1 �1l s u� I p� :•1 __ _ ,h P. k S, ' to y:;__ n• h . i..11 ' _ ?1 1 /i I I ]' 1 f rl, ��' -/� I y h • ; L% .,m -I 25 i 1 • 0 30 — lir `' )+6l I 6 = Tukwila Istil - . t Irk VICINITY MAP Source: USGS Renton Quadrangle FIGURE 4 • Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt.doc Figures-4 12/18/96 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 SITE DEVELOPMENT 1 tl\•,; " ‘....,-,_, ,.', r::, - . -t.i e. 7-,-,...,- •- ---, 5, V Clyde gri ow ..r.,..::. ,.,,,, , ,_ . , ;4 ,-t( - . 4. ! ,,,Fillii It ...` .,\..." 4,/,'; _••...\ , 1 1 *. 'I:,YSLI,P.71' -.J 2 " Seattle . -.„71'0,--1,1; .: , Medina c, se.l.i c..1.1 v'.;‘;40 i '1.Corn/0 Cal I3LON- _ _ tLeAitie 1-1,20340ve' W• :,,.. isewde I .„. DUVVi:Mith....71.7- -_-, - .:.. 7\16 __ -Weed- fluiirt 41) '':;(y•k. .; i . 09 00 '.00,,,,. , ) Inglewood, ii5Itiosie z. . NG,,,,,,00.z.%411.0til ,,,,, , !.. :3" Be levue E . • r I-- lell 1/3 Be II) ‘N. t.; F4 * , '- L.. - /Sitiein,003 , , -.\-.J-•8 • : I ,Pew--. WIT.'ft'.., n3.,•• n., ,,, '''', 8 4'"s' = ' 1% 4Eastga; i \t/h— - 3. ,,. •POOVE ,1'. ri6 .:4` „ IA' i All % illiFy.El a:T.97rd' ';UM•i*IN-...--..,-4Sia.kgmomi;-., ) island ,', , - 4. Hills .4,4 and 1 , i V 60TH Sr1,1 isrt 4. . 6 n NEWCASTIe., 1 \ •1E1 \ ,--• ;.:, - co„,cite .11 " ,. ...,..iCafil°0 • ,*.t.: ,,,:'' . I,L..,21 0. TP/1 e;mov, 4.4s, 4 40 Ir. • /I I c E WHY Issaquah, _ — + •Y0T4 ST • 95TH .. \ 4?. ... •. 24 *EN,. Center 1 as\ s, 1 EN Ls' s? Doorrn ,,,yolli .1 .,ria •.. . .,... . 1P 2 '''. V cm ,f,"• kv.:"^ I +I 1 , I CD - 10 .• i ' 1 tt MIAM ki;' et 421744N -1'''',• , . n'.'• Ell 4TH ST SE 128TH ST Renton .'.!......4,-, )1s.e,k N, s„1 F :iwy, Riverton;-- *."4. • rjrioi- ' •e 4. , 0 km a ,an 4%44 Burien152ND r...ano:e Hei: L ,,,,,, :in 1 ;1 a,* ST 0 rce,,liti., .,..-...... , ,. 2 rm, iPT.S.w.$ .•.1W .r:r---..('ILW ' !I ,;;`,,,i‘SEA-Tx 4,,, .' . (CD RENTON - .ARIE 11 .: li' COVE . ..i' mem `-L •s , INTL , 0 RPOR 1....,. :ii"; , • si .Fairwood .,...., , • Poor . 7.,' '. ,,,,,,a3 C3 Vashon 6 (i1.1)-1.:' , .t 2 , ' .11,1111,11P0 —."111111111111111 PETRo, 2 •)03TH ST '''' PROZI CT Normapnadr - ac° . ," • '2'''en' CD 204TH \ 20o0, t 7 ttl SI E \ Vashon Center, . CS g W; 41:*1" I a w t II I to Des 1 r s SI 201ITH ST v • I\! • 8 1. e MaPle w SW ., ',(10tale Moines'- 0,2 i- ' • ..7.4 •,,,valley 411)7.7 149A0 W ; \ Kent SE 240TH ST 54 240TH ST Burton , 4 I • ., gc4'"°"D :od,b,4d Zenith. n fl'.*. s ..,0 1-fighlr,1 41) teElt ST ero , 4 Dockton \s vr Con,n, , g „ORE.? • '• 1 ; z ,0 *, Cocl ! 3 .. .. re) ... - • cpc.. ,...! , 0 ,re esi( 4 4 " -- • , -,.- loyiGLEY , ..' - 5 i ,§". P A SSAGE s. 272ND ST MI - \ • 0l ,• Covin.,..n SE 276TH ST Sr, 4'1' i Redondo. i \ 5 277TH 1, C'- 53 • • 441 ) 7( (11 • . CbNGTOW"WY"RD a - - Pew 0 2 la .- w () 7 Attar Green River . z iico 4,-, .4 -\, Dosh „-------- fc ID 4 . 1 Community y ant / Point Dash• 6 .'. ar),...,* 3 - I • SE 3127H ST 5 41,t. \S'i.... AC A.„,- pan! ,...... I fl - ,,,,. 320TH ST 0 . v +CO P•rk r '• \ 1 Federal 42" i .4 pp 111,IITH ST SE . ...SLACK 0\6 -'0 4:0\.. lb ,OND ID cl,'' -, .Auburn ,,i,. . Pont 8 'woo-, ,.....,, ,,, W sw ' ` In tli ,.„,„„,,..10,.. . ' 25'--: —I 1 AUBURN S.ti , 1.4., --.. ... .-'41'• U:T".."1":AMOliki;°"14111" 1;,pn - Awe'-,,k- s4s I ler rest . UMW — .-- R. 0 /1. . eIw A M 417'I' i 1-,.. .104 ST SW % 4,..1.., Historical Kr1uSeu^ \, Ar.V1L NO ie t .,..r. ..... LOCATION MAP Source: Washington Official State Highway Map,WSDOT FIGURE 3 Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drorpt.doc Figures-3 12/18/96 Page 2 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET •ART 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS. REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT lX I Ch.4-DownstreamAnalysis Black River (P. 1) Pump Station * Upstream Analysis Nelson Place/lnngacres Way* 0 n 0 I-1 fl Additional Sheets Attatched * No effect on project PART 9 ESC:REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION IX I Sedimentation Facilities I X I Stabilize Exposed Surface IT Stabilized Construction Entrance ® Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities IX I Perimeter Runoff Control I X I Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris I X I Clearing and Grading Restrictions I X I Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities I X Cover Practices E] Flag Limits of NGPES I X I Construction Sequence 0 Other I= Other •ART 10' SURFACE WATER SYSTEM - - Grass Lined Channel 0 Tank ED Infiltration Method of Analysis 110 Pipe System IX I Vault El Depression SBUH "USER 1" I I Open Channel 0 Energy Dissapator = Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation 0 Dry Pond Ix I Wetland(cons tr u c t4 Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage IX 1 Wet Pond 0 Stream I 1 Regional Detention Compenatory storage is provided. Brief Description of System Operation See drainage report, sections IV and V_ Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation 0 Additional Sheets Attatched PART 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS. PART 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS (May require special structural review) 0 Drainage Easement I I Cast in Place Vault I XI Other Precast Vaults fl Access Easement I I Retaining Wall 0 Native Growth Protection Easement I I Rockery>4'High 0 Tract I I' Structural on Steep Slope fl Other ART 14 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site.Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attatchments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided /Z o G here is accurate. Sigma:lwe FIGURE 2 Page 1 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PART.2 PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT ENGINEER AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner Boeing ProjectName BCAG Headquarters Bldq. 25-2t Address p 0 Box 37n7, S 2R-71 Location 23 N. Phone Seattle, WA 981242207 Township Range 4 E. Lori Pitzer Project Engineer Section S 1/2 Sec.24 N 1/2 Sec.25 Company Roein g Project Size 12.5 AC Address Phone (20 6)544-5259 Upstream Drainage Basin Size Nel son PlAC93 AC I PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT.APPLICATION PART 4 OTHER PERMITS Subdivision 0 DOF/G HPA O Shoreline Management El Short Subdivision 0 COE 404 0 Rockery El Grading L DOE Dam Safety In Structural Vaults I X 1 Commercial I X I FEMA Floodplain ® Other Other El COE Wetlands 0 HPA PART a SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community City of Renton Drainage Basin Springbrook Creek PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 0 River I X I Floodplain Springbrook Creek, Zone AE ® Stream Springhrook Creek (adjacent) [X] Wetlands Urhan Dtsturbed El Critical Stream Reach 0 Seeps/Springs ' El Depressions/Swales El High Groundwater Table 0 Lake [ Groundwater Recharge 0 Steep Slopes Li Other El Lakeside/Erosion Hazard PART 7 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities Urban Disturbed 1.5% maximum low/minimal x 0 Additional Sheets Attatched 1/90 FIGURE 1 FIGURES Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 0 1 3 74 7/22 1 0/drnrpt01.doc Figures 12/19/96 VII TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION/EROSION CONTROL A. Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC)Plan The TESC plan is designed to comply with Chapter 5 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as adopted by the City of Renton. The first detail sheet in the TESC plans will list the standard City of Renton Erosion Control Notes (from the Drafting Standards) as well as requirements from the KCSWDM Reference - 9 Standard Plan Notes, as applicable. Since the notes are based on two independent sources and often have the same intent, they are organized to match the recommended construction sequence as shown at the end of Reference - 9. A draft of the first detail sheet in the Erosion/Sedimentation Control Drawings is included in Appendix I. The complete TESC plans will be submitted as part of the Demolition Permit Application, scheduled for early 1997. B. Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control(TESC) Calculations In accordance with the requirements of the City of Renton Drafting Standards - Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control, calculations'for a typical sediment trap and typical sediment pond are included herein, see Appendix I. These calculations comply with Chapter 5 of the KCSWDM as adopted by the City of Renton. Construction plans detailing the typical sediment trap and pond are also included Appendix I. To ensure that sediment laden runoff does not leave the site, the sediment pond is based on inflow from a 10-year 24-hour design storm (rather than a 2-year 24-hour storm) and is situated to collect runoff from the sediment traps before discharging treated flows to the CSTC Main Pond. C. NPDES Requirements Since this project will disturb more than five acres of total area, the applicant will be applying for coverage under the Washington State Department of Ecology's Baseline General Permit for Stormwater. The KCSWDM indicates that the requirements of Chapter 5 are equivalent to those required by the state through the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (DOE, 1982). The applicant will file a Notice of Intent (NOI) at least 30 days prior to the start of construction, and publish a public notice,possibly along with the SEPA notices. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc VII-1 12/19/96 - I �f With the low permeability soils typical of this site, the geotechnical engineer estimated that the maximum inflow to the CSTC Main Pond from groundwater would be on the order of 300 gpm, or 0.67 cfs. The groundwater regime at this site consists of an upper perched aquifer and a lower capped aquifer starting at elevation -1.5 that has a slight artesian pressure. The design of the proposed stormwater treatment pond is intended to excavate pond while keeping the cap on the underlying aquifer. The upper perched aquifer should not be significantly altered as the existing site has channels that run throughout the site at elevations approaching the proposed surface water elevation of the lake. I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc VI-3 12/19/96 When a 100 year storm flow occurs in Springbrook Creek, overtopping of the sill will occur and the site could be flooded to elevation 16.4. If this were to occur, the CSTC site would provide more storage than pre-CSTC construction conditions provided. Additionally, broadening of the overflow sill allows greater flows for longer periods than under pre-CSTC construction conditions. As reported in the CSTC Site Development TIR, modeling the pre-construction sill dimensions and areas in combination with a 50-year on-site design storm and 100-year flow in Springbrook Creek indicates the maximum elevation achieved on-site would have been 15.2 feet. In contrast, existing conditions (due to construction of the CSTC project) allow approximately 20 acre feet of additional storage on the site and allow flooding to elevation 16.4. C. Proposed Floodplain Conditions The proposed floodplain is detailed in Appendix A. This project displaces approximately 6 acre feet of floodplain volume between elevation 13 and 16.4. However, as explained in the previous paragraphs,the CSTC project increased the total floodplain storage by 56 acre feet at or below elevation - 16.0. As with the CSTC project, the proposed building floor slab will be located a minimum of two feet above the FEMA floodplain elevation. A more detailed stage-storage analysis will be provided in the final drainage report indicating that compensatory storage has been provided at appropriate elevations on the CSTC site. D. Groundwater Influence The existing groundwater elevations on the site vary from location to location. These elevations are shown in Appendix H. The existing soils on the site have the following typical soil moisture characteristics (as revealed in testing by Soil and Plant Laboratory, Bellevue) Soil Characteristics Water Holding Infiltration Capacity Soil Type Rate(In/Hr) (In. H2O/Ft. Soil) Sandy loam 0.50 2.2 Silt loam 0.33 3.0 Clay loam 0.25 3.4 _I ,I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc VI-2 12/19/96 VI FLOODPLAIN AND GROUNDWATER INFORMATION A. Floodplain Conditions Prior to the CSTC Project According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map Panel 328 of 650 and Flood Profile 45P for Springbrook Creek,the 100-year floodplain elevation in the vicinity of this project is 16.4 feet based on National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929. The FEMA map showing existing floodplain at elevation 16.4 is detailed in Appendix A, Figure A.1. Some discrepancy with actual conditions exists, as shown in Figure A.2, which is a site topographic survey of the site shaded to depict actual areas at or below elevation 16.4. Prior to construction of the Boeing CSTC project, the existing Longacres Office Park site had a total floodplain storage volume of approximately 89 acre-feet between elevation 9.0 and 16.4. However, some of that storage was not connected with the bank of Springbrook Creek due to topography, thereby reducing the actual floodplain storage to approximately 59 acre feet. This is detailed in Figure 25 of the CSTC Site Development TIR. Prior to construction at the CSTC site, an existing outlet culvert with a tide gate prevented Creek inflow to the site. However,the site had an existing bank, or sill, located approximately above the outlet culvert and allowed flow into the site when the Creek elevation exceeded elevation 14.3. The area of the sill was approximately 71 square feet, and allowed a maximum of 475 cfs into the site. This capacity was determine considering that the flow within Springbrook Creek was just past its peak and starting to drop. This amount of flow would have inundated the entire site, flooding all connected areas to elevation 16.4 even without any on-site stormwater storage at the time of flooding. B. Existing Floodplain Conditions Existing floodplain conditions are those created by construction of the CSTC project. The CSTC project increased floodplain storage to 115 acre feet at or below elevation 16.0, as detailed in Figure 25 of the CSTC Site Development TIR . Significant storage begins at elevation 8.5, and all of the storage is connected to the proposed sill. The Springbrook Creek outfall is now protected with a 36-inch elastomeric check valve preventing backflow into the site as long as the Creek remains below elevation 14.3. The overflow sill along the bank of Springbrook Creek is located at the southeastern end of the outlet stream, and forms the public walkway. The sill is further integrated with the landscape since the slope is bioengineered to prevent erosion. The sill cross section was increased to 230 square feet to accommodate nearly twice the flow of pre-construction conditions. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Ina. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc VI-1 12/19/96 The 8-inch outlet pipes from these catch basins provide over 1.0 PP cfs maximum capacity based on a minimum slope of 0.60%. The largest 25-year peak flow carried by 12-inch pipes within the parking lots is approximately 1.9 cfs; 100-year events create peak flows up to 2.2 cfs. Maximum capacity of the 12-inch pipes at critical locations, under gravity flow conditions, is at least 2.1 cfs based on a slope of 0.35%. All locations upstream of these points carry lesser flows with equal capacity pipe. Where 18-inch pipe is used, peak flows up to 4.1 cfs are expected during 100-year events, a capacity of 5.1 cfs is provided based on a 0.20% slope. Additional conveyance system calculations are provided in Appendix G. 2. Grass-Lined Roadside Ditches The private roadway located parallel to the future Oakesdale Avenue alignment conveys runoff through a series of grass lined roadside ditches. The ditches will be hydraulically designed in accordance with Section 4 of the KCSWDM, and will be hydroseeded to provide some degree of biofiltration. These ditches will route flows to the proposed wetpond just west of the proposed roadway prior to release to the existing practice track ditches. Design calculations for each of the grass-lined roadside ditches are included in Appendix G. - I I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc V-3 12/19/96 2. Parkway Loop Road Extension The extension of the parkway loop road to the west end of SW 16th Street will require installation of additional storm drainage facilities. Roadway runoff will be collected in a curb and gutter and then routed to catch basins. Runoff from the eastern end of this roadway will be piped to the existing CSTC drainage system just north of Pond "A". The remainder of the extension road runoff will be piped to a grit removal chamber similar to those found in the parking areas. A control manhole just prior to the vault will divert flows in excess of the water quality design storm peak flow around the wet vault. Just downstream, another control manhole diverts flow in excess of the 2-year event around the second stage CSTC Pond "A". From the second stage pond, flow will pass to the CSTC Main Pond. 3. Private Road The private roadway located parallel to the future Oakesdale Avenue alignment conveys runoff through a series of grass lined roadside ditches. These ditches will route flows to a proposed wetpond, which in turn discharges to the existing cross culvert under the existing road being replaced during this project. The existing cross culvert in turn drains to existing open channels within the practice track which eventually outfall to Springbrook Creek. Design calculations for the roadside ditches are included in Appendix G. B. Conveyance System Analysis and Design: The proposed conveyance system for the project site is designed to conform with Chapter 4 of the KCSWDM which provides approved methods and criteria for hydraulic analysis and design of storm drainage facilities. 1. Pipe System The predominant pipe material used throughout the site is reinforced concrete pipe, with unreinforced 8-inch diameter concrete used to connect inlets, rainwater leaders, and catch basins to system laterals. The system laterals range in size from 12-inch to 24-inch diameter. Type 1P catch basins are used in all parking and roadway areas, with maximum contributing areas of 5,000 square feet. Typical maximum flows for such inlets are 0.21 cfs and 0.24 cfs for 25- and 100-year 24-hour storms, respectively. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc V-2 12/19/96 V CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Proposed Conveyance System Overview 1. Building 25-20 Site Area All parking lot runoff will be collected in Type 1P catch basins. From the catch basins storm water runoff will be directed to a grit removal chamber, or wet vault. This vault will serve both as the first stage wetpond and a sediment removal chamber. A control manhole just prior to the vault will divert flows in excess of the water quality design storm peak flow around the wet vault. Following the wet vault is the second stage wetpond. A second control manhole is placed upstream of the second stage pond to diverts flow in excess of the 2-year event around the second stage pond. From the second stage pond, flow will pass into the third stage wetpond. The third stage wetpond for this site will be the existing CSTC Main Pond. Flows from the Building 25-20 roof drains, landscape yard drains and edge drains will be routed directly to the CSTC Main Pond. These flows would normally also bypass the third stage pond, but the CSTC Main Pond provides significantly more detention and surface area than required by the drainage code. This excess detention is provided so as to maintain floodplain storage volumes. From the third stage wetpond, flow exits through the existing constructed stream and then enters extensive marsh (delta) area and outfalls to Springbrook Creek through an outlet control structure. The CSTC Site outfall is made up of a large precast concrete vault structure housing a timber weir and fish screen which directs flow under a public pathway and vegetated bank through a 36-inch ductile iron pipe with an elastomeric check valve at a riprap-protected outfall. More detailed explanations of the CSTC Site and SW 16th Street conveyance systems can be found in Section V of the CSTC Site Development TIR. - I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc V-1 12/19/96 existing CSTC drainage system just north of Pond "A" and upstream of the diversion manhole, allowing second stage treatment of the low flows. The remainder of the extension road runoff will be piped to a grit removal chamber similar to those found in the parking areas. A control manhole just prior to the vault will divert flows in excess of the water quality design storm peak flow around the wet vault. Just downstream, another control manhole diverts flow in excess of the 2-year event around the second stage CSTC Pond "A". From the second stage pond, flow will pass to the CSTC Main Pond. 3. Private Road • The private roadway located parallel to the future Oakesdale Avenue alignment conveys runoff through a series of grass lined roadside ditches. Although the ditches do not meet all criteria of biofiltration or water quality systems, such ditches do provide significant water quality benefits. These ditches will direct flows to a proposed wetpond located near the southwest corner of the practice track and east of the private road. The wetpond will receive all flows from the road, as lack of topography precludes efficient bypass structures. The wetpond will have a surface area of approximately 1500 square feet, which is 150 percent larger than required by code. The volume of the pond will be at least equivalent to the total volume of the contributing water quality storm event. The pond will discharge to an existing cross culvert under the existing road being improved during this project. The existing cross culvert in turn drains to existing open channels within the practice track which eventually outfall to Springbrook Creek. Wetpond design calculations are included in Appendix F. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-12 12/19/96 These stormwater wetpond/detention ponds provide surface areas in excess of that required by code, resulting in post-development release rates that are considerably smaller than under pre- development conditions. These large wetpond/detention ponds provide storage area for extreme events such as the 100-year, 7-day storm while maximizing water quality benefits. Dr. Horner analyzed the performance of the adjacent CSTC site stormwater system during the design process on the basis of expected removal efficiencies for total suspended solids (TSS), total phosphorus (TP), zinc (Zn), lead (Pb) and copper (Cu). The table below summarizes the KCSWDM code requirements versus expected removal efficiencies: Analysis of CSTC Stormwater System Pollutant King County Predicted CSTC Type Requirement Performance TSS 67% - 87% 99% TP 32% 61% Zn 48% - 68% 65%- 73% Pb 67% - 87% 95% - 96% Cu 48% - 68% 65% -73% Additional discussion of the water quality system as it relates to conveyance can be found in Section V, Part A of this Report. Appendix E contains water quality data derived from samples taken from Springbrook Creek and the site prior to any Boeing development. This information shows the relatively poor water quality of the creek and some on-site locations. The on-site retention/detention and biofiltration system will improve the quality of runoff leaving the project site and will help improve the waters quality of Springbrook Creek. 2. Parkway Loop Road Extension This proposed roadway extension will be treated by a system similar to that of the Building 25-20 site area which utilizes a three stage wetpond/detention system. Roadway runoff will be collected in a curb and gutter and then routed to Type 1P catch basins. These catch basins provide extra sump depth to retain sediments. Runoff from the eastern end of this roadway will be piped to the Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc N-11 12/19/96 E. Water Quality System Water quality controls are incorporated into the project design in accordance with the KCSWDM as adopted by the City of Renton and correspondence with Richard R. Horner, Ph.D., of the Environmental Engineering and Science Department at the University of Washington, including Technical Report No. 98 (included in Appendix E). Based on these reports and the planned campus atmosphere for the site, extensive stormwater wetpond/detention ponds have been created within the site landscaping. 1. Building 25-20 Site Area The proposed stormwater system in the Building 25-20 site area implements a series of facilities for water quality and quantity control. Approximately 25% of the site is covered by landscaping, and the landscaping will include trees which have a higher uptake of water than other ground cover. The landscape is planned to provide a roughened edge (of wetland species) as water surfaces are approached, providing buffering of water flowing from landscaped surfaces. Within the parking areas are Type 1P catch basins which provide a deep sump for retaining sediment. The catch basin outlet will include a trap (an inverted elbow) to prevent floatables from entering the storm drainage system, and reduce the discharge of oils. From the catch basins, which are set off-line from the system laterals to reduce resuspension of sediments, storm water runoff is directed to a proposed grit removal chamber, or wet vault. This vault will serve both as the first stage wetpond and a sediment removal chamber. A control manhole just prior to the vault will divert flows in excess of the water quality design storm peak flow around the wet vault. This will prevent high flows from resuspending the sediments contained in the wet vault. Following the wet vault is the proposed second stage wetpond, which is a pond designed in accordance with the KCSWDM, with wetland plantings to improve water quality. Another control manhole is placed upstream of the second stage pond to diverts flow in excess of the 2-year event around the second stage pond. From the second stage pond, flow will pass into the existing third stage wetpond (CSTC Main Pond)to further improve water quality and provide detention. From the CSTC Main Pond, flow enters the existing constructed stream with wetland plantings both in and around the channel. The stream then passes through the extensive marsh (delta) area and outfalls to Springbrook Creek through an outlet control structure. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-10 12/19/96 4. Summary of Hydrologic Analysis A varietyof tables and figures have been created to summarize the -- g hydrologic and hydraulic analyses completed for this project. They are in Appendix D. - I i Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-9 12/19/96 j a. Closed Depression Analysis, Case 1 The first closed depression analysis case was previously modeled in Section I of the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992. The model assumed the site is a closed depression due to high water levels in Springbrook Creek. The basis for the first case assumed changing elevations in the creek during a 100-year storm in the Springbrook Creek Basin and a 50-year 24-hour design storm on the site itself. All of the on-site runoff volume was assumed to be retained on-site due to the differential head between the creek and the site at the elastomeric check valve at the Springbrook creek outfall. The valve precludes backwatering from the creek until creek elevations exceed elevation 14.3. The existing banks of Springbrook Creek form a sill which is at or above elevation 14.3. This set of circumstances yields a maximum water surface elevation that matches the creek elevation of 16.4. The sill weir for the existing site has an area of 70.6 square feet. The proposed weir has an area of 272.3 square feet. The proposed sill weir will allow approximately four times more water to enter the site, compared to the existing situation. b. Closed Depression Analysis, Case 2 The second situation studied did not include overtopping from Springbrook Creek, or outflow to Springbrook Creek through the check valve. Such a situation might occur if Springbrook Creek was flowing sufficiently high to prevent on-site runoff from draining through the check valve, but not high enough to overflow the flood sill at elevation 14.3. This situation was studied for the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year 24-hour storms, as well as the 100-year 7-day storm. The maximum water surface elevations were 12.1 and 15.2 feet during the 100-year 24-hour storm and the 100-year 7-day events, respectively. Therefore, the 100-year 7-day event would overtop the overflow sill and enter the creek, at a flow rate estimated to be 43 cfs. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-8 12/19/96 The reduction in inflow rates, the change in rainfall distribution and the change in computation software result in a difference between the reported values in the CSTC TIR post-development conditions and the pre-development conditions of this Report. To assist the reader, these values are compared in Table D.1 of Appendix D. The net result is that actual inflows to the CSTC Main Pond will be considerably less than those reported in the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992, mostly due to elimination of the Tukwila drain overflow. To clarify a statement on page 20 of the CSTC TIR, due to redesign of the SW 16th Street drainage plan, the CSTC does receive runoff from the roadway, and this runoff is included in the existing conditions for this project. 2. Hydrograph Routing All post-development hydrographs were routed through the proposed Building 25-20 site and subsequently to the existing CSTC Main Pond. The results of these analyses are summarized in Appendix D. As was the case with the CSTC Site development model, the post-development discharge rates are much lower than the pre-development discharge rates. To prove this point, a hydrologic "baseline" was created to represent the. Longacres Office Park site prior to any Boeing development at a location representing the CSTC Site outfall at Springbrook Creek. The baseline will be useful in the future should additional sitework be proposed. The baseline can be compared with post-development release rates following construction of this proposed project (and including the improvements made during the CSTC project). This comparison is shown in Table D.1 of Appendix D. 3. Closed Depression Analysis As noted in Special Requirement #7 - Closed Depressions (Section 2, Part B, of this Report), this site has also been modeled as a closed depression to determine water elevations during high flow events in Springbrook Creek. Two cases have been modeled and are described in the following paragraphs. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Ina. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-7 12/19/96 development conditions and the pre development conditions in this Report. 3. Design Storm Precipitation Values I , Total precipitation values for each design storm event were interpolated from isopluvial maps the KCSWDM, Tables 3.5.1C to 3.5.1H, as noted below: Precipitation Design Values Design Storm Event Total Precipitation Water Quality 0.67 (P2/3) 2-year, 24-hour 2.00 5-year, 24-hour 2.40 10-year, 24-hour 2.90 25-year, 24-hour 3.40 50-year, 24-hour 3.45 100-year; 24-hour 3.90 100-year, 7-day 9.80 D. Retention/Detention System ' I 1. Overview This project site drains to the existing CSTC Main Pond. The Main Pond was designed and intended to form the downstream end of the detention system for ultimate buildout of the Longacres Office Park Site. Although the CSTC Main Pond was not sized to. provide detention for all the contributing area of this ultimate buildout, it does provide significantly more detention than required for the existing contributing areas (generally the CSTC Site). Section XI of the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992 discusses the extensive detention volume provided and provides associated graphics. In addition, Section II, Part B of this Report provides rationale for eliminating the overflow from the 48-inch Tukwila Drain to the CSTC Main Pond. Elimination of this overflow reduces peak flows to the Main Pond by nearly 22 cfs during a 100-year 24-hour design storm event (see Table 19 of the CSTC TIR). This reduction in peak inflow alone more than compensates for the runoff directed to the Main Pond through construction of the proposed Building 25-20 project. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc IV-6 12/19/96 Post-development hydrographs were developed for each of the basins for the Water Quality Event, the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour event and the 100-year 7-day event. A summary of these hydrographs and site parameters used to generate them are detailed in Appendix C. Detailed information is also provided in Appendix C, including soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use and time of concentration parameters and detailed basin(hydrograph)reports. C. Hydrologic Analysis 1. Hydrograph Method In accordance with Chapter 3 "Hydrologic Analysis" of the KCSWDM, the hydrologic analyses in this Report are based on a single-event SCS-type model known as the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) method along with the User 1 design storm rainfall distributions. This design storm hyetograph was interpolated by King County Surface Water Management Division staff, and resolved to 10-minute intervals. Discussions with King County staff indicate that the distribution shown on page 3.5.1-2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual (and termed Type 1A) is actually a slightly modified version of the SCS Type 1A, and they consider it the "User 1" distribution. All analyses in this report utilize the User 1 distribution, which is identical to the KCSWDM's definition of a Type 1A distribution. 2. Computation Software All SCS runoff curve numbers are based on Table 3.5.2B of the KCSWDM, and are tabulated and combined for input into the hydrology software with a spreadsheet created by Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Time of concentration calculations are also computed by a spreadsheet, completed in accordance with page 3.5.2-5 of the KCSWDM. Hydrologic analyses were completed using WaterWorksTm hydrology software, Release 2.8. References to the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992 are made throughout this Report. For example, post development conditions of the CSTC TIR now form part of the existing downstream conditions for this site. However, the CSTC TIR utilized the King County HYD program for all hydrologic analyses. Since the two software packages yield different hydrographs with the same input parameters, there is a slight difference in reported values between the CSTC TIR post Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-5 12/19/96 I � - B. Developed Site Hydrology The post-development drainage basins are shown in Appendix C. Three of the pre-development basins are affected by this project; Basins 3, 4 and 5. For post-development conditions, Basins 3, 4 and 5 are renamed Basin A, B, and V,respectively,under post-developed conditions. 1. Basin A- CSTC Site Basin { Basin A represents the post-development conditions of pre-development Basin 3. The majority of the project site will be directed to Basin A, which includes the CSTC Main Pond. Additionally, most of pre-development Basin 4 will be rerouted to Basin A following this project since the pipeline crossing the site will be demolished to accommodate the proposed site infrastructure. This redirection of on-site runoff is in accordance with earlier drainage plans for ultimate buildout. Basin A total area is 152 acres. 2. Basin B - South Main Track Basin Basin B represents the post-development conditions of pre-development Basin 4. Since most of the runoff from Basin 4 is proposed to be redirected to Basin A, the total contributing area of Basin B is greatly reduced. Basin B will consist only of the proposed private road on the Oakesdale Avenue alignment and the practice track site. Some of the private road will effectively redirect runoff from pre-development Basin 5 to Basin B. Basin B total area is 12 acres. 3. Basin C - Sales Pavilion Basin Basin C represents the post-development conditions of Basin 5. Basin C is smaller than re- pre-development pre- , Basin 5 because the proposed private road on the Oakesdale Avenue alignment has associated roadside ditches which will flow to the north to Basin B. Basin C total area is 15 acres. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc IV-4 12/19/96 4. Basin 4 - South Main Track Basin This subbasin was previously defined in Section II of the Draft Longacres Park Floodplain and Stormwater Report, Sverdrup Corporation, dated April 30, 1991. As in that report, it is still defined as Basin 4, and includes 106.41 acres draining the southern half of the main racing oval to a 36-inch CMP running under the practice track. From this point flow travels through an open channel then to another 36-inch CMP under a narrow access road along Springbrook Creek's bank. The outfall to Springbrook Creek was at one time protected with a tide gate that has since been removed. 5. Basin 5 - Sales Pavilion Basin This subbasin was previously defined in Section II of the Draft Longacres Park Floodplain and Stormwater Report, Sverdrup Corporation, dated April 30, 1991. As in that report, it is defined as Basin 5 and includes 19.06 acres around the Breeders Pavilion. This basin drains via sheet flow to an existing 24-inch RCP under the future Oakesdale alignment to a ditch along the south end of the training track which meanders to an outfall along Springbrook Creek. 6. Basin 6 - South Meadow Basin This subbasin was previously defined in Section II of the Draft Longacres Park Floodplain and Stormwater Report, Sverdrup Corporation, dated April 30, 1991. This project does not affect Basin 6. Pre-development hydrographs were developed for each of the impacted basins for the Water Quality Event, the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour event and the 100-year 7-day event. A summary of these hydrographs and site parameters used to generate them are detailed in Appendix B. Detailed information is also provided in Appendix B, including soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use and time of concentration parameters and detailed basin(hydrograph)reports. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-3 12/19/96 As discussed in Section II, Part B (2) of this Report, there is no longer any need to accommodate flow from the Tukwila Basin on the Boeing Longacres Office Park Site. More detail about operation of the Tukwila Drain is provided in Section VII of the CSTC Site Development TIR. 2. Basin 2 -North of SW 16th Street Basin This subbasin was previously defined in Section II of the Draft Longacres Park Floodplain and Stormwater Report, Sverdrup Corporation, dated April 30, 1991. This project does not affect Basin 2. 3. Basin 3 -North Main Track Basin This subbasin was previously defined in Section IV of the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992, but was defined as Basin C following completion of the CSTC project. Since the work proposed in the TIR has been completed, it now forms the basis for existing conditions for this project and again is called Basin 3. This Basin covers 76.4 acres and contains two study areas which drain to the Boeing CSTC Main Pond. The first area is the CSTC Site and the second is a portion of SW 16th Street. The CSTC site encompasses 47.7 acres to the south of SW 16th Street, and the SW 16th Street study area totals 3.1 acres. The remaining 25.6 acres are made up of the northern portion of the previously demolished main racing oval and infield which drains overland to the CSTC Main Pond. The CSTC Site outfall is made up of a large precast concrete vault structure housing a timber weir and fish screen which directs flow under a public pathway and vegetated bank through a 36-inch ductile iron pipe with an elastomeric check valve at a riprap-protected outfall. More detailed explanations of the CSTC Site and SW 16th Street conveyance systems can be found in Section V of the CSTC Site Development TIR. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc IV-2 12/19/96 IV RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. ExistingSite Hydrology Y gJ' The Boeing Building 25-20 project site is located at Longacres Office Park in the City of Renton. The project site is located between the Green River Channel on the west and the Springbrook Creek Channel on the east. To the immediate north is the Boeing CSTC Site and to the south are the foundations of previous horse barns, horse barns and the Breeders Pavilion. The 12.5 acre 25-20 Building site development itself includes remnants of the previous horse racing facility, such as horse barn foundations, racing oval, parking areas and existing utilities. The site is relatively level with elevations generally between 13 and 20 based on USGS 1929 Sea Level Datum. The pre-development drainage subbasins impacted or connected with this site are shown in Appendix B. Three of the subbasins lie within the Longacres/Office Park property, while the Tukwila Drainage Basin lies to the west of the property. 1. Basin 1 -Tukwila Drainage Basin As discussed in Section VII, Part A, of the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992, the Tukwila Drainage Basin is a 92.9 acre drainage subbasin located outside the Boeing property limits, located to the northwest of the site and bounded on the east by the Burlington Northern Railroad (BNRR) and the West Valley Highway to the west. The basin's southerly limits are approximately SW 27th Street while the northerly limits are about 400 feet north of I-405. Tukwila Basin flow is generally overland in large vegetated swales and an existing 2 foot by 5 foot concrete box culvert along South 158th Street under the Union Pacific Railroad. Runoff from this basin enters the northwest portion of the CSTC Site from the west under the railroad via a 24-inch culvert which restricts eastward flow to 18 cfs. This flow restriction causes surface water to pond in the Tukwila Basin, west of the BNRR tracks. Downstream of this point, flow enters Basin 3 (on Boeing Longacres Office Park property) through an 18-inch, storm drain before reaching the more recently constructed 48-inch storm drain (Tukwila Drain) generally located within the SW 16th Street right-of-way. . The 48-inch pipeline discharges to Springbrook Creek through the west abutment of the SW 16th Street Bridge at the creek, and includes an elastomeric backwater valve which prevents "reverse" flow from the creek back into the Tukwila Basin when creek elevations are high. ti- Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc IV-1 12/19/96 17. Technical Information Report on the Floodplain/Stormwater System for Customer Services Training Center Site Development, Support Facilities and SW 16th Street, Renton, Washington. Sverdrup Corporation, October, 1992. 18. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 404 Clean Water Act Alternatives Analysis. Sverdrup Civil,Inc.,November, 1994. 19. Manual for Monitoring & Maintenance of Water Quality in Stormwater Ponds & Wetlands at the Boeing CSTC, L.C. Lee & -- I Associates, Inc.,November 14, 1994. I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt0l.doc III-7 12/19/96 r I 4. King County Department of Public Works Green River Management Agreement, July 18, 1985. 5. City of Tukwila, Nelson Place/Longacres Drive Basin Drainage Study. Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc., December, 1986. 6. City of Tukwila, Nelson Place/Longacres Way Storm Drainage System Preliminary Design. Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc., I I June, 1988. 7. King County, Washington FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Four Volumes, revised September 29, 1989. 8. City of Tukwila, Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., May, 1990. 9. Environmental Site Assessment Broadacres Property Renton, Washington, Volume I. Landau Associates, Inc., August 31, 1990. 10. City of Renton, Valley Drainage Study, 1991. 11. An Analysis of the Distribution and Jurisdictional Status of Waters of the United States Including Wetlands, at Longacres Park, Renton, Washington. L.C. Lee & Associates, Inc., January 3, 1991. 12. Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington, for Boeing Support Services. GeoEngineers Inc., January 23, 1991. 13. City of Renton Storm Water Utility, East Side Green River Watershed Plan - Current Conditions Document, October 1991. 14. Water Quality Monitoring and Quality Assurance Project Plan for ; the Black River Water Quality Management. Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., October 10, 1991. 15. Draft Flood Plain and Storm Water Report for Longacres Park Site Development. Sverdrup Corporation, April 30, 1991. 16. City of Renton Surface Water Utility Technical Memorandum; Boeing CSTC Facility Floodplain Analysis Review, R.W. Beck & Associates, September 1992. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc III-6 12/19/96 A Green River flow of 12,000 cfs is equated to elevation 19.0 downstream of the pump station. The pump room floor elevation is 25.0 NGVD. Since all upstream flow must be pumped the electric pumps are automated by float switches. The larger diesel pumps must be manually started and are used as required to pump out the storage pond. Trash racks are cleaned periodically depending on the debris build-up. There have been some flap gate failures with the rocker arm breaking off However, the pump bays can be isolated from backflow with stoplogs. A small fish ladder is operated 24 hours a day during the upstream migration period from September through January. Between April and June 15 the downstream migration is accommodated by an air lift chamber. A simplified fish counter consisting of a paddle in the upstream migration trough counts electronically the number of fish passing. Historical fish counts are as follows: Black River Fish Counts Season Number of Fish 83-84 155 84-85 119 85-86 47 86-87 82 87-88 166 88-89 95 89-90 77 90-91 69 E. Previous Studies Numerous studies and report have been written about the area in the vicinity of Longacres Office Park. Some of the more pertinent studies are as follows: 1. Soil Conservation Service P-1 and P-9 Channel studies. 2. FEMA Flood Insurance Study of Renton, November, 1980. 3. U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers Green River Flood Reduction Study, 1984. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc Ill-5 12/19/96 determination of a 100-year backwater elevation of 11.6 to 13.1 depending on a reduced pumping level of 400 cfs after Green River has exceeded 12,000 cfs at the bridge site. The Soil Conservation Service has studied potential improvements to_Springbrook Creek, referred to as the P-1 Channel. The improvements planned south of SW 16th Street include possible widening and realignment of the channel, improvement of Panther Creek (P-9 channel) for fisheries values, and associated cleanup efforts. Panther Creek flows into Springbrook to the east of the site at approximately the future location of SW 19th Street. The recently completed "East Side Green River Watershed Plan - Current Conditions Document", shows a high water elevation of 8.9 or 9.9 at SW 16th Street (depending on simulation assumptions). D. Black River The Black River as it exists today is 1 mile in length and its confluence with the Green River is 11.0 miles above Puget Sound. A pumping station is located on the Black River .3 miles above its confluence with the Green River. The watershed area at the pump station is 24.8 square miles which includes the 21.9 square miles of Springbrook Creek. The pumping station has no gravity flow provisions. All upstream flows must be pumped up to a gravity open channel which discharges to the Green River. The rated pumping capacity of the station is 2,945 cfs. There are eight main pumps with two of the larger currently mothballed and not used. There are five diesel pumps rated at 514 cfs, one at 225 cfs and two automated electric pumps at 75 cfs each. The FEMA study was based on 875 cfs as the pump station's firm capacity of maximum discharge. The pump station has a forebay (called the P-1 pond storage area) that was recently expanded by the excavation of approximately 1 million cubic yards. i ! The 1989 FEMA study indicates that peak outflows from the pump station have not exceeded 525 cfs (November, 1986 event with nominal P-1 pond storage). On March 4, 1991, the pump station operator indicated he was pumping at a rate of 750 cfs. Under standard operating conditions the maximum water surface elevation of the P-1 storage pond is elevation 3.5 NGVD. High water alarms are activated when the level reaches elevation 4.5. Since operation began in 1972, the highest upstream elevations observed was 7.0 NGVD and 18.7 downstream of the pump station. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc 111-4 s 12/19/96 • C. Springbrook Creek The confluence of Springbrook Creek with the Black River is established as the upstream end of the P-1 storage pond of the Black River. This confluence point is 0.6 miles above the Black River'P-1 pumping station and 1 mile above the confluence of the Black River with Green River. The watershed area of Springbrook Creek is 21.9 square miles with the following peak discharges: Peak Discharges CFS at Confluence Design Storm Event Peak Discharge Rate (cfs) 10-year 590(1) 50-year 930 100-year 1,100 500-year 1,550 (1) (1) Decreased 300 cfs due to P-1 pumping station. In the area of the project site the 100-year flood elevation is indicated as 16.4 at SW 16th Street and 16.0 at SW 23rd Street. The FEMA flood boundary map and the site contours as field mapped are shown in Appendix A. The flooding elevation of 16.4 is obtained by assuming that the P-1 pump station is restricted to a pumping rate of 300 cfs when a 100-year flood occurs on Springbrook Creek. This flowrate results from the small 225 cfs diesel and one of the two 75 cfs electric pumps being on line. Although the guidelines for operation of the station would allow the second 75 cfs electric pump to be operating, it was considered out of service. This restriction is considered due to flooding on the Green River, and in accordance with the guidelines, noted above, for the P-1 pump station operation. The highest elevation occurs in the forebay when the flood flow is less than the maximum of 1,400 cfs, during the downward leg of the hydrograph at a flow rate of approximately 785 cfs. This high water elevation is 15.0. This elevation is used in a HEC-2 (Hydraulic Engineering Model for Floodway Water Surface Profiles) to generate upstream water levels. This results in an elevation of 16.42 at the SW 16th Street bridge. The FEMA data does not include provisions for the SW 16th Street Bridge with a 60-foot span compared to the old span of 36 feet. It also does not include the new multi-barrel box culvert under Grady Way, the new box culvert constructed under I-405 or the recently completed P-1 Channel cross section up to the SW 16th Street bridge. The low girder of the SW 16th Street bridge is elevation 14.79 based on a Soil Conservation Service Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt01.doc 111-3 12/19/96 ' I Flood profiles of the Green River with and without levees generally indicate the same elevation of 23.2 feet in the vicinity of the CSTC site, opposite S. 158th Street (Longacres Way). Elevation 23.2 is significantly below the West Valley Highway which is at approximately elevation 25 to 29 adjacent to the project site. Therefore, floodwater from the Green River will not enter the site during a 500 year or lesser flood. On July 18, 1985, the Green River Management Agreement was entered into by King County and the cities of Auburn, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila. This agreement generally outlines and provides guidelines for improvements, monitoring, operations, and financial responsibilities. Important operating procedures are presented for the P-1 pump station, including maximum pumping rates from Springbrook Creek/Black River as follows: Black River(P-1) Pumping Operations Limits Measured Green River Black River (P-1) Flows at Auburn Maximum Allowable Pumping Gage (cfs) (cfs) Less than 9,000 cfs As required 9,000 cfs 2,945 cfs (1) 9,500 cfs 2,900 cfs 10,000 cfs 2,400 cfs 10,500 cfs 1,900 cfs 11,000 cfs 1,400 cfs 11,500 cfs 900 cfs 12,000 cfs See Note (2) Note 1: Maximum allowable pumping rate is 400 cfs to zero depending on levee monitoring by King County Director of Public Works or his designee. Further restrictions on P-1 pumping capacity may be required per the Pumping Operations Plan. Note 2: Assumes full installed capacity is available. I � I ,I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Ino. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc III-2 12/19/96 III OFF-SITE ANALYSIS A. Introduction There are two predominant streams in the area of the site. The Green River is the largest and is located in the City of Tukwila, Washington, about 1,200 feet west of Longacres, and west of the West Valley Highway (State Highway Route 181). The Green River has a levee system along its banks protecting nearby property. The flow is partially regulated by the Corps of Engineers', Howard Hanson Reservoir on the headwaters of the River. This controlled flow release, coupled with the levee system provides protection of the site from the Green River for at least a 100-year flood. In the vicinity of the project site, the West Valley Highway is higher than the levee system adjacent to the River providing additional flood protection. The second predominant stream is Springbrook Creek, a tributary of the Black River (which is a tributary to the Green River). All stormwater from the project site flows easterly to Springbrook Creek. The Building 25-20 site is within the watershed of Springbrook Creek, and portions of the site are also within the floodplain of the Creek according to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapping. The natural stream channel for Springbrook Creek was previously reconstructed downstream of the SW 16th Street Bridge, near the project site, by an excavated channel in accordance with direction from Drainage District No. 1. Springbrook Creek is located to the east of the project site. B. Green River The watershed area of the Green River at Renton is 450 square miles. Above the Howard A. Hanson Dam the watershed area is 215 square miles. The Green River flow is controlled by the Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, which is responsible for the regulation of dam outflows from the Howard A. Hanson Dam at Eagle Gorge on the upper Green River. The regulation limits the flow at Auburn to less than 12,000 cfs for up to a 500-year storm frequency. This flow rate represents a 2-year recurrence flood event if the stream were not regulated. The flood profiles for the Green River in the vicinity of the Longacres site indicate the same flood elevation for both the 10-year and the 500-year flood frequency. FEMA flood profiles are presented in Appendix A. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc 111-1 12/19/96 a. Geotechnical report, entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Customer Services Training Center Renton, Washington", dated February 11, 1992 by GeoEngineers, Inc. b. "Addendum No. 1 Geotechnical Design Recommendations Lateral Pile Design and Buoyancy Clarification Boeing CSTC Development, Renton, Washington", dated March 25, 1992 by GeoEngineers, Inc. c. "Addendum No. 2 Geotechnical Design Recommendations Lateral Pile Design (16 inch diameter) Boeing CSTC Development (UB 25-02, CB 25-03) Renton, Washington", dated March 27, 1992 by GeoEngineers, Inc. d. "Report of Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeological Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington for Boeing Support Services", dated December 9, 1991 by GeoEngineers, Inc. e. "Geotechnical Consultation, Potential Lake Impacts, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington," dated April 29, 1991 by GeoEngineers, Inc. 12. Special Requirement#12 - Soils Analysis and Report The existing mapping completed by King County in 1973 appears sufficient for the purposes of this project, therefore this special requirement does not apply. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inc. 013747/2210/dnvpt0l.doc II-8 12/19/96 8. Special Requirement #8 - Use of Lakes, Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak Rate Runoff Control This project proposes to use the existing Boeing CSTC Main Pond for detention. The outfall to this pond will be located along the south shore of the pond, at approximately elevation 7.0. The CSTC Main Pond is considered a wetland, however, it was designed to provide stormwater treatment and control. The Main Pond forms the downstream end of a linear stream system to be constructed as the development of the Longacres Park Site progresses. This plan also provides more floodplain storage volume than do the existing conditions. 9. Special Requirement#9 - Delineation of 100 Year Floodplain This project site is in the vicinity of Springbrook Creek, which has an associated floodplain. Therefore the project drawings will indicate the 100-year floodplain at based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 328 of 650. This project is outside the limits of the floodway but is within the flood fringe, or that portion of the plain outside the floodway which is covered by flood waters during the base flood. The FEMA floodplain is discussed in Section VI of this Report and more detailed information about the floodplain, including mapping, is included in Appendix A. 10. Special Requirement #10 - Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 and 2 Streams No existing flood protection facilities exist for the portion of Springbrook Creek adjacent to the project, therefore this special requirement does not apply. 11. Special Requirement#11 - Geotechnical Analysis and Report A geotechnical report for the Longacres Office Park site was prepared. It is titled "Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton Washington" dated January 23, 1991, and was completed by GeoEngineers, Inc. GeoEngineers is currently completing field work for a geotechnical report specific to this site, and that report will be issued in early 1997. Other related geotechnical reports include: Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc 1I-7 12/19/96 5. Special Requirement#5 - Special Water Quality Controls This special requirement applies, as over 1 acre of new impervious surface will be constructed for vehicular use and storage, and the project will drain to a Class 1 or 2 stream within one mile from the project site. Proposed special water quality controls are designed into the landscape at this site and at the existing downstream CSTC site. Stormwater wetpond areas will be integrated into the landscape to become an amenity for the site. The treatment concept utilizes a three pond system for water quality. The first stage consists of wet vaults to contain sediments and provide gravity oil/water separation. The second and third stages are open wetponds with wetland vegetation to improve the water quality by absorbing certain constituents in the stormwater stream. Design of the wetponds are further discussed in Section IV, Part E of this Report. 6. Special Requirement#6 - Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators Preliminary calculations indicate that this project will create less than 2,500 vehicle trips per day, therefore this special requirement does not apply. However, in keeping with the design criteria for the adjacent CSTC site, all first stage wetponds (wetvaults) will be sized to allow placement of coalescing plate filters at any time if water quality analysis indicates that discharges are not meeting code requirements. 7. Special Requirement#7 - Closed Depressions p The project site is not a closed depression. However, Springbrook Creek can reach flood elevations which prevent flow from leaving the site. Similar to the model created for the adjacent Boeing CSTC site, a closed depression analysis will be completed for this project. For more detailed information, see Section IV, Part D of this report. _ I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dmrpt01_doc II-6 12/19/96 maximum capacity of 45 cfs, which matches the design peak runoff rate as calculated by KCM. Further, the P-1 Channel has recently been completed to final cross section '-- up to the SW 16th Street Bridge. These two factors preclude the need for diversion of any flow to the Longacres system, as discussed by KCM. Therefore, the 18 cfs allowance will be deducted from the model completed for this project site. 3. Special Requirement #3 - Conditions Requiring Master Drainage Plan This special requirement does not apply, as the proposed project is stand alone, and: a. is not within a Master Planned Development (MDP) as described in an adopted Community Plan; OR b. is not a subdivision or Planned Unit Development (PUD) that will eventually have more than 100 single-family residential lots and encompass a contiguous drainage subbasin of more than 200 acres; OR c. is not a commercial development or Planned Unit Development (PUD) that will eventually construct more than 50 acres of impervious surface; OR d. will not clear an area of more than 500 acres within a contiguous drainage sub-basin. A Draft Master Drainage Plan based on a conceptual site Master Plan was previously transmitted to the City of Renton. 4. Special Requirement#4- Adopted Basin or Community Plans No Adopted Basin or Community Plan exists for this area, therefore this special requirement does not apply. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc II-5 12/19/96 2. Special Requirement #2 - Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan a. Existing Drainage Plans The City of Tukwila Nelson Place/Longacres Way Storm Drainage System Preliminary Design, completed by Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc., June 1988, included four alternative plans to divert existing surface water flows from the Tukwila Basin to a proposed storm drain constructed within the SW 16th Street right-of-way. This preliminary design was ' based on The City of Tukwila Nelson Place/Longacres Drive Basin Study, completed by KCM, December 1986. b. Recommended Alternative of the Existing Drainage n Drai a Plan g The recommended alternative in the KCM Preliminary Design included "a new 42-inch outfall line (40 cfs capacity) along SW 16th Street to the future P-1 Channel." This alternative was to carry up to 22 cfs and divert high flows (up to 18 cfs during the 25-year event) to the private Longacres system. The KCM studies explained that high flows had to be diverted to the Longacres Site.only when the given alternative had insufficient hydraulic capacity. They also stated that construction timing of the P-1 channel was uncertain and that the Longacres system would be used in the interim. Finally, the studies noted that agreements and permits would be required for the use of the private Longacres drainage system, but that under the 42-inch pipeline alternative, "no detention basin would be required - combined outflows provide adequate flow capabilities and channel provide any necessary detention storage." c. Current Conditions of the Tukwila Drain Based on the recommended alternative, the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October 1992, indicated that the CSTC site would be designed to accommodate overflow rates of up to 18 cfs from the Nelson Place/Longacres Drive Basin. Additionally, a 48-inch storm drain was constructed as part of the SW 16th Street Improvement Project. The pipeline is generally located in the SW 16th Street right-of- way and is based on the KCM preliminary design. As stated in the CSTC TIR, page 33, this pipeline has a Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc II-4 12/19/96 c. Existing site conditions As defined within this Core Requirement, the existing site conditions are defined as those that existed prior to May 1979 since the specific project area never had an approved drainage system. Existing conditions are documented by aerial photography and field surveys, and generally consist of conditions as they existed when the facility was an operating horse track. 4. Core Requirement#4 - Conveyance Systems The proposed conveyance system consists of closed pipes and grass-lined roadside ditches designed to convey the on-site peak rate runoff for the 100-year 24-hour design storm. Some surcharging may occur during 100-year 24-hour design events, while the 25-year 24-hour event will be conveyed without surcharge. See Section V of this Report for more detailed information. 5. Core Requirement#5 - Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control Engineered drainage plans are required for this project, hence, temporary erosion/sedimentation control (TESC) measures in accordance with Core Requirement #5 are also required. The 11 minimum requirements, KCSWDM Standard Plan Notes and the City of Renton Standard Plan Notes are addressed by the Erosion/Sedimentation Control Drawings which will be submitted as part of the Demolition Package in early 1997. For more detail, see Section VII of this Report. B. Discussion of Special Requirements 1. Special Requirement#1 - Critical Drainage Areas No critical drainage area is associated with this project site, therefore this special requirement does not apply. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc II-3 12/19/96 2. Core Requirement#2 - Off-Site Analysis The Level 1 off-site analysis for this project includes the Boeing CSTC site to the north, the Nelson Place/Longacres Way basin to the northwest of the site, Springbrook Creek, the Black River and the Green River. See Section III of this Report for more detail. 3. Core Requirement#3 - Runoff Control a. Peak rate runoff control Peak rate runoff control must be provided such that post development flows leave the site at or below existing release rates. This will be accomplished through the use of stormwater treatment/detention ponds to provide water quality benefits and water quantity control. In combination with the wetpond developed on this site, the large surface area and volume of the downstream Boeing CSTC Main _ Pond will reduce peak runoff rates well below pre- development conditions for all design storm events. b. Biofiltration This project must provide biofiltration because it will create more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface subject to vehicular use and storage. Most of the stormwater biofiltration will be provided downstream on the existing Boeing CSTC site by routing flows through the Main Pond, the open channel leading from the CSTC Main Pond to the Delta system and then to the outfall structure. The channel and delta area are planted with wetland vegetation species which have been monitored for survival rates since completion of the CSTC project. A second biofiltration facility will be constructed near the extension of the parkway road at it's connection with SW 16th Street. Runoff from this road extension will drain to a biofiltration swale and then to the CSTC Main Pond. A third biofiltration facility will be constructed along the private roadway on the Oakesdale alignment to treat roadway runoff prior to releasing them to the existing cross culvert under the existing road, which in turn flows to the infield of the practice track prior to discharge at Springbrook Creek. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/dnvpt0l.doc II-2 12/19/96 II PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY This Section includes a discussion of Core Requirements 1 - 5 and all Special Requirements from the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as referenced in the City of Renton Drainage Report Content List (from the City's Drafting Standards). The City of Renton Building Regulations formally adopt the current version of the KCSWDM, and amend them to include addition criteria for projects located within Zones 1 and 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area. The Aquifer Protection Area Map produced by RH2 Engineers, dated March 21, 1995, confirms that this project does not fall within the Aquifer Protection Area. A. Discussion of Core Requirements 1. Core Requirement#1 - Discharge at the Natural Location The existing project site drains to Springbrook Creek, and will continue to do so under post-development conditions. For the purpose of engineering analysis, the Longacres Office Park Site is divided into five drainage subbasins which all flow to Springbrook Creek. Under current conditions the project site falls within three project subbasins. The northern subbasin outfall is through the CSTC site, the central subbasin outfalls through the practice track and the southern outfall is along the southern boundary of the practice track. As indicated in the Site Masterplan, upon full site buildout, all surface water from SW 16th Street south to SW 27th Street will be routed through the CSTC Main Pond and Delta system prior to discharge through the CSTC outfall. Since this project involves only a small portion of the overall Longacres Office Park Site and a complete stormwater system has not been constructed, an interim system will be constructed to convey and treat project runoff. The majority of the project site will be directed through a series of ponds and then to the CSTC Main Pond. Runoff from the proposed connector roadway at the western end of SW 16th Street will be directed through a wet vault prior to discharge to the CSTC Main Pond. The remainder of the project area involves the private roadway parallel to the Oakesdale Avenue alignment. Runoff from this roadway will be collected in a grass-lined roadside ditch and carried to an existing cross culvert which discharges to the practice track drainage system. Aside from the private roadway on the Oakesdale alignment, all runoff from the project site will be directed to the existing CSTC Main Pond, and eventually outfall to Springbrook Creek. Therefore this development is compatible with the Master Stormwater Plan. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt01.doc 11-1 12/19/96 PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Purpose This report is written to fulfill the requirements of the City of Renton Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Content List, as described in the City's Master Application Package, received at the December 5, 1996 Pre-Application Meeting. The City requires submittal of a drainage report with several of it's permits, including the Site Plan Approval and Environmental Review. B. Introduction The Boeing Commercial Airplane Group (BCAG) Headquarters Building 25-20 site is located in the City of Renton, Washington, on the northerly portion of the Longacres Office Park property. The project proposes to construct a 300,000 square foot, 5 story office building to serve approximately 800 employees. The proposed project includes private roadways, a parking lot, utilities, storm drainage, covered walkways and landscaping improvements. The Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheets detailing site information and the constraints to development are included as Tables 1 and 2. The site location and vicinity maps are detailed on Tables 3 and 4. All Tables are located at the conclusion of the written portion of the report, before the Appendices. This project is designed to integrate with both the Draft Master Stormwater Plan based on the proposed Master Plan Development and the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992. Each of these documents were previously submitted to the City of Renton for review. C. Project Datum The current City of Renton vertical datum is NAVD 1988 according to the City's Drafting Standards. However, all previous mapping, design, reports and studies completed for the Longacres Office Park Site have been based on USGS 1929 Sea Level datum, including the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992. Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) continues to utilize the USGS datum for their Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Boeing and the City reached an agreement at the Mapping and Survey Control Meeting held at the City's offices December 12, 1996 allowing this project to be completed based on USGS 1929 vertical datum. This Report is based on USGS 1929 vertical datum. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc I-1 12/19/96 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) V CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND DESIGN V-1 A. Proposed Conveyance System Overview V-1 1. Building 25-20 Site Area V-2 2. Parkway Loop Road Extension V-2 3. Private Road V-2 B. Conveyance System Analysis and Design V-2 1. Pipe System V-2 2. Grass-lined Roadside Ditches V-3 VI FLOODPLAIN AND GROUNDWATER INFORMATION VI-1 A. Floodplain Conditions Prior to the CSTC Project VI-1 B. Existing Floodplain Conditions VI-1 C. Proposed Floodplain Conditions VI-2 D. Groundwater Influence VI-2 VII TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL VII-1 A. Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan VII-1 B. Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC) Calculations VII-1 C. NPDES Requirements VII-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 TIR Worksheet Page 1 Figure 2 TIR Worksheet Page 2 Figure 3 Location Map Figure 4 Vicinity Map APPENDICES APPENDIX A Floodplain Information APPENDIX B Existing Site Hydrology APPENDIX C Developed Site Hydrology APPENDIX D Retention/Detention Calculations APPENDIX E Water Quality Evaluations APPENDIX F Wet Pond Design APPENDIX G Conveyance System Design APPENDIX H Groundwater Information APPENDIX I Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC) Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inc. 013747/2210/dmrptO I.doc iv 12/19/96 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 10. Special Requirement#10 - Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 and 2 Streams I1-7 11. Special Requirement#11 - Geotechnical Analysis and Report 1I-7 12. Special Requirement#12 - Soils Analysis and Report I1-8 III OFF-SITE ANALYSIS III-1 A. Introduction III-1 B. Green River III-1 C. Springbrook Creek 1I1-3 D. Black River III-4 E. Previous Studies III-5 IV RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN IV-1 A. Existing Site Hydrology IV-1 1. Basin 1 -Tukwila Drainage Basin IV-1 2. Basin 2 -North of SW 16th Street Basin IV-2 3. Basin 3 -North Main Track Basin IV-2 4. Basin 4 - South Main Track Basin IV-3 5. Basin 5 - Sales Pavilion Basin IV-3 6. Basin 6 - South Meadow Basin IV-3 B. Developed Site Hydrology IV-4 1. Basin A - CSTC Site Basin IV-4 2. Basin B - South Main Track Basin IV-4 3. Basin C - Sales Pavilion Basin IV-4 C. Hydrologic Analysis IV-5 1. Hydrograph Method IV-5 2. Computation Software IV-5 3. Design Storm Precipitation Values IV-6 D. Retention/Detention System IV-6 1. Overview IV-6 2. Hydrograph Routing IV-7 3. Closed Depression Analysis IV-7 4. Summary of Hydrologic Analysis IV-9 E. Water Quality System IV-10 1. Building 25-20 Site Area IV-10 2. Parkway Loop Road Extension IV-11 3. Private Road IV-12 Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc iii 12/19/96 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Longacres Office Park Renton, Washington TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Report Certification Table of Contents ii Appendices iv List of Tables iv List of Figures iv I PROJECT OVERVIEW I-1 A. Purpose I-1 B. Introduction I-1 C. Project Datum I-1 II PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY II-1 A. Discussion of Core Requirements II-1 1. Core Requirement#1 - Discharge at the Natural Location II-1 2. Core Requirement#2 - Off-Site Analysis I1-2 3. Core Requirement#3 - Runoff Control II-3 4. Core Requirement#4 - Conveyance Systems 1I-3 5. Core Requirement#5 - Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control II-3 B. Discussion of Special Requirements II-3 1. Special Requirement#1 - Critical Drainage Areas II-3 2. Special Requirement#2 - Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan II-4 3. Special Requirement#3 - Conditions Requiring Master Drainage Plan II-5 4. Special Requirement#4 - Adopted Basin or Community Plans II-5 5. Special Requirement#5 - Special Water Quality Controls I1-6 6. Special Requirement#6 - Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators II-6 7. Special Requirement#7 - Closed Depressions II-6 8. Special Requirement#8 - Use of Lakes, Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak Rate Runoff Control II-7 9. Special Requirement#9 - Delineation of 100 Year Floodplain II-7 Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt0l.doc ii 12/19/96 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Lon acres Office e Park Renton, Washington REPORT CERTIFICATION The technical information and data included in this report was prepared by or under the direct supervision of the undersigned, whose seal as a registered professional engineer licensed to practice as such in the State of Washington is affixed below: �9 Jeffrey J. Schutt, P.E. EXPIRES 06/05/ 98 Project Engineer I Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 013747/2210/drnrpt01.doc i 12/19/96 ri 4 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Longacres Office Park Renton, Washington December 20, 1996 Prepared For: Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Seattle, Washington Prepared By: Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Bellevue,Washington BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Vic, DRAINAGE REPORT f5g For CONCEPTUAL , DRAINAGE PLAN ,m4sr. ,/v Commercial Airplane Group FAMO December 20, 1996 DEVELOPMENT PI A^N DEC 2 C 1996 � l Sverdrup - ECEiVE , 01339/CV]OB.pmS _,,,, ,, ,,;.-- , ., . :, _. , , . , ... ,,, ,,„ - /-62'17 ' [.' • 1 1 1 , , (7 • / • = 1 < /' I ; 'I • ti 1 II/' I/ ' \ 1. . \ \ 1. \;' , / 1 / -,\\ \ f 1r 11 -I\ . \ ` i' ; `1 i' , r ^/ .. - \ I f`, ;I\ ,1. \ i - - J I, , rr. 1 / I i t I' 5 I I I` / , /, /11 • r / I I , - \ - , \ • \ i. 1 . ' - I• 4 ' \ .'1 \ - ' ' REPORT ' - 1' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 'SERVICES ' -'r / .1 j v \ BOEING1 LONGACRES PARK; \ I I( • ; ' 1 ' '! i� \ 1 ; \' RENTON; 'WASH.INGITON . - r < 1 /> 1, ' i - 1 . \ � � .. FOR I . , r •�� • i ;I ' , i' , II ' }r r BOEINGi SUPPORT `SERVICES' 1 '• �11 V \ ,/ \ .,\' / / ( r\., ` ' - I , i , I - 1i, d�, I , 1. \ - /( /.t ; .) 1•.1 i \ \ • ' - 111 / , 11 ' ) J41 ` f .\ 1 \ is \ _ / / \ II ) / 1 `' \ r II1 - \. / ; -, , - \ / \ 1 IJr-, 1 \ 1 1 I I \ \ - 1 I I r I. i J -V ELl/P l qN rt " I ,; - ' 1,, \\.\ ,;, ri , 1996 , 1 I t / _ \\I! z,..„.....v. / . . f-• l 21 � % I ` , iD r 1 ' '/ ` ,/ ` / `` __ , 1 � '5 \ �' 1 r , /� ,. ,1. r I }11l / I\ / 1' \ ,( `I 1. �\ � r I l j I , r' . Geo • o Engineers Consulting Engineers • and Geoscientists January 23, 1991 Offices in Washington, Oregon,and Alaska BE&C Engineers P.O. Box 3797, MS 13-03 Seattle, Washington 98124-2207 ,- • Attention: Mr, Robert H. Wicklein, P.E. We are pleased to submit 26 copies of our "Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington for Boeing Support Services." The scope of our services is outlined in our proposal dated November 9, I/ 1990. Our services were authorized by BE&C Agreement No. BECE 0050, Work Order No. 90-8000. i During the course of our services, we have been in contact with you and '.. ` other members of your design team to discuss design issues and to provide information and recommendations as our findings were developed. It has been our pleasure to work with you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the contents of this report or if we can be of 11 further service, please contact us. Yours very truly, • GeoEngineers, Inc. Jon W. Koloski Principal NLT:JWK:cs ,i File No. 0120-090-B02 • GeoEngineers,Inc. 8410 154th Avenue N.E. Redmond,WA 98052 Telephone(206)861-6000 Fax(206)861-6050 Printed en recycled paper. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Page No. ` SCOPE 2 _i SITE CONDITIONS 3 SURFACE CONDITIONS 3 ~ SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 GENERAL 7 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 8 Regional Seismicity 8 Liquefaction Potential 9 —,; SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK 10 Site Preparation 10 Structural Fill 11 Erosion Control 13 Fill Settlement 13 EXCAVATIONS 15 FOUNDATION SUPPORT 16 General 16 Axial Pile Capacity 16 Pile Downdrag 18 Lateral Pile Capacity 18 am; Pile Settlement 19 Pile Installation 19 Pile Testing Program 20 FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT 21 ..,,k PRELOAD/SURCHARGE FILL 22 SUBGRADE WALLS 24 LATERAL RESISTANCE 25 PAVEMENTS 26 PERMANENT DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS 27 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 28 - LIMITATIONS . 29 i List of Figures Figure No. VICINITY MAP 1 SITE PLAN , 2 CROSS-SECTION A 3 ' CROSS-SECTION B 4 !_T RANGE OF ESTIMATED SETTLEMENTS 5 SETTLEMENT PLATE DETAIL 6 i APPENDIX A Page No. -- FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING A-1 FIELD EXPLORATIONS A-1 I • LABORATORY TESTING A-2 Y` List of Appendix A Figures • Figure No. SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM A-1 KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS A-2 LOG OF BORING A-3 through A-42 LOG OF MONITOR WELL A-43 through A-48 GRADATION CURVES A-49 and A-50 ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS A-51 ,� CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS A-52 through A-54 CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST DATA A-55 and A-56 ' APPENDIX B i ; Page No. REPORT ON SOIL SAMPLE CORROSIVITY TESTING B-1 through B-21 =-i i _ { ! - I Iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Boeing Longacres Park will occupy the existing Longacres horse racing facility in Renton, Washington. The current development concept consists of building 14 to 18 office buildings across the site. Most of the buildings will be two to four stories in height with total floor areas of approximately 200,000 square feet each. As most of the buildings are in the conceptual phase of planning, specific building locations, site grades, and design loads were not known at the time this study was completed. The overall scope of our study includes: o Evaluating surface and subsurface soil and ground water conditions Ali by reviewing available information and drilling 19 additional borings. o Recommendations for site preparation, earthwork, and excavations. o Recommendations for foundation support. o Recommendations for support of slabs and pavements. o Address the seismic considerations for the site and evaluate the potential for liquefaction SITE CONDITIONS The project site is approximately rectangular in shape and is situated on the floor of the Green River valley. The site is relatively level. The existing main race track occupies the north-central portion of the site. ! The grandstand buildings are situated west of the track, and most of the ' 1 horse barns are located east of the track. A remnant of an old channel of the Green River is present across the south half of the race track. Springbrook Creek flows along a portion of the east property line. ?- ' Portions of the site have been modified by minor regrading. Soil conditions are relatively uniform across the site. Existing fill across the site varies from silt or silty sand to construction debris to hay and manure. Native surface deposits consist of loose sand and soft to medium -, stiff silt underlain by medium dense to dense sand. The thickness of the native upper deposits ranges across the site from about 15 to 35 feet. The ' underlying medium dense to dense sand deposits extend to the depths explored in the borings. One boring encountered a lower zone of loose sand and medium stiff silt from a depth of about 46 to 70 feet. Ground water levels were measured at depths of about 4 to 7 feet. We anticipate that the ground water levels will fluctuate seasonally in response to changes in precipitation and the level of the Green_River. I CONCLUSIONS It is our opinion that the site can be developed as planned. Due to the presence of upper compressible fine-grained soils and loose granular soils, we recommend that the proposed buildings be pile-supported. As placement of fill or surface loads will result in settlements due to consolidation of underlying soils, slabs may be supported on-grade provided slab areas are preloaded to compensate for the weight of the slab, and that slabs are not constructed until settlements due to fill are complete. Our . ' conclusions and recommendations are summarized as follows: o Portions of the site are underlain by deposits of loose sand which are susceptible to liquefaction during a sustained earthquake. The effects of liquefaction include some reduction in the capacity of piles and possible cracking of on-grade floor slabs. o We recommend that any existing fill which contains organic matter be removed from building areas, utility trenches and pavement or other slab areas. o The soils at the site are moisture sensitive and will become soft when wet and disturbed. We strongly recommend that site preparation and earthwork be performed during periods of extended dry weather. r o Most of the on-site soils will be suitable for use in structural fill only under very limited conditions due to their moisture sensitivity. We anticipate that most of the fill required for raising building grades will need to be imported. o Placement of fill will result in settlement due to consolidation of underlying compressible soils. The majority of settlement will occur in three to five weeks. Some portions of the site will require longer time for settlements to occur. o We recommend that the buildings be pile supported due to the presence of loose and soft deposits across the site. We expect that augercast piles will be used, but have also included design values for driven piles. o Pile lengths will be on the order of 40 to 70 feet, depending on the capacity required and on the depth to the medium dense sand. 7` 1 i � I i o The main options for slab support are (1) support the slab no higher than the existing grade after recommended preparation of the subgrade (2) support the slab on a pad of structural fill after allowing sufficient time for the fill to settle or (3) structurally support the slab on piles. o We recommend that for support of on-grade slabs, the slab area be preloaded with additional fill to minimize postconstruction settlement due to floor loads. o We recommend delaying construction of utilities, pavements, and other settlement-sensitive facilities until settlements due to filling are complete. r-, o Due to the presence of fill with organic matter and native silt and organic silt across the site, we recommend corrosion protection be considered in the design of utilities. f ' 1 ' (__ i I REPORT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES I ! BOEING LONGACRES PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON FOR BOEING SUPPORT SERVICES � I INTRODUCTION r_, This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services for Boeing Longacres Park in Renton, Washington. The location of the project site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The site consists of about 215 acres located south of Interstate 405 and east of the West Valley Highway. The property has operated since 1933 I` as a horse racing facility and contains a grandstand, numerous parking areas, support buildings, horse barns, the race track and a training track. The Boeing Longacres Park will include about 14 to 18 office buildings two to four stories in height, together with related streets, parking facilities and buried utilities. Due to wetland considerations, buildings will not be situated in the extreme southeast corner of the site, nor in most of the infield of the main race track. However, an access road may extend through r— the track infield. At this time, the proposed buildings and .other site development ff features are in the l phase n. h bu 4�{ have total floor areas oconceptua f approximatelyofdesig 200,000Most squareoft e feet eachildings, with column spacing on the order of 40 feet in each direction. An exception is the planned CTFOS (Customer Training and Flight Operation Support) building. l This building will consist of three wings. Each wing will have dimensions of about 250 feet by 300 feet. One wing of the building will house settlement- and vibration-sensitive flight simulation equipment. Boeing is currently planning to locate this building in the northeast portion of the site. As most of the buildings are in the conceptual phase of planning, design loads and final site grades are not known at this time. We �.__ anticipate that column loads may be on the order of 300 to 600 kips for two- i to four-story buildings. Existing site grades in building areas will be raised 1 to 3 feet due to flooding considerations. { I GeoEngineers has performed previous geotechnical studies for portions of the site for the past owners of the track. An environmental site assessment has been performed by Landau Associates, Inc. SCOPE The purpose of our services is to evaluate subsurface soil and ground water conditions at the project site as the basis for our geotechnical ti recommendations and design criteria identified in the Statement of Work prepared by Boeing Support Services. Our specific scope of services includes: 1. Review existing subsurface information from previous explorations performed at or near the site by our firm and review available subsurface information performed by others. We also reviewed Volume 1 of a report dated August 31, 1990 by Landau Associates for a site assessment study. 2. Further explore subsurface conditions by drilling 19 additional borings. 3. Obtain samples from the borings at the direction of Boeing for chemical testing, as requested. 4. Determine pertinent engineering characteristics of the foundation soils from the results of laboratory tests performed on soil ' samples obtained from the explorations. 5. Provide recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, including assessment of the suitability of on-site soils for use ;_ in engineered fills, recommended fill slopes, compaction criteria and any special construction procedures due to special soil 1 characteristics. i I 6. Evaluate the magnitude of settlements due to filling or typical floor loading and provide recommendations for preloading, as appropriate. 7. Develop recommendations for subgrade excavations, including allowable temporary cut slopes, shoring options and possible dewatering requirements. i 8. Provide recommendations for foundation support. Pile support is anticipated for most of the structures, thus we have developed f '` 2 fl- capacity-penetration relationships for appropriate types of pile foundations, pile installation criteria and lateral pile ' capacities. n 9. Evaluate the magnitude of total settlements for selected pile j types and for typical column loading. 10. Provide recommendations for support of floor slabs, including 1 whether slabs can be supported on grade and a value for the modulus of subgrade reaction. 11. Develop recommendations for subgrade or other retaining walls, including design lateral soil pressures, passive pressures, r friction coefficients and drainage requirements. i 12. Provide recommendations for support of pavements. 13. Provide the frost depth for the site. 14. Evaluate site ground water conditions and provide recommendations regarding temporary and permanent drainage and erosion control measures. 15. Address the seismic considerations for the site including a discussion of earthquake conditions, the characteristic site period and evaluating the potential for liquefaction across the site. 16. Attend one to three meetings with Boeing representatives to discuss the results of our study, as appropriate. 17. Prepare a written report containing our conclusions and recommen- , dations along with the supporting field and laboratory data. Submit the report in draft form for review by Boeing prior to issuing the final report. SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE CONDITIONS 1 - The site is approximately rectangular in shape and is situated on the floor of the Green River valley. The existing Green River channel is located about 1,000 to 1,500 feet west of the west side boundary. Springbrook Creek (also known as the P-1 Channel) borders a portion of the northeast boundary of the site. The site is relatively level. The main race track is situated in the north-central portion of the parcel. The grandstand buildings are situated on the west side of the track. Paved and unpaved parking areas are located 3 1 between the track and the west property boundary, and between the south end of the track and Southwest 27th Street, which enters the site from the east. The main horse barn area is situated on the east side of the track, with a smaller training track located east of the barns. A more detailed description of the existing buildings is presented in the Landau report. Two undeveloped areas are present within the site. An area between Southwest 27th Street and the south boundary is undeveloped and mainly consists of a grass-covered field. A small portion of this area has been used to dispose of miscellaneous materials including soil, landscape waste and construction debris. The southeast corner of this area is on the edge of a large wetland which extends off-site to the east and south. The second undeveloped area is situated north of the training track between the barns and Springbrook Creek. This portion of the site has been used as a hay field in the past and is currently vegetated with tall grass and scattered brush. A row of large poplar trees surrounds the north, east and south perimeter of the main track; scattered cottonwood and other deciduous trees are present across the site. The infield of the main track and the training track consist of mowed grass. An arc-shaped shallow channel is present across the south half of the main race track infield. This depression is the remnants of an old channel 1 of the Green River. The channel remnant extends east through the barn area and across the north infield of the training track to the P-1 Channel. In I addition, there is a combination natural and excavated swale/ditch across the north infield of the main track and a shallow drain ditch around the inside perimeter of the main track. During prolonged periods of rainfall, standing water is present throughout the channel and ditch areas. Surface water is typically not present across the remainder of the site except for Springbrook Creek and in an area in the extreme southeast corner of the site. In the past, we have observed a significant portion of the infield and barn area to be flooded for a time after record-level storms. IJ 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface soil and ground water conditions were explored by drilling _ 19 test borings at the locations shown in Figure 2. Locations of borings we have performed for past studies for others are also shown. A description of the field exploration and laboratory testing procedures and the logs of the explorations are presented in the Appendix. We have also reviewed existing subsurface information from previous explorations performed at the site by our firm and by others. We have also reviewed the subsurface information presented in the Landau report, especially with respect to the character of existing fill encountered in the test pits. In general, the subsurface conditions reported from these . previous explorations are consistent with those encountered in the current explorations. Most of the site is either covered with sod, crushed rock surfacing or asphalt paving. In general, sod is present only in the infield of the main and training track and across the undeveloped areas north of the training track and south of Southwest 27th Street. As described in the Landau report, most of the site has undergone some grading or filling in the past. The areas which have received significant amounts of fill include the training track and infield, a portion of the field north of the training track and the undeveloped area south of Southwest 27th Street. Based on our knowledge of the track construction, up to 9 feet of fill is present within the north half of the main track embankment, with minor amounts of fill along the outside edge of the south half. In addition, a former channel of the Green River appears to have meandered through the site, extending from I^ the south boundary north to the infield of the race track, and then east close to the training track and off site. The old channel has not been filled in the infield of the main track, but has been filled in to the east, and was probably filled to the south prior to development of the race track. Sixteen of the nineteen borings did not encounter fill at the first sample depth (2.5 feet) the exceptions being Borings 2, 3, and 6. The fill observed in the borings generally consists of excavated and/or reworked native silt and silty sand which is similar in character to the native soils; some imported granular soils or crushed rock was noted.- Thus, fill may be present at other boring locations either above the first sampling interval or was sampled but not recognized as fill due to the absence of hay, wood, debris, or other fill indicators. Fill containing hay, manure, 5 wood, asphalt and other debris was encountered in many of the test pits accomplished by Landau. In addition, we believe that the practice track area and a portion of the field to the north were manure disposal sites. The fill and remainder of the site are underlain by an upper unit of interlayered silt, sandy silt, silty sand and sand with variable quantities of organic matter and lenses of peat. These soils are typical overbank flood deposits and flood-plain organics (peat) , underlain or interbedded with marine (estuarine) organic silt and fluvial sand. The thickness of these upper soft and loose deposits ranges across the site from about 15 to 35 feet. In general, the thickness of silt encountered in the borings was less than 10 feet, although Borings 6, 10, 13, 15 and 16 encountered 15 to 25 feet of silt and organic silt. These soils are generally moderately to highly compressible and will consolidate when subjected to new loads. The upper deposits are underlain by medium dense to dense sand. Thin deposits of gravelly sand to sandy gravel were encountered in some of the borings. These soils are also loose to moderately dense having been deposited as river channel bedload. Most of the borings encountered marine shell fragments in the sand below a depth of 40 feet. The presence of � P shells indicate that the deposits below this depth were deposited in an estuarine environment during the postglacial infilling of the Green River valley. Borings 4, 16 and 19, situated at the south end of the site, encountered a 5-foot-thick layer of medium stiff silt at a depth of 50 to 60 feet. All of the borings terminated in medium dense to dense sand or gravel. Somewhat inconsistent soil conditions were encountered in Boring 18. At this location, interbedded medium stiff clay and loose sand are present from a depth of about 46 to 70 feet and loose silty sand from 70 to 80 feet. The clay is moderately compressible. Dense sand and gravel was encountered below a depth of 80 feet in this boring. Two cross sections have been developed to illustrate the generalized subsurface conditions at the site. These cross sections are presented in Figures 3 and 4. Ground water levels were observed in the borings between a depth of 5 to 10 feet during drilling, with most of the borings encountering ground water at a depth of about 6 feet. Monitor wells were installed in or next to Borings 1, 3, 4, 11, 12 and 16 to facilitate future monitoring of ground 6 water levels. The ground water levels were measured on January 4, 1991 at depths of about 4 to 61 feet. These ground water levels are relatively consistent with those previously measured by Landau. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL I ' Based on the results of our explorations, it is our opinion that geotechnical conditions at the project site are compatible with the proposed development. Due to the presence of the weaker, compressible fine-grained soils and loose granular soils which are susceptible to liquefaction at shallow depth, we recommend that the proposed buildings be pile-supported. Depending on the design building loads, we anticipate that the piles will extend to depths of about 40 to 70 feet to be supported in the medium dense to dense sand deposits. Pile lengths may be longer for buildings situated in the southwestern portion of the site due to deeper deposits of silt in this area. Although final grades have not yet been established, we believe that existing grades in building areas will be raised 2 to 3 feet by filling. ti Placement of fill and building slab loads will cause consolidation of the underlying soils. To minimize settlement of ground level slabs, three support options are feasible: (1) support the slab such that the slab is at or below existing grades, (2) support the slab on a pad of structural fill after preloading the site to compensate for slab loads and allowing sufficient time for consolidation under the permanent and temporary fill loads to occur, or (3) structurally (i.e. , pile) support the slab. We expect that option (1) above is not widely applicable due to requirements for flood protection. The time required for settlements to occur will vary across the site due to variations in the density and thickness of the sand and silt layers. r- A surcharge program, i.e. , placing additional fill, could reduce the time required for the settlement to occur. Unless new fill placed in building areas is allowed to completely settle prior to installation of piles, IJ� I downdrag forces will develop on the piles. In addition, portions of the site contain surficial amounts of fill with organic matter (hay, wood, etc.) . Prior to construction of each building, we recommend that test pits be accomplished across each building 7 area to evaluate whether such fill is present. Where fill with organic material is present in building areas, we recommend that this fill be � I removed and replaced with structural fill, or the slab be pile supported. The recommendations presented in this report are general in nature as specific building locations and loads were not finalized at the time this report was completed. We anticipate that additional consultation will be necessary to provide more building-specific recommendations as each building location and configuration is determined. We recommend that review of specific buildinglocations, grades and slab loads be. accomplished as far PP I` in advance as possible to allow for preloading without delaying construction schedules. As discussed below, we recommend that additional explorations be accomplished in the vicinity of Boring 18 after building locations are finalized. Additional borings may also be required at other building sites, depending on the design requirements and the proximity of relevant explorations. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Regional Seismicity: The project site is located within a seismically active area in which more than 100 earthquakes have been recorded over several decades. Of these, two were large events which resulted in significant damage to structures. In 1949, an earthquake centered in the — Olympia area about 50 miles from Longacres registered a Richter magnitude of 7.1. In 1965, a Richter magnitude of 6.5 earthquake was centered between r- Seattle and Tacoma only a few miles from Longacres. On the basis of past earthquake activity, the Puget Sound region is assigned a Zone 3 rating for seismic activity on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest) in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) (1988 Edition) . For Seismic Zone 3, a seismic zone factor of 0.30 is applicable based on the UBC Table 23-I. Based on the results of our explorations, it is our opinion that the soil profile may be characterized using site coefficient S3, based on UBC Table 23-J. Site coefficient 53 results in a site factor equal to 1.5. Evaluation of the potential for damage from an earthquake at a site can be accomplished either through the procedure presented in the UBC or by evaluating a site's specific seismic Response Spectra for different probabilities of exceedence. This analysis is not presented in this report F but will be presented in a subsequent report addendum. 8 1 � Liquefaction Potential: Liquefaction refers to a condition where vibration or shaking of the ground, usually from earthquake forces, results in development of high pore pressures and subsequent loss of strength, or liquefaction, in a zone of soil. In general, soils which are susceptible to liquefaction include loose to medium dense clean to silty sands which are below the water table. Evaluation of the liquefaction potential is complex and depends on several parameters including soil grain size, grain shape, soil density, surface geometry, soil layer geometry, static stresses, as well as the design ground acceleration. Using an empirical approach to evaluate the potential for liquefaction, our analysis indicates that most of the site is underlain by 10 to 15 feet of loose sand which has a moderate to high risk of liquefying under a Magnitude 7.5 design earthquake with a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.15 g. In the vicinity of Borings 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 17 and 18, we observed 10 to 30 feet of sand which is susceptible to liquefaction. With the exception of Borings 16, 17 and 18, the zones of I � sand susceptible to liquefaction are above a depth of about 35 feet. Boring 16 encountered a 10-foot zone from about 40 to 50 feet, Boring 17 encountered scattered layers of sand susceptible to liquefaction down to a depth of 55 feet and Boring 18 encountered a loose zone from 70 to 80 feet. The effects of liquefaction are twofold: first, liquefaction usually results in loss of bearing capacity and resulting settlement. Second, liquefaction may result in reduction of lateral support for structures supported on piles. The loss of bearing capacity and settlement may result in cracking of on-grade floor slabs and/or loss of support for shallow foundations (i.e. , footings) . The reduction in lateral support of piles is not considered to be as significant due to the. integrity of the near-surface ' soils above the ground water table that will tend to act as a diaphragm. The risk of damage due to liquefaction can be minimized by ground improvement techniques, or by designing the structure to withstand a certain amount of loss of foundation support. Ground improvement techniques include dynamic compaction in which a large weight is dropped on the ground, vibroflotation in which sand is introduced into the ground while vibrating the surrounding soil with steel pipe probe, use of driven displacement piles and stone columns, which are similar to vibroflotation but using gravel I instead of sand. We are not recommending specific liquefaction mitigation measures in this report. However, in evaluating the impact of possible 9 damage due to liquefaction and the economics of minimizing this risk in specialized locations, the risk to other buildings and facilities in the vicinity experiencing damage due to liquefaction during an earthquake should also be considered. SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK Site Preparation: We recommend that all existing vegetation, major tree root systems, asphalt concrete pavement, concrete slabs and footings, crushed rock and other obstructions be removed from building and pavement areas. Any foundations or other embedded elements should be removed if they will interfere with pile or new utility installations. We recommend obstructions be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet below planned finish - I floor or pavement grades. Base course crushed rock removed during site preparation activities can be stockpiled for possible reuse provided the rock does not become contaminated with soil. Soil-contaminated crushed rock may be used for fill where compaction and free drainage are not critical. For existing undeveloped areas, we recommend that all brush and other debris be removed. Tree roots larger than 2 inches in diameter should be grubbed from building sites. Where less than 2 feet of new structural fill is anticipated, we recommend that any grass and sod mat be stripped from settlement-sensitive areas (e.g. , building and pavement areas) . Where site grades will be raised by more than 2 feet with structural fill, we recommend that the grass and lowlying vegetation be trimmed close to the ground surface and the cuttings wasted off-site prior to placing fill. 1 We anticipate that most of the soils exposed during site preparation work will vary from native loose sand and soft to medium stiff silt to fill varying from soft silt to compacted sand and gravel. Existing fill which contains organic matter such as straw or wood was encountered across portions of the site. In general, such fill may be present at scattered locations east and south of the main race track. Organic material would result in long term settlement as the material gradually decomposes. Thus, prior to or during site preparation activities, we recommend that four to six shallow test pits be accomplished in each building area to determine if any fill with organic matter is present. We recommend that fill with organic material be removed from building areas and replaced with structural fill. We recommend that any manure or soil mixed with manure be removed underneath sealed areas (e.g. , pavement or slab areas) . 10 I , Where the new building or pavement grades will be less than 3 feet above existing grades, we recommend that the exposed subgrades in pavement and on-grade slab areas be evaluated by thorough proofrolling with heavy rubber-tired construction equipment (dry weather construction) or by probing (wet weather construction) . During dry weather, we recommend that all loose, soft, or otherwise unsuitable areas be compacted with a heavy roller such that the surface is firm and unyielding. If the subgrade cannot be adequately compacted or if the work is performed during wet weather, all soft or loose zones should be removed and replaced with structural fill to the depth determined by the geotechnical engineer. Geotextile fabric may be necessary to aid in stabilizing some areas. The need, specifications and use of fabric should also be determined by a representative of GeoEngineers. The existing fill and native soils at the site are moisture sensitive 1 and will become soft when wet and disturbed. We recommend that site preparation and earthwork be performed during the normally drier late spring through early fall months when the surficial soils will provide better support for, construction equipment. If site preparation is accomplished during wet weather, no attempt should be made to compact or proofroll the surface. These activities would cause softening and rutting which could require extensive repair. All construction activities during wet weather should be done from (or on) access roads and layout areas which are constructed using pads of quarry spalls, gravel or clean pit run. Geotextile fabric can aid wet weather earthwork construction significantly. We should be consulted for applica- bility and specifications. Structural Fill: All new fill in building, pavement or other I ' settlement-sensitive areas should be placed as compacted structural fill after the site has been prepared as described above. All structural fill material should be free of debris, organic contaminants and rock fragments larger than 6 inches. The suitability of material for use as structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil. As the amount of fines (material passing a No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly more sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. We recommend that structural fill contain no more than about 5 percent fines in the portion passing a 3/4-inch sieve for placement in wet weather or on a wet subgrade. I 11 The percent fines can be higher for placement in dry weather, providing that the fill material is moisture conditioned as necessary for proper compac- tion. The near-surface soils at the site consist of sand, silty sand, silt and sandy silt. Excavated silt ,typically will not be suitable for use as ' 1 structural fill, but may be used in nonstructural applications such as landscape areas or as preload fill, subject to the limitations discussed in Preload/Surcharge Fill. Excavated sand may be suitable for use as structural fill, depending on the fines content of the soils, the moisture content of the soil when excavated and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of placement. If these soils become too wet, they will become difficult to place and compact to earthwork specifications. In general, we anticipate that a majority of excavated material will typically not be suitable for use as structural fill because of its fines or moisture * content. We suggest that the project plans and budget assume that excavated soil will either be placed in landscaping areas or removed from the site. Use of excavated soils for backfill of utility trenches or other excavations as subject to the conditions and restrictions described below. Pipe bedding where required must be imported. Structural fill placed in building areas and within 2 feet of the finished subgrade surface in sidewalk and pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557. At a depth of more than 2 feet below subgrade elevation in sidewalk and pavement areas, the structural fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the same standard. We recommend that structural fill be placed in loose layers not more than 8 inches thick. Each lift must be conditioned to the proper moisture content for compaction and uniformly compacted to the specified degree before placing subsequent layers. In areas where the subgrade is particularly soft, it might be desirable to place a geotextile fabric between the new fill and the on-site soils to separate these materials. We recommend that a nonwoven fabric such as Mirafi 140N or Phillips Fabrics 4NP be used for this purpose. We recommend that temporary fill slopes be inclined no steeper than 1H:1V. Permanent fill slopes should be constructed no steeper than 2H:1V. We suggest that permanent fill slopes be inclined at 3H:1V or flatter for ease of landscape maintenance or mowing. 12 - I I _ � 4 We recommend that a representative from GeoEngineers, Inc. be present during site preparation and structural fill placement. Our representative would observe the work, evaluate subgrade performance under proof- rolling/probing, perform representative in-place density tests to determine if the required compaction is being achieved and advise on any modifications to procedures which may be appropriate for the prevailing conditions. I l Erosion Control: Control of off-site transport of sediment will be an important environmental protective constraint. In our opinion, conventional erosion/sedimentation practices will be appropriate. We strongly recommend' I i that erosion control measures be installed prior to site grading activities. The goal of erosion/sedimentation control system design must be to (1) prevent mobilization of sediment, and (2) efficient trap sediment in surface runoff before it can be transported off site or to on-site critical areas such as the wetlands. We recommend that the project grading plans be prepared by someone properly qualified for, and attentive to, the erosion/ sedimentation issue. We will be pleased to work with the designer in that .; regard. The existing native and fill soils will be very difficult to filter or precipitate once suspended in surface runoff. Therefore, it will be important to cover and avoid vehicle traffic on exposed soil, especially during wet weather. Coarse sand, straw mulch, hog fuel, nonwoven geotextile or visqueen sheets can be used for cover, depending on the specific conditions. The runoff must be routed through some combination of filters and sedimentation ponds to clarify the water. Water treatment with a flocculant can also be effective. Dust control will be necessary during dry weather. Proper traffic { I surfaces such as asphalt treated base (ATB) will help significantly. Water on unpaved surfaces will be adequate. Fill Settlement: We anticipate that the building areas will receive 2 to 4 feet of fill in order to achieve the desired floor grades. Most of the site is underlain by 5 to 10 feet of compressible silt. However, as discussed under SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS, portions of the site are underlain by 15 to 25 feet of silt. We estimate that settlements resulting from placing 2 feet of fill will be on the order of 1 to 111 inches of settlement across most of the site, and up to 211 inches of settlement where thicker 1 1 deposits of silt are present. Four feet of fill would result in between 111 and 41 inches of settlement. Actual settlements will vary for each building 13 site depending on the height of the fill and variations in the thickness and compressibility of the silt underlying the site. The estimated settlements resulting from a range of fill, slab and/or floor loads are presented in Figure 5. Placement of fill or other loads will also induce settlements within a certain distance of the load in proportion to the loaded area. We estimate that settlements induced by large area loads such as a building pad will be minor at a distance of 25 feet and negligible at a distance of 50 feet from the edge of the loaded area. Based on the laboratory test results and on our past experience with projects in the site vicinity, we estimate that across most of the site approximately 90 percent of the anticipated settlement will occur in about three to five weeks. However, thicker deposits of silt were encountered in the vicinity of Borings 10, 13, 15 and 16. Where the deposits of silt are 15 to 30 feet in thickness, the settlements could require up to three to five months. As discussed in a subsequent section of this report, the time required for settlements to occur could be reduced by placing a surcharge fill. Fill-induced settlements could affect the performance of settlement sensitive facilities which are supported on-grade such as floor slabs, pavements, utilities, sidewalks, patios and entryways. Therefore, settlement performance and construction timing should be carefully considered in design. Of particular concern is the differential settlements which could occur between the pile-supported buildings and surrounding facilities supported on grade. Options for support of the lower floor slabs for the buildings are discussed in detail in a subsequent section of this report. To minimize impacts on other settlement-sensitive facilities (e.g. , pavements, utilities, sidewalks, patios and entryways) , we recommend that the site fill be placed at least six weeks prior to the construction of these facilities. For any buildings situated in the vicinity of Borings 10, 13, 15 and 16, we should be consulted as to time anticipated for fill- induced settlements to occur. Inconsistent subsurface conditions were encountered in Boring 18. As described in SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS, compressible clay with layers of loose sand was encountered from a depth of 46 to 70 feet. We estimate that surface loads of 200 and 600 psf would settle an additional 1/2 and 1 inch, respectively, due to the effects of this deposit. These settlements could ! y 14 require up to seven months to occur. As this deposit was not encountered 1rin nearby borings, any settlements caused by this deeper deposit could i result in unacceptable differential settlements underneath a building. Therefore, after specific building sites and proposed surface and building grades have been finalized, we recommend that additional borings and/or Dutch cone tests be accomplished in the vicinity of Boring 18 to better 4f� define the limits of this deeper deposit, and to further evaluate potential settlements and time for settlements to occur in this area. EXCAVATIONS At this time, we understand that none of the buildings will contain basements. Therefore, we expect that the majority of excavations will be relatively shallow, on the order of 5 to 10 feet for pile caps and utilities. However, elevator and/or special foundations which require 1 deeper excavations may be required for some or all of the buildings; deep excavation may also be required for some utility components such as pump stations. 1 In general, we anticipate that the ground water level across the site will be at a depth of 4 to 6 feet during the winter, spring, and early summer months, and at a depth of about 10 to 12 feet during the late summer i and fall months. Thus, the amount of water encountered in an excavation will depend in part on the depth of the excavation and on the time of year it is accomplished. We anticipate that dewatering of excavations which extend no deeper than 2 to 4 feet below the static ground water level can t-� be accomplished using shallow sumps and small pumps. Deeper excavations might require more extensive dewatering methods, depending on the depth and size of the excavation. Two possible dewatering alternatives for the site include a well point system consisting of closely spaced small-diameter pipes, or a deep well system using pumps set in larger diameter wells. The number and depth of well points or wells will depend on the depth and size of excavation, and on the soil conditions in the vicinity of the excavation. Excavations above the ground water table can be made with temporary side slopes of about 1H:1V. Temporary slopes may need to be flattened where localized zones of extremely loose or soft soils are encountered. Excavations extending below the ground water table should be sloped no steeper than 3H:1V or flatter as necessary to minimize sloughing or ravelling of the cut faces. We do not anticipate any significant permanent cut slopes an the site. ' I 15 Temporary retention systems must be anticipated where deep excavations are required. In our opinion, conventional temporary shoring measures such as a moveable trench box or sheet piles will be appropriate. If temporary shoring is required, we should be consulted to provide parameters for design of the shoring system. FOUNDATION SUPPORT General: We recommend that the buildings be pile-supported due to the y i presence of surficial loose and soft deposits across the site. For small or lightly loaded structures which are not settlement- sensitive, conventional shallow spread footings may be appropriate. For existing site soils, an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot may be used for design. We recommend that all footings be supported a minimal 18 inches below the final lowest adjacent grade and have a minimum width of 16 inches. We recommend that a representative from our l firm examine all footing excavations prior to forming or pouring concrete. ! We recommend that we review proposed structures supported on shallow foundations to evaluate potential settlement impacts. Based on the intended heights of the proposed buildings, we anticipate that piles which have design capacities in the range of 40 to 100 tons per pile will be suitable for this project. We understand that the Boeing Company currently plans on using augercast piles for support of the buildings. However, driven piles could also be used. We have included design values for different types of driven piles. Some communities in the Seattle area have placed a maximum length-to diameter ratio of 30:1 on augercast piles based on their interpretation of Section 29 of the Uniform Building Code. It is our opinion that this portion of Section 29 does not apply to augercast piles, as the piles are not constructed as uncased concrete piles (for which the restriction was written) . In our opinion, the soil conditions at the project site are suitable for installing augercast piles to the depths recommended below. We understand that the City of Renton will usually waive this restriction if the owner provides appropriate supporting documentation. We recommend that the Boeing Company discuss this requirement with City of Renton officials prior to finalizing design plans. Axial Pile Capacity: We recommend that the buildings be supported on piles which extend into the underlying medium dense to dense sand. The 16 , depth at which this stratum occurs varies from about 15 to 35 feet across the site. We should be consulted to evaluate required pile penetrations once specific building locations are finalized. A tabulation of recommended penetration into the supporting sand stratum and allowable axial capacities for the various pile types considered is presented below. This information is intended to be used as a guide for design purposes. Table 1 - Axial Pile Capacity !—' Penetration into Medium Dense to Dense Sand *Allowable Pile Capacity (tons) 1 j Pile Type and Size (feet) Downward** Uplift 9-inch tip timber 20 30 15 30 40 20 12-inch steel pipe 20 32 16 30 45 22 40 55 28 12-inch sq uare in h ua q re precast 20 47 22 I I 30 70 30 40 90 40 12-inch augercast 20 30 15 30 40 20 40 50 25 16-inch augercast 20 40 20 30 60 40 40 85 40 11 18-inch augercast 20 50 25 30 70 35 40 100 50 *Values are for the total of dead and long-term live loads. For piles which extend into the sand 30 or 40 feet, the values may be increased by one-third when considering live loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. For piles which extend only 20 feet into the sand, we recommend no increase for short-term loads since the potential loss of capacity due to _ liquefaction potential around the upper portion of a pile would largely offset the increase in capacity around the lower part. **For piles installed in the vicinity. of Boring 18, the penetrations to achieve desired capacities may be greater due to deeper deposits of ) G compressible soils. As discussed under Fill Settlements, we recommend we be retained to reevaluate pile penetration/capacity relationships in the vicinity of Boring 18 once specific building sites have been finalized. 17 The allowable capacities presented above are based on the strength of the supporting soils for the penetrations indicated and include a factor of safety of about 2.5. The capacities apply to single piles. If piles within groups are spaced at least three pile diameters on center, no reduction for pile group action need be made. The structural characteristics of pile materials and structural connections might impose limitations on pile capacities and should be evaluated by your structural engineer. For example, steel reinforcing will be needed for augercast piles subjected to uplift. We recommend that a single reinforcing bar be installed the entire length of the augercast pile to develop the allowable uplift capacities presented in Table 1. There is . I. some risk associated with supporting structural elements on single piles. Therefore, we recommend that all major structural elements be supported on pile groups consisting of two or more piles. ti Pile Downdrag: Pile downdrag forces develop when surrounding compressible soils settle relative to a pile, thus interacting with and If' adding load to the pile. We anticipate that most of the site will receive 2 to 4 feet of fill. As discussed above, we anticipate that the fill across most of the site will require three to five weeks to settle. However, time for settlement could take up to five months across portions of the site which are underlain by thicker deposits of silt. Downdrag forces on the piles will also vary across the site with varying thicknesses of silt. We estimate that downdrag forces ranging up to as much as 25 tons could develop depending on the pile type and the thickness of compressible soils. If the building fill, slab preload fill, �! and any new fill placed within 40 feet of the structure are placed sufficiently far in advance of pile installation, pile downdrag forces need not be considered in design. We recommend that we be retained to evaluate jthe time for fill settlements to occur and anticipated downdrag loads for individual buildings after each building location, construction schedule and grade are finalized. Lateral Pile Capacity: The allowable lateral loads for the various pile types considered are presented in Table 2. These lateral capacities 4 are based on a center-to-center pile spacing of at least three pile diameters, adequate steel reinforcement, and pile-head fixity against rotation. The capacities are based on a maximum pile deflection of approximately 1/2 inch. 18 � I Table 2 - Lateral Pile Capacity Pile Type and Tip Diameter Allowable Lateral Loads (tons) L_J 9-inch tip timber 2.0 12-inch steel pipe 4.0 12-inch square precast 3.7 12-inch augercast 2.7 16-inch augercast 4.2 18-inch augercast 5.0 We recommend that reinforcing be installed to a minimum depth of 15, 19 j and 22 feet in 12- , 16- and 18-inch-diameter augercast piles, respectively, 11 L.� to resist bending movements associated with lateral loading. Resistance to lateral loads can also be developed by passive pressure on the faces of pile caps, grade beams, tie-beams and other buried foundation elements. Allowable passive resistance values are presented t _ below under LATERAL RESISTANCE. Sliding friction on the base of pile supported foundation elements should be ignored. Pile Settlement: We estimate that the settlement of pile foundations, designed and installed as recommended, will be on the order of 1/2 to 3/4 inch or less. Most of this settlement will occur rapidly as loads are applied. Postconstruction differential settlements should be minor. Pile Installation: Augercast (cast-in-place) concrete piles should be installed to the recommended penetrations using a continuous-flight, hollow- steme—� auger. As is common practice, the pile grout is pumped under pressure through the hollow stem as the auger is withdrawn. Reinforcing steel for bending and uplift is placed in the fresh grout column immediately after withdrawal of the auger. We recommend that the augercast piles be installed by a contractor — experienced in their placement and using suitable equipment. Grout pumps should be fitted with a volume-measuring device and pressure gauge so that the volume of grout placed in each pile and the pressure head can be easily determined. While grouting, the rate of auger withdrawal should be controlled such that the volume of grout pumped is equivalent to at least 115 percent of the theoretical hole volume. A minimum grout line pressure of 100 psi should be maintained while grouting. We recommend that a minimum 3500 psi grout strength be used for augercast piles. We recommend that there be a waiting period of at least eight hours between installation of piles spaced closer than 10 feet center-to-center, in order to avoid 19 • • disturbance of concrete undergoing curing in a previously cast pile. We also recommend that the contract documents for augercast piling installation include a provision for drilling three to four pile holes per building and withdrawing the auger without turning prior to grouting so that our representative can examine the soil column in the auger flights and compare actual subsurface stratigraphy with that expected from our borings. It should be noted that the recommended pile penetrations and allowable capacities presented above are based on assumed uniformity of soil conditions between the explorations. There may be unexpected variations in i the depth to and characteristics of the supporting soils across the site. 11 In addition, no direct information regarding the capacity of augercast piles (e.g. , driving resistance data) is obtained while this type of pile is being ' installed. Therefore, it is particularly important that the installation of augercast piles be carefully monitored by a qualified individual working under the direct supervision of a properly experienced registered engineer. Accordingly, we recommend that pile installation be monitored by a member I of our staff who will observe installation procedures and evaluate the adequacy of individual pile installations. If driven piles are selected, it is important that the piles be driven with a hammer having an adequate energy. The minimum hammer energy as well j� as other details of pile driving including refusal criteria can be provided once a pile type and size have been selected. If driven piles are selected, we recommend that pile installation be monitored by a member of our staff who would observe installation procedures and evaluate the adequacy of individual pile penetrations. Pile Testing Program: Due to the widely spaced nature of the borings and the variability in thickness of loose sand and soft silt across the site, we recommend that a pile load test program be included prior to installation of production piles. If augercast piles are used for support, we recommend one pile load test per building be accomplished. Each pile load test should be performed in accordance with ASTM D 1143 and loaded in accordance with Section 5.1 (Standard Loading Procedure) . If driven piles are selected, we recommend that at least four piles be test driven at each building to better determine order lengths. Depending, on the type of driven pile selected, it may be appropriate to use a pile driving analyzer during the test driving program. 20 to FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT As described previously, the site is underlain by variable deposits of + compressible silt and the potential for slab settlement must be considered in design. In our opinion, there are three options for slab support, depending on the final grades selected and time constraints, during construction. These options are to (1) support the slab on-grade where the entire slab is at or below the existing ground surface, (2) support the slab on a pad of structural fill above the existing grade after allowing n- sufficient time for the fill to settle, and (3) structurally support the 1 slab on piles. As noted previously, we expect that Option 1 is not widely applicable due to requirements from flood protection. Exceptions might include below-grade utility vaults or loading dock ramps. Within enclosed below-grade areas (e.g. , vaults) buoyancy must be considered in the design. yf We recommend that any slab supported on grade (Options 1 or 2) be y.- supported on at least 18 inches of structural fill in order to provide reasonable uniform slab support. The structural fill should meet the requirements described in the SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK section of this report. The pad of structural fill may be developed by either excavating and replacing the upper on-site soils (for Option 1) , or by building a structural fill pad on top of the existing surface (Option 2) . We recommend that the top6 inches of the 18-inchpad consist of free-drainingsand and gravel or crushed rock containing less than 5 percent fines. A vapor barrier should be placed between the base course and the floor slab to s-, ; inhibit condensation on the underside of the slab. Option 1 might be feasible for buildings where the lowest floor slab can be placed no higher than 6 inches above existing grade across the entire building area. As discussed above, some overexcavation would be required r-- to construct the structural fill pad under the slab. For Option 1, we l ' estimate that settlement of sustained floor loads of up to 150 pounds per square foot will be in the range of 1/2 to 3/4 inch. We anticipate that Option 1 may not be feasible across most of the site if finished grades will be above the present ground surface. Option 2 would involve supporting the floor slab on a pad of structural fill above existing grades. . We estimate that a surface load of 200 psf could result in 1 to 11 inches of settlement. Thus, for Option 2 we recommend that slab areas be preloaded to minimize post-construction settlement of the slab. Slabs supported on structural fill which extends above existing grades should not 21 '� J I I l be formed and poured until all settlement due to the fill and preload is ill complete. Required time for settlements to occur is discussed in the Fill Settlement section of this report. We recommend a monitoring program using settlement plates to confirm that all settlements are effectively complete before construction of slabs. The monitoring plates should be installed and read as recommended under PRELOAD/SURCHARGE FILL. We estimate that the r postconstruction settlement of slabs constructed after allowing settlement of the fill and preload to occur will be minor. Option 3 would consist of structurally supporting the slab (i.e. , supporting the slab on piles) . We recommend that a vapor barrier be placed beneath the slab. Postconstruction, settlement of structurally supported slabs should be minor. For slabs supported on at least 18 inches of structural fill, a vertical subgrade modulus of 115 pci (pounds per cubic inch) may be used for slab design. This vertical subgrade modulus is for a 1-foot by 1-foot loaded area. Earthquake shaking may result in cracking of the slab due to liquefac- tion and any resulting subsidence and nonuniform settlement between the slab and pile-supported structure. This potential damage to the slabs can be eliminated or minimized if the slabs are pile-supported, or if ground improvement measures are accomplished. However, unless the slab will be _ supporting expensive and highly sensitive equipment, we believe it would be more practical as well as more economical to repair the slab in the future if it is damaged due to earthquake shaking. PRELOAD/SURCHARGE FILL The purpose of a preload program is to preinduce a major portion of the settlements which would otherwise occur when fill and building floor loads are applied. We recommend that preload fill be placed in the building areas to minimize differential settlements between the pile-supported building and ' the on-grade slab. A preload program will also significantly reduce jpotential differential settlement due to variability in areal loading and thicknesses of compressible soils. The time required for settlements due to fill or slab loads to occur can be accelerated by placing additional fill as a surcharge. The height of surcharge required will depend on the thickness of underlying silt and the time allowable for settlements to occur. Other options such as installing wick drains could also be used to 22 it 4 . � I r_ accelerate settlements. If surcharge fills or other measures are desired H to accelerate settlements, we should be retained to provide recommendations as appropriate. We recommend that preload/surcharge fill consist of well-graded, free- ,- draining sand or sand and gravel, as described above for structural fill, so that the preload fill can subsequently be used in grading other portions of the site. Use of clean sand and gravel will also minimize difficulties in rehandling and compaction if the fill must be removed during inclement weather. Excavated soils which are not suitable for use as structural fill may be used for preload fill, however, placement and removal will be severely fl limited by inclement weather. In addition, use of this material will require about 25 percent more preload height due to its lower density. Use i of native soil surcharge material will almost certainly contaminate the upper surface of building pad fill. This problem can be compensated for by rl increasing the height of the building pad fill. , The crest of the preload/surcharge fill should extend to full height at least 10 feet outside of planned building lines. If any buildings have the potential to be expanded at a future time, the full height of the preload should extend at least 25 feet beyond those building walls which abut the future expansion area. Side slopes of preload fill should be 11:1 _2 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. Preload fill need be compacted only to the extent necessary to support construction equipment. The preload surface should be crowned slightly to prevent ponding of water. We recommend that the preload, if used, remain in place for a minimum of five weeks, or until settlement marker observations indicate that consolidation of the underlying compressible strata is largely complete. The actual preload period required will depend on the thickness and extent of compressible soil layers. Following the preloading period, the excess fill can be removed from the building areas and used as structural fill in parking areas, assuming the preload fill is of the proper gradation. We recommend that a series of monitoring plates be installed prior to placing any fill in building areas to evaluate the rate of building pad and preload fill settlement and to establish when the preload can be removed. An example of a suitable monitoring plate and a description of monitoring procedures is presented in Figure 6. Initial elevation readings of the settlement plates must be obtained when they are set in place and before any 23 fill is placed if subsequent readings are to be meaningful. Elevations of the plates and the average adjacent ground surface should then be determined on a twice-weekly basis during fill placement and weekly thereafter so that settlement progress can be defined. Review of the survey data provides important information regarding the site performance and construction schedule. The varied soil profile defined by our explorations indicates that there will be differences in settlement magnitude and rate across the site. Consequently, we recommend that settlement monitor plates be installed at about 100 to 150 feet spacing within each building. The presence of the measurement rods which extend above the settlement -4 plates and through the fill will inhibit the mobility of earthmoving equipment to some extent and the contractor must exercise care to avoid damaging or displacing the rods. The construction documents should emphasize the importance of protecting settlement plates and measuring rods from disturbance. The preload fill should be left in place until the rate of settlement ' has stopped or is occurring at a uniform slow rate. If a surcharge fill is ice; placed, it should not be removed until the magnitude of estimated settlement under design load conditions has been achieved or exceeded. For fills which cover a relatively large area and which are not surcharged, the fill should be in place as long as possible before paving and some fine grading should be anticipated to restore the desired finished grade. ' SUBGRADE WALLS The lateral soil pressures acting on subgrade walls will depend on the I nature, density and configuration of the soil behind the wall and the amount r , of lateral wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed. For walls -' that are free to yield at the top at least one-thousandth of the height of r the wall, soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as wall stiffness or bracing. Assuming that the walls are backfilled and drained as outlined in the following paragraphs, we recommend r- that yielding walls supporting horizontal backfill be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 35 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) (triangular distribution) while nonyielding walls be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 55 pcf. The above-recommended lateral soil pressures do not 24 include the effects of surcharges such as floor loads, traffic loads or other surface loading. Surcharge effects should be considered as appropri- ate. In settlement-sensitive areas (e.g. , beneath on-grade slabs) , backfill for subgrade walls should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557. At other locations, wall backfill should be compacted to between 90 and 92 percent of ASTM D-1557. Measures should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures due to overcompaction of the backfill behind the wall. Positive drainage should be provided behind subgrade walls by placing a zone of free-draining sand and gravel containing less than 5 percent 'fines (material passing No. 200 sieve) against the wall. The drainage zone should be at least 18 inches thick (measured horizontally) and extend from the base ?� of the wall to within 1 foot of the finished ground surface behind the wall. 1 Perforated drainpipe having a minimum diameter of 4 inches should be embedded within the free-draining material at the base of the wall along its entire length. This drainpipe should discharge into a tightline leading to an appropriate collection and disposal system. Alternatively, weep holes made at about 4-foot centers at the base of the walls should be sufficient to drain water from exterior walls such as those adjacent to loading dock rm areas. LATERAL RESISTANCE Resistance to lateral foundation loads developed on the soil-foundation 1 j element interfaces is a function of the frictional resistance which can develop on the base and the passive resistance which can develop on the face as the below-grade elements of the structure tend to move into the soil. For on-grade floor slabs founded on structural fill placed and compacted in r accordance with our recommendations, the allowable frictional resistance may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0.5 applied to dead-load forces. Frictional resistance should be ignored for pile supported j foundation elements. The allowable passive resistance on the face of footings, grade beams or other embedded foundation elements can be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 250 pcf (triangular distribution) where these elements are cast directly against undisturbed native soils. Alternatively, passive pressures may be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 450 pcf if all soil extending out from the face of the foundation 25 f i element for a distance at least equal to two and one-half times the height of the element consists of structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM D-1557. The allowable passive pressures will be less for any elements of the structure which extend below the water table. Below the water table, the allowable passive resistance for native soil and structural fill should be reduced to 120 and 200 pcf, respectively. We recommend that buoyant passive pressures be assumed for those portions of embedded elements which extend more than 5 feet below the existing surface. Where floor slabs abut retaining walls, available passive resistance should be calculated from the bottom of the slab. The above values do not include a factor of safety. An appropriate factor should be included. For live loads, it is our opinion that no safety factor is needed. For dead fl loads, a safety factor in the range of 1.4 to 1.5 is suggested. PAVEMENTS Pavement subgrade areas should be stripped and proofrolled or otherwise examined as recommended in SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK. We recommend that all paving areas be underlain by a minimum of 12 inches of structural fill. Across most areas of the site, this will require placement of new fill, either by raising site grades or by excavation and replacement of native soils with structural fill. Some portions of the site may be underlain by existing sand and gravel fill for which the upper 12 inches should be recompacted to meet the criteria for structural fill. Where the exposed subgrade is soft, these soils must be excavated and replaced with structural fill to form a firm, unyielding subgrade. Assuming that proper subgrade preparation is accomplished and that pavement construction is done during a period of extended dry weather, we recommend that the pavement section in automobile parking areas consist of at. least 2 inches of Class B asphalt concrete, 4 inches of clean crushed rock with less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve, and a subbase consisting of at least 12 inches of compacted clean sand and gravel fill. In roadway and loaded truck areas, the thicknesses of asphalt concrete, crushed rock and subbase should be ' increased to 3, 6 and 15 inches, respectively. The Class B asphalt concrete and crushed rock should meet the criteria specified in Section 5-04 and 9-03.9(3) , respective) , of the Washington State Department of Transporta- Y g tion Standard Specifications. 1 26 Alternatively, a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 15 may be used for design to describe the pavement support conditions at the surface, presuming that the 12 inch subbase of sand and gravel is placed as recommended. If pavement sections other than those presented above are used, we recommend that all pavement sections include at least 4 inches of free-draining crushed rock with less than 5 percent fines. If pavements are constructed during wet weather or if the subgrade is wet and cannot be compacted satisfactorily, it will be necessary to place at least 6 to 12 inches of additional free-draining sand and gravel, to provide adequate pavement support. The actual thickness of additional sand and gravel fill required will depend upon the firmness of the subgrade at specific locations and should be evaluated during construction. In soft subgrade areas, we recommend that consideration be given to placing a woven geotextile between the native soils and the granular fill to separate these L_ materials and strengthen the pavement section. The crushed rock base course and the granular fill subbase should each Li be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557. It is very important to pavement perfor- mance that backfill in utility trenches underlying paved areas also be compacted in accordance with the recommendations for structural fill presented in this report. As discussed in this report, fill placed to raise site grades will be subject to settlements due to consolidation of underlying silt deposits. We estimate that across most of the site settlements will occur within six weeks of fill placement. Construction of on-grade utilities, pavements, slabs, curbs, and other settlement-sensitive facilities should be delayed until settlements due to filling are complete. PERMANENT DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS For permanent erosion protection, all cut and fill slopes should be ,f seeded or planted. The slopes may need a temporary erosion covering such as jute matting or other erosion protection matting until the vegetation is well established. { We recommend that the pavement surfaces be sloped so that surface drainage flows away from buildings. We recommend that all roof drains be collected in tightlines for diversion into the storm drain system. Curbs, berms or drainage ditches should be constructed along the top of fill slopes 27 { to intercept surface runoff and prevent this water from flowing down the I , slopes. Collected water should be routed to an appropriate disposal point. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Design frost depths in the Puget Sound area are typically taken as 18 inches below the ground surface. We believe that 18 inches is an adequate design frost depth for the project site. We recommend that foundations supporting sensitive equipment be pile supported. In general, it is our opinion that the site soil conditions are such that vibrations will be attenuated through the ground with distance. We expect that one of the largest sources of vibration will be traffic on the railroad lines situated along the west edge of the site. Due to the location of the railroad tracks and the presence of deeper soft and loose deposits in the southern end of the site, we suggest that buildings which will house equipment sensitive to vibration be situated in the east half of the site north of the existing Sales Pavilion. It will be possible, in our 1 opinion, to design vibration-isolated foundations if needed at other locations. If desired, we can provide specific vibration studies once specific building locations and vibration tolerance criteria have been j finalized. The pH and corrosivity potential across the project site was evaluated { by testing 10 samples. The test results are presented in Appendix B. In summary, most of the soils tested were mildly corrosive. All of the samples tested in the acidic range. The redox (oxidation-reduction potential) testing indicates that the soil conditions are favorable for supporting sulfate reducing bacteria. We recommend that corrosion protection measures { such as coating or wrapping pipes in conjunction with backfilling with free- draining sand or pea gravel be considered in the final design for utilities or other buried facilities which will be susceptible to corrosion. Some portions of the site, especially east of the main track and south r- of Southwest 27th Street, may contain fill consisting of waste straw and { manure. Any organic material encountered in utility excavations should not be reused as trench backfill. Although we have recommended that any straw or manure encountered in proposed sealed areas (e.g. , pavement or slabs) be removed, there might still be a potential for manure to result in the 28 I I presence of methane gas which could migrate to utility corridors. We recommend the potential for methane be considered in the design and maintenance of utilities. LIMITATIONS � - We have prepared this report for use by BE&C Engineers and their project design team in the design and planning of a portion of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpreta- rI tions should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The design details are not known at the time of preparation of this report. As your design develops, we expect that additional consultation may L be necessary to provide for modification or adaptation of our recommenda- tions. Some additional explorations may be appropriate once specific building locations are selected, as discussed in this report. When the design has been finalized, we recommend that GeoEngineers, Inc. be retained to review the final design and specifications to see that our recommenda- tions have been interpreted and implemented as intended. Our scope does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's method, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with time should be expected. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. Construction monitoring and testing is important to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with the !r ! intent of contract plans and specifications. For consistency in the interpretation of subsurface conditions and the application of design recommendations, GeoEngineers, Inc. should be retained to provide construc- tion monitoring and consultation services during earthwork and pile foundation activities. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been accomplished in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. 29 If there are any questions concerning this report, if more design details are needed, or if we can provide additional services, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, ▪ sscr 1 o L. �''�`�' GeoEngineers, Inc. No am z3 1:e- i• °1044 113804 Nancy L. Tochko, P.E. '^ /- ; .• % '? Senior Engineer Ju,JAL t-_ ..�' Jon W. Koloski Principal II NLT:JWK:cs - I I I-- I 30 I • to �t. Y52;!,,";. /..�C%:.. Air' `PARR r• 1 �1 a l'.":•::I!! ,f,• u ,,`fc !i% :w _ .i.•.:';3:7,,r,e RtOE.'',,•'� .1'.'' '>... I ST � I ..�ti\ .<o. §I,i��a,,`` :V• G. ,�> rr_'. '0;4: ` --_ 4, n i uR� 4di:a. I}. < Y'V :i#,T 1>'t> {, ..;, ,�i,-,.:q•i." I _ '� .� L<II :ji.p �s:i�< •i:•.L .,ky_l��cc)r&<.. ,..liyn. i..:;`?:F 1 :',v'j',::.. I: :: : 1_- - .rE.FS& T a.i.�''I(h, - :y-;!- ,.,� ,iMH,,`L. ..1-< ..14 RA -:.'•+'�: '.` ill 7 N t' :;`y IBEN,iyi.. - s... ',,?,`!, rotd .. 6 t I 1L9TH . .';::., r•,ARK;`,. '. 1 < IVLV� ' � .D I..a ;ISOTH S. ti RsrN T' G 'r.�fkt B.r •'d5'7•': t >y: ��I� • - k'' tib'4.>•'t'{.< •g� ' ':::T-'--s '^ .9� 7..�I.t .,\Nc7b,V ' •'ORTNER o ��i �® I•'� -h. _u...< IH y,7, j o.t . pp stsr sT ;" • I ��+�' 1 f ISTHD sr I 63E 1 - • `•�<.T:n7_LIZ ,I t` ....-P - .�'iAil I- :>:. •r-.e;,'� I 1 I IC'. c,9 �� :' < 1 0 s ILTN s"� Yf ICI m O N �.Ru�1�� T+ .,.b.�� tr 6..,� aS`�'� : ��\\ 1•RD „n,,.7•_ • •••• A ...�,:,..:.% I •:ti ,�.•;.� �1^. � �z. � • �."� �. �., r ,a y o4 Mk .�:. 6W ar1{9i _?ly_: nr ,4 <1� •ems`<_ - • .,,Ky�. :.�. -- '-S)HII• •l H • 'I_ s Imrrt sr. W l z - - ;.I>.':.;,--"I;.:;;; : -...j..r:' I+ `riY' (! r Tx 1 . n a O 4A.' 2 _ -:Y 5..: .x: \:�' sw 9TI1 . :',(•',�-'.- •(+! q - • s 1 s IRtn .I • , _ v' ':. _ .�J>,: 'fc* "+.y al9 n NtH • = -26,.':_-. 4. ° :' " , ; , C�sD ....,•�.. i: - FF ^'tT••GRm„ z _ Y r251.: .,' If, Rrr.',,V.6 S 17OTN ST M� ,'I. m / 1' S I• [NSEN Q -*.• a3I T 0It. ?I°:.: :¢ E`i>' ,' :!.. i..m . •L I GRftRe ' . D k•.. ▪ :• --: ',.':';:1",::‘?.- 4 T : • - ;> • • • sl NINKLER u I .• . ::;:,7;%;:i ,.:w.S ':i;:; ,;,, `-� id3 rv-yauHo-OR cc-• ,!.;,:-"aq "s1 `3-r< '. - ,SI]ITH—�_—__ .._I urcRGfnc,•: .. I :.'i _ .i,Q _3'< TN �175 H S7 ,: [Bvru e - •- - s:';l^.- = - "..I ': .I�..> .i g A ]TI ST • br 176" _ST ® 1 P..:.'.•;', .<>-- _ ▪;,LEI r-- • Ieo�1io as d T'j'cw< �Lnl sr I.,1, to '['bow lAK - - - 1:W, ll R I N xs ■ f ,4 - - 'I ..y•. 'Fs 4c.,.ry. /:-I '▪ i. s Sr 9 m. �-�,:.,,:.;;,,,,-.,:::,,I....,..",',..! �'�,�".': ::I y: I �17 rrN sKxo•c a �' - DR I: •WY , 'I .1:1•,- I S LIST'.. `S.1)) •tT I > � - 'ST' - VALLEY TH r9 N sT ' •x�'.y . I•r > .0.(n .,e � II<. 19Q 5 • •'' Q OI I •IA•.:i,:F,:•. 9t4. 4 5!� it I. • -:RD1. ^� ti.- r �I •SW«.a _•I RD' _I- ;?.. „�'�,,¢..' ' ^.+ .I. ,_act 1 o < I:;f 'sDAtFrrnRx 3 o.,. 5©N eI r ST 1>I TH -' T 7..' -.-�i;','.'..L _ 1RTN, t•'r I I I LSi(6' • N I .1:,•', ST -- Im w - 7,71 - I f I .i.i:. E. - 'RNER51 s 1S2ND I O __ �.Y':�h:, .I:.. '. b 1 Q f I. Y�, a '"b I / .,.,.:, kr it /l I • I a • - rc;%y.;1-,,i_-=;!• ':`x...,;,t... PARK../1 -` ul ..$-LBBTH L,. I I (V I ::\1-ie:.i?;!.':...::, . :...I sE LZ]S .S1 T I :Y'.::- .i::Li�,:.`;:::.. SE IINTN_-.sT / • c . `, .. -- . IZ Q I :.: 18TT ST 2 I �s IeBTH S7 s I I tH 9T Q I s 16yTH ' t • I e . I a ai 1 I S. W1.:; ::.:‘,.:::','.;,.. 't.:,` ` Ia' /� .. ..�.. _ a 4 I I..+�:. `Z•'• •I IZ eun'i5E ,,,,,,TN < 31. fir. I s MTH N ST ti s ISO ljH�sr _;U99IN3S. • - •I b 9e `19DIF ST , - s N I Iti 1 �:''�� `_ sE j90TN•�T N. rrcO � - _<--. . - _ --in — > — }>---__-' _- -�1(' Sc� InIY•yMD s5191NP :•19N' .. .`r .. Vl �_` $F Ja U �IS IIV --__ —ST.. r_N; rc 7..I S MOH` a sT ; KE 0'5, I s 9RHST 1It r=II I 9f IN' © < I y H 5\91,N 5` I \5_•� i- I SE Ivtr 1 Nsg • '• ' I s t%TH ST \ Iii: I N - • �:: I • $- SI 19BTH •• ", .1... SIN ) --'4L---- • • o"�P 2 3 I < s ro,TH Sr i a-5_r99PS:L, I1904i ST twr,9�c''.! '1','I:. �'„1 3 G I BOfING AEROSPACE CENTER I m T} al NI m $ s 2 T 1 a$T I > _ _.__— i I 'I a m I 15 27oTH sT m' aI aI _—_OF _ 20JTH�,,,• Sl - Cr N O N °r No Scale O O N 1i O \i • t VICINITY MAP Geo4'Engineers FIGURE 1 I. c:‘V . , ice' Grp „ „... , ce / �Q ` • ! . . G� 'r i t��g / Training Track 5Q. . \ 0 500 1000 ,J —� 10 Property Line ( I _ I P �� _ __ 5•a / — � - - -- - - - - - - - - - - . Sales SCALE IN FEET - - - a • 1 9 �� 4"MW-3 8 Barns -- A -+-5 11 ' Pavilion! c I A' '--'iUW-11 v t co t� • ,1 ` 0 -�1,4. �-17 19 • I , . ! \ Main Race Track - 4 • j NtL \. 0 1± BORING LOCATION AND NUMBER --•• 1 FOR CURRENT STUDY d. B� � o 0 0 ° �13 9NW-�16� .'�18 B' i IIfIIW-1 •, r �z 1 0 O MONITOR WELL LOCATION AND 0 MW-1 '0 12 NUMBER FOR CURRENT STUDY ° �IAW-12 -�-15. m 7 __ _-- 0 BORING OR• MONITOR WELL BY -- - - GEOENGINEERS FOR PREVIOUS STUDIES 'FOR OTHERS Burlington Northern RR t!' LOCAT ION OF CROSS SECT ION OPEN SWALES AND/OR MAJOR O 0 7 DRAINAGE DITCHES O o cr m MAJOR CULVERTS 0 C6 • ,. r West Val% Ni M a ,et 1 _ 150 .../ \ (.(2.-- 61• ..\\N„.„._' -. SITE PLAN Geo��Engineers FIGURE 2 • A' '� 3 cv�a cv�� . �, 3 T rcr)8 - W W OfO *' ,- S Cr1 ch $ N $ 03--g (7 � V ON 2' 2 • ZN Zcy z 7, Q N Q E QN 20- m _ m � 03 08 -20 - Very soft to soft silt (fill and native material) — Soft to medium stiff silt (fill and native material) / , — _ — — �r- —_ 1 .-J S �_ 0- — r' -0 Loose sand to silty sand "-� ` ` _ _ a — m c / u_ LL -- Medium dense sand to silty sand c / o - 5-20- ✓ with occasional layers of -20 , aldense sand and gravel Koose sand m W - W - {Loose san -40- --40 - • -60- --60 N NOTES: • 1 . SECTION LINES SHOWN ON FIGURE 2 . Horizontal Scale: 1" = 300' Vertical Scale: 1" = 20' �Z 2 . ELEVATIONS INTERPRETED FROM AERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC i J MAP, DATED 11/11/78, PREPARED BY WALKER & .ASSOCIATES . _ I _ 3 .THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE PROFILE ARE p BASED ON INTERPRETATION BETWEEN WIDELY SPACED BORINGS to AND SHOULD BE 'CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE . 1 O --i 0 O _ yi CROSS SECTION A- A' Geo�OEngineers FIGURE 3 • B B' m 3 3 m� . Ww 3 csi3 c+?p to r_o *"N r. - T0 TT N (�OpN T CO T �" N m � g z zN z ® oc � o °m g 20- c g g m 03 °°" _ _ - -20 ea = __ p Very soft silt (fill? Soft silt (fill?) :. 9 �� 9 IW P Loose sand to silty sand o silt with a Very soft to soft silt with ? - , 0- Loose sand to silty sandSoft silt` 't _ .a-trace of peat :2>-- -0 _ Loose sand ? .r �i --20 I;-20- Medium dense sand to silty LL c sand with occasional layers c O of dense sand and gravel a _o co / :as . a') - m 1 W -40- _ --40 W Loose sand and medium - stiff silt ) y_ - , /? -60- 'i --60 o Q, - N 1 ` -80- --80 : NOTES: 1 . SECTION LINES SHOWN ON FIGURE 2 . Horizontal Scale' 1" = 300' J 2 . ELEVAT IONS INTERPRETED FROM AERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC Vertical Scale: 1" = 20' MAP, DATED 11/11/78, PREPARED BY WALKER & ASSOCIATES . N - 3 .THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE PROFILE ARE BASED ON INTERPRETATION BETWEEN WIDELY SPACED. BORINGS oAND SHOULD BE, CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE . O N i Q \�/ FCROSS SECTION B - B' Geo�OEngineers FIGURE 4 i u I_ ' 8 - 6 - W U z v r' - 4 z W c W-J •. H cn F- i Nil Cr) 2 _ I _ •• 0 t rl z 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 SURFACE LOAD (PSF) , (DUE TO NEW FILL OR SLAB LOADS) N O I`1 o 1 I rn 1 _ o CV o I 1 \�j RANGE OF ESTIMATED SETTLEMENTS Geo� ,Englneers FIGURE 5 1 MEASUREMENT ROD, 1/2" 0 PIPE !_- / OR REBAR ^�/ CASING, 2" 0 PIPE (SET ON PLATE, NOT FASTENED) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE COUPLING WELDED TO PLATE SETTLEMENT PLATE, 16" X 16" X 1/4" SAND PAD IF NECESSARY (NOT TO SCALE) I � NOTES : 1 . INSTALL MARKERS ON FIRM GROUND OR ON SAND PADS IF NEEDED FOR STABILITY . TAKE INITIAL READING ON TOP OF ROD AND AT ADJACENT GROUND LEVEL PRIOR TO PLACE- , MENT OF ANY FILL . 2 . FOR EASE IN HANDLING, ROD AND CASING ARE USUALLY INSTALLED IN 5-FOOT SECTIONS . AS FILL PROGRESSES, COUPLINGS ARE USED TO INSTALL ADDITIONAL LENGTHS . CONTINUITY IS MAINTAINED BY READING THE TOP OF THE MEASUREMENT ROD, THEN IMMEDIATELY ADDING THE NEW SECTION AND READING THE TOP OF THE ADDED ROD . BOTH READINGS ARE RECORDED . � I 3 . RECORD THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE MEASUREMENT ROD IN EACH MARKER AT THE RECOMMENDED TIME INTERVALS . EACH TIME, NOTE THE ELEVATION OF THE ADJACENT FILL SURFACE . 4. READ THE MARKER TO THE NEAREST 0 . 01 FOOT, OR 0 . 005 O FOOT IF POSSIBLE . NOTE THE FILL ELEVATION TO THE NEAREST 0 . 1 FOOT . N5 . THE ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE REFERENCED TO A TEMPORARY BENCHMARK LOCATED ON STABLE GROUND AT LEAST 100 FEET FROM THE EMBANKMENT . Irl • . p, SETTLEMENT PLATE DETAIL Geo OEngineers FIGURE 6 ' ''\ • I '\ �'� lI / \ , ( ) \ '1 , — ' \ -V \ v Fr •i- - • ;1 I " ! /\\ 1 /I ! ( , .( \ ,I r•i. I - /, \'I \ • h' / �I I\ 1 • 'I . i /' - .,,,\ I / ,-' / \ \ �.. 1 1 , / i I i.. j \ , ( ,`\ ' �j�'/ /,= �1 7' ��i 1 \ .\ / • \)-r \ 1 j �- I 1 I \ ;\ I �.' '( l ,t' �.- // (, i (. / \ 'V ( �- I r/ i \I , ^`( I'\' I \ /\ I ; ` J ,. r' - -! l /l )- ]. i I • \`',/ ,'(-\ 1 /, 1 , y ' \ I,, ,./ \ �' 1- (' ` / 1 \ 'r•l I I 1 7' / \. •\ 1. \ ) f. / i )\, 'j1 I�\I1.I ' // �. -V.� ' - 1 /. •,1 ( , ,_ / __i ,\ : r . J � 1,/ h ( I f\ ,\ 1 �\'_•\ l; '-3 - '' / 1 - , •- --/', -,/ --, ' J ;�( I U , ( I , / 1 ' APPENDIX A I l ' , I I \ _ , 7 / I , i\ I , \ ' I / \ \ 7— /j ( \ \ \ 1 \ ,; d" I,' ,// - lit .\ ,\ //. ' 1. \• _ \"\ \ l� \ - -r\ - ( C� ~ ! I - -- 1 ( \) 'I / r 1 / ! \ • �' I I f 1 ! /; ., , ) f -1 I '' ' \ I \ - - .,\' \ '. ('• ` '/ /• —� • \ - , r- ,.-\- .\\ 1 '1 ' \ ) J, 1 ' , , - � / ( - ' _ ' I r \ f / 'r E—( 1 / " ' -, . / 1 / / (' r" J. ' •✓ 1 --- / \\/' (-• \/ ! ( \ '/ \' \ /•-- : '/ 1 // ) - I i1 \ .� \ ,l \ ./ - If- (. _ , ( . '} � ( /�L / / / - � i -- - \ V . / ' \ / ,V . ' \ / . ( ' . ``, I \/ 1 \ \' / - I I -r / r `\ _ C ,ly( - / ) \ , . ' \ y.' • . \ ,( ,' I / `\ ' . 1 / '1 \\ \ s �I N / 1 ) ?,. ` , —, ''/ '/I\ II \' I '', (. l 1, • ,I .'°: • I/ I) I, / -7 \'` '\ \ 1/ 1 /, / / 1, I \ \ • •,/- ; ! h''' / • \ • \ • ,\. �( V / \ / ,\ • _ � I ) 1 \ • \ / „ I. , I,\ ' -- _I s' \ �� \ \ / /.._ \ /.I ._ •\' <� . 1` ) \ I -' !/ APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD EXPLORATIONS The surface and subsurface soil and ground water conditions at the site were explored by drilling 19 borings at the locations shown in Figure 2. The boring locations and elevations were determined following drilling by surveying performed by Wilsey & Ham Pacific. The test borings were drilled between December 3 and 7, 1990 to depths of 44 to 89 feet below existing grade. These borings were advanced using a truck-mounted, continuous-flight, hollow-stem auger drill. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained from the borings using a 3-inch-outside- diameter split-barrel sampler driven into the soil with a 300-pound hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches, or other indicated distance, is recorded on the boring logs. All samples were sealed in containers to limit moisture loss, labeled i and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The borings were continuously monitored by a representative of our firm who selected sample intervals, examined and classified the soils recovered, kept a log of each boring, and monitored the installation of the monitor wells. Soils encountered were classified visually in general accordance with the classification system described in Figure A-1. A key to the boring log symbols is presented in Figure A-2. The logs of the borings are presented in Figures A-3 through A-42. The exploration logs are based on our interpretation of the field and laboratory data and indicate the various types of soils encountered. They also indicate the depths at which these soils or their characteristics change, although the change might actually be gradual. If the change occurred between samples in the borings, it was interpreted. Six monitor wells were installed as part of our study. The wells consist of 2-inch-diameter PVC, flush-threaded well casing and screen. Some of the wells were installed in the original bore holes after backfilling the lower portion of the holes with a soil-bentonite mixture. For the ' remainder of the wells, the drillers moved 3 to 4 feet away from the boring location and drilled down to the desired installation depth. The wells !r extended to depths of 15.5 to 20 feet. The top of the screen was set at a depth of 5 feet except for Monitor Well 1 which was set at a depth of A - 1 10 feet. A flush-mounted steel monument was installed over each well. The details of each monitor well are presented on the Monitor Well logs, Figures A-43 through A-48. Water level measurements were accomplished on January 4, 1991. The results of the measurements are presented on the monitor well logs. LABORATORY TESTING All soil samples were brought to our laboratory for further exami- nation The samples were examined for evidence of recent movement or disturbance. Selected samples were tested to determine moisture content, dry density, gradation, compressibility, and strength characteristics. Numerous soil samples were tested to determine moisture contents and dry densities. These determinations were used to correlate various soil strata and to evaluate the unit weight and degree of saturation of the soils. The results of the moisture and density determinations are presented on the boring logs. Mechanical grain-size analyses were performed on four samples to aid in classification of granular soils. Gradation curves for these samples are presented in Figure 49 and 50. Atterberg limits tests were performed on three samples to aid in classification of fine-grained soils. The results of the Atterberg limit tests are presented in Figure A-51. One-dimensional consolidation tests were performed to measure the dimensional and time-rate compressibility characteristics of three fine- grained samples. The consolidation test results are presented in Figures A-52 through A-54. Strength characteristics of coarse-grained samples were evaluated by performing triaxial tests. Strain-controlled triaxial compression tests were performed on 4 granular samples. The tests were run in a consolidated- drained manner. The triaxial compression test results are presented in Figures A-55 and A-56. i A - 2 • . SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM , GROUP MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL GROUP NAME GRAVEL CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL-GRADED GRAVEL,FINE TO COARSE COARSE GRAVEL GRAINED GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL SOILS MORE THAN 50% GRAVEL GM' SILTY GRAVEL OF COARSE FRACTION WITH FINES RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE GC CLAYEY GRAVEL MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON SAND CLEAN SAND SW WELL-GRADED SAND, FINE TO NO. 200 SIEVE COARSE SAND 1 SP POORLY-GRADED SAND MORE THAN 50% SAND SM SILTY SAND OF COARSE FRACTION WITH FINES PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE SC CLAYEY SAND SILT AND CLAY ML SILT FINE INORGANIC GRAINED CL CLAY 1 SOILS LIQUID LIMIT ,- LESS THAN 50 ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT MORE THAN 50% INORGANIC PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY I LIQUID LIMIT 50 OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT i-- HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT 1 NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: - 1. Field classification is based on Dry — Absence of moisture, dusty, dry visual examination of soil in general to the touch accordance with ASTM D2488-83. Moist — Damp, but no visible water 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487-83. Wet — Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from 3. Descriptions of soil density or below water table consistency are based on interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. 1 I co co \it, SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM in Geo En ineers ' W \\/ FIGURE A-1 a LABORATORY TESTS: SOIL GRAPH: AL Atterberg limits CP Compaction SM Soil Group Symbol CS Consolidation (See Note 2) DS Direct shear GS Grain - size Distinct Contact Between %F Percent fines Soil Strata HA Hydrometer analysis SK Permeability Gradual or Approximate Location of Change SM Moisture content Between Soil Strata MD Moisture and density SP Swelling pressure Water Level TX Triaxial compression Bottom of Boring UC Unconfined compression - CA Chemical analysis BLOW-COUNT/SAMPLE DATA: — 22 Location of relatively Blows required to drive a 2.4-inch I.D. undisturbed sample split-barrel sampler 12 inches or other indicated distances using a 12 ® Location of disturbed sample 300-pound hammer falling 30 inches. — 17 0 Location of sampling attempt with no recovery _ 10 0 . Location of sample obtained Blows required to drive a 1.5-inch I.D. in general accordance with (SPT) split-barrel sampler 12 inches Standard Penetration Test or other indicated distances using (ASTM D-1586) procedures 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. -' 26 m Location of SPT sampling attempt with no recovery 2 Location of grab sample "P" indicates sampler pushed with weight of hammer or against weight of drill rig. 1 NOTES: 1. The reader must refer to the discussion in the report text, the Key to Boring Log Symbols and the exploration logs for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. • 2. Soil classification system is summarized in Figure A-1. cc El ,4E - KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS 0' Geo 4 Engineers FIGURE A-2 TEST DATA BORING 1 ul in LP 31 N I- a,' 1 -4 DESCRIPTION tlW u 3 C O. Grou • -IC n x L ICI a. -Ci O E Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 12.55 J U)" DO.. IOU N 0 ••• SM Brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel(loose,moist)(fill) 0 - MI' Gray silt(very soft to soft,moist) - ! -- MD, 45 76 2 I _ AL 5- -5 •.••• SM Gray silty fine sand(loose to medium dense,wet) _ _ MD 27 11 ® • _ - :71 10 - nic silt soft moist to wet -10 ML Gra silt with t to 0 I I I OL - - I I 1 - MD 144 33 3 II I I - III I I 1 - F 15 - I I I -15 w - w - •%.••• SM/ Dark gray silty fine sand to fine sandy silt with organic matter - - ML (loose,soft,wet) - H - MD , 40 81 8 I • - • - •2 , I- - -•-••-- - E. - p 20 - SP Dark gray fine to medium sand(medium dense to dense,wet) —20 1 _ - _ MD 26 95 27 - m r--i 25 — •, SW Dark gray fine to coarse sand with gravel and a trace of organic -25 matter(medium dense,wet) E - 23 ••T•E - TF Q o 30 - -30 1.-: > SP Dark gray fine to medium sand(dense,wet) J - Z II - ' - 35 - -35 m - - m - 21 Grades to sand with fine gravel - 1 co _ _ I i J a).4 140 - —40 N / m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols. �_ I -.j Log of Boring Geo�o Engineers Figure A-3 ' 1 ' TEST DATA BORING 1 o (Continued) ..., , in L.4.1 3 I O 3C 4J 0 I- 441 -i„ DESCRIPTION leo iii,_ 3 C O. Group -1 ... 3IC u 0 3 E %-01, ▪ 00 X Lim -1 0 II Symbol OM U) .. ' 40 40 .:__,...,..*.•.-_ ;.•-----: SP— Dark gray fme to medium sand with silt,a trace of coarse sand, _ •:• ;.: SM fine gravel and shell fragments(medium dense,wet) _ _ • MD, 21 102 24 I •:• ... _ - - GS ...:-::•:::: 45 — ... ... —45 • -..• ........:*•-•.: 27 II ....'....:': _ .::.• . Boring completed at 483 feet on 12/3/90 _ - Ground water encountered at 6 feet during drilling 50 — —50 1 _ _ - - - - - - 55 I-- w w - - u. _ f Z _ _ H - - ,- I H - - D. , I oLLI 60 — , —60 - - ,,,, 0) - - r- 65 — —65 \ .-1 - - u) 1 E - - 0 Wi i _ - c.) 70 — —70 g _ _J _ Z •• - - 1 . _ J _ - 75 — —75 - - ID ID I - - • co 0) m 01 80 — — H - CD Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols .' . #9P Log of Boring Geo\ Engineers .••• . Figure A-•4 • TEST DATA BORING 2 w to LJ 3 u . ®! 3C 4.i ■ F- 401 m„ 3 a DESCRIPTION .n •-4 C— 31 C u n 3 E Group J U.X. 1 n m 0 N Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 15.03 '"Im. '� GP— Brown fine gravel with silt and fine sand(loose,moist)(fill) 0 - igeirits.GM - - .•• SM/ Black to mottled gray silty fine sand to fine sandy silt(loose, _ 7 ••: ML medium stiff,moist) 5— —5 - SP Black fine sand with a trace of silt(loose,wet) _ 7 , 10 — —10 - /..• SM Dark gray silty fine sand(very loose,wet) - MD 40 82 3 • : - ▪ 15 — —15 W = w - a z - . H x — 6 ® • •• - - ►- - - - a O 20— -• —20 —20 co - 16 ® SP Black fine to medium sand with a trace of silt(medium dense, t - wet) - 25 — —25 \ N _ - a N U MD 18 109 38 I Grades to with a trace of coarse sand U) - 0 30 — —30 J _ Z SW/ Gray gravelly fine to coarse sand to sandy fine to coarse gravel t •• - •_ .. 'W (medium dense,wet) - 20 :- - - . 35 — t: —35 to -- m — _-, - m 14 • •.•• SP Gray medium sand(medium dense,wet) — - co' Im m - - I a 40 — / —40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols \ -�t Log of Boring Geo�P Engineers Figure A-5 • 11 TEST DATA BORING 2 • (Continued) 4-1 m� 3 C o DESCRIPTION Grow e o o L m a -40 E Symbol J EC.)v 0Dv CO CO 40 40 SP Black fine sand(dense,wet) 41 45 — /,• SP Gray medium sand with shell fragments(medium dense to dense, —45 • wet) - 18 Boring completed at 49.0 feet on 12/3/90 - 50 — Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling —50 � 55 — —55 m w -LI- - H H - - 0 060 — —60 I to - 65 — —65 U) - UI n 70 — —70 F J - - - Z 75 — —75 a - m m - N 80 — —80 Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Qe• Log of Boring Geo ke Engineers Figure A-6 TEST DATA BORING 2 (Continued) 4.3 03 IV L4.3 3 3C EV 4J IV 4-1 —3 DESCRIPTION •-Iin4-1 103,_ 3 C 11 C ED 3 E Group LW 0.. m Symbol 03 U) 40 - • ..• . 40 •:• :• • SP Black fine sand(dense,wet) . . ... •. 41 • •*.- - 1 45 — - SP Gray medium sand with shell fragments(medium dense to dense, ••• . • wet) - —45 • •-•.-- 1 -1 . 18 I Boring completed at 49.0 feet on 12/3/90 50 — Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling —50 55 — —55 Ui H I F a. ow 60 — — a) 1 7,1 65 — —65 1 0.) Io •• 70 — —70 •• I I- , — z 75 — —75 Hia co Icn I' 80 — 0 Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Log of Boring Geo 'Engineers iNk.e Figure A-6 • TEST DATA BORING 3 • � ; •l •■ 3 II n 7C 4 i 1- 114-1 M,, I.1 a DESCRIPTION 1' Grou 4 0 0 X i aI a -I 0 II Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 14.28 1 ' J ZU -' CI CI.. mt) CO P 0 �_• 2 inches crushed rock(fill) 0 ML 1 - Gray silt(medium stiff,moist)(fill) - - 5 I - 5— —5 ••• SM Gray silty fine sand(very loose,wet) ; f - 3 _ - 10 - • -10 I MD 69 58 4 ■ ML Gray silt with organic matter and a trace of sand(very soft to - - soft,wet) - E- 15 •! - SM Gray silty fine sand(medium dense,wet) `15 /�-; W - - tL _ Z - • • - • H . - - - 24 ■ : `1 a _ .••-`•- SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) 0 20 — - —20 Irsi _ SW Black fine to coarse sand with occasional gravel(medium dense, _ wet) co 17 g •- - W _ .- .�+ 25 — —25 N — 1GW/ Gray sandy fine to coarse gravel interbedded with gravelly _ - .- SW medium to coarse sand(medium dense,wet) - U 17 ® .-. 0 30 — • —30 d I z •— — • .. _ .. _ • - MD 11 127 18 - _ 35 — . .q —35 Lim _ — m �,y 1 .•: SP Dark gray fine to medium sand(medium dense to dense,wet) } is' ■ - m � 40 — —40 m i Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 1 . p � Log of Boring Geo 0I Engineers Figure A-7 • TEST DATA BORING 3 • (Continued) m 1-1-1 01 3 C 4.1 I 4.) DESCRIPTION C 0-• u 0 E Group oox Lam -40 I Symbol -1 EU 13 CI M tO 40 40 .......•. ••• . ••• .•• _ 19 III .....:..... Boring completed at 44.0 feet on 12/4/90 45 — Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling —45 50 — —50 55 — —5H - i3LLI 60 — —60 co 65 — —65 ru I' 6 o 70 — —70 Z • 75 — —75 LO 1 CO i 80 — —80 Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 13P Log of Boring Geo k el Engineers likN4/Os Figure A-8 TEST DATA BORING 4 to LI L4-1 a ■ i 0 ]C +1 ■ ~ 418+ -4,, i.1 a DESCRIPTION Grou • FD o X1.11a. O a. -10 U 111 Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 18.58 I _I_ 0 ML Mottled grayish-brown sandy silt with a trace of roots(very soft 0 - to soft,moist to wet) - MD 45 74 2 , '-'' 5— • SP— Brownish-gray fine sand with silt(very loose to loose,wet) —5 i : SM _ 2 ® - - _ 10 - • - -10 s ■ - 15 - • -15 W - •--.•--- SP Dark gray fine sand(medium dense,moist) - lL • - H - 20 ■ - F- - - 0 , • 20 — '.•:- SP Black fine to medium sand(loose,wet) -20 6 - m m - - �I a ^ 25 - -25 - N _ - -' 1 E - MD 30 77 8 ■ - U Ul - ;? 30 - -30 I- IJ - - - Z - 8 ■ - •35 - -35 _ '-.- SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense to dense,wet) _ m - - m 36 ■ - I m m - - • i I 1 el 40 - �.:. -40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols I \� Log of Boring Geo\�Engineers Figure A-9 • TEST DATA BORING 4 —, m (Continued) , . w 7C 4i r ~ 4.101 a� 3 C a DESCRIPTION .0 •aC" 71Cp O7 E Group EO v 00va MO w Symbol 00 _ • 41 � - z_! 45 - -45 `i _ 32 I • _ 50 - -50 Dark gray interbedded fine sand with silt to silty fine sand - (medium dense,wet) - - 37 n - L. • • F 55 - • -55 H _ 17 N _ 4 a - •--i Si 60 - �/• • ML Gray fine sandy silt with occasional shell fragments(medium stiff, —60 - wet) - _ i - - i • _ MD 37 83 7 - m m 1 --"_• SP— Gray fine sand with silt and occasional shell fragments(medium - -65 \ -65 - : SM dense,wet) a _ f—i N - U _ 29 � - co _ _ U 70 _ • /.•.•:' SP Giay fine sand with occasional wood fragments(medium dense to -70 •i j_ dense,wet) J ' Z - • - 1� - 34 75 — SW Gray fine to coarse sand with gravel and a trace of shell _75 `'—. fragments(very dense,wet) - y - 'gy • m = CO _ MD 9 130 55 • =; „w Crh _ ::? 80 j -80 / m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 1 �'' Log of Boring l = Geo�'P En ineers �`�. g Figure A- 10 TEST DATA BORING 4 - . gg (Continued) ,---, , 4, (I ‘, (g w 3 • — I- 4.I IV •••i,..., 1 4.I -i DESCRIPTION SW •ii_ 3 C 0. .0 -4C^ • 3IC 0 0 3 E Group ,---1 ru o o x LSD. -10 II Symbol _I EC.1,., 0 Os. CO 0 U) I - - 80 80 , .., :•• - ; . - 55 - - Boring completed at 83.5 feet on 12/4/90 - Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling 85 — —85 - . - - - - - - - 90 — • —90 . - - - ! - - 1 . ___ 1- 95 — —95 ' U1 IL - - ) • 1 IL - Z H - - I I- - - a. 1.00 — —100 - - , - - - - CO co - --, - 1 r- , ,_, 105 — —105 \ - (1J - - ,--, - - , E , 0 - - CI - - <I . 110 — —110 . •• I- -I - - - Z ,.7 - - - - ' I 115 — —115 . - - ; . 0 csi . - - CO 1 . -, 0 - - CD CD I 1 1 I - - or 1 120 — —120 .4 1 __ s. Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols I --1 '''Atli o,. Log of Boring I i . Geo 1'0 Engineers Figure A-li 1 ' TEST DATA BORING 5 Li I-ii al oi C ••'ice 1 DESCRIPTION MP m U 3 C O. Grou q 0 0 X LL m p, .-I 0 ID Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 13.70 J EU v CI o v MU U) 1 li 0 2 inches asphalt concrete underlain bybrown silty fine to medium 0 - ML sand(medium dense,moist)(fill) - _ Dark gray silt with a trace of sand(soft to medium stiff,moist) i I - _ MD 34 87 4 I _ 5- -5 - f. • SM/ Dark gray silty fine sand to silt with sand(very loose,soft,wet) - •- : • ML - ` � _ 2 I _ __ 10 — • —10 - SP Black fine sand with a trace of silt(very loose to loose,wet) - _ MD 31 91 4 - 1 F15 - -15 7w - - J' -H 1 •I - - • l- - - 0. 1_ O 20 - SP Black fine to medium sand with a trace of silt(dense,wet) -20 - • MD, 22 103 31 0 •• - T .-1 1 - GS - • °�' 25 - -25 LI' E29UGrades to sand with fine gravel U 30 - -30 : I' Z ' 40 - 1 - - 35 - -35 L.- m - • - • m _ 21 � - W fm - - a 40 - 1 J -40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanaMon of symbols I i ' ! I+ Log of Boring Geo�Og Engineers Figure A-12 . 1 • TEST DATA BORING 5 r-i Di (Continued) C 4-3 II I- a 3 1 DESCRIPTION �'' Grou a o 0 X L i a -II D III Symbol -I EU;.. OO.. MO N 40 L 40 - SP Dark gray fine to medium sand with shell fragments(medium - dense,wet) _ r-' - - 23 45 - -45 _ 23 - 50 - •=.' SW/ Gray gravelly fine to coarse sand to sandy fine to coarse gravel 50 , , -_. !)GW (very dense,wet) - :' + _ : t. _ MD 10 131 50 '• - •. • 55 - _:'..i. -55 W : H - 45 , � - i_-! I-- - Boring completed at 58.5 feet on 12/3/90 _ + 0- Ground water encountered at a depth of about 6 feet during 1 _ ow 60 - • drilling —60 I 0 0) - - --, \ 65 - -65 :_- N - - .-I U - - 0) - - Q ' ,-1 0 70 - -70 J , ZJ - - 75 - -75 m - - m 0 - - f m - . N 80 - -80 .I 1 0 Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Log of Boring Geo NO Engineers Figure A=13 r 1 TEST DATA BORING 6 O C 4) II - I- 'ii d •4,, 1 4i -{ DESCRIPTION .CI •pc-+ aCp 3 7 E Group ' l E0 O N o o a CO 0 N Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 17.27 0 ML Brown sandy silt with wood fragments(medium stiff,moist)(fill) 0 - 6 I - i^' 5- -5 - 7 ® - 10 - /. • SM Black silty fine sand with occasional layers of fine sand(loose, -10 wet) - L . 1- - MD 32 87 6 • : - L • • 1- 15 - -15 W - ••W . . W - _ _ 12 - 1_ ± 0 20 - -20 `F- - 2 ❑ - m 0) - • • ~ a 25 - - -25 E - •: • : OL/ Gray organic silt with lenses of dark brown peat and sand(soft, 0 MD • 181 28 6 - .- : PT wet) - N - 2.: . - ct ` .30 - .7.. . GW Gray fine to coarse gravel with sand(very dense,wet) -30 53 ® .: 35 - -35 r! - SW- Gray fine to coarse sand with silt,gravel and a trace of organic - N _- SM matter(medium dense to dense,wet) to coMD, 13 ' 118 30 4•• • - rn co _ -• 1 ;mil 40 _ GS '. a / —40 m Note:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols i ' �/ _ i � Log of Boring Geo\o'Engineers I' Figure A-14 - i ; ' TEST DATA BORING 6 I1 01 (Continued) 4.1 al II ~ n -i^ i DESCRIPTION •-4C.. ]ICu 0] E Group EU.0 o o a m c�i N Symbol s 40 — f . 40 x, • - - - 42 , :. - --.1 45 — " SP Gray fine to medium sand(dense,wet) —45 _ - 37 - ' - Boring completed at 49.0 feet on 12/3/90 - 50 — Ground water encountered at approximately 63 feet during —50 j�l drilling F 55 — —55 r- w IL - - L_ z - - i M - - 1- I H - - 0 i-. I o 60 — —60 - m m _ a 65 — —65 N _ _ .1 N _1 0 - N - - o 70 — —70 L-1 Z - 75 — —75 L. m - - CO 1 - - ti- co 0) `_- N 80 — —80 r m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols ' I ��• Log of Boring Geoff Engineers I *e Figure A-.15 TEST DATA BORING 7 to Cli U L4J 31 M U 3 C .1 M I- M" 3 C a DESCRIPTION Gro m o o� L U 0 -I 0 E Symbol ED.. 13 CL. m D N _ 0 �.•• 2 inches asphalt concrete and 5 inches crushed rock 0 • SP—Dark gray fine sand with silt(very loose,wet)(fill?) - . SM - 3 El - I 5- : -5 ML Gray silt with organic matter and lenses of peat(soft,moist) - MD 57 66 3 I - ' 10 — —10 SM/ Interbedded dark gray silty fme sand and brown silt with peat - . - ML (loose,soft,wet) - ' ; - 12 • : - F15 - • -15 w - - -:-. •- SP Black fme to medium sand with wood fragments(loose,wet) IL Z - - H _ = MD 48 69 6 I - H - - IL !_ 0 20 - -20 — - /. •:- SP Black fine to medium sand with occasional chunks of wood (medium dense,wet) - __' m - 30 II - Cr) - - ^ -1 25 - -25 N - _ .i t O - 32 • Grades to fine sand - co _ - a - ° 30 - -30 1- ' - 27 Grades to fine to medium sand - 35 - ••• ••- -35 _ SP—Gray fine to medium sand with silt(medium dense,wet) _ ,�? - SM - m - 1 _ MD 23 103 26 - - j m _ _ 1 N ' 40 - - . • 1 -40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols - , Log of Boring Geo% Engineers Figure A-16 , I TEST DATA BORING / • 1-' m (Continued) i m 1.1-1 31 P -- 3m a 11 1 ++ ., 1+1 -ii DESCRIPTION C 3 C p o 3 E G .n •- roup \ 13 am N Symbol ' -J • En.. o O 40 40 i!••.:• SP Dark gray interbedded fine sand and fine to medium sand- (medium dense,wet) - 26 ® - 45 — • —45 +I - • -21 50 — —50 _-I - 27 ® :• • - - _ F 55 — —55 w • z - - H = MD + 24 100 38 - _ • a - Boring completed at 59.0 feet on 12/5/90 - wp 60 — Ground water encountered at approximately 10 feet during —60 • drilling i m m - -\ ' a 65 — —65 \ N - - .-1 H E - - U N - - Q - 0 70 — —70 I- J - - Z ----, 75 — —75 ;, 1, to 1 m 1 m - - I m I - - a, 80 — —80 Cu 1 m , Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 1 ' 1 1 I <01,VP Log of Boring , Geo"kloo Engineers Figure A-17 s TEST DATA BORING 8 -7 4, in in s.4.1 31 in d 3C 4.1 o ~ 44m •a^ I -a DESCRIPTION •�C.. 31 c 0 0 i E Group i J E O X L 0O a. -I 0 N Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 16.43 .._ 0 ML Brownish-gray sandy silt with a trace of organic matter(medium - stiff,moist)(fill?) - - 8 , - 5— ✓ —5 _ /.-:• SP Black fine to medium sand(loose to medium dense,wet) _ - 6 0 10 — —10 H - MD 26 92 8 - 15 — —15 w w - w - Z N _ _ 11 ® Grades to medium sand - � a - 0 20 — —20 co - 8 Grades to fine sand - m - - 25 — —25 N - _ .1 1 to - U - 21 N - - 0 30 — —30 Z - • - Grades to with occasional wood fragments - 9 35 — —35 _ :-.•.•' SP Gray fine to medium coarse sand with a trace of fine gravel _ j m (dense,wet) to _ - m t (_' m - 35 - i 0) - _ co —ao r9 Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols i Log of Boring _ Geo by Engineers Figure A-18 TEST DATA BORING 8 r— a . (Continued) !, a C I- N� n�k. 3 C 0 DESCRIPTION Grou • Fo o\ 0 0 a -1 U N Symbol 40 v 40 i - 35 ., - I - •.•�••• SP— Gray fine to medium sand with silt(dense,wet) - 45 — �!'•: SP Gray medium sand with occasional shell fragments(medium —45 _ dense,wet) - MD 22 104 25 I •. __ - .••• SM Gray fine to medium silty sand with occasional shell fragments - 1 • (medium dense,wet) 50 — •" —50 SW Gray fine to coarse sand with a trace of silt,occasional gravel and - m - shell fragments(dense,wet) - - - 42 -: + - - ,!•• - �_ 55 — :•- —55 r-'1 W - : - t I I H .-Tf • - 32 - ii a Boring completed at 59.0 feet on 12/7/90 1__' p 60 — Ground water encountered at approximately 5 feet during drilling —60 i - i 0) _ - . a 65 — —65 \ N - - .I . , to I I E - - 0 �. U) - - 0 70 — —70 1-• Z • 75 — —75 i I - - 1 ID [9 - - 0) m - - 1 - a 80 — —80 .•I — co Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols -.lj Log of Boring Geo N�Engineers Figure A-.19 • i' L. , TEST DATA BORING 9 M N• LIi 7 M I-- a a^ ) -I DESCRIPTION r- • Grou - i o 0 x L i a --i 0 4 Symbol Surface Elevation(ft): 16.86 J EU.. CI CI.. mU (1) 0 .-• SM Brown silty fine sand(medium dense,moist) 0 - :: - 5— —5 Sky•Grayish-brown silty fine sand to fine sand with silt(very loose to _ __ - SP-SM loose,wet) � -_ MD 32 86 2 - -- 10 — - -10 - 1 - - _ F 15 — - —15 I u• - %'•• • SP/ Black interbedded fine sand with a trace of silt and fine sand with Z - SP-SM silt(loose,wet) H - - _ = 9 El F- _ - - a • - 0 20 — —20 I _ - m 14 Grades to medium dense 0) - - a , 25 — - —25 \ ` N - - .-I - I I E - U - 14 - 30 — —30 1- — MD 30 93 18 - Grades to sand with occasional wood fragments 35 — - —35 + m _ - m - m - 16 - m - - a 40 —40 r-, m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols I -. Log of Boring Geo��Engineers Figure A-20 . . \ F . . TEST DATA BORING 9 - • . . IA (Continued) L w w s.4.1 3 C 3 • I- 41 i ••4, I 4.1 .-I .DESCRIPTION 610 11%. 3 C O.ip •-iC,-, OOM 3cu 0 3 E Group LOLL .-I0 4 Symbol 40 — J ELI•-, 130... COO U) • ••••'• SM Gray silty fine to medium sand with pockets of fine to coarse 0 1 - sand and occasional shell fragments(medium dense,wet) - - ..... . . -..•-._ • - zs ..... . - _ -.....- , 45 — • .•...•.-•.-.- —45 , ! 1 ••... - , . -...... '•••" . -....... - ••••• •, - • "•-••- - 1 ••...... . Grades to dense - ) •.•.. --:-.....— -- Boring completed at 49.0 feet on 12/7/90 50 — Ground water encountered at approximately 7.5 feet during —50 drilling . - - 1 • _ i tu , tu - • _ i 1 U. z I H . - - I H - . - L' 0. Isi 60 — . —60 --' _ J _ - o , , co _ 1 , 65 — —65 , \ — Cu - , - -1 -u'i Z _ - 0 in . - - a . 70 — —70 i I g ( ' -I - - .. _ r.- 1 1 75 — —75 ---, , 1 ' ID . m 1 - , 0, , - ' 0 -I - • - 0 80 — —80 ni . ,— o , I I Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols __,' • - . p Log of Boring Geo% Engineers • - °Ik. Figure A-21 TEST DATA BORING 10 ' m -.1 m ® C II 31 F- m •a.. I+1 -1 DESCRIPTION Grou 4 O N L O tl •-'o I Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 16.46 J EU••• 0CI.. CO N 0 - • SM Dark brown silty sand(loose,moist)(topsoil) 0 - ML Gray silt with organic matter and lenses of peat(soft to medium - - _ stiff,moist to wet) -, - MD 97 64 6 I _ 5- / ML Gray silt with a trace of organic matter(very soft to soft,wet) -5 - MD, 44 77 2 I - CS, _ AL - 1 10 — —10 - 2 El - • 1- 15 - /.'•: SP Dark gray fine to medium sand(medium dense to dense,wet) —15 Li _ W - W • H - 18 - F- - • - a 0 20 - -20 _ MD 26 98._ 20 ■ - m - - 25 - -25 -I E _ 34 _ 0 0 30 - -30 ( - z • .. - 36 I - 35 - -35 t - - m 14 ® •' - - co - ' m m - • - i a 40 - fr / -40 - m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Ge �� Log of Boring o%ei Engineers Figure A-22 __I i • TEST DATA BORING 10 a (Continued) IA a III I- �.. 14.I .-Ii DESCRIPTION I{N IQ U 3 C t1 Grou • q 00\ Lilo_ -1 O I• Symbol J FUG ppv mU CO ' 40 40 • SP Dark gray fine to medium sand with shell fragments(medium — dense to dense,wet) - • - � 45 — —45 29 - • 1 I I 50 — —50 SW/ Gray fine to coarse sand with gravel to sandy gravel(dense,wet) - !`GW — — •46 � :-ow - $$ '#'�a�GW Gray fme to coarse gravel with sand(medium dense,wet) —55 - r- W _ :�:� - ' • I H - M 8 22 I a - _ • ili _I p 60 — ,:�'=' SW Gray fine to coarse sand with gravel(dense,wet) —60 1 — 33 . .—. - m — m _ : 65 — •• —65 U - 42 � ;—IR- _ Q ;:yr 0 70 — • • —70 Z - '`.�.r • - -- 67 '�: r Grades to very dense _ 75 — • • SP Gray fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) —75 ' p _ m m - 28 Boring completed at 78.5 feet on 12/4/90 - m _ Ground water encountered at approximately 5 to 6 feet during _ m drilling N 80 — —80 co Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols \tea Log of Boring Geo\P Engineers Figure A- 23 i1 , • TEST DATA BORING 11 N 4..• •r Y C CO ~ 4111 m� 3[ a DESCRIPTION a -IC\ i Y p_ -1 0 W Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 16A9 ( J EU v D .. m O U) __ 0 ML Mottled brown and gray silt with occasional pieces of gravel(soft, 0 - moist)(fill?) _ 4 - 5- ,------ML Gray silt with a trace sand and organic matter(very soft to soft, _5 wet) _ MD 47 74 2 I - • 10 - -10 • SM/ Gray interbedded silty fine sand to fine sandy silt(loose,soft to - -= - . ML medium stiff,wet) - 6 15 - %•-•.-• SM Gray silty fine sand(loose,wet) -15 W _ W - - W _ Z H _ 9 2 H - . : . - o. hl 20 - .._• SP- Grayish-black fine sand with silt(medium dense,wet) -20 - • SM - , o 25 - SP Black fine to medium sand with a trace of silt(medium dense, -25 ro - wet) vi Ho J ___' Z 31 , 1 35- -35 N I to - MD 18 109 21 II • SP- Gray fine to medium sand with a trace of coarse sand and shell - a) - SM fragments(medium dense,wet) 40 - -40 m • Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Log of Boring 1 Geo�r Engineers Figure A-24 • TEST DATA BORING 11 . (Continued) ' i ]C 4. m 1- -o.., 3 C n DESCRIPTION 1130 `" Grou a o o X imp, -1 o E Symbol EU.. OOv MO \N 40 . 40 - 21 45 — - —45 _ MD, 18 109 29 - TX 50 — —50 44 , Grades to dense _ 1_ 55 — = —55 w _ w - • • - w I H - i9 ❑ :: _ I F- - _ a. W SW Gray fine to coarse sand with occasional gravel(dense,wet) 0 60 — :'�• —60 -. _ _ 45 g —:— - - - \ 65 — —65 co : :•• U • _ Boring completed at 683 feet on 12/7/90 _ Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling O 70 — —70 I- -1 - - Z 75 — —75 —I in m — - m 1 — _ W I m — - 1 r N 80 — —80 .4 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 1 - lit. Log of Boring Geo Engineers Figure A-25 TEST DATA BORING 12 4 E iA Lii 31 N m 7C 4.1 II I- tll� I C a DESCRIPTION mei•aC� 3Cp 07 E Group r J E O>• O CM 0., m 0 U Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 16.06 1 0 2 inches asphalt concrete underlain by 4 inches crushed rock 0 - • SM Brown silty fine sand(very loose,moist) - _ 4 ® - 5 • . —5 i!. - SP— Black fine sand with silt(loose,wet) _ SM 5 ® - _ 10 - . -10 - MD, 101 60 4 r--r•t- OL Brown organic silt(soft,moist) - II I I - CS I I 1 - 15 — I I —15 W - .1,------.-- ML/ Gray silt with layers of black fine sand(soft,loose,wet) _ IL • - - SP •1 Z - - ►a — 1 = — 5 ■ - -- H - . a - 020 — • - . - —20 - • SP Black fine to medium sand(loose,wet) Q1 1 - \ - .., 25 — • —25 li N — /-.--• SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) — (!) U - MD 24 101 24 I - N - Q ::I • —30 I- z —35 m _ to - i - 32 Grades to sand with a trace of shell fragments m _ a 40 —40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols i Log of Boring Geo�O Engineers Figure A-26 TEST DATA BORING 12 n (Continued) M L41 31 M m 3 C .“ M F- 4n17 "1-s 1 'i DESCRIPTION DO Mri_ 3 C a m oo> L i a0 oi-+ Symbol EU v CICIv MO N 40 — 40 - 29 I : ` 45 — %.-:- SP Dark gray fine sand(medium dense,wet) —45' - 20 I - 50 — —50 - MD 23 102 25l. - F 55 — —55 w w - - w z - H - Blow count may not be representative of soil encountered a 060 — —60 40 Grades to dense m rn - • - 65 — • —65 a N U 56 to - • - 1 U 70 — —70 z - 53 75 — • • —75 m _ SW Dark gray fine to coarse sand with gravel and shell fragments _ m • '•--! (dense,wet) a) - 45 Boring completed at 79.0 feet on 12/4/90 - m :- 1 - Ground water encountered at approximately 65 feet during _ I m • drilling a 80 — —80 'I 1a Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols uv Logof Boring l Geo e Engineers Figure A-27 TEST DATA BORING 13 m GI r •.1,� I+1 a DESCRIPTION •-fC' 7 C p O 7 E Group U 0 0 X O O E. m U CO Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.) 15.75 0 ML Mottled brown and gray silt(soft,moist) 0 H _ MD 41 78 2 1 - 5— —5 - - .!•. • SP— Gray fine sand with silt(very loose,wet) • _ - SM - 1� ® - - 2 • - 10 — • - —10 .. ML Dark gray fine sandy silt with a trace of peat(soft,wet) - 3 ® - - F 15 — —15 — Ui - w - LL - Z Grades to silt with organic matter H _ MD 72 56 3 � � - E- - 0 20 — / / SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) —20 1 _ 14 � - m 25— —25 - N _ r _ MD 22 105 19 r U N .. 3O •— • —30 j - _ - 24 . - - 35 — —35 - co - al 20 ❑ •-. - - m L m 40 — r J —40 -s co Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols • \.IP Log of Boring Geo��Engineers Figure A-28 TEST DATA BORING 13 - bi (Continued) 01 3C 4 I F- 4.1 j "1' 1 41 -1 DESCRIPTION SW O 3 C a Grou m o o Lim -°I 0 E Symbol -1 ZO'-• OC)... mO CO 40 bt'-b'M/ 40 sp Dark gray fine to medium sand with silt to fine to medium sand _ • with a trace of shell fragments(medium dense,wet) • - • 1 - 16 ■ . •• _ • 45 — \ - -45 •• /..••:- SP Gray fine to medium sand with a trace of shell fragments and _ _ 21 ■ peat(medium dense,wet) - 50 — -50 - _ 10 ® - 1- 55 — —55 m - - 1 , "- - 1Z _ MD 34 86 17 II•1 - 1-- - - 0. 0 60 — —60 _ ■ • - eD m , _ Boring completed at 63S feet on 12/6/90 _ N Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling -1 65 — —65 --' N _ _ -4 1 _ _ U) F - - O U) - - 0 70 — —70 I- 1 - - Z I 75 — —75 ID m - - m 1 a) - Q) 1 a I 80 — —80 a m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols I I 1 \�1 Log of Boring Geo�O Engineers �/ Figure A-29 TEST DATA BORING 14 to Pm C 4J e a- 4'01 'a^ 1 4.1 .-1 DESCRIPTION _ �' Grou 0 X L i a -1 0 11 Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 18.01 FUG+ OOv I130 CO ML Mottled brown sandy silt with a trace of organic matter(soft, 0 - moist) - - - 4 I - SM Mottled brown silty fine sand(loose,moist to wet) - 5— —5 - 9 ® : - 10 — /.•-: SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) —10 - - MD 27 97 11 ■ 15 — —15 - 1 W w - -z _ ■ 0. 0 20 — —20 co y - Lens of peat at 23.5 feetCr) - 25 — -25 a - - U - 18 ■ - N - o 30 — —30 1- J - Z i - 23 I Grades to fine sand 35 — —35 CD -CO m - 23 ■ Grades to sand with occasional wood fragments m m - - a 40 — J —40 a m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Geo NOt��• Log of Boring Engineers Figure A-30 TEST DATA BORING 14 N (Continued) II I- • to L4J 3 II 11 a,s I4J -II DESCRIPTION .O •iC.. aCU o7 E Group t E0\ O Lam m-40 M Symbol 40 - 40 - — SM Gray silty fine sand with a trace of shell fragments(medium _ • . dense,wet) - I - - •- 14 45 - • • -45 MD 28 96 23 - 50 - % SM Gray silty fine sand with a trace of organic matter(medium -50 _ - dense,wet) - - 14 I • • 55 - V. -55 w . w - - - • ,- I z - . = ` FZ- - •27 , ' - O. •60 - . -60 0 • : _ co - 18 ® . NBoring completed at 64.0 feet on 12/7/90 -I 65 - Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling -65 a _ _ E _ _ V UI - - 0 70 - -70 F' � I j 75 - -75 ID CO 1 0) - I co N 80 -80 .a co Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Geo��,p Engineers Log of Boring �� `e g Figure A"31 r BORING DATA BORI1,G 15 - • .0• •• d 3 +4 Y I— 4J W 'a" I+.1 -1 DESCRIPTION -i r c U 30 C t1 Grou C 0 0 X L m 0 -I 0 E Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 18.02 1 -I F-U v CI Ow mU (p ML Mottled gray and brown silt with a trace of sand and organic - matter(very soft to soft,moist to wet) - - 2 • - 5- -5 1 _ 3 ® - 10 - -10 - MD 48 73 3 I Grades to gray silt - 15 - -15 w w - u_ z - `T- SM Gray silty fine sand(medium dense,wet) H _ 14 I _ - - _ I- - - a O20 - ✓••-- SM/ Interbedded gray silty fine sand and fine sandy silt(very loose, -20 - • ' - ML wet) - - 3 , . _ - o) _ • - ••• •25 - /. - SP- Black fine to medium sand with silt(medium dense,wet) -25 •N _ - SM E _ MD 22 - U - U) - 0 30 - . <-.- SP Black fine to medium sand with a trace of silt(medium dense, -30 J - wet) - Z • - 35 - -35 m 17 ❑ - m - 0) m I _ - m 40 - 7. —40 m I Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols /iv. Log of Boring Geo Engineers �/ Figure A-32 • • TEST DATA BORING 15 gi (Continued) 11 I- 4J I •a., I+i -1 DESCRIPTION GoLe osrou- i \ a -I Symbol J EOM COv MO M 40 .. 40 i _ 27 _ 45 — —45 - %'••.;• •SP Gray£me to medium •sand with a trace of shell fragments - - (medium dense,wet) - _ 29 - 50 — • • —50 1 - 29 1 - • 1- 55 — —55 w - _ iu _ z - 21 - _ -_ Boring completed at 58S feet on 12/7/90 _ aGround water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling 0 60 — —60 • • a) - - -• \ a 65 — —65 - w _ - .a co E - - Q N - 0 70 — —70 F J z 75 — —75 _ to I _ 0) m 1 - - • U 80 —80 N -I • Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 1��. Log of Boring Geo No Engineers Figure A- 33 TEST DATA BORING, 16 W 4.1 II 4.1 ~ .-1, 1+i a DESCRIPTION ito N 0 3a C D. Grou i 0 0 x. ca.i s -4 0 E Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 19.54 I J EC.)•+ - O CIv COO N 0 --- .••• ML/ Interbedded fine sandy silt and silty fine sand with roots(soft, 0 1 _ •. SM loose,moist) - _ MD 33 '78 3 - 1 5— ;! ML Gray silt with fine sand(very soft to soft,wet) —5 _ 2 � _ 10 — —10 _ 1 � - 15 — —15 w _ w - ML Gray silt with lenses of peat(soft,wet) It. -1 Z H _ MD 64 61 3 I - I H - - a ' 0 20 — —20 - 4 Grades to with lenses of fine sand - m to _ - 25 — —25 N I - _ .-1 to - SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) E _ 29 - U N - - n 30 — —30 _I - - Z , _ MD 24 101 31 •• - 35 — —35 a m - Ea m - co m 1 - a 40 — —40 .4 l m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols I �4 Log of Boring Geo ��Engineers Figure A-34 TEST DATA BORING 16 in (Continued) I- 4.1111 M� 3) a DESCRIPTION Grou 4 onNI iia --10 E Symbol MI••+ (30... MO 0) I 40 _ 40 14 1 _ ❑ - 45 — —45 _ SP— Gray fine sand with silt and a trace of organic matter(medium _ - 12 , : SM dense,wet) I 50 — —50 _ MD 23 101 20 ; - I_ 55 — —55 w - - 1 Z - - ►i _ 12 g . Grades to sand with shell fragments _ a ,/ olli60 %".• - ML/ Gray fine sandy silt to silty fine sand(medium stiff,loose,wet) —60 - : • SM - _ 6 _ co . • 0) _ • . - r- _ / 65 /-.•-- SM Gray silty fine sand(medium dense,wet) —65 _ .1 _ 22 I _ 1 0 . Q o 70 SP— Gray fine sand with silt(dense,wet) —70 -J - - SM - Z - - 39 - - Boring completed at 73S feet on 12/6/90 - Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling 75 — —75 m - - - m 1 m _ • _ 0) m - 1 a 80 — —80 a m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols • �„ Log of Boring GeoF Engineers Figure A-.35 J N r7 TEST DATA BORING 1 4J Y 0 1 7 +1 N I- +'m '.i� 14J 'a DESCRIPTION N1 c U 3 C O. Grou J x W a' m c0 to Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 17.52 0 .. 0 _ ML Mottled brown silt with a trace of organic matter(very soft to - soft,moist) - • - MD 44 76 2 I - 5- -5 4 ® : • -. SP— Black fine to medium sand with silt(loose,wet) - - SM 10 — —10 - 11 I _ - . F15 -. -15 W - r-. SP Black fine to medium sand with coarse sand and wood fragments (loose,wet) - Z = MD 45 74 9 � .• IL - - r O 20 - /._• SP— Gray fine sand with silt(medium dense,wet) -20 - SM - - 11 ® - : 1 \ 25 - —25 /--•:• SP Black fine to medium sand(dense,wet) co U - 32 � - - Ui - - o • H 1 30 — • ML Gray silt(stiff,wet) —30 Z - 12 SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) 35 - -35 I _ _ I- m - - m m - 17 ® : Grades to with shell fragments - rn a 40 — -a w Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols i i Log of Boring Ge0 Nik,..••Engineers Figure A-36 TEST DATA BORING . 17 • (Continued) 1-- +J m •a„ I -1 DESCRIPTION OO la U 3 C E Grou a oo� i�o -0+o i Symbol J EU DO.. MO 0) 40 40 - SM Gray silty fine sand with a trace of organic matter and shell - fragments(loose to medium dense,wet) - MD 28 95 8 II ; ; - 45 - -45 50 - -50 - 17 I - F 55 - • l -55 I W - /._- SP— Dark gray fine to medium sand with silt(dense,wet) - W • • SM U.z H _ _ p60 — •!••'.•_ SP Gray fine to medium sand(dense,wet) —60 ! - m 40 •N - m - Boring completed at 64.0 feet on 12/6/90 ..-1 65 - Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling —65 N N _ .-I N _- E - - U N - - U 70 - -70 J I I - - Z 75 - -75 1 to - - - m - m - 0) m I _ - ni I 80 - -80 a m i Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols �� Log of Boring Ge0�O Figure TEST DATA 1 BORING8 I m i4.1 3 I F a^ 14) -1 DESCRIPTION MO c Mt,. 3 C C- Grou .M! X o o a -10 to Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 19.35 0 ML Mottled brown silt with fine sand and a trace of organic matter 0 - (very soft,moist) - - MD 44 75 2 5— —5 SP Dark brown to black fine sand with a trace of silt(loose to- - 12 • medium dense,wet) 10 — —10 9 1- 15 — —15 w • - w - LL _ / ,••:• SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense,wet) - Z I H - = MD 25 99 21 1 •- 1- - - 0. 0 20 - -20 • co _- 20 ® - m - - • • -I 25 — —25 .1 U - � Grades to sand with lenses of brown silt with organic matter Ul - - o 30 — —30 J - - Z MD 23 101 38 Grades to fine to medium sand - 35 — —35 w • m - - m ' 29 ■ wI 40 — —40 .., m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols \� Log of Boring Geo 40 Engineers - Figure A-38 TEST DATA • BORING 18 �, (Continued) m C m I— j m� 3 C a DESCRIPTION UGrou W o 0 X m a -ii o E Symbol J EU,-, 0 D., CO U a) 40 _ 40 _ 29 I - i , 45 — —45 7 . //f/J CI✓ Gray interbedded clay and silty fine sand(medium stiff,medium - SM dense,wet) • 50 — —so MD, 40 79 4 I Grades to soft and loose AL 1 55 — —55 w w - ' z H 9 Grades to silty fine sand with a trace of o nit matter _ t3' O. - 0 w 60 — —60 11 I Grades back to claywith lenses of siltysand °' — —65 i \ 6s I N U 8 III N -- 0 0 7 — —70 F- SM Gray silty fine sand with a trace of shell fragments(loose,wet) - J - Z - - MD 29 93 7 I : , 75 — —75 • m . m _ m 1 _ _ m 6 Iw _ m a 80 — / 80 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols i \� Log of Boring Geo NO Engineers _ , v® Figure A-39 • • TEST DATA BORING 18 • (Continued) a ■ 01 3C +� • 4.103 .N" 3 C a DESCRIPTION G a ooNt _ia °o i Symbrouo EU s+ ❑Ov mU U) 80 I. _ 80 1�, • SP— Gray fine to medium sand with silt(dense,wet) - : SM ' 85 — CrW/ Dark gray fine to coarse gravel with sand to gravelly fine to —85 - •`- SW coarse sand(very dense,wet) - • 45 Boring completed at 89.0 feet on 12/5/90 - 90 — Ground water encountered at approximately 5.5 feet during —90 ' drilling • 95 — —95 u_ w — w z H )-- - - • "0'100 - -100 m m - - • 105 — —105 N - - -I z • U U) - - Q U 110 - -110 J - ` Z 115 — —115 m — m m 120 — -120 __ m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols ��j Log of Boring Geo�0 Engineers Figure A-.40 TEST DATA BORING 19 1 to .ii In f- a� 1 41 -1 DESCRIPTION Go PO 0 3 C 0- Grou i 0 0\ L L p_ -100 II Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 17.18 -1 EU•+ ❑❑., MC.) N ML Mottled gray sandy silt with occasional organic matter(very soft, 0 - wet) - 2 ® - 5— —5 . — 2 ® SP/SW - �, ark gray interbedded fine sand,silty fine sand and silt(very- - loose,soft,wet) 10 — —10 - 4 ® • • - 15 — -.i9 ' OL/ Brown organic silt to peat(stiff,wet) —15 F- ' ' PT 1y tU hK -. 11 y H - - MD 65 59 11 ii •'• SM Gray silty fine sand with a trace of organic matter(loose to M. - medium dense,wet) - a W20 — • -20 — 9 ® - cp - SP Black fine to medium sand(loose,wet) - \ 25 — !. :• SP Black fine to medium sand with a trace of organic matter —25 - N - (medium dense,wet) - .a U 1MD, 21 104 28 I • - to j - TX - 30 — —30 - Z 1 - 31 . 35 — —35 to 1 _ m , - MD 25 98 26 � Grades to with occasional layers of silty fine to medium sand I�f m -- m 40 ._ " J —40 Nr. m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols f i \gip Log of Boring Geo-o Engineers Figure A-41 TEST DATA BORING 19 v (Continued) ~ M� n" i 4.1 a DESCRIPTION 4' Grou J Zt°l o o. .40 U M Symbol .. 40 - 40 ^ - 33 ~' 45 — —45 - , Grades to with a trace of shell fragments - 50 — —50 _ SM/ Gray interbedded silty fine sand and sandy silt(loose,moist,wet) - ,i ML i~ 6 SP-SM/ 55 — . SM Gray fine to medium sand with silt to silty fine sand with —55 I- :occasional chunks of wood(medium dense to dense,wet) W - - IL - Z . H _ ' = MD, 29 94 27 I • -- - 1- i- - TX, - 0 60 — GS • -60 m MD 24 101 34 I : : in - 65.— %. SP Gray fine to medium sand(dense,wet) —65 N - - co U - 39 � Boring completed at 69.0 feet on 12/6/90 O 70 — Ground water encountered at approximately 6 feet during drilling -70 1 Z - - i - 75 — —75 I, in m m - - ` a 80 — —80 .1 -- m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols �itØ Log of Boring Geo� En ineers4• g Figure A-42 y , ` MONITOR WELL NO. MW-1 I • , WELL SCHEMATIC I • 3 .I a DESCRIPTION Group -I v I Symbl Surface Elevation(ft.): 12.55 t 0 0 - Steel surface Refer to log of Boring B-1 for soil conditions encountered- monument and - Water level at a depth of 4.73 feet on 1/4/91 = = concrete - T-Bentonite seal _ w---2-inch Schedule 40 I 5- PVC solid pipe -5 10 - -10 - '• 'w—2-inch Schedule 40 _ • • PVC screen, - 0.020-inch slot - = • width 15 - `••= -15 W - =••+-Medium sand W - • :- backfill - Z • H - _ - I H =_ - _ a. _ 20 - - Base of well at 20 -20 - feet - r I - i ro 25 - -25 in U N - Q g 30 - -30 J - Z I j a _ _ 35 - -35 m _ _ ,--- m 1 _ a) - a 40 - -40 m ^ Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbolsI: ,I L ��Ø Log of Monitor Well Geo k Engineers' Figure A-43 f , • MONITOR WELL NO. MW-3 WELL SCHEMATIC m 3[ a DESCRIPTION Group —' 0 m Symbl Surface Elevation(ft.): 14.28 m O in 0 Steel surface Refer to log of Boring B-3 for soil conditions encountered 0 monument and Unable to measure water level due to locked casing(locked — _ _ concrete by others) - '� = 'r—Bentonite seal — 2-inch Schedule 40 5— PVC solid pipe —5 3 .' 2-inch Schedule 40 10 — PVC screen, —10 _ 0.020-inch slot width — ='• —Medium sand — — backfill _ 15 — `— —15 — W _ Base of well at 15.5 feet Z - H 0. 0 20 — —20 co 25 — —25 N U 0 30 — —30 35 — —35 N m m - - 0) - m N 40 — —40 ,---, m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols \� Log of Monitor Well Geor Engineers � Figure A-44 MONITOR WELL NO. MW-4 _ WELL SCHEMATIC i DESCRIPTION Group .-�i o i Symbl Surface Elevation(ft.): 18.58 li COC) N i._ - - Steel surface Refer to log of Boring B-4 for soil conditions encountered 0 monument and • Water level at a depth of 6.54 feet on 1/4/91 _ - = = concrete l — —Bentonite seal - -2-inch Schedule 40 - r- ' 5— e`. .•. PVC solid pipe —5 C , 10 ' ±▪ ' . 2-inch Schedule 40 `10 • ' - — . PVC screen, - : 0.020-inch slot - width - i ▪• _ 15 — —15 ~ - __'"-Medium sand - — backfill - Z H — - I — a _ _ - • p 20 — — Base of well at 20 —20 feet - - - ..1 m 25 — —25 - - — N - E - U - - co - Q F0 30 — —30 35 — —35 , lo m is. - — 0) a 40 — -40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols __ - Log of Monitor Well Geo kiolo Engineers Figure A-45 MONITOR WELL NO. MW-11 WELL SCHEMATIC DESCRIPTION Group a 0 m Symbl Surface Elevation(ft.): 16.49 m U m 0 - Steel surface 0 Refer to log of Boring 11 for soil conditions encountered _ - monument and Water level at a depth of 6.79 feet on 1/4/91 - = = concrete _ —Bentonite seal - -2-inch Schedule 40 5- _ PVC solid pipe -5 10 • • _- • --2-inch Schedule 40 -10 . - ▪ PVC screen, - _ 0.020-inch slot• - width 15 - _.+--Medium sand -15 w - _ '. backfill - ll _ _ - Z -_ ~ _ — - a O 20 - • Base of well at 20 -20 - feet - 0) 25 - -25 0 a E - U 30 - -30 J - Z 35 - -35 I _ co co N I a 40 - -40 m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols 0°' Log of' Monitor Well Geo'40 Engineers ® _ I Figure A-46 MONITOR WELL NO. MW-12 ° WELL SCHEMATIC ti a' DESCRIPTION Group -1 U to Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 16.06 0 - Cr Steel surface Refer to log of Boring B-12 for soil conditions encountered _ 0 — — monument and Water level at a depth of 4.12 feet on 1/4/90 _ = concrete = Bentonite seal - = 2-inch Schedule 40 5— PVC solid pipe —5 — =� 2-inch Schedule 40 10 — _ PVC screen, —10 0.020-inch slot width • • =••4—Medium sand- _ ' backfill - F 15 — • —15 W _ Base of well at 15-5 - IL feet _ Z - - H I- n. 0 20 — —20 °' 25 — —25 CO F N - _ 30 — —30 J - (_- Z r - _ 35 — —35 N m m - W a 40 — —40 r--I m Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Log of Monitor Well Geo f�Engineers Figure A-47 MONITOR WELL NO. MW-16 WELL SCHEMATIC m { DESCRIPTION' 3 C aO Grou •-• o i Symbol Surface Elevation(ft.): 19.54 1 m U (U) t - -11rSteel surface Refer to log of Boring B-16 for soil conditions encountered _ 0 monument and Water level at a depth of 7.15 feet on 1/4/91 = concrete _ r= -r—Bentonite seal - - •—2-inch Schedule 40 5— _ PVC solid pipe —5 10 — : ••••--2-inch Schedule 40 —10 - PVC screen, - 0.020-inch slot - • • width 15 — _ —15 w _ _ _••4--Medium sand Z - _ backfill - H _ _ _ • H - •— a __.;: - w • 20 — Base of well at 20 —20 feet • 25 — —25 U U) 30 — —30 - Z 35 — —35 m - m - m mco 40 — —40 Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols �/ Log of Monitor Well Geo b0 Engineers Figure A-48 GEI 30-88 - 0120-090-B02 NLT : KKT 12 -31-90 U. S . STANDARD SIEVE SIZE tir' <,-)�. .�.\ * �\ . V �� ) � COO 100 Coo CD 100 p 1 1 �L I I I I \WV tll i- 8° I 1 C =' 3 70 i CD I I 60 I { • CA ce I I z 50 I 40 I z I I o 30 { I I� . . ry 20 I i I \ ' 10 I I 1 I \ I I I- t I 0 I i I I_ -n 9 1000 • 100 10 1 . 0 0 . 1 0 . 01 0 . 001 a c a GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 23 m z COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY C COARSE I FINE COARSEI MEDIUM I FINE ibk < ! . EXPLORATION SAMPLE N SYMBOL NUMBER DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 1 42 . 5 ' DARK GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT, A TRACE OF COARSE SAND, FINE GRAVEL AND SHELL FRAGMENTS (SP-SM) 5 22 . 5 ' BLACK FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH A TRACE • OF SILT (SP) GEI 30-88 0120-090-B02 NLT:KKT 1/3/90 U. S . STANDARD SIEVE SIZE CAD 10 0 ^) ~' �\ '\ N.P. 43' �0. 4). �P. �. 4o. . O 1 1 1 -I �_I- I i 1 e 90 I f \tit = 8 0 I o I= 3 70 I I I CD I cD m 60 I I I I , � ce I I z 50 iI LL I I I 40 I I I . \ _z o 30 I I I- Lu Lu I I \ I a. 20 I I E I 10 I I I 33 a 0 i _ I I I I i I 1 -I 7 a 1000 100 10 1 . 0 0 . 1 0 . 01 0 . 001 Ei -I c a GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS M0 Z m C COBBLES COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSEI MEDIUMND I FINE SILT OR CLAY ON m EXPLORATION SAMPLE W SYMBOL NUMBER DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 6 38 ' GRAY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH SILT AND FINE GRAVEL AND A TRACE OF ORGAN`I`C MATTER (SW-SM) 19 58 ' GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH OCCASIONAL MEDIUM SAND AND ORGANIC MATTER (SM) 0120-090-B02 NLT : KKT 12-31-90 60 I C(D PLASTICITY CHART Aft 1 5 0 . CH IV , t w 40 CIO . z . CD P'\ CD >- • � 30 U OH and MH __I 20 a. CL O 10 m CL—ML �.�' - ML and OL 70 i co ' I Imo 00 10 20 30 40 50 , 60 70 80 90 100 0 r. LIQUID LIMIT C 3 m —1 m N EXPLORATION SAMPLE MOISTURE LIQUID PLASTICITY I m NUMBER DEPTH CONTENT (%) LIMIT (%) INDEX (%) SOIL DESCRIPTION j -I O 1 2 . 5 ' 45 43 15 GRAY SILT. (ML) m C0 10 7 , 5 ' 44 36 9 GRAY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL r ORGANIC MATTER (ML) .N • ® 18 53 ' 40 • 34 5 GRAY CLAY WITH OCCASIONAL FINE SAND . (CL) • PRESSURE (LBS/FT2 x 103) 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 40 50 I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I . 02 I I I 1 f I I I I I I I . 04 I I 1 1 • z I I I I I I w I I . I I I 5 . 06 I I I f I I • o I I I I I � I I o . 08 I 1 I i it o I I I I r . 10 • t I I I I H I I I I I I I I I L I 1 I f t o I I I i l I a SAMPLE DRY BORING DEPTH SOIL MOISTURE DENSITY KEY NUMBER (FT) CLASSIFICATION , CONTENT (LBS/FT3) 10 7 . 5 GRAY SILT WITH 44% 77 OCCASIONAL ORGANIC 06 MATTER (ML) CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Geo�O Engineers FIGURE A-52 PRESSURE (LBS/FT2 x 103) 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 ' 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 40 50 l I I I • I I I • I I I I I I I • . 04 - --II I I I I 1 I I l . I I I I I - . 08 I • = I I I I z I I I 1 I I I I w I I I I • . 12 I I I I I - z • I I I I I -- v I l I I 1 o • I I I o . 18 I 1 I I I I I I I o I l I I ! • in zo I I I I • rn . 20 I 1 I I I I •I H I l I l I 1 Y ► I I I I I I J I ► I i I z I I I I N • i I I I I - o m _ . o SAMPLE DRY o BORING DEPTH SOIL MOISTURE DENSITY � , c, KEY NUMBER • (FT) CLASSIFICATION CONTENT (LBS/FT3) 12 13 - BROWN ORGANIC SILT 101% 60 • WITH OCCASIONAL : . • p- ORGANIC MATTER (OL) . . � CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS ' Geo� Engineers FIGURE A-53 -- PRESSURE (LBS/FT2 x 103) • .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 40 50 0 I I -I . 1 I I - I. I I I 1 I . I I . 04 1 I I I I I I I ._ 1 l I I I I . _ i I I I I I 1 I I I . 08 ' I I I I 1 i I I I I z 1 I I I I I I I I w I I I I ^i 5 . 12 . -- z -- I I - a' H ( I • I I o . 16 I _ I 1 .I 1 i I I I (-, o -----'1 N I 1 ,-....-..11 I o I I I I I I I I I I ~� . 2 0 1 I I I I J z • I l I I I I j I I I I I - • I 1 ► I �, o I I I m o I I 1 ar, I I I o I I "- 1 I I I I o SAMPLE DRY . i BORING DEPTH SOIL • MOISTURE DENSITY ' KEY NUMBER (FT) CLASSIFICATION CONTENT (LBS/FT3) 18 53 GRAY SILT WITH • 40% 79 • OCCASIONAL FINE SAND m • (ML) . \�9 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Geo�OEngineers FIGURE A-54 I II 80- 60- U) 0_ in U w 40- o rn I- I U) cN 20- ( • o N 0 20 40 60 80 100 m of NORMAL STRESS, PSI � I BORING SAMPLE SAMPLE MOISTURE DRY SYMBOL NUMBER DEPTH DESCRIPTION CONTENT DENSITY (FEET) (%) (PCF) 1 42.5 DARK GRAY FINE TO MED— 21 102 IUM SAND WITH SILT(SP- SM) 5 22.5 BLACK FINE TO MEDIUM 22 103 co oo SAND WITH A TRACE OF SILT (SP) - - - __- '— 6 37 . 5 GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM 13 118 c; SAND WITH SILT (SP—SM) w 0 CONSOLIDATED DRAINED `� TRIAXIAL TEST DATA Geo 1OEngineers FIGURE A-55 I • 1 _ I 1 - . 80 ' cn IZ 60 - cn w w a i— v) 1 w 40 / I cn M 207 \ • / \ \ \ \ I"- 0 ( 11 • -J - z 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 NORMAL STRESS, PSI N 1 I - O m SAMPLE MOISTURE DRY c' BORING SAMPLE o SYMBOL DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY NUMBER DESCRIPTION O (FEET) (%) (PCF) N j o j 19 28 BLACK FINE TO 214-. 104 MEDIUM SAND (SP) • ,00 — — 19 . 58 GRAY SILTY FINE 29 94 '� SAND (SM) cr. p -• 11 47 . 5 GRAY FINE TO MED- 18 109 0` IUM SAND WITH w SILT AND SHELL o FRAGMENTS(SP-SM) • ';.CONSOLIDATED DRAINED '��' TRIAXIAL TEST DATA Geo��En ineers • �. g„ , - . FIGURE A-56 �' \ , 1 'a \/ �\ )• _ 1, • I,l •. I 1 _ I I 1\•; / +. r / I , \ • ' \ '( \ 1 \ ' —,� r / , ) I • r r 1 )l- \� r \ — ( I -. r \ I \ v e i \ 'A,, - i I\h • • \r '- / I -�1. / •• , i. • -•1 / ,-\ I. • 1 , /I I \ \ \\' / _ ,\ \ /\\` '( ll 1' 1 \ \,I \ ;\I' .r / 1 1 2i�� \ / 11 • 1/ �` 1 r l ;I_ \ ,,tq_ y r I % I 1 \ \ (` \' T I l • • /' ! .� �' (APPENDIX;B I. , •'c I / I , r / _ .I 1 1.,,l -N\ 1, . , ,,l, I', i )^r'j\-• 1 I , • • 1 r 1, • f •L I \ 1 -} , 1 5" f 1 -_1 IN \ / 1 1 , , : / / 1 1. • \ \, . 1 / / . ,\ J, ,i i I I - I: J - _ , / t r 1 • \ I ' \ / / I - J \ 'I ' j• 7• i ! t I /.1' - = \ `\ v ` I / ; 7 \\ I I • - ,I \ \' .� l y /w ! 1/ I r ` ' t``/ - \/ '.1, I \ -1 1 \ r \y - \ I( 1, J ' t - , / \ l \, I 1 / ,. \'-: .1 _ I' , 1. I r. I \ • , . \ , . • �,, \\ ,./ \ ! 1 VII J ; 1• 1.' r / , I 1\• ,1- / . ! 1- -`+ t ! \ r\ 1. ., ' •/I ( / ! \ /1 \ /_ I 7 :� / l I R. �' \ I' / / \ ' 1 = ., ' I , ;l • ; i I i.(/ , / i i • �\ !_ ( d 1 L / I ., ' - :. ! I - _.I , •` �_ ,. ` 1 1 'I / ,1 - • HI i I, \ / 1 i / I/ 1\ , 1 1) '7- -\ - / \• ` -- 1' I1 >. -\ \ ' "�\_•"/\ r1 \ - - f r,' r. l . 1 ,' `\ \ I -\rl, )I V/ \ 1 i 4--'\.` ,,)1I / :`,mi \ / / _\ ,—. I / I, l`., i. , , • /-:• I / r _ r 1 1 - / J '�1 t,• _ / / ` , I \ / , li'\\1 / ./ , \ \ / 1 1` r n! L I 1. i 1 ,' • •/ 1 k /' - 1 ' it -- - . 1 • l) = _�' •' \ '1. I �` 1.�\ 1.f� i IJ� . A P P END I X B 1 .4.�/�► 11 Nal `114.) PECIALTY CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. 7 0\\\\/ ///✓/ 301 South Hamlin Drive Telephone (206) 435-3422 //%/ Arlington, Washington 98223 FAX: (206) 435-3580 Worldwide Consulting December 28 , 1990 Project No . 5639128 ; Ms. Nancy Tochko , GeoEngineers, Inc. j2405 14-0th Avenue N.E. Bellevue, Washington 98005 s ' Reference: GeoEngineers Job No. 120-90 Boeing Longacres Park Project _ I ;Subject: Report on Soil Sample Corrosivity Testing )Dear Ms . Tochko: 'This letter and the appended material constitute our report on the 'testing carried out on 10 soil samples received from your office. Purpose of Testing iIn accordance with your instructions, the soil sample testing consisted of measuring the resistivity, pH, Redox , and Sulfides 'content to determine corrosion rates that could be anticipated for 'buried metallic structures to be installed in the soils ;represented by the samples . Description of Testing The results of the soil sample testing are recorded on the "Soil Sample Testing Results" sheet included in the Appendix to this :report. Information defining soil resistivity, pH, Redox, and Sulfides content is also included in the Appendix for reference purposes . !Results of Testing 1 . The resistivity tests run on the 10 soil. samples showed only slight variation in the soils 'from boring location to boring location, and with depth at the individual locations . (a) The resistivitiesof the soils range from a low of 2 ,900 ohm-cm (mildly corrosive) to a high of 17 ,000 ohm-cm (relatively non-corrosive) , with 9 out of the 10 samples in the mildly corrosive- range. • B - 1 /Jim 4`�' �IIII�\I^ sL r+'1\\\.*!// )/ Ms . Nancy Tochko •!�omuriii✓i ;. December 28, 1990 ��V_-ere/./ page -2- (SPECIALTY CONSULTANTS GROUP,hINC. (b) The variations in resistivity from point to point will • tend to generate increased corrosion activity on metallic ` . structures installed in these soils, because of potential ' differences associated with the varying resistivities . 2 . The pH testing carried out on the 10 soil samples showed all to be in the acidic range (pH 5 .26 to pH 6 .39) . (a) The acidic pH of the soils represented by the samples will tend to increase general corrosion rates , albeit not to a serious degree. 3 . The Redox and Sulfides testing conducted on the 10 soil samples showed significant indications of sulfate reducing ::- bacteria activity. (a) The Redox value of all 10 soil samples was well below +100 millivolts, with seven of the 10 samples having negative values . (b) Three of the 10 samples showed "trace" Sulfides . 4 . The physical characteristics of the soils represented by the 10 samples tested consisted predominantly of low resistivity dense silty clays which will tend to generate corrosion activity on buried metallic structures . Conclusions • • From the testing accomplished on the 10 soil samples from the Boeing Longacres Park Project site, the following is concluded with respect to corrosion rates on metallic structures and piping installed in these soils : 1 . It is estimated that general corrosion rages of up to three mils per year ( .003") will occur on steel structures and on steel and ductile iron utility piping installed in these - _ soils . (a) Because of the variations in the soils from point to point, and the conditions favorable to anaerobic bacterial activity, it is estimated that pitting activity up to six mils per year ( .006") could be experienced . (b) Other factors could also increase corrosion and pitting rates. These factors include stray current activity, high concentrations of soil salts (chlorides , sulfates, j sulfides , etc.) , and others . 1 • Il I B - 2 .I °IgMligArl ALA WALURIl ,I1 t. Ms. Nancy TochkO �iiri December 28 , 1990 virez •- page -3- aPECIALTY CONSULTANTS GROUP,INC. Recommendations If corrosion rates are anticipated that could affect the integrity and shorten the planned service life of buried metallic utility piping and other metallic structures that will be installed in these soils, the following should be considered. 1 . Coat steel piping and other steel structures with a good quality protective coating such as a coal tar mastic, protective tape wrap, or other such material . (a) Supplement the protective coating with the installation of sacrificial anodes to provide control of corrosion • at • "holidays" and damaged areas in the coating . 2 . Ductile iron piping should be encased in loose polyethylene wrap in accordance with ANSI/AWWA, Standard C105/A21 .5-82 . (a) A copy of this standard is appended to this report . 3 . Coated and/or wrapped steel and ductile iron piping should be bedded and covered with clean washed sand . 4 . Concrete structures installed in the soils represented by the 10 samples tested should require no additional corrosion protection , unless it is determined that excessive amounts of soil salts are present that are deleterious to concrete. (a) This would apply to concrete coated steel and ductile iron piping. (b) Soil salts deleterious to concrete include chlorides, sulfates , carbonates , and others . (c) Laboratory testing of a few soil samples from random borings across the site should be tested for chlorides and sulfates to determine whether' or not deterioration of concrete might occur . * * - * * * * *. B - 3 'MA Ms . Nancy Tochko Nr^�la�ti► .wi• Cecember 28 , 1990 page —4— ZPECIALTY CONSULTANTS GROUP;INC. • Thank you for the opportunity afforded us to be of service to you on this project . If you have any questions concerning this report; or if additional information is needed, please contact us at once. Respectfully submitted , H. F. (Hank) Galka S . Corrosion Consultant HFG//cv Attachments • • • • B — 4 I • SOIL . SAMPLE TEST I hiG RESULTS __' BORING RESISTIVITY REDOX NUMBER DEPTH DESCRIPTION (ohm—cm) pH (mv) SULFIDES "s , 1 8 ' Medium brown coarse 4 ,300 5.47 +25 Negative 'I. silty, sand, clayey, r damp. j . 21 3' Yellow brown fine 4 ,600 5.42 -49 Negative silty sand, lumpy, damp. 3 3 ' Yellow fine silty 2,900 5 .59 +12 Negative clay, damp. 5 8' Dark gray medium fine 6,900 6.39 ' -125 Trace 1 silty sand, wet. 6 8' Light brown fine silty 6 ,100 5.26 . -11 Negative sand, clay, damp 7I 3 ' Dark brown/black 12,000 5.65 -2 Trace medium coarse silty sand, wet. - 91 3' Medium brown fine: 7 ,600 5.93 -11 Trace ' silty sand,. lumpy, - ! " dry. 1I4 8' - . Dark brown medium : : ..- 8 ,400 6.29. -42 Negative. . fine silty sand, wet. 15 • 8' Light brown - (tan) very : 3',700 : 6.21" -3 Negative : fine sticky clay, wet. 19 8 '- :. " : Med.iUm brown,=-.medium 17,000.`., - : 6.25 . - +3 Negative fine. silty sand, wet. . . ` ` { f _ • B - 5 SOIL RESISTIVITY The corrosivity of a soil is directly related to its resis- tivity. Soil resistivity tends to control and distribute corrosion currents on buried metallic structures. For ex- ampler the lower the soil resistivity, the better the soil conducts electricity, and therefore, the greater the corro- sion rate. Conversely, the higher the soil resistivity, the • less the ability of the soil to conduct electricity, and therefore, the lower the corrosion rate. The unit of soil resistivity measurement most widely used in corrosion control work is the ohm-centimeter . The following table shows the corrosivity of soils as related to their resistivity. Soil Resistivity Soil Corrosivity Below 500 ohm-cm Very corrosive 500 to 1000 ohm-cm Corrosive 1000 to 2000 ohm-cm Moderately corrosive 2000 to 10,000 ohm-cm Mildly corrosive Above 10,000 ohm-cm Progressively less corrosive Wet , heavy clays and tideflats muck are examples of low resistivity soils which are usually very corrosive. Examples of high resistivity soils are dry sands and gravels which are usually relatively noncorrosive. B - 6 SOIL pH pH is the measurement of the hydrogen (H+) ion concentration in a soil or solution. In water , when the pH is 7 (or ' neutral ) , the hydroxyl (OH-) ions are in equal concentration to the hydrogen ions at lx (E-07) moles/liter . The log of the ' reciprocal of this value is equal to 7, or therefore neutral . At a pH of 6, the H+ ion concentration is 10 times greater than the neutral state, and the solution is acidic . Con- versely, when the pH is 8 the concentration of H+ ions is 10 times less than neutral , and the solution is basic or alka- line. Soils may be either acid , alkaline, or neutral . Acidic soils tend to be more corrosive than alkaline soils for materials such as steel , ductile iron, copper , and concrete; while the more alkaline soils may adversely affect aluminum. Soil pH, in combination with other factors, will affect the corrosion rate of a buried metallic structure in various ways. For example, at pH 0.0 to 6.5 (acidic range) , a soil will serve as a very corrosive electrolyte when moisture is present in sufficient amounts. At pH 6.5 to 7.5 (relatively neutral range) , conditions are optimum for bacteriological action, such as sulfate-reducing bacteria . At pH 7.5 to 14 .0 (alkaline range) , dissolved salts are generally present and low soil resistivity is usually found . __� B - 7 Similar to steel , cast iron and ductile iron are not readily attacked in environments ranging between pH 4.0 and pH 8.5. Below the pH 4.0 range, the iron is increasingly oxidized . IC Above the pH 8.5 range, the soils provide a good electrolyte for development of anodic and cathodic differential cells that cause extensive pitting . In the neutral pH range (6.5 to 7.5) , anaerobic bacteria thrive in soils with low Redox potential , organic food sources, and water present . Steel in concrete cylinder pipelines is protected by the hydration of the cement which results in the formation of calcium hydroxide providing a uniform alkaline environment with a pH between 12 and 13. Highly acidic soils, however , provide hungry hydrogen ions that break down this favorable alkaline environment and form concentrations of chloride ions that stimulate oxidation of the reinforcing steel . The resulting force of the expansion of the corrosion products causes spalling of the protective concrete coating arid in- creasing corrosion problems. i4 iV B - 8 • • RF_DOX TESTING - "Redox" is an abbreviation of the term "Oxidation-Reduction Potential" . The measurement of Redox is an indication of the amount of cxidents in a soil . A knowledge of sail Redox is important since metals in a low oxidation environment are anodic to those in a higher state. An .increasing Redox potential above 100 millivolts (mv) is an indication of increasing soil aeration. Below that range, the life support • for sulfate reducing bacteria is enhanced and increases as the Redox potential decreases. Where negative Redox poten- tials are found , the growth of anaerobic sulfate reducing bacteria is optimum, providing that other soil conditions are favorable--such as neutral pH, water , and the presence of sulfates. Sails containing stagnant water with much organic material are likely to exhibit low Redox potential and indi- cate conditions suitable for the growth of sulfate reducing bacteria. • B - 9 SULFIDES TESTING is When sulfate reducing. bacteria consume sulfates present in soil , the by-products of that process include sulfide com- pounds. These compounds act as , depolarizing agents -that enhance corrosion activity in localized cells on buried metallic structures. Anaerobic bacteria thrive best at soil temperatures above 50 degrees F and at a pH of 7.0. They become less active at lower. temperatures And as the pH departs from the neutral range. The presence of sulfides in a soil is determined by the Sodium-Az.ide Iodine qualitative test . In this test , sulfides in the soil sample act as a catalyst and 'release free nitrogen • from the compound mixture, with resultant bubbling or foaming . • The results of this test are placed within three categories for reporting purposes: Negative, Trace, and Positive. . These categories reflect an increasing scale of reaction from nothing to vigorous foaming or evolution of gas. The greater the gas evolution, the higher the amounts of sulfides present in the soil sample. Ili., . B - 10 ANSI/AWWA C105/A21.5-82 _ [Revision of ANSI/AWWA CI05-72 (R77)] • AMERICAN NAI1ONAL� STANDARD for POLYETHYLENE ENCASEMENT FOR DUCTILE-IRON PIPING FOR WATER AND OTHER LIQUIDS • ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARIAT • AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION CO-SECRETARIATS AMERICAN GAS ASSOCIATION NEW ENGLAND WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION First edition approved h.r American National Standards Institute, Inc., Dec•. 27, 1972. Revised edition approved by American National Standards Institute. Inc.. Mar 26. 1982. Published by AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80235 B — 11 I $ • ;I I I • • American National Standard An American National Standard implies a consensus of those substantially concerned with its scope and provisions..An American National Standard is intended as a guide to aid the manufacturer, the consumer, and the general public. The existence of an American National Standard does not in any respect preclude anyone,whether he has approved the standard or not, from manufacturing, marketing, purchasing, or using products, processes, or procedures not conforming to the standard. American National Standards are subject to periodic review, and users are cautioned to obtain the latest editions. Producers of goods made in conformity with an American National Standard are encouraged to state on their own responsibility in advertising and promotion material or on tags or labels that the goods are produced in conformity with particular American National Standards. CAUTION NOTICE. This American National Standard may be revised or withdrawn at any time. The procedures of the American National Standards Institute require that action be taken to reaffirm, revise, or withdraw this standard no later than five(5)years from the date of publication. Purchasers of American National Standards may receive current information on all standards by calling or writing the American National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 100I8,(212)354-3300. I Copyright © 1982 by American Water Works Association Printed in USA ii B — 12 f Committee Personnel Subcommittee 4, Cast-Iron Pipe and Fittings, which reviewed this standard,had the following personnel at that time: TROY F. STROUD, Chairman KENNETH W. HENDERSON, Vice-Chairman User Members Producer Members • S. C. BAKER A. M. HORTON B. W. FRANKLIN J. P. JOHNSON K. W. HENDERSON HAROLD KENNEDY JR. R. C. HOLMAN J. H. MILLER M. G. HOOVER J. H. SALE D. A. LINCOLN T. F. STROUD W. H. SMITH T. B. WRIGHT Standards Committee A2I, Cast-Iron Pipe and Fittings, which reviewed and approved this standard, had the following personnel at the time of approval: ARNOLD M. TINKEY, Chairman THOMAS D. HOLMES, Vice-Chairman JOHN I. CAPITO, Secretary Name of Organization Represented Representative American Gas Association H. J. FORR American Society for Testing and Materials GEORGE LUCIw* • American Water Works Association G. S. ALLEN R. A. ARTHUR D. R. BOYD J. I. CAPITO* K. W. HENDERSON 'Nonvoting liaison iii B - 13 , I Committee Personnel (continued) American Water Works Association M. G. HOOVER R. J. KoCOL G. M. KRALIK D. M. KUKUK R. L. LEE J. H. MILLER W. H. SMITH A. M. TINKEY D. L. TIPPIN THURMAN UPCHURCH • L. W. WELLER Canadian Standards Association W. F. SEMENCHUK*. Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association T. D. HOLMES HAROLD KENNEDY JR. P. I. MCGRATH JR. L. L. NEEPER T. F. STROUD Manufacturers' Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry T. C. JESTER Naval Facilities Engineering Command S. C. BAKER New England.Water Works Association ALBERT HELT Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc. W. CAREYt L. J. DosEDLO 'Nonvoting liaison tAlternate It ' B - 14 iv '' Table of Contents SEC. PAGE SEC. PAGE. Foreword 5-4 Installation 2 I. History of Standard vi Table II. History of Polyethylene Encasement vi5.1 Tube and Sheet Sizes 2 III. Research vii IV. Useful Life of Polyethylene vii Figures V. Exposure to Sunlight vii 5.1 Method A • 3 VI. Options vii 5.2 Method B VII. Major Revisions vii 5.3 Method C 3 Standard Appendix A 5 5-1 Scope l Appendix Table 5-2 Definition • I 5-3 Materials I A.I Soil-Test Evaluation 7 • • • v B - 15 II I• • ' I Foreword This foreword is for information only and is not a part of ANSIIAWWA C10S. I. Historyof Standard when required, for grayand ductile cas - In 1926, ASA(now ANSI) Committee iron pipe and fittings. A21, Cast-Iron Pipe and Fittings, was 2. Development of procedures for organized under the sponsorship of the investigation of soil to determine AGA, ASTM, AWWA, and NEWWA. when polyethylene protection is ind - The current sponsors are AGA, AWWA, cated. and NEWWA, and the present scope of In response to these assignments, Sub- Committee A21 activity is standardiza- committee 4 has: tion of specifications for cast-iron and I . Developed ANSI A21 .5-1972 ductile-iron pressure pipe for gas, water, (AWWA C105-72), Standard for Po1w- and other liquids, and fittings for use with ethylene Encasement for Gray and Dui - such pipe. These specifications are to tile Cast-Iron Piping for Water and Oth�©r include design, dimensions, materials, Liquids. coatings, linings, joints, accessories, and 2. Developed Appendix A outlinin methods of inspection and test.. soil-investigation procedures. In 1958, Committee A21 was reorgan- In 1976, Subcommittee 4 reviewed the ized. Subcommittees were established to 1972 edition and submitted a recommer- study each group of standards in accor- dation to Committee A21 that the stand- dance with the review and revision policy and be reaffirmed without change from of ASA (now ANSI). The present scope the 1972 edition, except for the updating of Subcommittee 4, Coatings and Lin- of this foreword. ings, is to review the matter of interior In 1981 , Subcommittee 4 agai and exterior corrosion of gray and reviewed the standard. The major revi- ductile-iron pipe and fittings and to draft sions incorporated into the current ed�i-- standards for the interior and exterior tion as a result of that review arc listed in protection of gray and ductile-iron pipe Sec. VII of this foreword. and fittings. ]n accordance with this scope, Sub- II. History of Polyethylene Encase- committee 4 was charged with the respon- ment sibility for: Loose polyethylene encasement was I. Development of standards on first used experimentally in the United polyethylene encasement materials and States for protection of cast-iron pipe i� their installation as corrosion protection, corrosive environments in 1951. The first vi B — 16 i M POLYETHYLENE ENCASEMENT FOR DUCTILE-IRON PIPING viz field installation of polyethylene wrap on tion of the US Department of the cast-iron pipe in an operating water sys- Interiort on polyethylene film used tern was in I95R and consisted of about underground showed that tensile strength 600 ft (ISO m) of 12-in. pipe installed in a was nearly constant in a 7-yr test period waste-dump fill area. Since that time, and that elongation was only slightly hundreds of installations have been made affected. The I3ureau's accelerated soil- in severely corrosive soils throughout the burial testing (acceleration estimated to United States in pipe sizes ranging from be five to ten times that of field condi- 4-54 in. in diameter. Polyethylene encase- Lions) showed polyethylene to be highly ment has been used as a soil-corrosion resistant to bacteriological deterioration. • preventative in Canada, England, France, • Germany, and several other countries V. Exposure to Sunlight since development of the procedure in the Prolonged exposure to sunlight will United States. eventually deteriorate polyethylene film. Therefore, such exposure prior to back- III. Research filling the wrapped pipe should be kept to Research by the Cast Iron Pipe a minimum. If several weeks of exposure Research Association (CIPRA)* on sev- prior to backfilling are anticipated, Class eral severely corrosive test sites has indi- C material should be used (see Sec. 5- cated that polyethylene encasement 3.1.1). provides a high degree of protection and results in minimal and generally insignifi- VI. Options cant exterior surface corrosion of gray This standard includes certain options, and ductile cast-iron pipe thus protected. which, if desired, must be specified.These Investigations of many field installa- options are: tions in which loose polyethylene encase- 1. Color of polyethylene material ment has been used as protection for gray (Sec. 5-3). and ductile cast-iron pipe against soil cor- 2. Installation method—A, B, or C rosion have confirmed CIPRA's findings (Sec. 5-4)—if there is a preference. • with the experimental specimens. These field installations have further indicated VII. Major Revisions that the dielectric capability of polyethyl- The major revisions in this edition con- ene provides shielding for gray and due- sist of the following: • tile cast-iron pipe against stray direct I. Reference to gray cast-iron pipe in current at most levels encountered in the the title and throughout the standard was field. deleted because gray iron pipe is no IV. Useful Life of Polyethylene longer produced in the United States. 2. Metric conversions of all dimen- Tests on polyethylene used in the pro- sions are included in this standard. Metric tection of gray and ductile cast-iron pipe dimensions are direct conversions of cus- have shown that after 20 years of expo- tomary US inch-pound units and are not sure to severely corrosive soils, strength those specified in International Organiza- loss and elongation reduction are insignif- tion for Standardization(ISO)standards. leant. Studies by the Bureau of Reclama- t ihoratory and Field Investigations of Plastic 'CI PRA became the Ductile Iron Pipe Research Films, US Dept. of the Interior,Bureau of Reclama- Association in 1979. tion, Rcpt. No. ChE-10. (Sept. 19(4). B — 17 i it ANSI/AWWA C105/A21.5-82 [Revision of ANSI/AWWA C 105-72 (R77)]I! • American National Standard for Polyethylene Encasement for Ductile-Iron Piping for Water and Other Liquids Sec. 5-1 Scope 5-3.1.I Raw material used to manu- This standard covers materials and facture polyethylene film. installation procedures for polyethylene Type: I encasement to be applied to underground Class: A (natural color) or C (black) installations of ductile-iron pipe. This Grade: E-I standard also may be used for polyethyl- Flow rate (formerly melt index): cne encasement of fittings, valves, and 0.4 maximum other appurtenances to ductile-iron pipe Dielectric strength: Volume resistivity, systems. minimum ohm-cm! = 1015 5-3.1.2 Polyethylene film. Sec. 5-2 Definition Tensile strength: 1200 psi (8.3 MPa) 5-2. 1 Polyethylene encasement: minimum The encasement of piping with polyethyl- Elongation: 300 percent minimum ene film in tube or sheet form. Dielectric strength: 800 V/mil (31.5 Sec. 5-3 Materials V/,um) thickness minimum 5-3.2 Thickness. Polyethylene film 5-3. 1 Polyethylene. Polyethylene shall have a minimum thickness of 0.008 film shall be manufactured of virgin in. (8 mil, or 200 µm). The minus toler- polyethylene material conforming to the ancc on thickness shall not exceed 10 per- following requirements of ASTM Stand- cent of the nominal thickness. and Specification D-1248-78—Polyethyl- 5-3.3 Tube size or sheet width. ene Plastics Molding and Extrusion Tube size or sheet width for each pipe Materials: diameter shall he as listed in Table 5.1. I� B - 18 I Ij • • 2 ANSI;AWWA C105iA21.5-82 • TABLE 5.1 _ Tube and Sheer Si:es • Minimum Polyethylene Width Nominal Pipe in. (cm) Diameter in. Flat Tube Sheet 3 14 (35) 28 (70) 4 16 (41) 32 (82) 6 20 (51) 40 (102) 8 24 (61) 48 (122) 10 27 (69) 54 (137) 12 . 30 (76) 60 (152) 14 34 (86) 68 (172) 16 37 (94') 74 (188) 18 41 (104) 82 (208) 20 45 (114) 90 (229) 24 54 (137) 108 (274) 30 67 (170) 134 (340) 36 ' 81 (206) 162 (411) 42 95 (241) 190 (483) 48 108 (274) 216 (549) 54 121 (307) 242 (615) • Sec. 5-4 Installation fashion lengthwise until it clears the pipe g PP 5-4.1 General. The polyethylene ends. encasement shall prevent contact between Lower the pipe into the trench and the pipe and the surrounding backfill and make up the pipe joint with the preceding bedding material but is not intended to be section of pipe. A shallow bell hole must a completely airtight and watertight be made at joints to facilitate installation enclosure. Overlaps shall be secured by of the polyethylene tube. the use of adhesive tape, plastic string, or After assembling the pipe joint, make any other material capable of holding the the overlap of the polyethylene tube. Pull polyethylene encasement in place until the bunched polyethylene from the backfilling operations are completed.. preceding length of pipe, slip it over the 5-4.2 Pipe. This standard includes end of the new length of pipe,and secure three different methods of installation of it in place. Then slip the _end of the polyethylene encasement on pipe. Meth- polyethylene from the new pipe section ods A and B are for use with polyethylene over the end of the first wrap until it tubes and method C is for use with overlaps the joint at the end of the preced- polyethylene sheets. ing length of pipe. Secure the overlap in 5-4.2.1 Method A. (Refer to Figure place. Take up the slack.width to make a 5.1.) Cut polyethylene tube to a length snug, but not tight, fit along the barrel of approximately 2 ft (0.6 m) longer than the pipe, securing the fold at quarter that of the pipe section. Slip the tube points. around the pipe, centering it to provide a Repair any rips, punctures, or other I-ft(0.3-m) overlap on each adjacent pipe damage to the polyethylene with adhesive section, and bunching it accordion- tape. or with a short length of polyethyl- B — 19 POLYETHYLENE ENCASEMENT FOR DUCTILE-IRON PIPING 3 ene tube cut open, wrapped around the 3-ft (0.9-m) length of polyethylene over 'pipe, and secured in place. Proceed with the joint, overlapping the polyethylene installation of the next section of pipe in previously installed on each adjacent sec- the same manner. tion of pipe by at least I ft (0.3 m); make 5-4.2.2 Method B. (Refer to Figure snug and secure each end as described in 5.2.) Cut polyethylene tube to a length Sec. 5-4.2.1. approximately 1 ft (0.3 m) shorter than Repair any rips, punctures, or other polyethylene chat of the pipe section. Slip the tube damageto the as described around the pipe, centering it to provide 6 in Sec. 5-4.2.1. Proceed with installation in.(15 cm) of bare pipe at each end. Make of the next section of pipe in the same polyethylene snug, but not tight; secure manner. ends as described in Sec. 5-4.2.1. 5-4.2.3 Method C. (Refer to Figure Before making up a joint, slip a 3-ft 5.3.) Cut polyethylene sheet to a length (0.9-m) length of polyethylene tube over approximately 2 ft (0.6 m) longer than the end of the preceding pipe section, that of the pipe section. Center the cut bunching it accordion-fashion length- length to provide a 1-ft(0.3-m)overlap on wise. After completing the joint, pull the each adjacent pipe section, bunching it r 4/r k ! 61. zi22�iiit Figure 5.1. Method A: One length of polyethylene tube for each length of pipe, overlapped at joint. r _ ._.(3 Figure 5.2 Method B: Separate pieces of polyethylene tube for barrel of pipe and ' I for joints. Tube over joints overlaps tube encasing barrel. /47-./ 1 ..._. --.---•-„.... ._....s._,,....._.._____,T,..____.._._ \_.__....__.____._ Figure 5.3. Method C: Pipeline completely wrapped with flat polyethylene sheet. B - 20 I I ,r 4 ANSI/AWWA CI05/A21.5-82 until it clears the pipe ends. Wrap the polyethylene securely in place at valve- polyethylene around the pipe so that it stem and other penetrations. circumferentially overlaps the top quad- 5-4.5 Openings in encasement. Pro- rant of the pipe. Secure the cut edge of vide openings for branches, service taps, polyethylene sheet at intervals of approxi blow-offs,air valves, and similar appurte- mately 3 ft (0.9 m). nances by making an X-shaped cut in the Lower the wrapped pipe into the trench polyethylene and temporarily folding and make up the pipe joint with the back the film. After the appurtenance is preceding section of pipe. A shallow bell installed, tape the slack securely to the hole must be made at joints to facilitate appurtenance and repair the cut, as well installation of the polyethylene. After as any other damaged areas in the completing the joint, make the overlap as polyethylene, with tape. described in Sec. 5-4.2.1. Repair any rips, punctures, or other 5-4.6 Junctions between wrapped damage to the polyethylene as described and unwrapped pipe. Where polyethyl- in Sec. 5-4.2.1. Proceed with installation ene-wrapped pipe joins an adjacent pipe of the next section of pipe in the same that is not wrapped, extend the polyethyl- manner. ene wrap to cover the adjacent pipe for a 5-4.3 Pipe-shaped appurtenances. distance of at least 2 ft (0.6 m). Secure the Cover bends, reducers, offsets, and end with circumferential turns of tape. other pipe-shaped appurtenances with 5-4.7 Back/ill for polyethylene- polyethylene in the same manner as the wrapped pipe. Use the same backfill pipe. material as that specified for pipe without 5-4.4 Odd-shaped appurtenances. polyethylene wrapping,exercising care to When valves, tees, crosses, and other prevent damage to the polyethylene wrap- odd-shaped pieces cannot be wrapped ping when placing backfill. Backfill mate- practically in a tube,wrap with a flat sheet rial shall be free from cinders, refuse, or split length of polyethylene tube by boulders, rocks, stones, or other material passing the sheet under the appurtenance that could damage polyethylene. In gen- and bringing .it up around the body. eral, backfilling practice should be in Make seams by bringing the edges accordance with the latest revision of together, folding over twice, and taping AWWA C600, Standard for Installation down. Handle width and overlaps at of Ductile-iron Water Mains and Their joints as described in Sec. 5-4.2.1. Tape Appurtenances. • B - 21