Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscJU~ 2 ~ I 1 .. l "" "4 .. , ,, ' 1, ~ •• ·1 ~'-1> ~ ,•.~ .... ,, .. , .. ;«' ..,/< •.• t > ~ ~ .... ·'\,. . • ,1.... .... ..... ·.l,'. ,, ' ' . \ i • \~~~;'." FENCE TO REMAIN AND \$..}i\f1 '(BE MATCHED WITH NEW. ~i ~, /' HEIGHT VARIES BETWEEN ' ·~""-·;,1· 6' AND 8' ~ GATE TO BE RELOCATED Tree ~ Solutionsinc Consulting Arborists Project No. TS -4840 TO: SITE: RE: DATE: PREPARED BY: Summary Arborist Report Fazio Associates LLC c/o Rob Fazio 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 ATS Automation Project June 2, 2015 Chris Madison, ISA Certified Arborist #PN-7671A ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ·, .. J\J\\\ '2 5 2G\5 I inventoried a total of thirty-nine (39) trees on site-six (6) of these trees were under six inches in diameter at standard height (DSH), and were not counted for tree retention purposes. Therefore a total of thirty three trees {33) will be retained. With reference to the preliminary design of the addition, three (3) trees are slated for removal in preparation for development. Using these tallies, a total of ninety-one percent (91 %) of trees I inventoried will be retained. Eighty-one {81%) percent above the ten percent {10%) tree retention required for commercial zones. Assignment & Scope of Report This report outlines the site inspection by Chris Madison of Tree Solutions Inc, on May 27, 2015. Included are observations and data collected at the site located at 432 Shattuck Avenue South. Rob Fazio of Fazio Associates LLC, requested these services to acquire information for project planning. I was asked to tag and evaluate the significant trees on site, with reference to an 'Existing Site Plan' dated March 6, 2015 provided to me by Rob Fazio. I tagged the trees using metal tags that had a number which corresponds to the Attached: Table of Trees. I ran out of tags after tree 696, so no tags were used for trees 697 through 707. I was asked to produce an Arborist Report including my findings and recommendations. I was also supplied with a 'New Site Plan', indicating the rough location of a new addition to the current building- which I referred to when considering tree retention and tree removal. The tree size, species, health and structural condition and related notes and recommendations for each tree can be found in Attached: Table of Trees. A marked up 'Existing Site Plan' with tree locations and correlating numbers can be found in Attached: Site Plans with Mark ups. Photographs, Glossary and References follow the site map. Limits of assignment can be found in Appendix A. Methods can be found in Appendix B. Additional assumptions and limiting conditions can be found in Appendix C. 2940 vv·estl2ke 1\vf! N {Suite tt. E-' VVA 98100 Phone 20G.528 4670 , t I u n s. 11 et ATS Automation Project June 2, 2015 Observations Site p.2 of 9 The site fronts Shattuck Ave S in Renton. One commercial structure currently exists on site. This structure houses the ATS Automation company. This site is a commercially zoned area. The 'New Site Plans' I was provided with indicated that an addition is being designed for construction. The current design calls for the addition to be placed in the north/northwest corner of the building. There was one small area of the 'Existing Site Plan' which did not match the physical site. I labeled this area on my Site Plans with Mark ups. It shows two trees located in a parking strip next to an extra parking space-from my observations in the field this area does not exist. (see Figure 2 and Photo 1). Trees I inventoried a total of thirty-nine trees on site. Six of these were less than six inches DSH, and will not be included in the total retention numbers. In total thirty-three trees will be counted towards the retention numbers. One of the trees I inventoried on site is a landmark tree (Tree 683); one of the adjacent site trees is also landmark tree (Tree L). The majority of species on this site were ornamental trees, and not native to this area. Most of the species well suited to urban environments; these species include red maple (Acer rubrum), European birch (Betula pendulo), and pin oak (Quercus pallustris). There were three rows of ornamental shrubs that were not collected due to their small size. These hedges include one Japanese black pine (Pinus thungbergii )hedge to the west, one arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis) hedge to the north, and one arborvitae hedge located near trees 671 and 672 (see Photos 2 and 3). Discussion Given the current site plans I have seen, a total of ninety-one percent of the trees will be retained. The City of Renton code requires that a total of ten percent of trees must be retained during development in commercially zoned areas. This design currently retains eighty-one percent more trees than required. None of these trees are dangerous or located in critical area buffers. To my knowledge none of these trees are located in future public streets or private access easements. The designs call for the installation of a fire department access gate near the northeast corner of the site. A Landmark tree exists near here, Tree L. Landmark trees are prohibited from removal, and must be protected during construction. Trees 670 and 673 are going to be adjacent to the proposed addition. These trees should be protected during construction. Tree 673 was in fair health, and had poor form. A more aesthetically pleasing tree may be desired near the entrance way. 2940 Westlake Ave. N [Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolut1ons net ATS Aulon1ction PrOJt:'Cl June" 2, 201S p.3 ot g Any trees with their drip lines located in the construction zone should be protected. I have attached our Tree Protection Specifications to this report as a guideline for good tree protection. Tree location should be considered in designing site access for construction vehicles. Soils should be protected from compaction, and overhead clearance should be considered. Heavy materials should never be stored beneath trees during construction. Recommendations • Acquire proper permits before any tree removal or pruning. • Protect trees adjacent to construction activities using the proper tree protection requirements as designated by the City of Renton. • Consider the attached Tree Protection Specifications as guidelines for tree protection of all trees that will be affected by construction. 2940 Westlake Ave. N 1Su1te W V\I tie. V\li\ 08100 Phone 20G S28.4G70 .;lions.net ATS Auto1T1ation Project June 2, 2015 Site Map and Plans __./' / __.__.-· i ·-··-----------··--1 ~ I i '-----IAA,1'1 ~ •" 1!'1<1""7..J'i ,......,,""" p.4 of 9 I 'ii".--!1Zt,e.;. ...., ""'"' ~ .. "el;> Pt~ Figure 1-New Site Plans. Addition to be added on the North/Northwest corner. Map indicates trees to be removed with current design. Tree numbers indicated by call-out. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesoiutions.net ATS Autom<1tio11 Prowct junt-' 2, 2015 -~I - '\[I] ·.\~. ,, JF~ ---) ... ···~! ;:_-- rs of 9 DEAD Figure 2-Area in orange inaccurate survey area. Two trees, a median, and two parking spaces were added to survey. Note single parking space between the two birch trees (689 and 690) adjacent to diagonal parking. Photographs Compare to Photo 1 below. Photo 1-Area where survey was inaccurate. Compare to Figure 2 above. LY40 Vvc,stlake Ave. N (Suite i \\' '.Iv' \ 'It-'. V,./1\ 1;1810\1 I '. '0 n ( I~ (" t ATS Automation Project June 2, 2015 p.6 of 9 Photo 2-Japanese black pine hedge-too small to be collected. Located just west of tree 670. Photo 3-Arborvitae hedge located near tree 671. Was not collected due to its size. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite tt200J Seattle, \/VA 98109 Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolutions net ATS Automat:on Prnject June J., 201.S Glossary p. 7 of g co-dominant stems: stems or branches of nearly equal diameter, often weakly attached (Matheny et al. 1998) crown/canopy: the aboveground portions of a tree (Lilly 2001) drip line: perimeter of the area under a tree delineated by the crown (Lilly 2001) DSH: diameter at standard height; the diameter of the trunk measured 54 inches (4.5 feet) above grade (Matheny et al. 1998) ISA: International Society of Arboriculture included bark: bark that becomes embedded in a crotch between branch and trunk or between codominant stems and causes a weak structure (Lilly 2001) Landmark Tree: A tree of 30 inches or greater at DSH Renton City Code) significant size: a tree measuring 6" DSH or greater structural defects: flaws, decay, or other faults in the trunk, branches, or root collar of a tree, which may lead to failure (Lilly 2001) References ANSI A300 (Part 1) -2008 American National Standards Institute. American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree. Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Maintenance: Standard Practices (Pruning). New York: Tree Care Industry Association, 2008. Sugimura, D.W. "DPD Director's Rule 16-2008". Seattle, WA, 2009. Dunster & Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd. Assessing Trees in Urban Areas and the Urban- Rural Interface, US Release 1.0. Silverton: Pacific Northwest Chapter ISA, 2006 Lilly, Sharon. Arborists' Certification Study Guide. Champaign, IL: The International Society of Arboriculture, 2001. Matheny, Nelda and James R. Clark. Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 1998. Mattheck, Claus and Helge Breloer, The Body Language of Trees.: A Handbook for Failure Analysis. London: HMSO, 1994. 7940 \Ves~lake Ave N (Sur Li?/ V,1 WI/. I : I O ll ~ 1'"1 E' '. ATS Automation Project June 2, 2015 Appendix A -Limits of Assignment p 8 of 9 Unless stated otherwise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects the condition of those trees at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of the subject trees without dissection, excavation, probing, climbing, or coring unless explicitly specified. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the subject trees may not arise in the future. Tree Solutions did not review any reports or perform any tests related to the soil located on the subject property unless outlined in the scope of services. Tree Solutions staff are not and do not claim to be soils experts. An independent inventory and evaluation of the site's soil should be obtained by a qualified professional if an additional understanding of the site's characteristics is needed to make an informed decision. Appendix B -Methods I evaluated tree health and structure utilizing visual tree assessment (VTA) methods. The basis behind VTA is the identification of symptoms, which the tree produces in reaction to a weak spot or area of mechanical stress. A tree reacts to mechanical and physiological stresses by growing more vigorously to re-enforce weak areas, while depriving less stressed parts (Mattheck & Breloer 1994). An understanding of the uniform stress allows me to make informed judgments about the condition of a tree. I measured the diameter of each tree at 54 inches above grade, diameter at standard height (DSH). If a tree had multiple stems, I measured each stem individually at standard height and determined a single- stem equivalent diameter by using the method outlined in the City of Seattle Director's Rule 16-2008. A tree is considered Exceptional based on this single stem equivalent value. I used a laser range finder to determine distances. All drip lines were measured from the outer extent of the branches to the outer most extent of the tree trunk. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Phone 206.528.4670 www. t reeso I u tio ns. net ATS Automation Project J_,nc 7, 7015 Appendix C -Assumptions & Limiting Conditions p 9 of 9 I. Consultant assumes that any legal description provided to Consultant is correct and that title to property is good and marketable. Consultant assumes no responsibility for legal matters. Consultant assumes all property appraised or evaluated is free and clear, and is under responsible ownership and competent management. 2. Consultant assumes that the property and its use do not violate applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or regulations. 3. Although Consultant has taken care to obtain all information from reliable sources and to verify the data insofar as possible, Consultant does not guarantee and is not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 4. Client may not require Consultant to testify or attend court by reason of any report unless mutually satisfactory contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such Services as described in the Consulting Arborist Agreement. 5. Unless otherwise required by law, possession of this report does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any person other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior express written consent of the Consultant. 6. Unless otherwise required by law, no part of this report shall be conveyed by any person, including the Client, the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media without the Consultant's prior express written consent. 7. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the Consultant, and the Consultant's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specific value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event or upon any finding to be reported. 8. All photographs included in this report were taken by Tree Solutions Inc. during the documented site visit, unless otherwise noted. 9. Sketches, drawings and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. The reproduction of any information generated by architects, engineers or other consultants and any sketches, drawings or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of such information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Consultant as to the sufficiency or accuracy of the information. 10. Unless otherwise agreed, (1) information contained in this report covers only the items examined and reflects the condition of the those items at the time of inspection; and (2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, climbing, or coring. Consultant makes no warranty or guarantee, express or implied, that the problems or deficiencies of the plans or property in question may not arise in the future. 11. Loss or alteration of any part of this Agreement invalidates the entire report. · ·le. WA. 98109 Phone 206.1.'8 •H, 70 \V '.'.' V t Ion c, n P '. Tree A Solutionsinc Consulting Arborists Tree Protection Specifications 1. This specification must be followed for all trees that are in close proximity to any clearing and grading limits. 2. Educate all workers on site about tree protection techniques and requirements during preconstruction meetings and by sharing and posting this Tree Protection Specification. 3. After the site has been surveyed and clearing and grading stakes are in place, the project arborist should visit the site to determine the actual placement of tree protection measures based on the potential impact to tree root systems. Final adjustment of clearing limits by the arborist will be made on site prior to construction. 4. Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing or other barriers shall be installed along all clearing limits to protect the Critical Root Zones (CRZ) of trees that are to be preserved. Optimal CRZ areas should be the greater of the drip line or calculated at 1-foot radius for every 1-inch of tree diameter. TPZ fencing shall be a minimum of a 4-foot tall orange plastic fencing anchored with steel stakes or a 6-foot tall chain link fence, depending on the project needs. Alternative barriers may be approved with consent of the project arborist. One entry point into the TPZ to gain access to the tree shall be provided for all trees, especially those surrounded by a chain link fence. Damaged barriers shall be re-established or replaced. 5. The project arborist may require chain link fencing or plywood boxing around trees in certain high traffic areas. The arborist will meet on site with the contractor to determine the specific types of fencing and placement, and the specific clearing instructions for areas near preserved trees. Adjustment of the initial TPZ lay out may be required as construction progresses and should be approved by the project arborist. 6. Post appropriate signage to the fencing to help convey the importance of the CRZ to workers. 7. TPZ fencing shall not be moved without authorization from the project arborist or the site supervisor. All fencing is to be left in place until the completion of the project. Tree protection signage shall be attached to fencing only. 8. A 4 to 6-inch deep layer of coarse arborist woodchips or hog fuel mulch shall be layered over the top of the soil surface. The mulch shall be kept 12-inches away from the base of any tree. Alternative mulch may be used with the prior approval of the project arborist. 9. Work required for removal of unwanted vegetation within the CRZ areas will be hand work only. NO HEAVY EQUIPMENT SHALL BE USED IN THE TPZ. 10. Within the TPZ areas, no parking, materials storage, dumping, or burning is allowed. 11. Do not attach anything to trees using nails, screws, and/or spikes. 12. Any trees adjacent to high traffic areas or building envelopes shall be pruned to attain proper safety and clearance prior to the construction. The project arborist will provide a recommendation using American national Standards Institute ANSI A300 Standard Practices for Pruning. Use of an International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist to perform the recommended work is strongly recommended. 13. When removing trees outside of the TPZ determined to be unacceptable for retention, use methods such as directional felling to avoid damage to trees and other valuable vegetation that is being retained. Small trees and other native vegetation in these areas should be carefully preserved. 14. Tree stumps that are within a TPZ or immediately adjacent to the CRZ of a preserved tree or other vegetation shall be removed by grinding. 15. Where the project arborist has determined that roots of a preserved tree may be encountered during excavation or grading, a Certified Arborist shall be on site to supervise any root pruning and to assess the potential impact of such pruning. 16. Excavation equipment shall have flat front buckets to be used when lowering the grade that may contact roots of a preserved tree. WA 98103 Phom-, 206 5211 .4b 70 1 t I on ..., n t! t General Tree Protection Spec1ficat1on 10/15/2014 -----_ _ _ _ -----p_,2___cif_2 17. Excavation should occur at perpendicular angles that will reduce the potential to tear and break roots further back towards the tree. 18. Any root greater than 1-inches in diameter that is encountered shall be carefully cut with a sharp tool and not torn with a backhoe. Avoid, when feasible, cutting any root greater than 4 inches in diameter. Roots cut shall be immediately covered with soil or mulch and kept moist. When roots must be exposed around concrete forms before back-filling can occur, cover the roots with wet burlap and a white plastic sheeting. 19. Where access for machinery or any vehicle is required within the CRZ or TPZ of any preserved tree, the soil should be protected from compaction. Acceptable methods include an 18 inch deep layer of wood chips or hog fuel, 1 inch thick plywood, Alturna Mats, or steel sheets be placed over the soil surface. 20. Do not trench for utilities installation or repair, or for irrigation system installation within the TPZ without consent of the project arborist. Alter routes of underground infrastructure or use alternate methods such as pipe boring, air excavation, or HVAC to work around roots. 21. Landscaping specified within the TPZ areas shall be designed to limit disturbance of surface soils and preserved vegetation. No root pruning is permitted. New plants added in these areas should be of the smallest size possible to minimize disturbance. 22. Do not change grade by cutting or filling within the TPZ without consent of the project arborist. 23. Where backfill is required within a CRZ or TPZ area, the project arborist shall determine the amount and type of fill material to be used. 24. Supplemental irrigation for all protected trees is required during the summer months or prolonged periods of dry weather. In the absence of adequate rainfall, apply at least 1 inch of water per week by deep soaking methods. THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT FOR SUCESSFUL TREE RETENTION. 25. Fertilize trees as necessary with phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, and other macro-and micro- nutrients as indicated by a soil nutrient analysis test, but wait at least 1 year to apply any nitrogen. Nitrogen shall only be applied according to the American National Standards Institute A300 (part 2) Standard Practices for Fertilization or the International Society of Arboriculture's Best Management Practice for Fertilization. 26. Monitoring of all trees, especially those exposed to new environmental conditions such as exposure to wind, sun, or deep shade, should be monitored during construction and annually for several seasons following construction to check for adverse changes to the tree health or stability. Copyright Tree Solutions Inc. 2011 2940 Westlake Ave N /1200 SeattlP, WA 98103 Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolut1ons net Tree ~ Solutionsinc Con sul ting Arb or ists DSH Health Structural Tree ID Scientific Name Common Name (inches) Condition Condition 669 Thuja plicata Western red 27 Go od Goo d cedar 670 Prunus ce rasifera Fl owerin g p lu m 21.2* Good Go d 'Th un derclo u d' 671 Betula pendula European birch 16.8 Good Fair 672 Prunus cerasus Floweri ng cherry 16 .4 Good Fa i r 67 3 Ace r circinatum Vin e maple 8 .7 Fa i r Poo r 67 4 Acer r ubrum Red ma p le 3.9 Good Good 67 5 Corn us florida Ea stern dogwood 7 .8* Fa ir Poor 676 Betul a pendu l a Eu ropean b i rc h 13 .5 Goo d Good 677 Pru nus sp. Che r ry tree 12.5 Good Good 678 Prunus sp. Ch erry tree 11 Go od Good 679 Prun us sp . Cherry t ree 9.2 Good Fa ir 680 Prunus sp. Ch e r ry tree 11 * Fai r Poo r 681 Acer rubrum Red maple 5.5 Good Fa ir 682 Robinia pseudoacacia Black locust 5 Goo d Fa ir 683 Platanus American 3 1.3 Good Go od occidentalis sycamore 68 4 /le x aquifoliu m Holl y tree 1 1.9* Go o d Fa ir 685 Acerrubrum Red maple 4.7 Good Good T re e Soluti o ns , Inc. 2940 West lake Ave . N (S u ite #200) Seattle, WA 9 8109 Table of Trees 432 Sh attuc k Avenue South Renton , 'NA 98057 Drip line Rad ius (feet) Landmark Proposed North East South West tree Action 18 14.5 17 17 Remove 1 8 1 2.5 24 18 Ret ain 22 18.5 22 25 Remove 24 18 2 4 12.5 Remove 10 14 3 10.5 Re t ai n 10 .5 10.5 10.5 10.5 Ret ai n 0 10.5 14 14 Retain 2 0 6 19 .5 2 0 Ret ai n 20 5 24 5 Retai n 20 5 21 5 Re ta i n 20 4 7.5 4 Ret ai n 0 4 30 8 Reta i n 3 13 14 .5 13 Retain 0 14 18.5 15 Reta in 22.5 22 .5 22.5 22.5 Yes Reta i n 7 .5 7 .5 7 .5 7.5 Re t ai n 12 1 2 12 12 Retai n Page 1 o f 4 Notes Date of In ve ntory: 5/27/2015 Tab le Pr e p a r ed : 5/29/20 15 Uti li ty lines to ea st. Compacted soil s at base -parki ng lot and st ru cture imped i ng root zone. *M easur ement take n from below t he union. M echanical damage on t he south side due t o car/tr uck . Roo t ing sp ace limit ed by par ki ng lot. Photo t ropic lean to west . Landsca pi ng fa br ic located at bas e. Root obstructio n t o the south-parking lot. Landscap i ng fab ric at bas e. Graft shows swelli ng. Roo t obst r uc ti o n t o th e sou t h-pa rki ng lot. Co - dom inant form, union has narrow ang le of attachment with incl uded bar k. Larger st em is l ess 11nriaht Knobby re spon se growth . Poo r his tory of pruning. Base obstructed by paved area arou nd ba se of t ree . *M ult i-s t emme d tree: 4.8, 2.8, 4.6, 3 . Heavy in f est ati on of ivy . Anthracn ose, sparse canopy to t he north. Phototropi c lean t o the west. Roots obstructed by cu r b to South. Sha res canopy w i th tree 677. Root obst r ucti on t o t he so ut h. Share s ca no py with 676 and 678 . Root obstructi on to the so ut h. Sha res canopy w i th 677 and 679 . Root obst r uction t o the so ut h. Supp ressed growth. Sha res canop y w ith 678 and 680 . *Mul t i-stemmed t ree : 9.1, 6.2. Tw isting stems . Root s ob st r uc t ed to t he south . Shares canopy w ith 679 . cou ld use fo rm ative pruni ng . Vo lunt ee r t ree. Pho totro pic lea n to sou t h. Ni ce la rge tree . Bow form to east. * Mu lti-s t emmed t r ee : 8 .8, 8.1. Co -dom inant form. Roo t obstruc t ion due to infra structure . www.t r ee so l u t ions.net 2 06-5 28-4670 Tree ~ Solutionsinc Consulting Arborists DSH Health Structural Tree ID Scientific Name Common Name (inches) Condition Condition 686 Acer circinatum Vine maple 5.3* Good Good 687 Crataegus sp. Hawthorn 13.7 Good Good 688 Sorbus aucuparia Mountain ash 19 .6 Good Good 689 Betula pendula European birch 17.8 Good Good 690 Betula pendula European birch 21.7 Go o d Good 691 Pseudotsuga Douglas fir 29.4 Good Fair menziesii 692 Quercus polustris Pin oak 23.5 Good Good 693 Prunus serrula Flowering cherry 22 Fair Poor 694 Quercus palustris Pin oak 25.6 Good Good 695 Quercus palustris Pin oa k 28 Good Good 696 Prunus serrula Flowering cherry 22.8* Good Fair 697 Prunus /u sitanica Po rtuga l l aurel 9 .4* Good Fair 698 Prunus /u sitonico Portugal laurel 15.3* Good Fair 699 Prunus lusitanica Portugal la urel 8.5* Good Fair 700 Prunus lusitanica Portugal laure l 11.7* Good Fair 701 Prunus lusitanica Portuga l laurel 8.3* Fair Fair 702 Prunus /usitonica Portugal laurel 8.9* Good Fair Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 9 8109 Table of Trees 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 Drip line Radius (feet) Landmark Proposed North East South West tree Action 3 2 7 15 Retain 11 10.5 20 13 Retain 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 Retain 13.5 13 20 20 Retain 13.5 17 20 24 Retain 26 30 21 16.5 Retain 18 12.5 30 21 Retain 13.5 13 .5 13.5 13.5 Retain 19.5 14.5 28 20 Retain 31.5 32 18 28 Retain 3 10 24 27 Retain 17.5 0 14 14 Retain 17.5 13 14 18 Reta in 17.5 0 14 16 Retain 17.5 4 14 16 Retain 0 0 14 0 Retain 0 0 14 0 Retain Page 2 of 4 *Multi-stemmed tree : 3.7, 3.8. Phototropic lean to the sou th. Notes Date o f In ve ntory: 5/27/2015 Table Prepared: 5/29/2015 Co-dominant form at four feet. Small dead woody part s in the canopy. Bow form to the southeast-phototropic lea n. Few broken bra nches in the canopy. History of crown raising. La rge removal cuts on trunks. Four cuts 4 to 7 inches in diameter. Signs of cherry bark tortrix. Small d ead woody parts in cano py. Phot otropic lea n (sl ight) to t he north. Root o bstru ctio n by pa rking curb. Over extended branch to the west. Large removal cuts on trun k. *Multi -s t emmed: 8, 6, 14, 9, 9, 8. Suppresse d t o North. Looks like rootstock may hav e taken over. Measurements taken abov e union. *M ul ti-stemmed: 2.7, 9. Phototropic lean to west. Supp ressed tree . No tag. *M ulti-ste mm ed: 4.6, 14.6 . No t ag. *M ulti-st emm ed: 3, 8. Phototropic lean to the west. Suppressed tree . No tag. *Multi-stemmed : 4, 9, 4, 5, 10. No tag . *Multi-stem med: 4 .5, 7. Suppressed tree. No tag . *Mu lti-st emmed : 4, 8. Suppresse d tree. No tag . www.treesolutions.net 206-528-46 70 Tree ~ So lutionsinc Con sulting Arborists DSH Health Tree ID Scientific Name Common Name (inches) Condition 7 03 Prunus lus itanica Portugal laurel 10.3* Good 704 Prunus Jus itanica Portugal laurel 9 * Good 705 Prunus Jusitanica Portugal laurel 5.8 * Good 706 Be tula pendula European birc h 14 Good 707 Acer circi natum Vine maple 7 .6 * Good A Pseudotsuga Doug la s fir 18 Goo d menziesii B Pseudotsuga Doug las fi r 14 Goo d m en zi es ii C Pseudotsuga menziesii Dougla s fir 6 Goo d D Pseudots ug a Dougla s fir 7 Good m en zi es ii E Pseudots ug a Dougla s fir 1 9 Good menziesii F Pseudotsuga menziesii Dougla s fir 14 Good G Pse udots u ga menziesii Doug las fir 14 Good H Prunus Ch e rry laurel *see not es Fai r lauroceras us I M a gn o lia s p . Mag nol i a *see notes Good J Cory/us cornuta Western ha zelnut *see not es Good var. californica K Cory/us cornuta We stern ha ze lnut *see notes Poor v ar . californica Tree Solutio n s, Inc . 2940 Westlake Ave . N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 9 8 109 Structural Condition Fair Good Fair Fa i r Good Good Good Fa ir Good Good Good Good Poor Go od Good Fair Table of Trees 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 Drip line Radius (feet) Landmark Proposed North East South West tree Action 4 3 13 3 Retain 9 9 14 9 Retain 6 4 16 10 Retain 15 15 15 15 Retain 10 3 10 10 Reta i n Adjacent trees* 9 9 2 10 16 12 12 9 12 12 15.5 Page 3 o f 4 Notes *Multi-ste mm ed: 3, 7, 7. Suppresse d t ree . No tag. *Multi-s temmed: 6, 6, 3. No tag. *Multi-s temmed : 4, 3, 3. No tag. Kin ke d fo rm -bui lding to eas t . No t ag. *Mu lti-st emm ed: 4, 6.5. buildi ng t o east . No tag. Drip li ne t o fence. Ro ug h ly 3 f ee t w es t of f ence. Drip li ne t o fence. Rou ghly 5 feet w est of f ence. Drip li ne to fence. Ro ughly 3 f eet w est of f ence . Drip lin e t o fe nce . Rou ghl y 3 fee t west of fence. Drip lin e to fence . Rou ghl y 3 f ee t west of f enc e. Drip lin e t o fen ce. Rou ghl y 3 fee t west of f ence. Dri p lin e to fe nce . Rou ghl y 3 fee t west of fence . Six 5-7 inch stems. Num erou s dea d st ems . Dat e of Inv entory: 5 /2 7/2 015 Table Prepared: 5/29/2015 Fo ur 16 inch (o r m ore) stems . Ve ry mature spec i me n tree i n nei gh boring lot. Eig ht 4 -6 inc h st em s. La rge shrub in d eclin e. A lot of di ebac k of st ems. Locate d in neighboring lot. Ei ght 4 -6 i nc h st em s. La rge shr ub in d eclin e. A lo t of di eback of stems . Locat ed in neig hboring lot. w ww.treesolutions.net 206-528-4670 Tree ~ Solutionsinc consulting Arborists DSH Health Structural Tree ID Scientific Name Common Name (inches) Condition Condition L Pseudotsuga Douglas fir menziesii 31.5 Good Poor M Acer rubrum Red maple 5.6 Good Good N Cory/us cornuta Western hazelnut •see notes var. californica Tree to be removed Landmark tree Tree Le ss than six inches DSH Additional notes: DSH (Diameter at Standard Height} is measured 4.5 feet above grade. Table of Trees 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 Drip line Radius {feet) Landmark Proposed North East South West tree Action 22.5 22 .5 22.5 22.5 Yes 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 5 Notes Date of Inventory: 5/27/2015 Table Prepared: 5/29/2015 Ei gh t 4-6 inc h stem s. Lar ge shrub i n decline. A lot of dieback of stems. Located in neighboring lot. Multi-stem trees are noted, and a single stem equivalent is calculated using the method defined in the Guide for Plant Appraisa l 9th Ed. Drip line is measured from the ce nter of the tree to the outermost extent of the canopy Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Page 4 of 4 www.treesol utions.net 206 -528 -4670 cpt' I m ,T'(t' ~; ~ I '1 1"1=- Prepared for: ATS Automation GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ATS WAREHOUSE 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington PROJECT NO. 14-269 December 23, 2014 '. ~ 1 \\ \ \ }j=it;; PLAN @ \ \ • ? r .. " \ \ I __.;,,,--,... ' . ;S --" I N C O R P O R A T E D 3213 Eastlake Avenue E Suite B, Seattle, WA 98102 T. 206.262.0370 F. 206.262.0374 December 23, 2014 File No. 14-269 Mr. Brian Allen A TS Automation 450 Shattuck Ave S. Renton, WA 98057 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Allen, PanGE@ I • C O • • 0 • A T a D Gecte:::.11n,cai & Ea1r.r;ouaxe Eng!neenng Co 11suitan:s Enclosed is our geotechnical report for the design of the foundations for the new 2 to 3 story warehouse that will be constructed immediately north of the ATS main building. We anticipate that column loads for the warehouse may be on the order of 100 kips. The site of the warehouse is underlain by moderately compressible soils as well as soils that may be susceptible to liquefaction in a strong earthquake. As such, use of conventional spread footing foundations without ground improvement may result in building settlements on the order of 3 to 4 inches under static loading and an additional I to 2 inches under seismic loading. Use of a preload will reduce static settlements to about 1 inch but dynamic settlements will be unaffected. Use of ground densification from Geopiers or stone columns extending to a depth of about 25 feet will likely reduce static and dynamic settlements to about l inch. Alternatively, 18" diameter augercast pile foundations installed to a depth of about 5 3 feet to support both the structure and floor slab will likely reduce settlements to about Yi inch. Shorter augercast piles (i.e. about 25 feet long) with a lower design capacity may also be used with expected settlements on the order of 1 inch. Sincerely, w·. \ ;:::..J c ..... J W. Paul Grant, P.E. Principal Enclosure: Geotechnical Report ~~ l-::. l :1,t l,1L· \ \ ,·11u~· I .1,1 '.:_11L· I), ....,,::11\k. \\ .\ ')~ 11:--1 ~- , ,ii { ::'I liq h::'-f 1 ','!I I :1,. 1 :111-1 1;::1-11:: · ~ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 I. I SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................... 1 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK AND AUTHORIZA TIO:\ .......................................................................... 1 2.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE ........................................................................................ 1 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 2 3.1 SOILS ............................................................................................................................. 2 3.2 GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................. .3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 3 4.1 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS.. . ........................................................................ .3 4.2 LIQUEFACTION .............................................................................................................. .4 4 .3 PRELOAD FILL ............................................................................................................... .4 4.4 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS. .. ......................................................................... 4 4.5 GROUND IMPROVEMENT ...... ...... .... . ......................................................................... .5 4.6 AUGERCAST PILE FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................... 6 4.7 STRUCTURAL FILL AND COMPACTION ............................................................................ 7 4.8 FLOOR SLABS ................................................................................................................. 7 4.9 STORMWATER INFILTRATION......... . ......................................................................... 7 4.10 PAVEMENT ................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CON SID ERA TIO:'IS ................................................................. 8 5. 1 MATERIAL REUSE ..................... .. ,,,,,, .............................. ,,, ................ , .. ,,,, .. ,,, ...... 8 5.2 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND EROSION CON'iIDERATIONS .................................................... 8 5.3 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK ....................................................................................... 8 6.0 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES .............................................................. 9 7.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................... 10 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 12 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc PanGEO, Inc. LIST OF FIGURES AND APPENDIX (FOLLOWING TEXT) Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Generalized Subsurface Profile Section A-A' Figure I Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Lateral Pile Capacity, 18-inch Augercast Pile, 40 kip Lateral Load -Static Lateral Pile Capacity, 18-inch Augercast Pile, 11 kip Lateral Load -Seismic LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Figure A-l Figure A-2 Figure A-3 Figure A-4 Figure A-5 Figure A-6 Summary Exploration Logs Terms and Symbols for Boring and Test Pit Logs Log of Test Boring BH-1 Cone Penetration Test Log CPI -I Cone Penetration Test Log CPI -2 Cone Penetration Test Log CPI -3 Cone Penetration Test Log CPI -4 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc II PanGEO, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT A TS WAREHOUSE 432 SHATTUCK AVENUE SOUTH REI\TON, WASHINGTON 1.0 INTRODUCTION PanGEO, Inc. (PanGEO) completed a geoteclmical engineering stndy to provide foundation design parameters for the new A TS warehouse in Renton. The stndy included evaluating the subsurface conditions at the site and providing foundation recommendations for different support alternatives for the new warehouse. The following summarizes our findings and conclusions. 1.1 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTIO'.\f The site of new warehouse encompasses the two parcels at 428 and 432 Shattnck Avenue South as shown on Figure I. Current development on the parcels includes a single story commercial building on the south that will be demolished for the new construction and a graveled parking lot on the north. The ground surface on the combined properties is relatively level at about elevation 30 feet. As shown on Figure 2, the 2 to 3 story warehouse will have a length of 90 feet and a width of 40 feet. A truck drive lane and a loading dock will be located on the north side of the building. We anticipate that the main floor of the warehouse will be elevated about 3 to 4 feet above the existing grade to facilitate movement on the loading dock. We also anticipate that column loads from the new structnre may be on the order of I 00 kips 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK AND AUTHORIZA TIO:\ Our work was accomplished in accordance with our proposal letter dated October 7, 2014, which was authorized by Mr. Brian Allen with ATS Automation October J S'h_ Our work scope included reviewing existing geotechnical data for the site and advancing two cone penetrometer test (CPI) probes to explore subsurface conditions at the site of the warehouse from which we derived design recommendations as discussed in this report. 2.0 SITE RECO'.'INAISSANCE On November 25, 2014, we conducted a site reconnaissance to identify indications of differential settlement of existing buildings in the vicinity of the site. During our visit we observed about 2 to 3 inches of differential settlement of a wood framed garage immediately north of the 428 parcel and about I inch of differential settlement in the existing single story commercial building on the 432 parcel. Both structnres are assumed to be supported on shallow spread footing foundations. The observed settlement confirms the presence of compressible soils underlying the warehouse site. 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 SOILS Subsurface conditions at the site were inferred from the logs of two new CPT probes (CPT-3 and CPT-4) advanced at the site of the warehouse and three previous explorations that were advanced adjacent to the ATS building. The locations of the current and prior explorations are shown on Figure 2. With the exception of CPT-3 that encountered refusal at a depth of about 24 feet, the remaining 3 CPT explorations were advanced to a depth of about 52 feet where each probe encountered refusal. Boring BH-1 from our prior work was advanced to a maximum depth of about 78.5 feet. Consistent subsurface conditions were generally encountered in all explorations as reflected in about 48 feet of alluvium with zones of soft compressible soil and potentially liquefiable soil overlying dense to very dense bed load (i.e. sand and gravel) alluvial or outwash deposits. However, the warehouse explorations (CPT-3 and CPT-4) as well as CPT-2 located south of the warehouse site all encountered a dense to very dense upper bed load deposit between depths of about 22 and 32 feet. Subsurface conditions at the warehouse site are graphically depicted in Figure 3 and logs of all explorations are presented in Appendix A. The following describes the soils encountered in the explorations: Upper Alluvium -The materials within about 48 feet of the existing ground surface consist of interbedded sands, silts and clays that were deposited in a low energy environment. Sands within the upper alluvium are typically loose and the silty clays and clayey silts are typically soft. The CPT probes indicate that the upper alluvium may also contain sensitive or compressible materials such as peat. Upper Bed Load Alluvium or Outwash -An upper stratum of bed load deposits consisting of dense to very dense sand and gravel was encountered between depths of about 22 and 32 feet in the explorations at the warehouse site. CPT-3 encountered refusal in this stratum a depth of about 25 feet whereas CPT-4 was able to advance through this stratum and back into underlying weaker alluvial deposits. Lower Bed load Alluvium or Outwash-With the exception ofCPT-3 which encountered refusal at a shallow depth, all remaining site explorations encountered a lower bed load alluvial or outwash deposit at a depth of about 48 feet (El. --18 ft.). This deposit consists of dense to very dense, fine to coarse grained sand with some gravel. While the CPT probes encountered refusal in this stratum, boring BH-lwas able to penetrate this stratum to a depth of78.5, at which point the boring was terminated. Standard Penetration Test N-values in this stratum typically varied between 35 and 80 bpf. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 2 PanGEO, Inc. 3.2 GROUNDWATER Groundwater was inferred at a depth about 8 feet based on the pore water pressure measurements from the CPI probes. However, groundwater seepage may be encountered closer to the ground surface as related to the interbedded nature of the near surface sands and silts. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS A'.'ID RECOMMENDATIONS The site of the new warehouse is underlain by compressible soils that may settle several inches under the weight of the anticipated 3 to 4 fill that may be used to elevate the floor slab of the building to the loading dock level. Additional settlement may also occur from the high column loads (i.e. -100 kips). Accordingly, ground improvement measures or deep foundations will likely be needed to reduce building settlements to acceptable levels. As a minimum, we recommend surcharging the building with at least 6 feet of soil extending above the planned elevation of the first floor slab to reduce static settlements to tolerable levels to allow the building to be supported on conventional spread footing foundations. The surcharge load, however, would not reduce earthquake induced settlements that may be on the order of I to 2 inches. Alternatively, ground improvement consisting or Geopiers or stone columns may be specified to support the floor slabs and footings of the building. These installations are typically contractor designed to support footing bearing pressures of about 4 ksf and floor slab loads. These elements would typically terminate in the upper bed load stratum at a depth of about 25 feet and should provide static settlements of less than about 1 inch and additional settlement of about I inch as related to potential liquefaction in the zone of lower alluvium. Finally, the least amount of building settlement (i.e. less than Y, inch) may be achieved with the use of augercast piles extending to the lower bed load deposits to support the building shell and the floor slabs. 18' diameter augercast piles extending at least 5 feet into to the lower bed load deposits would have an allowable compression load of about 120 kips. Augercast piles that terminate in the upper bed load deposits would have a reduced allowable compression capacity of about I 00 kips and settlement characteristics similar to those of the stone column ground improvements. Detailed design recommendations are presented below_ 4.1 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS The following provides seismic design parameters for the site that are in conformance with the 2012 International Building Code ( !BC), which specifies a design earthquake having a 2% probability of occurrence in 50 years (return interval of2,475 years), and the 2008 USGS seismic hazard maps: 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 3 PanGEO, Inc. Spectral Spectral Design Control Acceleratio Acceleratio Site Spectral Periods Site n at 0.2 sec. n at 1.0 sec. Coefficients Response (sec.) Class (g) (g) Parameters Ss S1 Fa Fv Sos SDI To Ts D 1.44 0.54 1.0 1.5 0.96 0.54 0.11 0.56 4.2 LIQUEFACTION The loose upper and lower alluvial soils underlying the site contain some zones of potentially liquefiable soil. These zones are typically thin and discontinuous such that ground settlements related to potential liquefaction are expected to be on the order of I to 2 inches. Because of the depth of these zones (i.e. greater than 10 feet), any liquefaction within these materials would only result in ground settlement which may cause some architectural damage and some structural distress of the building but not a foundation failure. 4.3 PRELOAD FILL The use of conventional shallow footings to support the building should be preceded by placing a static surcharge fill on the site to consolidate the underlying compressible soils. Static settlements may be reduced to about I inch by placing a preload fill that extends at least 6 feet above the elevation of the finished first floor slab. The top of the fill should extend at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the building. The fill should be left to consolidate the underlying soils for at least 4 weeks. Prior to placing the fill, settlement markers should be placed on the ground at 4 locations to allow monitoring the rate of ground settlement. Survey readings should be obtained twice weekly documenting the elevations of the survey markers to confirm the time at which the preload can be removed. While a preload will reduce static settlement, the building may still experience about I to 2 inches of settlement related to potential liquefaction of some of the loose, saturated sands that underlie the site. 4.4 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS Fallowing the placement of the pre load fill, conventional spread and strip footings may be constructed to support the building. All footings should be founded a minimum distance of 18 inches below the finished grade and should have a minimum width of 18 inches. Because it is quite likely that the design footing grades will be located over relatively weak cohesive soils, we recommend that all footing be over excavated to a 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 4 PanGEO, Inc. depth of 2 feet and the excavated material replaced with a compacted structural fill which will also serve as a working platform for the footing construction. All footing excavations should observed by PanGEO to confirm that the exposed footing subgrade is consistent with the expected conditions and adequate to support the proposed building. We recommend that the footings be sized using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of2 ksfwhich may be increased by 1/3 for transient conditions such as wind and seismic loadings. Total static settlements for the footings as constructed as described above and following placement of the surcharge fill are anticipated to be on the order of 1 inch with differential settlements of about half this amount. Most settlement will occur during construction as loads are applied. Total building settlements following a large earthquake are expected to be on the order of I to 2 inches. Lateral forces from wind or seismic loading may be resisted by the combination of passive earth pressures acting against the embedded portions of the foundations and by friction acting on the base of the foundations. Passive resistance values may be determined using an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This value includes a factor safety of at least 2 assuming that the properly compacted structural fill will be placed adjacent to the sides of the footings. A coefficient friction of 0.5 may be used to determine the frictional resistance at the base of the footings. This coefficient includes a factor safety of approximate 1.5. 4.5 GROUND IMPROVEMENT In lieu of the surcharge fill, ground improvement consisting of the installation of Geopiers or stone columns that terminate in the upper bed load stratum at a depth of about 25 feet may be conducted to support the footings and floor slabs of the buildings. This type of ground improvement is a contractor design-built element to meet performance specifications for settlement and allowable footing bearing pressure. Contractors capable of conducting such work include Geopier Northwest, Hayward Baker, and Malcolm Drilling. These systems consist of compacting columns ofwell- graded stone to increase the bearing capacity of poor soils, mitigate liquefaction potential, and reduce settlement. In developing a performance specification for this work we recommend that the ground improvement elements be specified as being compatible with a footing allowable bearing pressure of 4 ksf and a maximum static building settlement of I inch. Again, because the design will not improve the soil underlying the upper bed load stratum, the building may experience 1 to 2 inches of settlement following a large earthquake. The performance of conventional footings may be improved by tying the individual footings together with concrete grade beams. The performance specification may include or exclude floor slab support for the ground improvement elements. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 5 PanGEO, Inc. Although liquefaction could occur during a rare IBC code level earthquake below the treated soils, it is our opinion that this will not result in a bearing failure of the building foundation due to the improved upper crust. 4.6 AUGERCAST PILE FOUNDATIONS Settlement may be reduced to less than Yi inch for both static and dynamic loading by supporting the building shell and floor slabs on 18-inch diameter augercast piles that extend into the lower bed load deposits which were encountered at about elevation -18 feet. Auger-cast piles are installed by drilling with a continuous flight hollow stem auger to the required depth, and pumping grout through the hollow stem of the auger as the auger is withdrawn. After the auger is completely removed, steel reinforcement is placed in the grout-filled hole. The rate at which the auger is withdrawn must be consistent with grout supply. If the auger is withdrawn too quickly, the pile will be under-grouted, resulting in "necking" of the pile or contamination of grout materials from caving soil. We recommend that the following design parameters for sizing the augercast piles: Minimum pile diameter: 18-inches Minimum pile embedment in dense 5 feet ( 120 kip pile) sand: 10 feet (200 kip pile) Minimum Pile Tip Elevation: -23 feet (120 kip pile) -28 feet (200 kip pile) Compressive Capacity (18" dia.): 120 kips all./ 240 kips ult. (5' embed.) 200 kips all./ 400 kips ult. (10' embed.) Tension Capacity (18" dia.): 70 kip all./ 140 kips ult. (5' embed.) 140 kips all./ 280 kips ult. (IO' embed.) The augercast piles should be spaced a minimum distance of 3 times the pile diameter. Lateral loads acting on the building will be resisted by a combination of passive earth pressure acting on the pile caps and grade beams as well as from the lateral resistance of the augercast piles. The computer program ALLPILE was used to evaluate the lateral resistance of the augercast piles assuming a fixed head condition at the pile cap. The results of these analyses are presented in Figures 4 and 5. The analyses presented in Figure 4 represent the pile behavior up to the point where the underlying soils liquefy or experience significant degradation. These conditions would likely govern for most of the earthquake ground shaking. The analyses presented in Figure 5 reflect conditions of degraded or liquefied soil, which may be more reflective of conditions near the end of the earthquake or after cessation of strong ground shaking. Both analyses were conducted using lateral loads that would result in about Y, inch of pile deflection. Lower applied 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 6 PanGEO, Inc. loads would generally result in proponionately lower deflections. Because of the relatively wide pile spacing in the new addition, group effects are not expected to control pile capacities. As an alternative to the deeper piles, the augercast piles may be designed to bear within the upper bed load deposits at a design tip elevation of +3 feet. These piles would have an allowable compression capacity of 100 kips and an allowable tension capacity of 50 kips. Augercast piles bearing within the upper bed load deposits would have the same settlement characteristics as the stone column ground improvement option. 4.7 STRUCTURAL FILL AND COMPACTIO'I We recommend using all weather material such as City of Seattle Mineral Aggregate Type 17 (2003 City of Seattle Standard Specifications, 9-03.12(3)) or WSDOT Gravel Borrow (9-03.14(1)) for structural fill. The backfill should be moisture conditioned to within about 3 percent of optimum moisture content, placed in loose, horizontal lifts less than 8 inches in thickness, and systematically compacted to a dense and relatively unyielding condition and to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D 15 5 7. 4.8 FLOOR SLABS Slab on grade floors (i.e. floors that are not structurally supported) should be constructed over subgrade that has been compacted to a dense and unyielding condition. We recommend use of a modulus of subgrade reaction of I 00 pci for the floor slab design. All floor slabs should be constructed on a minimum 4-inch thick capillary break consisting of free-draining, crushed rock or well-graded gravel compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. The capillary break material should have no more than 10 percent passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 5 percent by weight of the material passing the U.S. Standard No. 100 sieve. City of Seattle Type 22 material meets this gradation requirement. We also recommend that a 10-mil polyethylene vapor barrier be placed below the slab. 4.9 STORMW ATER INFILTRATION The cone penetrometer probes suggest that poor draining cohesive soils, such as silty clays, are the predominant materials that underlie the site. Consequently, we recommend that any infiltration scheme be based on a conservative infiltration rate of about 0.1 to 0.3 inches per hour. Any designs assuming groundwater infiltration should be confirmed with additional site explorations. 4.10 PAVEMENT We recommend that the pavement section for the truck lanes consist of 4 inches of HMA overlying 9 inches of Crushed Surfacing Base Course (CSBC) (WSDOT 9-03.09(3)) over 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 7 PanGEO, Inc. the compacted subgrade. All materials within the pavement section should be compacted to 95% of the materials maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D 1557. A lesser pavement section consisting of 3 inches of HMA over 6 inches of CSBC may be used for auto parking and drive lanes. 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 MATERIAL REUSE Native on-site soils with silt contents in excess of about 5% may be difficult to handle and compact during wet weather. If use of the existing soils is planned, any excavated soil should be stockpiled and protected with plastic sheeting to prevent softening from rainfall. 5.2 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATIONS Surface runoff can be controlled during construction by careful grading practices. Typically, this includes the construction of shallow, upgrade perimeter ditches or low earthen berms to collect runoff and prevent water from entering excavations. Temporary erosion control may require the use of hay bales on the downhill side of the project to prevent water from leaving the site and potential storm water detention to trap sand and silt before the water is discharged to a suitable outlet. All collected water should be directed to a permanent discharge system such as a storm sewer. It should be noted that the site soils are prone to surficial erosion. Special care should be taken to avoid surface water on open cut excavations, and exposed slopes should be protected with visqueen. Temporary provisions may also be required such as the use of quarry spalls at the entrance to the construction site to reduce the possibility of the offsite transport of soil on the truck tires. Permanent control of surface water and roof runoff should be incorporated in the final grading design. All collected runoff should be directed into conduits that carry the water away from the pavement or structure and into storm drain systems or other appropriate outlets. Adequate surface gradients should be incorporated into the grading design such that surface runoff is directed away from structures. 5.3 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK General recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet conditions are presented below: • Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize subgrade exposure to wet weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil should be followed promptly by the placement and compaction of clean structural fill. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 8 PanGEO, Inc. The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. • During wet weather, the allowable fines content of the structural fill should be reduced to no more than 5 percent by weight based on the portion passing%- inch sieve. The fines should be non-plastic. • The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run-off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water. • Bales of straw and/or geotextile silt fences should be strategically located to control erosion and the movement of soil. Erosion control measures should be installed along all the property boundaries. • Excavation slopes and soils stockpiled on site should also be covered with plastic sheets. 6.0 CONSTRUCTI01\ SUPPORT SERVICES The recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate program of tests and observations will be made during construction to verify compliance with these recommendations. These tests and observations should include, by not necessarily be limited to, the following: • Review final project plans and specifications • Verify implementation of erosion control measures • Monitor pile/ground improvement installations • Verify adequacy of slab and pavement subgrade • Confirm the adequacy of the compaction of structural backfill • Other consultation as may be required during construction Pending the completion of the final design drawings, we will provide you a proposal for construction monitoring services to address the above items. Geotechnical construction monitoring, by the geotechnical engineer of record, may be required by the City of Renton to obtain an occupancy pennit for the building. We will provide the services necessary to assure you compliance with the Building Permit. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 9 PanGEO, Inc. 7.0 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by the consultant team for the design of the proposed warehouse. Recommendations contained in this report are based on a site reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program, review of pertinent subsurface information, and our understanding of the project. The study was performed using a mutually agreed-upon scope of work. Variations in subsurface conditions may exist between the locations of the explorations and the actual conditions underlying the site. The nature and extent of soil variations may not be evident until construction occurs. If any soil conditions are encountered at the site that are different from those described in this report, we should be immediately notified to review the applicability of our recommendations. Additionally, we should also be notified to review the applicability of our recommendations if there are any changes in the project scope. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Additionally, the scope of our work specifically excludes the assessment of environmental characteristics, particularly those involving hazardous substances. This report has been prepared for planning and design purposes for specific application to the proposed project in accordance with the generally accepted standards of local practice at the time this report was written. No warranty, express or implied, is made. This report may be used only by the client and for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both off and on-site), or other factors including advances in our understanding of applied science, may change over time and could materially affect our findings. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after 24 months from its issuance. PanGEO should be notified if the project is delayed by more than 24 months from the date of this report so that we may review the applicability of our conclusions considering the time lapse. It is the client's responsibility to see that all parties to this project, including the designer, contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the 14-269 A TS Warehouse Rpt.doc 10 PanGEO, Inc. contractor's option and risk. Any party other than the client who wishes to use this report shall notify PanGEO of such intended use and for permission to copy this report. Based on the intended use of the report, PanGEO may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be reissued. Noncompliance with any of these requirements will release PanGEO from any liability resulting from the use this report. W. Paul Grant, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 11 PanGEO, Inc. REFERENCES International Building Code (IBC), 2012, International Code Council WSDOT, 2012, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridges, and Municipal Construction. 14-269 A TS Ware house Rpt.doc 12 PanGEO, Inc. PanGE@ ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue So. VICINITY MAP I M C O R P O R A T & D Renton, Washington ProJect No F1gJre No 14-269 { j N 0 ~ 0 I ii: .; ~I s E) FIRE I • t::tjl YDRANT !WfJ/AY 5E LIKELY AlLOWED -2-1208 STANDARD )VE (E) lWFJ/AY EIET ;HT (/) I w ~ ~ 1---- (.) :::, ~ I Cl) I r:o;i-------"' =a -------v' rri I c-· rri ~~ ~ ~ Ir--------------• ~I ~ Approximate Scale 1":20' 0 0 0 0 1f'·;?~?2<~:i2£P)S;J~~¥W:%·;:~r;>FJt ... '.·.·.·.; ... •.·.· .. ·. =:> CPT-4 ~ ms!E0Y I ( ~j) ~~. ~YEO SHEET NOTES I <'.y REQUIRED RECYCLING AND REFUSE AREA. I <g) 15' SETBACK REQUIRED FOR BUILDING IF l.Ess. THAN 25 FEET IN HEIGHT. 0 NEW PARKING STAll (~. Al.LOWED, 1 STAll PER 1,000 NET SQ. FT.). <v LOADING ZONE. -, <v BUILDING ENTRANCE. ?(~_jf?i (_'J.':) 1 .... .,,. I ' -ft.' I w ,-G'-_- 1 • B-1 PanGEO Boring e CPT-1 Cone Penetrometer Test 0 A PEDESTRIAN TRUSS BRIDGE -t 0 -~.~ ~~ "" ¢=:ii WHIT- WORTH ST. . / / ·.: ><''/ ,•,-, ~ ,-·, /" . ,' /: ,,.,.' . '/-',:/ ', //// ., ¥-frf//f/ . ·'/·, / • .-. ·_L ... L.c~-.--·r i ' \ PanGE@ I • C O R P O R A T 5 D 1f \ \\ ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington SITE PLAN SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN Project No. Figure No fl ~ ,; § ~ • i ill ~ • A40 SECTION A-A' 35 CPT-3 30 CPT-4 Proposed Warehouse 25 20 15 10 ?----~------7 Clay and Silt beds ?-------------------~--___________ ? . ~ . Dense Sandy Alluvium occasional Silty to Clayey interbeds ?--------------~------------------- lnterbedded fine Sand, Silt and Clay, scattered organics and peat -7 5 ~---------------------------------7 7-----------------------C::::::::::::::-------7 ----------------------------------7 Dense Sand and Gravel 0 Bedload Deposit ~ -Ql -5 .l!2 ·= -10 ~ C: 0 :.;::; -15 t'O > ~ -20 w -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 -60 -65 L 0 10 20 Note: All soils under the site are interpreted as Alluvium. Dense sand layer at depth is interpreted as bedload alluvium. but may be of marine or outwash origin. 0 100 200 300 400 500 Qc(TSF) 30 40 50 Dense Sand and Gravel Bedload Deposit 7----------------~-----------------7 lnterbeddecl fine Sand, Silt and Clay 7---------------------------::--------------------------7 60 Legend: CPT-2 Dense, Coarse Bedload Alluvium or Outwash 70 Distance in Feet ::;:::=.=-r'Tc,o'lpo=graphic Surface Groundwater 1 Level~ s.;;1·u~;; .J - 80 0 100 200 300 400 500 Qc (TSF) 90 100 Notes: 110 120 1. Site topography interpreted from King County GIS data . A' 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 ~ --5 Ql .l!2 -10 ·= ~ C: -15 _g t'O > -20 Ql w -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 -60 -65 130 140 'c • 1* £ Bo~n~~~ PanGml ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE SECTION A -A' ~ :r Proie ;l: 14-269 3 ct No I • C D R P D R A T • D ~? . - t; ;QN CD en :, ::r > -.. -j o ::i: en :, C ~ i ::e £I,) l> ~ Ill < CD ::,-CD ::r -· ::::J 0 :, C C: '9. n, en 0 en CD :, 0 " -2. ro ~ z 0 C: -::r ~ ~ ZS~ r .,, .!.. l> ... r z -j ;i,, nm ' "' 0, iil ::c ~ "' ;u > r :I> C "ti ""Tl·"-(Q rm r a o ;um m nn z > :i,,> oCen"tl ... ' -j > en "ti n :j;! r= =i -j m -< 0 Deplh (z) from Pile Top-ft 0 --0.50 Yt=0.49' St=0.000455 10 20 30 40 50 60 Pile Tip Yt=0.000 St=0.000000 DEFLECTION, yt •in 0 +0.50 yt=O at 14.7-ft St=O at 18.5-ft Head Yt=0.499 Max. yt,:,Q.499 Head St=0.002470 -200 'v MOMENT -kip-ft 0 I Head M:iment=-186.7 Max. Moment=186.7 +200 -50 SHEAR-kip 0 I I I I I I Head Shear=40.0 Wax Shear=4D.O •50 y -lb/ft3 • 110 30 526 30 62 6 40 E-l¢llin2""-3000 1-114=5153 C-kip!fl:2 k-lb/in3 e50-% 0 45 S.od 0 30 S.md 0 140 Saod Elewlion from Pile Top-ft 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 6. rTTT1rTITTTTrTTTT1rTITTTrTrTTTT1rTTTT1rTITTTTfTTTT1rTITTJTrTTTT1rTTJ 0 ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' I I l I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I ~11111111111111111 1111111 !s~ O O O g' 0 ~ ~ .ea. ~ ,. .. Cf ~ 0 .. 0 " 0 0 • t M Cf ffi 0 :e~ Jlfjj i-:_ ___ "7,::::_::_ _______ _::::::=--------------~C-t-i 15 "' 0 "' 0 0 l)i 0 ~ 0 • C "T .. .,. 0 M N ;; 0 ll,, .,. N ~ N • 0 ~ "' ~i j" cl' ll ~ ~ ~ t 0 Id N N ~NO .~o l=------------==:::::0-------------------~i;i ~"~ ••• ..J Ill " l!:E 0 M ~ 0 ,;, M 0 ~o ~q ii E:1 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 _LJ..LJL..LLL.L1JI...LLL.LI...LLL.LlNI_J_Ju_J...J__LJ...LLMl.L1~•L•LLLJ.J.OJ.O~O-LIL,J.OJ.O~O~OLOLLOJ.OJ.OJ.I..J,LL'~'J.'J.'-''-''L'~II liE a1 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 I I I I ....... , , , , · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · '3lii: PanGE@ I • C O • • D • A T • D ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington Project No. LATERAL PILE CAPACITY 18-INCH AUGERCAST PILE 11 KIP LATERAL LOAD· SEISMIC 14-269 Figure No S APPENDIX A Summary Exploration Logs RELATIVE DENSITY/ CONSISTENCY l---.2f<>A,]iw , , GRAVEL = ~ .. T, ~· Av Density 1 SPT 1 Approx. Relative SPT Approx. Undrained Shear N-values Density(%) Consistency : N·values Strength (psij Very Loose <4 Loose 4 to 10 Med. Dense 10 to 30 Dense Very Dense 30 to 50 ,50 <15 15 • 35 35-65 65 • 85 85 · 100 j Very Soft Soft Med. Stiff Stiff : Very Stiff I Hard . <2 2 to4 4 to8 8 to 15 15 to 30 ,30 <250 250 • 500 500 -1000 1000 · 2000 2000 · 4000 ,4000 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS Gravel 50% or more of the coarse fraction retained on the 14 sieve. Use dual symbols (eg. GP-GM) for 5% lo 12% fines. Sand 50% or more of the coarse fraction passing the 14 sieve. Use dual symbols {eg. SP-SM) for 5% to 12% fines. Silt and Clay SO%or more passing 1200 sieve GRAVEL (<5% fines) GRAVEL (>12%fines) SAND (<5% fines) SAND (,12% fines) Liquid Limit < 50 Liquid limit > 50 Highly Organic Soils GROUP DESCRIPTIONS . Well·graded GRAVEL .....•...........••..•••••••••••••••••••••..•............... Poorly-graded GRAVEL .....•.........••••••••••••••••••••......................... , ~~ i 5il_1Y. ~~A~E_L ................................... . GC ( Clayey GRAVEL ·····-··································----·---··········· Well·graded SAND Poorly-graded SAND ..................................................... SM • ,Sll,1Y. ~A,N°. ...................................... .. SC , Clayey SAND ....................................................... SILT Lean SILT Organic SILT or CLAY ..................................................... Organic SILT or CLAY PT : PEAT Notes: 1. Soil exploration loqs contain material descriptions based on visual observation and field tests usinq a system modified from the Uniform Soil Classification System (USCS). Where necessary laboratqry tests have been conducted (as noted in the "Other Tests" column), unit descriptions may include a classification. Please refer to the discussions in the report text for a more complete description of the suDsurface conditions. 2. The graphic symbols given above are not inclusive of. all symbols that may appear on the borehole loqs. Other symbols may be used where field observations ind1cateO mixed soil constituents or dual const1tuenf materials. DESCRIPTIONS OF SOIL STRUCTURES Layered: Units of material distinQuished by color and/or composition from matel"ial units above and below Laminated: Layers of soil typically 0.05 to 1 mm thick, max. 1 cm Lens: Layer of soil that pinches out laterally lnterlayered: Alternating layers of differing soil material Pocket: Erratic, discontinuous deposit of limited extent Homogeneous: Soil with uniform color and composition throughout Fissured: Breaks along defined planes Slickensided: Fracture planes that are polished or glossy Blocky: Angular soil lumps that resist breakdown Disrupted: Soil that is broken and mixed Scattered: Less than one per foot Numerous: More than one per foot BCN: AnQle between llf!dding plane and a plane nor'inal to core axrs COMPONENT DEFINITIONS COMPONENT SIZE / SIEVE RANGE COMPONENT SIZE / SIEVE RANGE Boulder: > 12 inches Sand Cobbles: 3 to 12 inches Coarse Sand: 14 to 110 sieve (4.5 to 2,0 mm) Gravel Medium Sand: 110 to 140 sieve (2.0 to 0,42 mm) Coarse Gravel: 3 to 314 inches Fine Sand: #40 to #200 sieve (0.42 to 0.074 mm) Fine Gravel: 3/4 inches to #4 sieve Silt 0.07410 0.002 mm Clay <0.002 mm TEST SYMBOLS for In Situ and Laboratory Tests listed in "Other Tests" column. CBR California Bearing Ratio Comp Compaction Tests Con Consolidation DD Dry Density DS Direct Shear %F Fines Content GS Grain Size Perm Permeability pp Pocket Penetrometer R R.value SG Specific Gravity TV Torvane TXC Triaxial Compression ucc Unconfined Compression SYMBOLS Sample/In Situ test types and intervals f'\/1 2·inch OD Split Spoon, SPT l,0:J (140·1b, hammer, 30' drop) B ~ J,25·inch OD Spilt Spoon (JOO·lb hammer, 30" drop) Non·standard penetration test (see boring log for details) I Thin wall (Shelby) tube ~ Grab [] Rockcore m VaneShear MONITORING WELL Groundwater Level at time of drillinq (ATD) Static Groundwater Level Cement I Concrete Seal Bentonite grout I seal Silica sand backfill Slotted tip Slough Bonam of Boring MOISTURE CONTENT Dry Dusty, dry to the touch Moist Damp but oo visible water Wet Visible free water ! J>anGE@ Terms and Symbols for "' , •• 0 •• 0 • A T • 0 Boring and Test Pit Logs Figure A-1 S,1.:.Ph:,::o:::,n:;ae_: ,::.20:::6:;:.2~6::,2;::.0.::,37:,:0._ ____________________________________ __, Project: ATS Building Renovation Surface Elevation: -30 Job Number: 06-221 Top of Casing Elev.: N/A Location: 450 Shattuck Avenue South, Renton, WA Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger Coordinates: Northing: , Easting: g d z 0) .c C. -C. E 0) Cl "' (J) 0 S-1 5 S-2 S-3 10 S-4 S-5 15 S-6 S-7 20 S-8 S-9 25 a, E .. If) .!: "' -"' ! iii 2 2 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 3 10 9 Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: £l "' 0) f-- ~ 0) .c 6 Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: :g E >, (J) 79.0ft 1/19107 1/19107 SHE Sampling Method: SPT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Base Course Loose, rusty brown SAND: moist becoming wet, fine to coarse grained, interbeds of gray silty clay at top, trace fine gravel, laminated. (Alluvium) Well graded sand, trace fine gravel, laminae of peat and silt at tip, 10° dip Soft, green gray, slighdy Clayey SILT with SILT beds: wet, non-plastic and low plastic, rapid dilatancy, trace fine sand, wood and peaty material scattered throughout, sub-horizontal laminae. (Alluvium) Groundwater interpreted from CPT logs Soft, interibedded green gray Silty CLAY and Silty fine SAND: wet, low plastic, 6" beds, laminated. (Alluvium) Grading to interbedded fine sand and silty day, soft/loose, beds 1/4" to 4", sub-horizontal, laminated Loose, gray SAND: wet, fine to medium grained, poorly graded, sub-horizontally layered, 20% interbeds of silty clay. (Alluvium) Grading to loose, gray, fine to medium sand with occasional organic grains, laminated with occasional silty clay interbeds Loose, gray, fine to medium sand, wet, discrete silt interbeds, horizontal layering, non-plastic, rapid dilatancy, but slightiy sticky Soft, green gray, Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT: wet, non-plastic to low plastic, rapid to slow dilatancy. laminated with occasional fine sand interlaminae, scattered organic bits along bedding. (Alluvium) Medium dense to loose, gray SAND: wet, fine to coarse, well graded but with finer/coarser interbeds, trace silt in fine beds, sub-horizontal layering. (Alluvium) 0 N-Value .a. PL Moisture LL I • I ~RQD Recovery~ 50 100 Remarks: Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with an autobip CME hammer mechanism. ~ Drilling Company: Holocene Drilling ~'l--=--'::....-.a......:...---~------=----.L..-------------------------------1 §PanGE@ 0 (!I •• c o R p o R a T • a Fi·gure A 2 o Phone: 206.262.0370 • ~ ... ;a.;=--===--------------..,.------------------------------' The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 3 LOG OF TEST BORING B-1 Project: ATS Building Renovation Suliace Elevation: -30 Job Number: 06-221 Top of Casing Elev.: N/A Location: 450 Shattuck Avenue South, Renton, WA Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger Coordinates: Northing: , Easting: Sampling Method: SPT g ci z .,:: Q) a. a. E Q) Cl "' (J) S-11 35 S-12 40 S-13 45 S-14 50 S-15 55 S-16 S-17 u, ti 0 ~ r, ~ E MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Q) >, .c (J) 0 .,,-+---+~-h-=--==~.,...,,-~-~=,.,-==,,,.,....="TCC=cccc---0 Soft, gray SILT: wet, non-plastic to low plastic, rapid dilatancy, 0 1 2 0 2 4 6 15 19 7 23 17 1 11 23 7 22 22 ... sub-horizontally laminated, 1" fine sand and brown peaty laminae at tip. (Alluvium) (Continued) Loose, gray SAND: wet. fine to coarse grained, well graded. homogenous, occasional fine gravel, sub-horizontally layered, 3" silty clay bed at tip, sharp contact, scattered brown organics. (Alluvium} Soft, gray, Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT: moist to wet. interbedded. low to medium plastic or non-plastic, laminated with occasional peaty laminae, sand seam. (Alluvium) Grading to silty fine sand. laminated. homogeneous Dense, rusty brown SAND: wet, fine to coarse grained, well graded, moderately weathered, with subrounded fine to coarse gravel, sub-horizontal layering. {Bedload Alluvium) Mainly volcanic clasts, some other lithologies lnterbedded fine to medium sand with fine to coarse sand and gravel, moderately weathered with minor clayey matrix Heaving conditions, rusty brown return water, uneven drive indicates finer/coarser beds. Coal clast on auger from about this level PL I ~RQD N-Value A Moisture • LL I 8 65 .L _ _L_L __ L_ __ .L:''..''..'..' L------~----------------.....l-----.J.....1. ................................... --j ~ Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: 79.0ft 1/19/07 1/19/07 SHE Remarks: Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with an autotrip CME hammer mechanism. ~''"==D=n=·11_in_,g'-C"-o"-m=p-•n~y'=:===--ccccH_o:clo"-c"-e"n"e-D_ril_lin...:g::.... ___ _._ _______________________________ --I !PanGE@ LOG OF TEST BORING B-1 (!) , • c o R • o R A T • n F1·gure A 2 '3,._P:.,h,:::O;::n,_e:_,2.,0a:;6,a:26.,2;:;.0:;::3a,;70:....------------------------------------_, The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 3 Project: ATS Building Renovation Surface Elevation: -30 NIA Job Number: 06-221 Top of Casing Elev.: Location: 450 Shattuck Avenue South. Renton, WA Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger SPT Coordinates: Northing: , Easting: ~ !E. £ 15. Q) 0 65 70 75 80 85 90 § § z 95 ~ ~ 0 z J!! a. E "' Cl) S-18 S-19 S-20 ~ C: <O -"' ~ in 4 14 21 7 21 31 16 29 40 I Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: ~ Date Borehole Completed: i5 Logged By: 79.0ft 1119/07 1119/07 SHE Sampling Method: MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Dense. rusty brown SAND: wet. fine to coarse grained. well graded, moderately weathered, with subrounded fine to coarse gravel, sub-horizontal layering. (Bedload Alluvium) (Continued) Dense, yellow brown, fine to coarse sand: wet, moderately weathered, subangular to subrounded, blocky to platy, minor matrix Very dense, brown sand with gravel, wet. well graded. bedded and laminated with aligned tabular grains Bottom of Boring PL I ~RQD 0 N-Value .A Moisture • LL I Remarks: Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with an autotrip CME hammer mechanism. ~ Drilling Company: Holocene Drilling ~l-==~~-~--=~--=-----~---'-----------------------------------1 !PanGE@ LOG OF TEST BORING B-1 C!I , • c o R p o • " T E u Fi"gure A 2 9._P._h_o_ne_:_.2_06_._2&_2_..0 .. 37_.o ____________________________________ -_ The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 3 of 3 epth (fl) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 PanGeo, Inc. Tip Resistance QcTSF ' ' --,-------,---,--- ____ I ___ _ > ----_, --,- ~-----____ I------- /> : ---J_ -+-~-,·- Operator: Dafni Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DSG0708 250 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 0 6 ' ---1=:.::T I _::-_:__¥~~ ' ----,-+ -:I_ -, -·--1-_3.- .c_--:;:::: -..l I I !.sc_l I 1 --1 ,,-1-' ~-'..~~-~- J.---,-1-I ·-"•"( I I C::O. I <' } -:--- -l·> I I~<?~ I -~-~-<~ ._J-co:1 --' ~·r-:.-, I " ' -~-:.I I --~tit/' --r--r -,+ '--1 I I ,--=T:-~:::-1 - ~ ~~r:· s:.·.i- ,c::,) : ' -' ' · r ~=1---'-- ,--1-I r-~ \-- . 1--1--- --~----1---~£~~~~---- ' _[_ -- 1· ; I -' __ _, ___ _ ___ ,.. ___ _, __ _ ' sensitive fine grained organic material clay ,1-- ~;-I .,c-j I (T - \L __ ,---1=- I---_,, ·:r -1. Maximum Depth = 51.18 feet silty clay to clay clayey silt to silty clay sandy silt to clayey silt CPT Date/Time: 1/9/200710:23:47 AM Location: ATS Building Renovation Job Number: 06-221 Pore Pressure Pw PSI Soil Behavior Type• Zone: UBC-1983 SPTN" 60% Hammer -20 I I I ;'1 '·.1 ' l ' ', l'J I "-1..___1 1,...,:i I'···\ I (I 50 I I I (-·, I -;-;:,:,---i-l - c ( '\ I \ I ,',-1 J_":> I 1( 1 ' ' 1::-1-1 __ _ I~ I I 1>, I ~T , I ,, j) J/ - L__:--ca_<: ~ -,-~ -,.-- ' " --i---,--1 ' ' -L I_J_ I I_ 1 ---T ,, ' ,, .__ ,c..__j____,_ J. -'-_j - I..JT-"1 I I ·--1.. ,·:,, I -.1 ~,~~: ', I -T --I--...Le,. _i;:--r f ' ,, 0 12 0 50 T"l--,-- ' J_ J ..! ' --_J _J _, _,_ - + -I -J --1-1-1- 1 I I I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' Depth Increment= 0.164 feet • 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand •9 sand Northwest Cone Exploration • 10 gravelly sand to sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (*) • 12 sand to clayey sand r·) Fig. A-3 epth (ft) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 PanGeo, Inc. Tip Resistance QcTSF T T L ' ' _...J_---==--~-rc;:-, r T T Operator: Dafni Sounding: CPT-02 Cone Used: DSG0708 250 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 0 6 l'_ I l=l_=r-_ I °T-.:,i ' y' ,~:..! I ~T'° I 11~1 "-_J.__-t' I I T-t7 I : ~;2'~: I I <,._I 1;~-i: 1( _--~-----:----i---;--- I I I I I I I I I I I I -----.-.......L I I I ---,-,7 ' ' ~-I 2> c_, _ _j_ __ ...:=::, ---- ---- -~ --, --- ' L-----l ----1---~~ ~--=-=-=-: L -'-- sensitive fine grained organic material clay '~---' ~--1..L1 Maximum Depth = 52.33 feel silty clay to clay clayey silt to silty clay sandy silt lo clayey silt CPT Date/Time: 1/9/200711:59:45AM Location: ATS Building Renovation Job Number: 06-221 Pore Pressure PwPSI Soil Behavior Type" Zone: UBC-1983 SPTN" 60% Hammer -10 25 I 111 I I '~ I z_-~ ',' ,, ,, ' +,: : I<.' I 1..2.L_!.__,_ ' ' ' 0 12 0 50 ' -, -, ' _, " ' :I I T;-;-,-1-,--., ' ;I I ·1 I I I ' ' '1 I y I ' ' ' ;i l :1 : I 1[11---- 1! I I I ' ' ' L' 1,1 1\, I I I J~ I ) 'I 1(1 I LI r: : ' ' 1 °QJ :s; : I "1--....! I I ii I,~+ s., ',, '\' l ,c.,I i ' _1_1_ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 11---r-.1 1. I I I I I I I j 1.-1- -t --l --J --J."'1-1-1- 1\ I I I I I -,1 I> I I I I I ' ' ' ' ' ' 1··1 Depth Increment= 0.164 feet • 7 silty sand to sandy silt • 10 gravelly sand to sand 8 sand to silty sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (") •9 sand • 12 sand to clayey sand (0 ) Northwest Cone exoloration Fig. A-4 epth (It) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Tip Resistance QcTSF ' , \ ' -' ,, (_-J..._ ' ------__ 1 __ 1 __ 1 _ ___ _J __ J. __ L ______ l__ ' ' ---l--+-----1-1- 1 sensitive fine grained • 2 organic material • 3 clay lnSitu Engineering Pangeo Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-03 Cone Used: DDG1254 800 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 0 6 _ I __ I _ _, - ' I I I I I I I ' I I I ,__f-----l--+ -+-; Maximum Depth = 24.44 feet silty clay to clay clayey silt to silty clay sandy silt to clayey silt CPT Date/Time: 11/25/2014 8:00:34 AM Location: 432 Shattuck Ave Job Number: 14-279 Pore Pressure PwPSI -10 60 ___ I __ I _ _I __,_ __ _J__I_.J ' ' -+-,--+---! Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 0 12 I I I I I I I I I ' I __ 1_1 __ _ ' LI , _ _J_j _L J. .LL.. ~f--1---j--j-+ --1- , ' '' Depth Increment= 0.164 feet SPTW 60% Hammer 0 100 [ \, J, Ti-i"1·--- 1n__1 I I I Ille I I : : : \~ : : : :f: (:: i\l I I\ I I ' ,, ' I I '1 I I I : +~\-:-:--:-,-, I IV, I I I I I _lr I I I I I ::.;---:_; ' ' :1----r .. 1 J__I ____ I _ ' ' __ _j _,_,_, '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I -1- , ' ' ' ' silty sand to sandy silt sand to silty sand sand • 1 O gravelly sand to sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (*) • 12 sand to clayey send(') Fia. A-5 epth (ft) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Tip Resistance QcTSF ' -r-~--T--r---,--r- ( > > I ' ' I I I · ' __ _l __ L ___ _j __ .J..._ L_/1 ~ /: -,--~..1_ I '-+-_j_ _ __l_ I _,_ ---<--+ --f--=-_=!_~--l --,j...- {---1 I I ,-,~-,~-- • 1 sensitive fine grained • 2 organic material • 3 clay lnSitu Engineering Pangeo Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-04 Cone Used: DDG1254 800 0 Friction Ratio Fs/Oc (%) 6 Maximum Depth= 51.18 feet • 4 silty clay to clay • 5 clayey sill to sitty clay • 6 sandy silt to clayey silt CPT DatefTime: 11/25/2014 8:42:57 AM Location: 432 Shattuck Ave Job Number: 14-279 Pore Pressure PwPSI Soil Behavior Type• Zone: UBC-1983 -10 60 0 12 ) I I I I I I ' ~ ~ ' 1, I 1: ', -\~ -, -~ - (' I~\ I ' \' 5! " ' Depth Increment= 0.164 feet 0 SPTW 60% Hammer 100 (: )' ) ' I I I I Ill -1--1-, ' "b: I I I l I I ._.r·T 'Ji'' I I I I I I I I I :~1111 1<="'1 I I I.J.,_ l~~_:_:~: ' ' ' '__:J-+f: ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' t~ --'-'-' {~: '" :(: '~ ;y :~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' l"U-, I I ~~~~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' • 7 silty sand to sandy silt · 8 sand to silty sand • 10 gravelly sand to sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (·) • 9 sand • 12 sand to clayey sand(·) Fio. A-6 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CityoL ;f)frr-.--~. ·r1c········ \ ::f) ',J~-_,.~~J ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS:~ This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAD AGENCIES: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is conside~!;.~\,e-~j £. D but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate thr~ll:i-' ·-· determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible J6~t')f> l\l\~ completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. " ,., ... , :·:')N C\'i\' o;· r· .. · -.. pl_,!'\\'-\':"·:·· '<1·~-; 1 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Illiz!Q] For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B even though questions may be answered "does not apply". In addition the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proponent", and "affected geographic area" respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B -Environmental Elements -that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. For help go to: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html A. BACKGROUND Illiz!Q] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Illiz!Q] ATS Expansion 2. Name of applicant: Illiz!Q] Owner: Team Properties, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Illiz!Q] Owner: Team Properties, LLC. 450 Shattuck Avenue. S. Renton, WA 98057 Contact: Brian Allen: {425) 251-9680 Applicant: Weaver Architects 141141h Ave., Suite 810, Seattle WA 98101 Contact: Paul Grundhoffer: {206) 799-8332 4. Date checklist prepared: Illiz!Q] May 81h 2015 5. Agency requesting checklist: Illiz!Q] City of Renton, Department of Community and Economic Development, Planning Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Illiz!Q] July 2015 through April 2016 2 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.~ No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.~ Geotechnical Engineering Report by PanGEO (December 23, 2014). Existing Site Survey Technical Information Report by LPD Engineering (May 4, 2015) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.~ No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. ~ City of Renton, Department of Community and Economic Development, including construction and land use permit approval. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.)~ The proposal includes the removal of an existing 1,442 sq. ft. single story wood frame commercial building and parking lot to provide a 3 story, 12,000 square foot total addition, exterior courtyards, new drive aisle, 4 new parking stalls to an existing commercial office building. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.~ Building Expansion site address: 428 & 432 Shattuck Ave. S. Renton WA 98055 Current building site address: 450 Shattuck Ave. S. Renton WA 98055 Quarter Section SE, Section 18, Township 23, Range 05 East 3 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 Legal Description: lots 8 to 15, inclusive, Block 2, Smithers Fifth Addition to the Town of Renton, according to the plat thereof recoded in Volume 16 of Plats, page 33, records of King County, Washington; EXCEPT the North 25 feet of said Lot 15; TOGETHER WITH the West one- half of vacated alley adjacent to Lots 10 to 12, inclusive; AND TOGETHER WITH the East one-half of vacated alley adjacent to Lots 13 & 14, and adjacent to the South 15 feet of lots 15; AND TOGETHER WITH the West half of that portion of vacated Whitworth Avenue South, per City of Renton Ordinance No. 5353, effective March 61 \ 2008, adjacent to Lots 13 & 14 and adjacent to the South 15 feet of Lot 15; AND TOGETHER WITH vacated triangular parcel of land lying South of the South line of lot 12, lying North of the North margin of the right of way of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company right of way and lying East of the East line of Shattuck Avenue. All situate in the Southeast quarter of Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS~ 1. EARTH a. General description of the site~ (check or circle one): ,/ Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ------ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?~ Currently steepest slope is about a 2.6 % grade. The new driveway will have a short section of 8% grade. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils.~ The soils listed below are per the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by PanGEO on December 23 2014. A structural slab with grand beams and augercast piles will be used to address soil conditions as described below. See the report for additional information. Upper Alluvium -The materials within about 48 feet of the existing ground surface consist of interbedded sands, silts and clays that were deposited in a low energy environment. Sands within the upper alluvium are typically loose and the silty clays and clayey silts are typically soft. 4 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.S-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 The CPT probes indicate that the upper alluvium may also contain sensitive or compressible materials such as peat. Upper Bed Load Alluvium or Outwash -An upper stratum of bed load deposits consisting of dense to very dense sand and gravel was encountered between depths of about 22 and 32 feet. Lower Bed load Alluvium or Outwash -site explorations encountered a lower bed load alluvial or outwash deposit at a depth of about 48 feet (El. --18 ft.). This deposit consists of dense to very dense, fine to coarse grained sand with some gravel. While the CPT probes encountered refusal in this stratum, boring BH-lwas able to penetrate this stratum to a depth of 78.5, at which point the boring was terminated. Standard Penetration Test N-values in this stratum typically varied between 35 and 80 bpf. No d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. ll:!mQl e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. ll:!mQl Area of Work: 21, 500 SF Stripping: 250 CY (includes 12" existing building at 57 CY, 4" existing paving at 94 CY, and 12" existing landscaping at 92 CY) Cut: 450 CY {for building foundation) Fill: 700 CY (includes paving sections and building) f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. ll:!mQl Surface erosion may occur as a result of clearing and grading operations, however due to the flat slopes on site and the location of the limit of site disturbance proposed, this is expected to be minor as the project site is composed primarily of slopes under 2%. Minor localized erosion may occur as a result of construction activities, however will not extend outside the project limits. Use of on-site erosion control measures including construction entrances, catch basin protection, and other standard construction erosion control practices, and seasonal limitations of construction will control potential on-site erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? ll:!mQl 5 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\03-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 Approximately 80.5% h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: ~ To the extent possible the disturbed area of the project site will be limited to minimize erosion potential. Erosion elements include a stabilized construction entrance, tree protection fencing, and catch basin inlet protection. 2. AIR No a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction. operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.~ During construction: General construction vehicle emissions, asphalt preparation, paint, sealant, adhesives etc. Post construction: None. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.~ c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:~ None 3. WATER No No a. Surface Water:~ 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.~ 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. ~ 6 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 None No No No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. ~ 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.~ 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.~ 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.~ b. Ground Water: No None 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.~ 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals.; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.~ c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.~ 7 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\03.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 The Applicant has commissioned a Technical Information Report and Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to address questions of this nature in detail. The primary source of stormwater will be rainfall. Rainfall landing upon the proposed paved surfaces will be collected with catch basins and conveyed via storm drain lines to the northwest where it will be treated for water quality with a stormfilter. The piped system will connect to an existing 18-inch storm line on the west side of Shattuck Avenue S. Rainfall onto the proposed building will be collected with roof drains and be conveyed to the same piped system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. lt!.!tll2l. No waste materials will be discharged into the ground due to this project. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. The project will not affect the general drainage patterns. The proposed conveyance system will discharge from the site at the northwest corner and connect to the existing 18-inch storm line on the west side of Shattuck Avenue. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: There will be no flow control measures installed because the 0.1-cfs flow control exemption is applicable to the project. See the project's Technical Information Report for more information. 4. PLANTS lt!.!tli2l. a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: lt!.!tll2l. ,/ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ,/ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ,/ shrubs ,/ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other 8 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-Dutgoing Correspondence\D3.S-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 __ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? 1tlfilQ} Three existing significant trees are to be removed and 1,200 sq. ft of landscaping (shrubs) and 400 sq. ft. of grass are to be removed. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. ItlfilQ} None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: 1tlfilQ} New Landscaping will consist of drought tolerant native plants and new trees and will be added to exceed the current quantity removed for development of the site. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None. 5. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: 1tlfilQ} Birds; hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Typical native songbirds Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: "'N'-=o"-n'-=e'----------- Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other~N=o~n=e ____ _ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. ItlfilQ} None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. ItlfilQ} No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:.l!:!filQJ. Increase habit by providing native plants in new landscaping. 9 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\03-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. [bgjQ} Electricity will be used to provide heating to the building addition. Basic electrical service will also be used for lighting. No b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. [bgjQ} c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: [bgjQ} None 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH No a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. [bgjQ} 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None None 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. 10 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst 5EPA.docRev: 02/2015 None 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other}?~ None 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.~ General construction noise during the day for the extent of the construction period. 3} Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:~ None 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe.~ Current use is a commercial office space. The proposed use will remain the same. Adjacent properties are zoned for the same type of use. No b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non-forest use?~ 1} Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land 11 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\03.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 No normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: c. Describe any structures on the site. IbmQ1 There is an existing single story 1,442 sq. ft. wood framed commercial office building and a 4 story, 25,000 sq. ft. brick/ steel framed commercial office building. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? IbmQ1 Yes, the single story 1,442 square foot wood framed commercial office building will be removed. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? IbmQ1 Urban Center Downtown (UCO) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation ofthe site? IbmQl Urban Center Downtown (UCO) g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? IbmQ1 Not Applicable No h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. IbmQl i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? IbmQ1 210 workers, no residences. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? IbmQ1 None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: IbmQl NONE 12 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\03-0utgoing Correspondence\03.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: ~ The building current and planned use is compatible with the existing and projected uses designated by the City of Renton. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: There are no nearby agricultural or forest land. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.~ None, Not Applicable b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. ~ None, Not Applicable c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:~ None, Not Applicable 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?~ 41' -6" b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?~ None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:~ 13 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\03-0utgolng Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 The scale, proportions and materials of the building have been selected to continue the current aesthetics of the building and to comply with the Urban Design Regulations for District 'A' to allow for the building to be in context with the surrounding neighborhoods future development. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? lb!llill The building addition will at the north side of the current building so light and glare created will be very limited to the late afternoon when light will strike the buildings west face. Glare will be limited by street front and site trees along the west fa~ade along with canopies at the west facade. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? lb!llill No c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? lb!llill None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: lb!llill The little glare that could be created will be mitigated by street front and site trees along the west fa~ade as well as canopies at the side walk level. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? lb!llill None b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. lb!llill None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: lb!llill None 14 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\03.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe.~ None b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Is there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources.~ None c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.~ None d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.~ Access to the site is from Shattuck Ave. S. The site currently has three drive aisle. The proposed expansion will reduce the number of aisle to two. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?~ Yes, bus transit is locate one block west at Rainier Ave S. 15 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? 1.!JmQ1 4 additional stalls total (12 new stalls to replace 8 that are to be removed. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private}. l.!JmQI New sidewalks No e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Ihfilt2.l f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non-passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? 1.!JmQ1 Vehicular trips per day would be 142. Peak trips would be at the beginning and ending of working hours; 7:30-9:00 and 4:00 to 5:30. No g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 1.!JmQ1 Providing additional bicycle parking. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES No a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. l.!JmQI b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.lbfilQ} 16 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 None. 16. UTILITIES a. Check or circle utilities currently available at the site:JbfilQI ./ electricity, · ./ natural gas, ./ water, ./ refuse service, ./ telephone, ./ sanitary sewer, septic system, other --------------- b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed.~ The utilities are existing as listed above. PSE is the utility provider. The electrical service will be increased to accommodate the new addition. To achieve this the current on site transformer will be upsized in place. C. SIGNATURE~ The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make j.ts decisJon. I •/ /~" I rf7 /// ,' Proponent Signature: ~~:t · b'~:tj-·--~- Name of Signee (printed): Paul Grudhoffer _____________ _ Position and Agency/Organization: Weaver Architects (Owner's Agent) ___ _ Date Submitted: 06.18.15 ------- 17 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS~ Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 18 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\D3.S-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 19 N:\14-097-00 ATS Warehouse\D-Communications\D3-0utgoing Correspondence\03.5-Agency\4. envchlst SEPA.docRev: 02/2015 LL.b I ----~---J ----~-4THST. __________ _ I NEIGHBORHOOD o 5o' 1 oo· 200· L 1.,__k I S.4THST. ----~ --J I------------------ ! 101 ID-a i 17-:111.-D I ' '~--~ ~~ , tw:Q t_Qii tc1=9 lD_D I : 0 Q: :o -~i1' ~D---9: 0 __ 0 C/)w·1' 1 L ___ I ~-LJ~ , o , n =n ~ '>-µ_ o,5:' , D -, ---- ~*1 . I • .. PtR:Ei. .... I' .. < ~ -----) i i P• ,......-""'""'"" , , S. 5TH ST. ~~--~-1, i ! ~#A'T r I _;J] rc::~ -----I L---__.--./' ~~~ : . I : D I I L I' __---~ I ----10 D li1' :[]oi ~--=4 ---, (LJ , , -o':c TI--,, D' --~--1 i , 1 -:jj P-c:JJii tb~ ~b--~ , --rl I ~Q~ ~~-GJ~'1 ~-8 p__q I D I I ( 1 ,D 01 I I II I . I -_I I I II I 0 50' 100' 200· J\JN i 5 LG\S ATS OFFICE EXPANSION TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I -Project Overview ...................................................................................................................................... I Section 2 -Conditions and Requirements Summary ........................................................................................... 3 Section 3 -Offsite Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 4 -Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design ................................................... 9 Section 5 -Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design ...................................................................................... 13 Section 6 -Special Reports and Studies ................................................................................................................ 13 Section 7 -Other Permits .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Section 8 -CSWPPP Analysis and Design ............................................................................................................. 14 Section 9-Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant ....................................... 14 Section 10-Operations and Maintenance Manual ............................................................................................. 14 FIGURES Figure I: TIR Worksheet Figure 2: Vicinity Map Figure 3: Existing Impervious Coverage Figure 4: Existing Conditions Figure 5: Soils Map Figure 6: Proposed Conditions Figure 7: Downstream Drainage Map APPENDICES Appendix A -Design Drawings Appendix B -Design Calculations and Supporting Information Appendix C -Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill Plan (SWPPS) & Preliminary Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Narrative Appendix D -Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Appendix E -Geotechnical Report JUN 2 5 2015 ATS OFFICE EXPANSION 432 SHATTUCK AVES TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT MAY4,2015 SECTION I -PROJECT OVERVIEW This Technical Infonnation Report (TIR) is for a new office building expansion, adjacent to the existing A TS Automation building. Refer to Figure 1 -TIR Worksheet for basic site infonnation. The project is located at 432 Shattuck Avenue Swithin the City of Renton. The site is in Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian. Refer to Figure 2 -Vicinity Map. The City of Renton has adopted the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) with the City's Amendments, dated February 20 I 0. Based upon the City of Renton amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM, the project is subject to drainage review as it is subject to a City of Renton development pennit because it includes greater than 2,000 square feet (SF) of new plus replaced impervious surface and 7,000 SF of land disturbing activity. Based upon Figure 1.1.2.A in the Renton Amendments, the Flow Chart for Determining Type of Drainage Review Required, the project is subject to a "Full Drainage Review" because the project results in greater than 2,000 SF of new plus replaced impervious surface, and it is not a large project or single family residential project. Per the "Full Drainage Review" requirements in Table 1.1.2.A, the TIR addresses Core Requirements #1-8 and Special Requirements #1-6 of the City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM. The proposed project is a new office/storage building on the north side of the existing ATS building, along with proposed parking, walkways, and drainage infrastructure. Existing Site The project disturbance area wilJ mostly take place on one parcel (7841300175). The parcel is about 0.95 acres. Previously, the site consisted of three individual parcels, but a City of Renton Lot Combination Application has been approved in April 2015 to combine the parcels. The project disturbance area will mostly be on the north side of this parcel, consisting of an existing gravel parking lot and a small commercial building that will be demolished. On the southern end of this parcel is the existing A TS building. The total disturbance area is approximately 16,909 SF (0.388 acres). The disturbance area also includes a portion of the right-of-way along Shattuck Avenue Sand the alley to the northeast of the A TS site. The project area is bounded by Shattuck Ave S to the west, a public alley to the east, a single-family residence to the north. and the existing A TS building to the south. The existing topography on site is relatively flat, with slopes of0-2% throughout the project disturbance limits. Based on site survey, there does not appear to be any stonnwater infrastructure within the proposed project area. There is an existing public stonn drain main line on the west side of Shattuck Avenue, to which the proposed drainage infrastructure will connect. The project is considered a redevelopment project based upon the following definition from the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM: "Redevelopment project means a project that proposes to add, replace. or modify impervious surfaces (fur purposes oth,er than a residential subdivision or lPD En~neering Pll( Page I AB Office hpansion Technical lnfonnarion Report maintenance) on a site that is already substantially developed in a manner consistent with its current zoning or with a legal non-conforming use, or has an existing impervious sUJ'face coverage of 35% or more. "An aerial image was scaled and used in AutoCAD to delineate the existing impervious coverage for the parcel. All building, roof, concrete and asphalt surfaces are considered impervious. The existing gravel parking area was not counted as impervious based upon the KCSWDM's definition of"new impervious" surface, which states that proposed surfaces over existing gravel are new impervious surfaces (See Section 4 for further explanation). Refer to Figure 3 -Existing Impervious Coverage. The existing impervious coverage is approximately 61 %, which exceeds 35% and therefore the project is considered a Redevelopment. See Figure 4-Existing Conditions for a layout of the existing impervious areas within the disturbance area. According to the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, the site soils are mapped as Urban Land. Refer to Figure 5 -Soils Map. The SCS Soil Type is recognized as Renton (RE), classified under the Hydrologic Soil Group D and will be defined as Till in the stormwater calculations (Table 3.2.2.B, 2009 KCSWDM). A Geotechnical Engineering Report has been prepared by PanGeo, Inc. dated December 23, 2014; a copy has of been provided in Appendix E. Based upon the exploration pits, the underlying soils were generally described as silty clays. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 8 feet below grade. The site is located within the Cedar Valley Sole Source Aquifer area. According to City of Renton GIS, there are no other environmentally sensitive areas within or in close proximity to the site. Proposed Site Improvements Proposed improvements include a new office building, constructed off the north side of the existing A TS Automation building. The existing one-story commercial building north of the existing ATS building will be demolished. A paved parking lot will be established along the north and east sides of the building expansion, including a heavy duty asphalt driving lane to accommodate truck traffic. The west patio and onsite portion of the walkway will be surfaced with permeable pavers. Access improvements will be made to ensure ADA compliance. Utility improvements include a new fire hydrant assembly, connecting to the existing water line in Shattuck Avenue. There is an existing 6-inch side sewer connection coming onto the site near the northwest comer of the existing A TS building. A new side sewer connection is proposed for the building expansion. Refer to Figure 6 -Proposed Conditions for a layout of the proposed improvements. LPD Engineering PLLC Page 2 All Ofo Expansion Technical lnfonnation Report Proposed Stormwater Management Improvements As noted above, the proposed project meets the criteria subject to a "Full Drainage Review." Storm water management improvements include catch basins and pipes for conveyance, along with roof downspouts for the proposed building addition. The project proposes the use of Flow Control BMPs to mitigate runoff from the impervious area associated with the project. This will consist of pervious pavers to the southwest and southeast of the office building addition. To address water quality treatment requirements, there will be a two-facility treatment train, consisting of a wetvault followed by a Storm Filter structure installed in the parking lot to the north. The site discharge point is near the northwest comer of the disturbance area, with the proposed conveyance system connecting to the existing storm line on the west side of Shattuck Avenue. Refer to Section 4 of this report for more infonnation regarding the stormwater design. SECTION 2-CONDITIONSAND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY This section addresses the Core Requirements (Section 1.2) and Special Requirements (Section 1.3) requirements set forth by the City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM. Core Requirements Core Requirement 1 -Discharge at Natural Location (1.2.1): The proposed stormwater system will connect to the existing storm line in Shattuck Avenue S. Drainage will then follow the existing downstream drainage path. Core Requirement 2 -Off-site Analysis (1.2.2): An offsite analysis for the project has been completed and is included within Section 3 of this Report. Core Requirement 3 -Flow Control (l.2.3): According to the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM Flow Control Application Map (Reference 11-A), the project site is located in a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard Area. According to the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM Section 1.2.3.1.A. Peak Rate Flow Control Standard Areas, flow control mitigation to existing site conditions is required for the project's target surfaces. Below is a description of the target surfaces for this project: 1. New impervious su,face that is not fully dispersed per the criteria in Section 1.2.3.2 (p. 1-41). For individual lots within residential subdivision projects, the extent of new impervious swjace shall be assumed as specified in Chapter 3. Note, any new impervious su,face such as a bridge that spans the ordina,y high water of a stream, pond, or lake may be excluded as a target surface if the runoff from such span is conveyed to the ordinary high water area in accordance with Criteria (b), (c), (d), and (e) o{the "Direct Discharge Exemption" (p 1-33). New impervious surfaces will be considered a target surface. LPD Engineering PLLC Page J All Office Expansion Technic,J lnfunnarion Report 11,I 2. New pervious surface that is not folly dispersed. For individual lots within residential subdivision projects, the extent of new pervious surface shall be assumed to be the entire lot area, except the assumed impervious portion and any portion in which native conditions are preserved by covenant, tract, or easement. In addition, the new pervious surface on individual lots shall be assumed to be I 00% grass. The project does not create any "new" pervious surface. Thus based upon the above requirements, only new impervious surfaces will be considered as "Target Impervious Surface." However, as described in Section 4 of this report, a flow control facility is not required due to Exception l in Section 1.2.3.1 of the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, which asserts that a flow control facility is not required if the difference in the 100-year peak runoff rate between the existing site condition and the developed condition is less than 0.1 cubic feet per second (cfs). Flow control BMPs must be implemented per section 1.2.3.3 of the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. Flow control BMPs will include pervious pavers. Refer to Section 4 -Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design in this report for more detailed information. Core Requirement 4 -Conveyance System (1.2.4): Refer to Section 5 of this Report for the conveyance design and analysis. Core Requirement 5 -Erosion and Sedimentation Control (1.2.5): A full temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan will be included with the permit submittal. This plan will be considered the minimum for anticipated site conditions. The Contractor will be responsible for implementing all TESC measures and upgrading as necessary. The TESC facilities will be in place prior to any clearing, grubbing or construction. See sheet C 1.0 in Appendix A and the preliminary construction stormwater pollution prevention (SWPPP) narrative in Appendix C. Core Requirement 6 -Maintenance and Operations (1.2.6): The property owner will maintain and operate the water quality treatment facilities. Conveyance facilities and drainage structures within the right-of-way and/or drainage easements will be operated and maintained by the City of Renton. An Operation and Maintenance Manual, per Section 2.3. l of the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, will be provided to the property owner and City prior to permit issuance. Operation and Maintenance Guidelines are attached in Appendix D of this report. Core Requirement 7 -Financial Guarantees and Liability (1.2. 7): Financial guarantees and liability for the proposed project will be completed by the owner prior to permit issuance. Core Requirement 8 -Water Quality (1.2.8): The redevelopment project contains more than 5,000 SF of new plus replaced pollution-generating impervious surface (PGIS) that is not fully dispersed. Because the site is classified as commercial land use, water quality facilities must be selected from the Enhanced Basic WQ Treatment Menu. A two-facility treatment train, consisting of a wetvault followed by a StormFilter structure was chosen. Refer to Section 4 of this report for water quality facility design and analysis. lPD Enwneering PLLC Page 4 All Office Expansion Technic,J lnfonnation Report Special Requirements Special Requirement 1-Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements (1.3.1): • Master Drainage Plans (MD?.\) -Project is not within an area covered by an approved Master Drainage Plan. • Basin Plans (BPs) -The project site is in the Black River drainage basin. There is no specific basin plan for the Black River basin. • Salmon Conservation Plans (SCPs) -Project is not within an area governed by a Salmon Conservation Plan. • Stormwater Compliance Plans (.',WC f's) -The project is not within an area governed by a SWCP. • Flood Hazard Reduction Plan (FHRPs) -The project site is not within a designated flood hazard area • Shared Facility Drainage Plan fSFDPs) -The proposed project is not within an area with SFDP. Special Requirement 2 -Flood Hazard Arca Delineation (1.3.2): The project site is not within or adjacent to a designated flood hazard area. Special Requirement 3 -Flood Protection Facilities (1.3.3): The project does not rely on an existing flood protection facility. nor will a new flood protection facility be constructed; therefore this requirement is not applicable. Special Requirement 4 -Source Control (1.3.4): The project requires a commercial building/commercial site development permit; therefore source controls are applicable in accordance with the King County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual and Renton Municipal Code IV. Water quality facilities will include a two-facility treatment train from the Enhanced Basic Water Quality Menu of the KCSWDM. Special Requirement 5 -Oil Control (1.3.5): The project will not have high-use site characteristics; therefore oil controls are not applicable. Special Requirement 6 -Aquifer Protection Area (1.3.6): Per Reference 11-B, the project is within the "Cedar Valley Sole Source Aquifer Project Review Area." However, the project is not within an Aquifer Protection Area (APA) zone. LPD En~neering PLLC Page 5 ATS Office Expansion Technical lnfom1ation Report SECTION 3 -0FFSITE ANALYSIS The following is the Level I downstream analysis for the proposed project. Refer to Figure 7 - Downstream Drainage Map. Task I -Study Area Definition and Maps The study area consists ofone parcels (7841300175) and the total disturbance area is about 0.388 acres. The downstream analysis for the project site is based upon the following resources: • Site Survey, completed by Duncanson Company, Inc. • King County iMap • City of Renton Online GIS Map Application Task 2 -Resource Review Basin Swnmary Based upon King County iMap, the site is located within the Black River drainage basin, which is within the Duwamish-Green River Watershed. Floodway Map Per FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 53033C0977F, the site is not located within floodway or flood plain. Sensitive Areas The sensitive areas within one-mile upstream and downstream of the subject property were examined using the City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 KCSWDM and King County iMap application. The following are the sensitive area designations for the project site and within one mile downstream of the site: • SAO Erosion Hazard-The project is not within a designated erosion hazard area. • SAO Seismic Hazard -The project site is not within a designated seismic hazard area .. • SAO Landslide Hazard-The project is not within a designated landslide hazard area. • SAO Coal Mine -There are no known coal mines on the site or within one mile of the site. • SAO Stream -There are no streams within the project site or within the downstream drainage course. • SAO Wetland -There are no wetlands located within the project site or within the downstream drainage course. • Groundwater Contamination -The project site and upstream study area are within an area designated as a "low" groundwater contamination zone. • Sole Source Aquifer-According to Reference 11-B and iMap, the project site area, upstream area, and.downstream area are within the Cedar Valley Sole Source Aquifer. • Channel Migration Hazard -There are no known channel migration hazards on the site or within one mile of the site. LPD Engineering Pll( Page 6 All Office Expansion Tedinical lnfonnation Report Critical Areas The critical areas within one mile upstream and downstream of the subject property were examined using the King County GJS iMap application. Based on the GIS mapping, the following are the critical area designations for the project site and within one mile downstream of the site: • Critical area ordinance (CAO) Basin Condition -The project area, upstream area, and downstream area is designated as "low." The "low" basin condition designation is due to the high development intensity within the project and downstream area The majority of the project site and downstream area has reduced forest cover and large amounts of impervious surfaces. • Critical area ordinance (CAO) Shoreline Condition-The project site, upstream area, and downstream area are not within a CAO Shoreline Condition. Topographic Map The topographic information for the site is shown on the Grading and Drainage Plan. (Refer to Appendix A). Drainage Complaints According to King County's iMap program, there have been no drainage complaints within the last 10 years within the project site, upstream area, or downstream area. King County Soils Survey According to the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, the site soils are mapped as Urban Land (Ur). Refer to Figure 5 -Soils Map. A Geotechnical Engineering Report has been prepared by PanGeo, Inc. dated December 23, 2014. The geotechnical report is attached in Appendix E. Migrating River Studies According to King County iMap, the project site is not located within a channel migration hazard area. 303d List of Polluted Waters There are no waters that are within the project site area or within one-mile downstream of the project site that are on the current Washington State Department of Ecology's Clean Water Act 303d list. Water Quality Problems According to King County's iMap program, neither the project site, nor the downstream area is within a designated King County water quality problem area. LPD En~neering PLLC Page 7 All Office Expansion Technical lnfonnarion Report Task 3 -Field Inspection Onsite Conditions Currently there is a commercial building located in the project area north of the existing A TS building. To the north of the commercial building is a gravel drive. To the west of the commercial building is a small paved parking area. The existing A TS building and the small commercial building are separated by a driveway. Topography of the site is generally flat, sloping down in the northerly direction at an approximate slope of 1 %. There does not appear to be any onsite storm water infrastructure within the project disturbance area. Upstream Areas Due to the flat topography of the project area, offsite runoff from the surrounding properties is assumed to be limited to none. Task 4 -Drainage System Description and Problem Descriptions As described earlier, due to the relatively flat topography, stormwater is assumed to sheet flow west off the site, and then flows southward along the existing curb. At the manhole at the intersection of Shattuck Avenue S and S 4ili Place, the drainage course can split in two directions (west and south), both joining further downstream. Refer to Figure 7 -Downstreatn Drainage Map. Below is a description of the "west" downstreatn drainage course: I. Surface runoff will flow along the curb and enter an inlet structure and 12-inch storm drain line near the intersection of Shattuck Avenue Sand S 4th Place. 2. The 12-inch system flows west, becoming an 18-inch system after a manhole in the center of the aforementioned intersection. 3. The 18-inch storm drain system conveys flow westbound along S 4th Place for about 570 feet to a manhole near the intersection ofS 4th Place and Rainier Avenue S. 4. From this manhole, the system turns south and conveys flow along Rainier Avenue S to another manhole approximately 270 feet to the south. 5. The stormwater system turns west and enters a stormwater pump station. The force-main piped system continues west for about 880 feet through an existing parking lot to a manhole at the northwest comer of the lot, passing the V.-mile point downstream from the site. 6. At this point, the system becomes a 60-inch gravity system that flows to a manhole within Hardie Avenue SW. 7. The storm system becomes 60-inch and continues west through another parking lot. The system reduces to 48-inch and turns south at a structure approximately 825 feet away from the manhole in Hardie A venue SW. 8. After the piped system flows south for about 340 feet, reaching a manhole in SW 7'" Street, the piped system becomes 54-inch and turns to the west. 9. The 54-inch system discharges into a vault near the intersection of SW 7th Street and Lind Avenue SW. The outlet from the vault is a 60-inch piped system that continues west along SW 7th Street. 10. The 60-inch system continues to the west for approximately another 2,700 feet to a manhole at the northwest comer of the intersection of SW 7th Street and Naches Avenue SW. LPD Engineering PLLC Page 8 All Office E,pansion Technic. ln~nnation Report 11. The 60-inch stonn line heads north for approximately 640 feet and outfalls into the Black River at a point about l .25 miles from the site. 12. The Black River eventually discharges to the Duwamish River. The following is the "south" downstream drainage course, starting from the manhole indicated in #2 above. 13. From the manhole at the intersection of Shattuck Avenue & 4th Place, a 48-inch conveyance system continues south along Shattuck A venue S for about 1,150 feet. 14. This 48-inch stonn line enters a vault within the intersection of Shattuck Ave S and SW 7th Street. 15. The outlet is a 60-inch stonn line heading in the westbound direction for about 2,500 feet, where it enters a vault (see item 8 above) at the intersection of Lind Avenue SW and SW 7tl, Street. Along this stretch of 60-inch stonn drain main, the system passes the Y.-mile point downstream from the site. 16. From this point, the downstream course is the same as #8-11 from the "west" downstream course noted above. SECTION 4 -FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Existing Site Hydrology Based on the site survey, there is no existing stormwater infrastructure within the project disturbance area. It is assumed that runoff from the west side of the site sheet flows and leaves the site at the driveway cut near the small parking area to the west of the existing commercial building. Runoff from the east side of the site appears to flow toward a catch basin in the existing A TS parking lot, southeast of the project area. Based on site topography and G IS infonnation, the eastbound drainage is assumed to join the same downstream course as the westbound runoff. Refer to the Offsite Analysis section for infonnation. Developed Site Hydrology TI1e proposed drainage design includes catch basins and conveyance pipes throughout the parking lot to collect and convey stonnwater. The stormwatcr is routed toward the northwest comer of the site, where the runoff from the pollution-generating impervious surfaces (POIS) will be routed to the proposed wetvault and StonnFilter system for water quality treatment. The roof surfaces will be routed north to a catch basin downstream of the water quality treatment systems. From this catch basin, a proposed 12- inch stonn drain line will connect to the existing stonn main in Shattuck Avenue S. Refer to sheet C2.0 in Appendix A, which shows the stonn drainage plan for the site. LPD Enwneering PLLC Page 9 All Office Expansion Technical lnfonnation Repon Flow Control System The proposed project improvements will include the construction of a new office building expansion and accompanying parking lot, along with walkways. Refer to Figure 6 -Proposed Conditions, which shows the proposed site conditions and a summary of the surface areas. The project is within a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area, and thus the true existing conditions are allowed to be evaluated as the predeveloped condition. Per section 1.2.3.1 of the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, Execptionl was evaluated to determine if flow control facilities are necessary. Exception 1 states: "The facility requirement in Peak Flow Control Standard Areas is waived for any threshold discharge area in which the target surfaces subject to this requirement will generate no more than a 0.1-cfi increase in the existing site conditions I 00-year peak flow. " So the gravel will not be considered an existing impervious surface in the calculations. According to the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, the definition for new impervious surface is "the addition of a hard or compacted surface like roofi, pavement, gravel, or dirt; or the addition of a more compacted surface, like paving over pre-existing dirt or gravel. " Thus, the existing gravel parking on the north side of the site that will be replaced by paving will be considered a new impervious surface. Therefore, the existing gravel is not counted an existing impervious surface. Table 1 shows a breakdown of the proposed effective impervious surfaces and how the target impervious surface was determined. The pervious pavers will be modeled as 50% impervious, 50% grass per Tablel.2.3.C of the KCSWDM. All other impervious surfaces will be considered 100% effective impervious. Areas involving utility trenching were not counted as new/replaced or existing impervious surfaces. Table 1 -Proposed Effective Impervious Areas New Plus Replaced Building (Considered to be / OO°A. effective impervious) New Plus Replaced Standard Concrete (Considered to be / 00% effective impervious) New Plus Replaced Asphalt (Considered to be I 00% effective impervious) New Plus Replaced Pervious Pavers (I, 158 SF total, considered to be 50% effective impervious) Total New Plus Replaced Impervious Existing Impervious to be Removed (Replaced Impervious) (Considered as replaced impervious and deducted from the total above to give the new impervious surface. See Figure 4 for existing impervious area) Total New Impervious Surface (Iarget lm11erviQYi Surface) LPD En~neering PUC Page 10 Square Feet Acres · 4,140 0.095 1,716 0.039 7,181 0.165 579 0.013 13,616 0.313 -7,917 -0.182 5,699 0.131 ATS Office Expansion Tedmical lnfunnarion Report As outlined previously, only new impervious surfaces will be considered as the target impervious surface requiring flow control mitigation and BMPs, However, Exception 1 of the Peak Rate Flow Control Standard area was evaluated, which allows for the comparison of JOO-year peak flow rates between the developed condition and the true existing site conditions. Using the King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS), the peak flow rates for the developed condition and the predeveloped existing site conditions was determined. The KCRTS output is included in Appendix B. In the predeveloped time series, the 0.182 acres of existing impervious (See Figure 4) was modeled as impervious, while the remaining area was modeled as till grass. The developed time series includes proposed site conditions, which consists of a total new plus replaced impervious of 0.313 acres (See Table 1) and the remaining area modeled as till grass. The following table summarizes the 100- year peak flow rates. Table 2 -100-year Peak Flow Rates I 00-year Existing Site Conditions Peak Flow Rate 0.130 cfs I 00-year Developed Site Conditions Peak Flow Rate 0.164 cfs Difference in I 00-yr Peak Flow Rate 0.034 ds The difference between the peak flow rates in the existing site conditions and developed site conditions runoff in the 100-year event is below the 0.1 efs threshold; therefore a flow control facility is not required. However, flow control BMPs are still required. Flow Control BMPs According to Section 5.2.1 of the KCSWDM, since the site area is greater than 22,000 square feet with more than 45% impervious coverage, the project is characterized as "Large Lot High Impervious." _ Therefore flow control BMPs must be evaluated per section 5.2.1.3 of the KCSWDM. Full dispersion of roof runoff will not be feasible due to the lack of unpaved open space on the site. The project must implement another option from the listed BMPs in section 5.2. I .3. The project will result in impervious surface coverage of more than 65%; therefore, flow control BMPs must be applied to an impervious area equal to I 0% of the site/lot or 20% of the target impervious surface, whichever is less. In this case, the lesser value is 20% of the target impervious surface (5,699 SF), which means a minimum of 1,140 SF of impervious area must be mitigated with a flow control BMP. LPD En~neering Pll( Page 11 ATS Office Ex~ansion Technical Information Report Below is Figure 5.2.1.A from the KCSWDM, outlining the path described above for Flow Control BMPs. I FIGURE 5.l,J.A FLOW CHART FOR DETERMING INDIVIDUAL LOT BMP REQUIREMENTS I la 1h11 pnlfeCt on a .n.not I v-b I feallble and .maUerthan 22.0009CIUllfe fHt? I _ .. _ ... v .. .. .......... "4>Pl'I one ot mort of lhe fo11ow1nG lo lmpfflloua area _ ..... -·-' ~10% o1 altwlol lor ~ ,1zes <tt.ooo ,rand .t. 20% of root ..... aaper ... _.. ~ fOr ~ alzes b91We8n 11,000 and 22,000 •I (F(II' Stdlon C.2.1? """""""' "'"" profel:ts lcaled In cntlcN """"~ .nu lhele No! ............ lmpeNlous sea IIOOl.dB double): _ .. _ 1. Llmlc.d lnftlrlUon (Secllon C.2.3) la u lealllle __ .. 2. a.Jc Dllpe,-!on (Section c.2.<t) ............ 3. Rain Garden (Section c.2.6) ... _ ..... .....- 4. Pfflneabkt hVfflMt (Secllon C.2.6} ... .. _ Yeo .... -fi. Ralmwlwr HarvNUng. (Sediorl C.2.7) ---full lnfllltdon c.2.11. No 6. V~d Roof (Section C.2.8) ..... _ 7. Reducltd bnpervlou1 Service Credit (5edlon C.2.9) runoff aa. per 8. N.atlve GtGwlh RNntlon Credi (Section C.2.10) Sadlon C.2.2? I I "'' --I " b, It feUiJkJ and Of Satgw with ~MOUi autlac:e I applcable lo~ full dlsP11r.lon on all ~ .............. __ .. ---..... 5ec1iOr1 C.2.1'i' ..._.. ...... orn'lOtt, ... """"""'"roof No for thlilt po,tkin of i.tgef lmporvloua audM.e nal acldN8led ... __.. ....... 'o1itth Ml dhlpersim or wlh kdl lnftllraUon of roof runoff. dranage sy•m 1, Full lnflltration (SedlOn C.2.2 « 5eellcl'l 5.4) Is A INaRlle W1Cl aptllcable tc _ .... 2. IJmlted lnfHtrauon (Sedlon C.2.3) ~ irfl)lement fUll lnltllratlon ol _ ....... 3. Buie Dllf;Mlr.ion (Section C.2.<t) Iha roof runoff n per ............. 4. Rain Garden (&lellor1 C.2.6) 5ec1iOn C2.2 or Seclon 5.4? SeclionC.2.11. 5. Pttm1Hllle Pavemtnl {Section c.2.6) v .. v .. , 8.. Rainwater HarveeUng (Section C.2. 7) ~ 7. 1/qltaled Roof (5ectlon C.2.8) -"lhGte art~ fa/pt 8. Reducad Impervious~ Credtt (SecUon C.2.9) __ ... addteued v.iltl u dlapenllon Ol u. NaUv• Growth Rlttnllon CNdH 'Sedton c.2.1111o I with u lnfillnlljorJ ol roof Maott? ' , I The~nutbea ,...,__ I -Is lt loaliblo and or la,g9r IMlh kttpwvkaUt; surface applicable lo lmplemenl c---'"' of more lban 45%? I full dllpen;lon M all r..., lmpervlon No ·~-per Projedt with,.,,..........,_ 11ea sre*f Ulan4 or -S$cOon C.2.1? leaa Ulan 65% one or JJOe of the following rh.llt be applied to an v .. ! area greater than or equal to 20% DI 1he alle or 40% of Iha WJll lmpwVloUt sudace whichever I:& libt OR lol projeds -, ... ona or more oi 1he folawlng ng1 be No further BMPa .,.... .... OUI sntalllNler lhfn OI' eqtJIIIJ lO 10% 0, 8fl8 reqtnd. Note: «201'~=audac•.~-ktM: ........... 1. Fuil I 5.4} CCIV'ledkln of root 2. Umlted lnfUltaUon (Secllon C2.3} d1JM1811(1W to 3. 8aalc O.,-.fon (Seclon C.2.4) , .... .._ -t. Rain Garden ~c~ 1y&1em nwst be 5. ieannubli 6v CIOn e.2.m I .. __. 6. RainWaltr HatvNtlne (Sedion C.2. 7) .............. 7. Vagetated Roof (Sacllon c.2.8) ........... 8. Rtilllted Lmparvlous Service Credit (Secllon C-2.9) C.2.11. 9. Naltva Growth RattnUon Crtdl ......__.iOl'I C,2.10' The chosen Flow Control BMP for this project is permeable pavers_ See sheet C3_ J for a detail of the permeable pavers. The permeable paver surface will be used on the patios southwest and southeast of the proposed building addition (excluding the ramp and stairs)-The total area of the permeable pavers is 1,158 SF, thus satisfying the flow control BMP requirements. LPD En~neering PLLC Page 12 ATI Office Expansion Technical Information Re~on Water Quality Treatment As described earlier, the redevelopment project contains more than 5,000 SF of new plus replaced pollution-generating impervious surface (PGlS) that is not fully dispersed. The project will have commercial land use, thus requiring the utilization of the Enhanced Basic Water Quality Menu per section 6.1.2 of the KCSWDM. A two-facility treatment train is proposed in the parking lot area north of the proposed office building. The treatment train will include a wetvault followed by a Storm Filter structure with leaf compost (CSF) media. The wetvault was sized per section 6.4.1.1 of the 2009 KCSWDM. A minimum wetpool volume of 843 cubic feet was calculated based upon the tributary impervious areas. The wetpool calculation spreadsheet is included in Appendix B. The wet vault will have dimensions of24'x6'x8', allowing for 6 feet of permanent wetpool storage, 1 foot of freeboard, and I foot of sediment storage. The actual wetpool volume will be 864 cubic feet. The StormFilter structure was designed with input from Contech Stormwater Solutions. Per section 6.5.5.1 of the KCSWDM, the CSF StormFilter for enhance basic treatment must be "sized using both the flow-based and mass-based methods, and the designer shall select the result yielding the larger number of cartridges." The water quality flow for StormFilters with CSF media for enhanced basic treatment is 60% of the developed 2-ycar flow. Based on Contech's analysis, the flow-based method yielded more cartridges. Therefore, the Storm Filter structure will have 4 cartridges within a 60-inch manhole. Refer to Contech's StormFilter cost estimate attached in Appendix B. Also refer to the details of both the wetvault and StormFilter on sheet C2. l in Appendix A. SECTION 5 -CONVEYANCE SYSTEMSANALYSISAND DESIGN The proposed conveyance system was designed in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. The proposed conveyance systems are sized to convey at minimum the 25-year runoff event without overtopping. The proposed 12-inch storm drain line connecting to the existing 18-inch line was analyzed for conveyance. This pipe was assumed to be conveying flow from the entire project area, which is a tributary impervious area of 13,645 SF (0.313 acres). See the Conveyance Analysis Worksheet and associated KCRTS Output in Appendix B. The full-flow capacity of the pipe was detennined using Manning's Equation. The proposed 12-inch pipe (n~0.011) is at a slope of 1.7%, which yields a full-flow capacity of 5.50 cubic feet per second (cfs). KCRTS was used with 15-minute time step to find the 25-year and 100-year peak flow, which were found to be 0.30 cfs and 0.41 cfs, respectively. Thus, the proposed conveyance system will have adequate capacity to accommodate the 25-year and l 00-year storm event. SECTION 6-SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES A geotechnical report, dated December 23, 2014, has been conducted by PanGeo, Inc. and is attached in Appendix E of this report. LPD Engineering PLL( Page 13 ATS Office Expansion Technical lnfonnarion Repon SECTION 7 -OTHER PERMITS There will be no other pennits required for this project. SECTION 8-CSWPPP ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The construction stonn water pollution prevention plan (CSWPPP) consists of the TESC plan in the drawing set with the accompanying preliminary construction SWPPP narrative per the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Stonnwater Management Manual for Western Washington, and a Stonnwater Pollution Prevention and Spill (SWPPS) plan per the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. The TESC plan is in Appendix A, while the SWPPP narrative and SWPPS plan are provided in Appendix C of this report. Sizing calculations were perfonned for a sediment settling facility and the calculations are included in Appendix B. The proposed wetvault will be utilized as a sediment settling facility in the TESC phase. See the SWPPP narrative for more infonnation. SECTION 9 -BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES,AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Financial guarantees and liability for the proposed project will be completed by owner prior to pennit issuance. SECTION I 0-OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Recommended operations and maintenance guidelines for the stonnwater drainage facilities located within the project are provided in Appendix D of this report. An Operations and Maintenance Manual, per section 2.3.1 of the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, will be provided with the pennit submittal. LPD Engineering PLLC Page 14 All Office Expansion Tedinical lnfonnarion Report !figure 1 -TIR Worksheet I KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Tea.I"\ f'rope.r+; e.:,, U .C Phone ( Lf2.S) 2.S \ -jG,'&O Address '150 Sh4,.,±uc.k, Avl'. c:, Re()hn • WA 9 'RO~' -i' Project Engineer /v\ o..rc Se.<" \Ji?. i PE Company Ll't> En;;ii"ne.e.,>n\'), P UJ. Phone (2.0{,\ 72S-\2.11 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION CJ Landuse Services Subdivison / Short Subd. / UPD ll9 Buildina "0 rvices M/F / \i_Ommerica]} I SFR CJ Clearing and Grading CJ Right-of-Way Use CJ Other Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Type of Drainage Review C§ID / Targeted (circle): Large Site Date (include revision dates): Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS I . Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION . Project Name ATS &,l,-p,..,.._-\ioo ODES Permit# --~~~---- Location Township _1_3_N __ _ Range _S_E ____ _ Section --'-\-'~'------ Site Address '-\32 Sho.t\-ui.J<.. Ave. '5 R€-<\ton, wt\ 1'i\'05'1 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS CJ DFWHPA CJ COE404 CJ DOE Dam Safety CJ FEMA Floodplain CJ COE Wetlands CJ Other __ _ CJ Shoreline Management CJ Structural RockeryNault/ __ CJ ESA Section 7 Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type (circle one): <§ii) / Modified / Small Site Date (include revision dates): Date of Final: Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication / Experimental / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of Annrovai: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9/2009 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes!@> Describe: Start Date: Completion Date: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY ANO DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan : N//t Special District Ove-r71a ... y=-s:""7 ,-:-,/-;-:--A-------- Drainege Basin: 61 o tit. I< iYU- Stormwater Requirements: Peak &:I:< fl•III c~..,;.,..1 S:\n,rv\a<'d; Part 9 ONSITE ANO ADJACENT SENSITNE AREAS D River/Stream ---------0 Lake D Wetlands ----------0 Closed Depression -----~-0 Floodplain _________ _ D 0ther ----------- Part 10 SOILS D Steep Slope -------- 0 Erosion Hazard -------CJ Landslide Hazard ______ _ D Coal Mine Hazard ______ _ D Seismic Hazard -------CJ Habitat Protection -------CJ _________ _ Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential IJrbq.f\ W(ll..-') u !I 1<,,io 1.,v'I\ CJ High Groundwater Table (wtthin 5 feet) Q!I Sole Source Aquifer CJ Other D Seeps/Springs CJ Additional Sheets Attached 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 2 1/9/2009 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE CJ Core 2 -Offsite Analisis CJ Sensitive/Critical Areas CJ §!;PA CJ Other CJ CJ Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET Threshold Discharge Area: /name or descriotionl Core Requirements (all 8 apply) Discharne at Natural Location Offsite Analysis Flow Control /incl. facilitv summarv sheet\ Conveyance System Erosion and Sediment Control Maintenance and Operation Financial Guarantees and Liabilitv Water Quality (include facility summary sheet) LIMITATION/ SITE CONSTRAINT (provide one TIR Summarv Sheet cer Threshold Dischar= Areal Number of Natural Discharne Locations: • Level: (1) / 2 / 3 dated:_'1.1Jtc.o.2.:..,.'l1...I 1,..5,.._ __ _ Level: 1 / 2 / 3 or Exemption Number __,,:1..:...,.--- Small Site BMPs ~ h c h -;-'-oo..; · ---+ Spill containment located at: ESC Site Supervisor. Contact Phone: T8D ( lo,.+,-"""lur\ After Hours Phone: Responsibility: ~ / Public If Private, Maintenance Lnn Reauired: Yes f~ Provided: Yes / No T8D Type: Basic / Sens. Lake / <>-rihanced or Exemption No. --------- Landscaoe Manaaement Plan: Yes / /No\ / Bog Soeclal Renulrements (as annllcable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MDP /BP/ LMP / Shared Fae. fNOne) Renuirements Name: Floodptain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major I Minor / Exemption / ~ Flood Protection Facilities Source Control (comm./industrial landuse) 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): ------ Datum: Describe: N/A Describe landuse: COn'l1Y1tr1,·,.._\ Describe any structural controls: N / A 3 t/9/2009 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High-use Site: Yes I 0 Treatment BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes /@ with whom? Other Dralnaae Structures Describe: (\ C,f\t.. Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION ~ Clearing Limits ~ Slabifize Exposed Surfaces 181 Cover Measures ~ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities la Perimeter Protection ~ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris, Ensure ti::I Traffic Area Stabilization Operation of Permanent Facilities ~ Sediment Retention CJ Flag Limits of SAO and open space ll!:I Surface Water CoHection preservation areas CJ Other ~ Dewatering Control ~ Dust Control ~ Flow Control Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS-INote: Include Facllinl Summarv and Sketch\ Flow Control TuneJDescrlotion Water Qualitv Tvoe/Descrintion CJ Detention CJ Blofiltration CJ Infiltration CJ Wetpool CJ Regional Facility ~ Media FIitration ~r,.,fi~ ..,LGSf.,~;. CJ Shared Facility CJ Oil Control ~ Flow Control ~e,r l"1 c.,. bl'-CJ Spill Control BMPs p;;::,;e..,f'\errt" CJ Flow Control BMPs CJ Other !!SI Other we±i.::9.u\-1- 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9/2009 4 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTSffRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS D Drainage Easement D Cast in Place Vault D Covenant D Retaining Wall D Native Growth Protection Covenant D Rockery > 4' High D Tract D Structural on Steep Slope D Other D Other Part 17 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 a the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my know g i rmaUon P, ed here is accurate. ~----7. -~"' . / / 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9/2009 s 0 .D D ~ .2 Q_ .D .c X w a E .3 a "' .c u " L ID > 0 ID 3 2 u 0 0 L Q_ u -" -" Q_ C ·c ID ID C C w 0 Q_ -" U) ~ s'>N ,o1 Q_ 0 ::, C ·u > I V> C $ """ m z :,, < 0 .,, m ~ r-z m V> m ~ :,, z < m m ~ z z ~ < ~ m z S 132ND ST ~ C z 0 :,, < m V> ~ s1 ·mmm·,.-~ ID I I Solt, ,20, :) Seottle,WA98104 Q p. 206.725.1211 f. 206.973.5344 ~ engineering pile -.lpd"''"'"'"'"m L AIRPORT WAY ,,\------·--~---- I~ ~~~~~:I Ir -•1 l> I~ I :2 Im I"' PROJ~CT AREA I I W7THST/_._ S 2ND ST . ~ ::i: ~ 0 $ 0 "' "' vi :,, V> $ HST~ m "' V> ~ S6HST;;: $ 0 "' "' J __ ...1vi.;.,......_...J.,....L.....- < m V> Lt\KE t,,VE S (- 1 s Gl'-~D::i~r,.'{ S RENTON VILLAGE P "' C "' z m ~ m "' ~ r-r )> $ V> l> < m V> ~ m r- "' ~ m "' "' m z V> 0 z "' 0 V> .,, m r '< l> N m z J';, r r- ~ m RD ST .,, l> "' "' l> < m z S 7T ST N ATS-AtJTOMA TION DESCRIPTION MAY 4, 2015 FIGURE VICINITY MAP 2 't;:, .,2 .::w .. _ ~ i'i'.'. ~ ·Cl { 4-J 2§ 'l..> C:,') <::, -S 2 <:::i <:: ..c?, <:: ~ ] <::, t: ~ 'SC ~ 'SC ~ ·: "8 I&' i ~ '--~ <::, ~ :,;:: ~ '-' ~ ·:,-., 2 () -~=~ (~ ,. "(:- (.) & "t3-, l..~ ~ -J ~ ~ ~ ?> '6 & ~ s: (:; '-'> ::, .C> ~ ~ ~ ""--': ~ ,- ~ " '<.J ', ~ ~ ~ l..':: @2015 LPD Engineering PLLC 1 m m 911 .6 .. '" , ... DESCRIP TION Su it e 420, I I Seattle, WA 98104 p. 206.725.1211 f. 206.973 . 534 4 engineering pllc WVA,.fpdeng ineering.com N 0 30 60 I I I Sca le 1 "= 60' EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE C§:§31 Existing Impervious Total Site Area Percentage of Site Impervious 0.58 AC 0.95 AC 61.1% A TS AUTOMATION MAY 4, 20 15 FIGUR E EXISTING IMPERVIOUS 3 COVERAGE ~ ~ "'t::i f ._ .. ::.. .... , § ~ ~ '<::, ~ "-., ~ C( "' '::::: c'2: ~ L,__: ~ <l> ~ •;; UTlUTY lREt¥;HIJIIOt . ~- NOT COUNTED AS ' . "> ., EXISllNG IMPERVIOUS -~ ,.,..,.r J •-GRAVEL ~j PARKING · \!_ </ EXIS~~,'.+- cOMMEAc1ALI i• ... . ~ BUILDING, : .,' J .·. ' ·-· .. ·i ( .~-·r I, 'I /. // ~ ,.. '·-"' • / / / / / /...;; ' t ~ "' ·,, V ,;;.,•~ PROJECT AREA H'(;.:.,.·;..; .c::: t:i ~ , l •I .: i' f •.,,. , \~·~, I ,· .~' •. · ,(, . •. \,-~ /'. ;~'.,-:-;; '_i • , ·,...-·1:·,r -.,.' --·----------·-----·,-. ... ·/ .,-~:-: .. f. f1.' ~ ~ c.': ~ c::: ~ (::, t: c:, :S '<:: t? " ~ <.., ~ ...::: ~ -ca:: ..__ 1' (::, ~ . t:: :~~ ,:\:: '· ct ~ .c::: ~ <l> <l> .,; ~ ~ ~ --..., 0") I ; I ' I ·---·-·-· . -I \ ),IJ -• 1 ·,~-~-.• \ I I M ,_ -i I lt'V I ' .L·~' •• ,. k'r Y""'x~x~x-x~x~SI .y ' \\ -· -: ·-· ::\-;.', .r / I lr "I I I I :·;·:.;:\'.'' . 1"J1 . , ID \ . ·' ': :'_ I , ::::i'.i;:, ·'" I ,~·r~-I I 13 I -: ;:s I ;,., ~ ii --~I -....;, ,· ,1 ~ tN --7-, : :j:;_I , , / .. '. ~ Cij . :' ;/ ~ ,-/ ,, , I ~ ,%,··/_::~,t§ J ' .. ,.,,,;, .> ' ·~:~ '(1/· .' .I ' / i ,r : . ,. --...,;;-... .... -, ... , i ' -v ~·;;: , ---ra.r: I ~ cf: t s 4th Pl :..,.:.;----- • :.:ii-. )"I ~..,-.; -.:~ ,,c.\ "~···" ,.., r ~-...,_, I ~-,.•,f .• ,,.., • , / , 7.1:,/ ~ ' A J;.7 I i ,,.,._,. --,a . --,:~,,;:· I -~ ... ! / ,!,;',',-/ I ' • : ,' ..... ;; \;:/ Ir, i, /,, I •• / t . <:> :..:: iS c::: c3 .&' ,,:;; .\'.) ~ 1-- ,, ,. J '/ ', ' / .•'""'' / .I ~ ... • . ~. i I I . ....,,.._,.. ... . . ~ .> :.,., , / ;' \ I ' / .( ,. -~-: -"';4' _,, ·-· · ,.. ?' . . · l~ ' ,_ . .· • ... • V,' ·,c~ • ' ··r _,... ,· .. /' I , .. I .,, • 'r ' --. . i_. • {.-·...-lJTILITY ~NCHNb . .;:.c..:::. -~\ I :..':-• • ... l 1 , :/::.. "" ·,~-'. •• ) / ~ '/ 'I J ·., • I F',. ,; ~ I ,_ • ., -., -,--·-,.;.,=. .. 1 NOT/C~OUNTED AS :! \ _ .. 0_ 1; · "', • / I , _ • \_ I I,, __ -iv/ EXISTI I IMPERVIOUS I . ~;;:,-:..,, •,.( / ' . / / . , ' . . I , / ' .. ~ 'St-I / 1· . Y,;___ --/ . , "! (l:i ·.L. ,_ ·, r' '::i / ,i I , \/' (:) / ~;.I~;,~ t~t ~ * , >\ r 1 ,.:,:.n~~ ... , ~ t..:::: @2015 LPD Engineering PLLC I I ,, I \ ly f '_.-~ ' r 'Ji ... ... EXISTING ALLEY -l r-----, --. ··- 'l I , / '/ :;/' // // // r // . ,!1 --~~-·~ ~ ,.J ,.>'.,·J'..»Z' A /,( EXISTING ATS BUILDING m m m 91 1 Wffie rn A,e Suit e 420, I I Seattle, WA 98 104 p. 206. 725.1211 f. 206. 973. 5344 engineering pllc www .lpdengineeri ng.com N 0 15 30 I ! I Scale 1 "=30' Impervious Area Summary ~ EX ISTIN G IMPERVIOUS AREA 7,917 SF (0.182 AC) TOTAL EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA 7,917 SF (0.182 AC) A TS AUTOMATION DESCRIPT ION MAY 4, 2015 FIG URE EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 C L.... 0 Q_ ...J (J) KIN G CO UNTY AREA, WASHINGTON (WA63 3) :5 N MAP UNIT SYM BOL M A P UNIT NAME 0 Q_ ,;: D 0 :z (/) 0 (J) ID <IJ .._ ::, 0 [_;:: gm l '"w~ .... • I Su~e 420, Seollle, WA 98104 p. 206.725 .1211 f. 206.973.5344 ) engineering pile ww-w.lpdengineering.com Ur U rba n Land A TS AUTOMATION DESCRIPTI ON MAY 4, 2015 FIGU RE SOILS MAP 5 ~ ~ § ::_,.:_ ~ 't:, <:., -:::: f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ <.:::s -~ ~ <::: :g c:::, i " ~ ~ V) ~ ~ ~ '<I; ~ c:::, ~ :,-,;: ~ -~ f2 C: l l <:.:: ·c;., ~ ~ ..._, c.) -~ ~ ~ -15 vi <:: -~ t <:.:: ~ l ~ ct ~.t!\~~~1, \ 1, .• ' ,, ,;:"' r: .,.._.,,...,, ( • ) ~· ,\: .-,.1 ,., ;·, ... • • 1-\{ .. ,•'' ~ i.,. . : . ' /, . :,-:,,.~ ... ; ~ ...... ..,..,.. ..... _,2 ...... : ,.~ r ':'1 Y'..¥.c I• ;~ ~:/'.; / ~",J'7A _•;,,..· ~_Jy:.-. ..... ·-· ' ., . 'l / I • ._,, ,~ -~ -:..~" ,: ' ,i:: ""· / ·'-"· lfJllJTY TRE~,. ' ' . -n m·rcOUNTED t\§.. JJ _,_,,-~- ... lfJ/J ,x. .. , .•. _ ..... / -~·~ I ~TTOEXSO ,,unurrL~ NOfcqJN"fED AS Nety/REPLACB) MPEAVIOUS l l ___ ,,. .. .. -~, ' .r,," l.i. ;;; ~ •. ,' .. ,1 •' / :... lJ.J ~ PROJECT AREA 1 ..:( I'....:. ... ,:- R.OW CONTROL. BMP PERMEABLE PAVERS 1,158 SF , / // 7 · I I I I I I EXISTING ATS BUILDING ,;f .r /7" / 7,11"( :· ~"'. . l ·j /. ' / . ....... .; .1, ...... , N 0 15 .30 I I I Sca le 1 "=30' Area Summar New/Reolaced Areas 17/LZJ 4,140 SF (0 .095 AC) BU ILD ING ( 100% EFFECTI VE IMPERVIOUS) t'"-"-.\ "-.\ ~ STAN DARD CONCRETE >\ '\\ : ( 100% EFFECTIVE IMPERVIOUS) 1,716 SF (0.039 AC ) l O o 6 o 6 o I ASPHA LT ~ a o a o o ( 100% EFFECTIVE IMPERVIOUS) 7,181 SF (0.165 AC ) / 1 .....-, / I .....-, PERVIOUS PI\VERS I~ -I ~ -I (1,158 SF AT 50% EFFECT IVE IMPERVIOUS) 579 SF (0.0 13 AC) TOTAL NEW PLU S REPLACED EFFECTIVE IMPERVIOUS !\REA 13,616 SF (0.31.3 AC) EXISTING IM PERVIO US AREA FROM FIGURE 4 (DEDUCT) -7,917 SF (-0.182 AC) NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA *5,699 SF (0 .131 AC) (*TARGET IMPERVIOUS SURFACE) '° I f,EV/ /REf'LJ>:,CED f ~ IMPERVIOUS . ~ ,./ j ·~.1 ~ ·' -~ ,._~ • \'-· j -l.::: , ~~., f •• __ . " t .-. I ;j !'.!_;_ I . •:· ~ t.;:: @2015 LPD Engineering PLLC gm m 911We<emA" Suite 420, I I Seattle, WA 98104 p. 206.725.1211 f. 206 .973.5344 engineeri ng pllc ••w.lpdengileering.com A TS AUTOMATION DE SCR IPTION MAY 4, 20 15 FIGURE PROPOSED CONDITIONS 6 (; A TS AUTOMATION MAY 4, 2015 FIGURE II mm 9'1W,~m, ... DESCRIPTION Suite 420, DOWNSTREAM 7 ©20 15 LP D En gi nee ring PLL C I I Seattle, WA 98 104 p. 206.725.1211 f. 206.973.53 44 DRAINAGE MAP engineering pllc www.lpdengineer ing.com lj I . A-, ri.-- ---. . J l I i "" • ,....,-~--. EXN:P/6~ ~ =.a""=,,. . . I I I I l II • t l,IA.//KW "Sru· !IP£ l (,Ire// 9t5lf ...,,~ t:-~IJ'"loyl',/ c~~ r,"lllfN} £-2/U! l~"!fll'(S) ,-. t _ _. l,,.,,,_. i"' t 1-- f ! ;_· ii I i' ,. ' '1j \ l l l t I I . l " I I I I 'i1 t "I l\ ~ JI "t M ~ " ; I ' EX CURii "',., JM.I.R/0175 - I II!.! I 11 l>X/N 71UIJJQ115 l 10 • ~ 19 '!I -·------Scale1'-IO' IECOIMK)8) CONS1RJCT10N SEOlENCE t. PRE-o::iNS'1WJC'!l MEDIC. - CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 2. POS1' NI 11JH ME MID PfDE Ml&R Of me SlftlMSClt 0MY BE 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES. CXNl(l.lWEI) IQH 1HE RED.RD NCfflCE CF ~ ml). TM WT 1/HJ,,.,., 1 RAD t1t f1iNCE a.EMIG IIIJS. 4. INSW.L Clllal aat PROIB:IION F RBUIED. a. GMIE MD NSW.L. CCINSIRIJCl10N amMCI II DISTIG mt PRll'OSED Cl.Ill cur. lDCA1DI 1MY EE 10.1US1ED lllllNJ ltE CXWSIRIJenDN SQEll.lL e. IMIDU. fllllllEJER PIIOIECIION (8U FEIU.). 7, INmU. ffllll DINil S'l'Sf&I 14 stW'lUClt. SIORM fl.lER C8 {MOT lHE CMffMJOES) NI) 1IET W.U. USE NI) wamr.N 1B lDIPOIWfr' SEl:IIEff ...... a. MDIC llEMDIJIIClf. aDE AN) SfMUZE SIi£ CXINSJRLC1ION 11010S. Q. CONSTRUCF SllfJU IM1ER CQNl'RCU (IIIIERCEPJOR DmH3 OR E111B. PFE SI.OPE w. DC.) w,JNPJ1aY 11111 a.w. w NCI BUUllG OONSIRUCIIIN RIii: PIDJECI' DmUIPIIElff. 10. ~ E1m10N OClfffllllL -..S N 11CCORD1iNCE MDI N'PEJIXIC D OF H SUIF1iCt 'MIER IE!illll IMllN. NfJ MNU'JtCllRJtS IIJ:DIElrlW10NS 11, IEJ.ADTE ElilOl5Dt ODNIROL IEASUflES OR INsrALL NEW WM.ID SO 1lW' AS SffE: COJIIIDl9 aWGE n£ EIQSIJN NfJ 5BJIElff ODNTROL IS M..WWS N /OXIRIWG 1lfH ltE mY"S ERDSICIN NG SEDIIElff CONlm.. SlliNDMDS. 12. 0DWR lil MOS nW' al. BE lNmlC£D FOR MCIE 11M SMN IM'1'S IUNJ ff DRr SE'MON OR 1IO IM'l'S IUll«a 11£ Wtr sti\SDfll Intl 1n11W. WOOD FIIEII MUI.CH. CCIFOST. l'lASllC SHEEIIG OR EQl.NUM'. WEAVER ARCHITECTS. INC. 141\ FOURTH AVENUE. SUITE 810 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 90101 P. 206.262.9622 F. 206.262.9507 ,. ............. ·-~~-~3014 I I I 9HW"<emA~ Suite 420 Seilttle, WA 98104 p. 206.725. t211 f,.rofi,973.5344 engineering pile·~·'-'='•·= --=-----1-1.5. STMIIJZE ALL M(£}S TlW' RUQI F11W. GRl,D£ wmtN SE.YEM DM"S. \"e:,,i{I, ---,._L__~ 14. SEED OR SOD Nlf MDS 11) RDN1 IJNWORKED RlR lil:lRE,: 1HNi1 JO MI'S. ' ):::E-1$. LFt* COlrl'tEl10N Of' THE PROJECT, ALL DISTURIED MOS IIUST BE STIIBIJZED AND BW'S AElllMD F N'PRDf"RKIE. , 1e. ~ aDtl WET VMJLT NI) S'fORM FL1ER CB. LI..EClEN) -----PROPERIY LN: --JO --EX CONTOUR (I\IDEX) ..,.--28 ----EX CONTOUR EX ....... PROPOSED BUI.OINC Olffl.JNE ---=SO-'"WWW"O IIUUllNG/STRUOIURE - ~--~ SAWCUT UNE ASPIW.T REMOVAL V///TJZ! COIICA£IE ....... / I@ @ tj =:,; CONSTRUCTION 0 * ~ CONSIRUCllON """"" SLT FENCE EX TREE TO RDW\I EX TREE TO BE RDIOVED TREE PR01B:IJON EX CURB TO BE REMO\ED EX FECE TO BE RDKMD • INl.EJ """""""" ----LIIJS Of WORK ~ TRWKl.11.AA SLT DIKE CallW ...... ~p ~.~- 1-eoo •••-a••• """"-STORII FUtR -ram SWENSON SAY FAGtT A S'TRUCTUR/i. ENGINEERING CORPORAUON ~·~"m: -~ 1ffl. 44,~ WA Ul21 --""~-- No. r.ue De-=~ ~- -l _________ _ ~-------- 1--°"""' by: JLC Ravi-by: UP .'.2: Pf'oject No, 06071-2015-0l Cl) => Cf) TESC AND SITE I-DEMOLITION ~=t::e:eloN",Yf',Soalo........__... ......... I ,,,_,w,, ~ C1 .0 J t n ! SCHEMATIC Dm1. PROWlE "SmrAMGlJARD SElllMENf CA'IQI BASIN NSER1" OR APPR<MD EQUAL t.WU'ACTURER'S ~E: BOWHOO E?MRONWENTAL I: SAFEIY ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 375 P1IESTON. WA 98050 ]WPHOl<E: (800) 909-3677 www.sHOPBCMHOO.COM """"\ =~ ,_ .. Sl1lOO'LE - t A JIii.. NIS CATCH SASIN INLET PROTECTION I~ f {!1; J f i:1 -i •.· .... ,. ,, .. ] A '• _· . '~ . ··: 1 l .IIIUll3II f :"it: SURf'N% ND. IS OOl«JIEI£. I ADt£'SMS SUCH AS t.am NM. OR SNIJ I GtOS stWJ. IE USED. F 11 IS AN ASPHM.1 ! SURFACE'. A IUIIERIZED ASPHALT EIU.SION cvt BE USED. TIE w:KNG llllENJ" 11.JSf IIE lff'LED I.NIER 11£ F1ll 1.BC1H or H EWIRER SECllDN NI> 11£ MIRCll. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 2 i ... IEAI. Sll'PORJ POST~~ ON --~ ti HT. ........ """"' {OIWIOE"""""""' FENCEl .., 4' Hf. --.. CIIDlP OF 1REES AT DRP LI£ OR /15 SHOWN ON PUNS Mmll; ' ~ :1 'j· .. :::._ """' 1. A 4 mar 11GH 1EIIPORMN' FENCE ILISI' SE Pl.ACED AT 11£ DRP LIE OF 1l&S PIIOR 10 11£ COMMENCEIIENI' OF CI.EMIIQ OR FMIHWORK. t«1IFY THE a.EMIC AND GRADING ltSFCltlR TO GET BOIH 1l£ INSfECTl)N NIJ WRll1EN H'PROVH. OF' FIJOCED TREES NI> 1EIFORM't PfKfTECl10N FENCIIG MOtll) TREES 1D BE M,'ED PER 11£ IPPIIMD a.ENN. AND GRADtC ...... 2. NO sroa<PI.IPG OF IMTERW. AND NO 'IIIIClUR TRAFFIC llE. M.lOIED WITHN Tl£ lNTS OF Tl£ DRl'll£. 11£ ml'CJfWn' FtNCIIG. UNlESS APPRDYED 1h' 11£ HIBORISr. FIDIG,, EllrJIVAJION. NI) QEARNQ t.«.IST BE IICCCM'lJSIE> B't tWIJI 1EHODS OII.Y lNDS llftCNED B1 MBORIST. 3. RIOOIS OF 'TREES 1D BE SMD MICH ARE MW'1ED DURltG CONSIRUCllON ILISI' BE 11BJED N H Fa.J.OMNO Wi\Y: FOR tlMUtCED R0aJS C'4R 1• It DWiEER. tiWCE A a.EM,. S1MGHf cur ltl REMCM: 1l£ IWWED PORTION OF 11£ !IDOi' All. EXPOSED ROt1l'S 11.L E lEMPORARI.Y CCMRED WITH IWF' llllllJ,P OR WOOD st'AYINGS 10 PRDDfl' DR'WNO NI> COIIERED Wini EMJH IS SOON M POSSB.E. MIS TREE PROTECTION FENCING rxr"' , ... GG. """' 3 :•x4• WOOD POSIS, ma ....,. POSIS, ........ ......... SILTFENCE 4 CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES. ('t'1Jiii1Tcl WEAVER ARCHITECTS. INC. 1411 FOURTH AVENUE. SUITE 810 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 P, 206.262.9622 f. 206.262.9507 .w........-11-~rtg11111-c21114 g P I "'w",m'" Soi!e420 Sei!ttle, WA 98104 p.2<16.725.\Zll I. 206.973.5344 engineering pile.-.,..,,_,,_ a!: ,,. SWENSON SAY FAGtT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION ~24~--mr -!kif:: 11..--..= WA aat21 ........... .._....,._,,,.. Ho. Issue Oe&:rlption ""' I -..... · .... · .. ·A.'.';:;,,,\··· .. ·· .. LIIIS. OFSEEMN? ·-,,~\_-....... ,, ·-·~,~~ ~ I ND. ~:·~<:~ND. CDDE[ml( ==-MIUE i::·-.-.. -.-"'"'.,'",,-----.---1 la 8II LBS ~ Pn:iJKt No: Ol!I071-2015-01 ! -cc I ~TESC DETAILS 1 r i - ... ~=ee,11:14"><31'.S---t:tr{-! SILTDI; 5 CONSTRUCTION FENCING 6 NOT usro 7 NOT USED 8 ~ C1 .1 •I...-------------------.L..-------------------.l...-------------------.l...--------------------1 CB6IAL N01EII 1. EXISJIC CDlllfflONS: A. CONrH:r ML f£ESSMt UIIJl't PURYE1'0RS 10 COOflDINffl: UTIIIY curoFFS MD IW.S. YERFY 1H,V AU. APPROPll"1E SBMCES tWE Bml t&.OIWCIED. B. CCN'DRM 10 I.DCM. GCMRNIG RBUEENrS RmflRDNG NOISE CONIRCl.. C. INfDlt WE wtClJlNt Nm PEDESTRWt 1IWF1C R001ES: 2. ~ ....... hlWEIIEIU 'MJH RCW11S. S1REEf'S,, AL.LEYS. SIEW.KS. .Ml) ADJICENT 1 DO ""' CUJOE CR llllSIRl.<:T snms, FIIE ~~ Al1ffl CR .......,..,. 'MlHOUr PS11SS1DN fROII NJJHCRID tVMNO 4. F REQUltED BY CCMRt..a 11U111C11RES. PRCMDE IL1EIWJE lilDUTES ARCUI> a.mm OR OIISlllllCl!D """" ..... A. \UIFY LOCAnON NII> E1£Wi110N or E11SN UIUTES AT IQflS OF COIIECTION PRIOR 10 COWENCIIQ 1ICRK ON IEI' U1l..ffY lHA1 IS 10 BE IX1NCTED 10 11£ EX5JIG UIIJIY. OOORllll\1E 'MDI OINER'S REFhESEM'mt'E F ICl1ML CXNIIIONS AR[ AT -WIIH FUNS. B. \UIFY I.OWION MD Ell.Wi1ICIN Of' EXISING UIUTES Sll'F1CIENILY IN 1D1N1CE Of" CONSIRIJCIION 10 AU.m Ftlt OOORmMJION JWJ MmliM1ION Cf' cotftJClS wmtOUf DOIN TIE. &. DIENSIONS NI) lAYCIUIS: A. 11£ CONIRICTOR 5 RlSPQNSlllE RlR P1DE1MNO H..L BENCt1MRKS MD SWCES NI> IS REQllRED TO REN.AC£ Mt SIMES OR BEMCHWICS THA.T ARE DISPlACED OR lillS5IIG. B. 1t£ CONlltllCl'Ofl &S RESPONSa£ FOR Rl\'E.W Of' All U11.11Y PUR't'E'r'DR AND CfJY RECORDS IIElA'fM: TO TIE EJCISIIIQ llllElilRCllN) UTIJTES. 1tE CONIRICTOR IS RESPONSlll.E RIii ~ DMWlE 10 TieE f1iCIJIES MD SIW.L RESTORE Ml. U1I.IIIES "1 CClfflW:roR"S OMil EXPENSE. THE COlfDltCTOR IS 10 NOIFY H OWNER'S REPIEENOON[ MEMm..Y F lllDIIIOtN) UTUIES NCJI' SHOIN ON R£CORD DOa.lEIIS ME - C. 11£ camw::roR -.J.. BE RE5PONSa.E FOR RlltlSt..:, SEl1lfG: NI> MMIM HJ. I.JI£ LOC\1ION srAKES. A QI.Ml.HD IA'l'tVr ENG1EER, SUIM'tOR, OR TE.aNrA. SPB*I.JST IIJST IIIE ASSIQtE) TD ntE CON'IM..IOFIS a£W FOR MS WORIC MID SHML BE ON SITE 1(1 IOU. TIES HM .... -"""""'-5 IIElllll -10GEIHER M1H All IECESStRI' EQWIIENI', SI.FPIJES NG NITRIJIEfJS RElA1ID 1HEREIO. 1llS BII.FMENT NI) P£RSCIIEL llJSr BE AVMAEII.£. AT NO MlllflltlW. COST 10 Tl£ OIMR OR OMER's NEFRESENrAlM. f'OR ntE FWf'OSE Of' VERfYNJ LA'l'Wr NI> CEIOF'fflG TIE K::OIWN or WORK ON 1l£ SITE. .............. _ A. COIIPLY 'MlH ALL H'PLICIII.E FEDEJW.. SrAJE NI) UDL CCIDES NI) SAFETY IGI.UnDNS. IF TIElilE ARE Nff CONFIJCIS MIONG REFERENCED STNGliRDS. ll£ 111H: HIINGENT REQUIDENl'S SIW.L GOt'ERN. B. oew, ALL NBDSM'I' PEIUTS. GAADtlQ N01ES 1. M.L WORK stW..L BE N OOIAJRIWI:[ wmt 'THE GEDIWN.W. ENG1tEER11G REPORT, Iii$ MEHOUSE, Ml CB>. IC. DEC 2J. 2014. 2. Tl£ fRlllET GWIEUNCAL ENGINEER OF' REJ::clRD OR 115 ll:PRE5ENWM: 111ST BE ONSllE D1RG CftlilCAL DRnMCR( OPEFt1G10NS. 11£ GEDTEDHIICAL EN61EER StW.L OBSERVE Hl. EXrM11QNS Ml) FIL. llffN3. IN ADIX1lClN, TIE BfGl&R SIW.L ltSPEC1' 11£ SOL CUIS PRIOR 10 CONS1RIJCiNJN OF IN1S Ml> NlPECT 1HE COIIPICnClt N Rl MENS. 11£ ENG1EER IIUST SUM1' FED FEPOR1S II WRfflG 10 n1E Pm NSP£CRlR FOR SOLS ~ MD FOll6\1DI CONSiRUCIION. AU. 6WHICIIK SHCIW) 8E IN CCN'ORliMCE WITH Tl£ ~ IN 11£ GE'OrECIINQL """""· 3. K GmlBHltH. BfGl&R 111ST IIE PRESENT "1 K PAE-aJNSJRUC'IION IEETNG(S). 1\1 ADDIIIDN. 1HE fOU.DIIIG CCIISIRl.lCl10N STAGES IIJST IIE 1NSPEC1m. MOllltRD,, AND mmD 11,S IEDSMl'I' BY K GEDTEQfCIL ENGNER Of REIXHl: 7. WEJY' S'ISIEMS: A. PROIICI' AU. EXCAMQXIN N ElUS$ Of' FOUR-FEEi' N DEPIH 111H A SAFETY S'l"SIDI COWOIIMIG TO Tl£ REFERENCED REQllREIDTS, B. 1l£ CXINIR#QOR S EXCAVAllON SAFEIY S'fSTEII SHM.l IIE DESIGNED flt A GUM.FED PERSON 1111> MEE!' 11£ REFEAENCED REQUf8Ell'S. C. Ill EXCitM\1111 NCJI' REQllRIIQ TRENCH WErY' S'l'SIDIS SHM.l Al.SO IIEET lHE 'GIA SVEIY SWIWl:DS NI> art Of EIEl..llWE RE1PEEN1S.. .. _ A. IMJDKS NOT DeDl\1ED FOR SM.\ME SHM.l BE IRJICEN .!f1.-~ NI> LBWJ.Y DISPOSED Cf' BY 1l£ CONnWmlR. CMIE SIW.L BE TIMEN NURMNG: ITEIIS 10 ENSIIIE 11W' twMGE: DOES Nm OCCUR TO lt£ EXISING TREES MD 1F117iEUEN1S 'MICH M£ 10 RDWN IN Pl.ACE. ML REIICMlil..S stW.L BE MXXIMPUStl:D rt 1N1NG A N£AT WJmC\L SMICllT AT 11£ lAll'S or RDOW. ALL CDNCRE1E 111111.K RDICMlS stW.l. BE !!NCllT /Cl TIIE NEXT' H>JACENT ..all'. AD.WEIT IM1ERW.S DE:S1GM1ED TO REWel TIMT llf£. IWWEJ BY' 11£ CONTJV.cl'OR IIUIIIG 1tE WORK SfW1. BE REPLaD AJ II> ADllfflOtW. ODSI' 10 1tlE Olt&. B. SPRNl.E EXCMIATm 1M1E11W. MD ~ RCMIS ,a IEDSMft" TO LIIT DUST TO H lOIEST PRACID&E l&'EL DO NOT USE wmR 10 SOOH AN EX?ENT AS 10 C'ILISE FLOOIIIIG. CClnM9Wm RUNOFF, QR DC. C. N 11£ &'£NI' 11£ cotfJIW:IOR EMOCIUNl!RS U1IJIY IJNES NOT SHOIN ON n£ SIIE PUN OR OltDIIISE IOCA1'ED 10 BE S\\U), 1EMMD. OR AMIX)N[D, n1E I.OOO'ION fl SUCH UES stW.L BE 1M111!ED 1\1 nlE FE.D AND H OWNER'S REPIIESENJA1M l«JlHl). Lfll.......,. "-AU. IMTERW. a1CH IS PROPOSED 10 8E USED IS FU. BB'IOltC OR 1W:1CF1.1.. S1W.1. BE CIIWl(I) N 1ESIB) mt IDS1URE CONl11lr N COIFACIHIIJIY. OMDAllON MID TEST IIESl.l.TS stW.L BE !UIIT1BJ RJR RE.\WW N ACCEPWU rt TtE OWNER'S REPRl3BIBtlNE PRIOR 10 PI.ACEl1EMI' fl FIL SEE SPB:l'ICltllONS Fm Nt1R1M110N Nm RESnlCTIONS ON 11£ USE OF RECWCI.ID 1M1ERW.. 16 FU. B. "'1EJIW.. USED 1\1 Fl1IG SIW.1. BE lffROPRIATE TD H SITE AND nlE INTEtllED USE OF 11"1' POmON OF Tl£ SOE. C. 10PSOI. stWJ. NCJI' IIE USED N!, A FU. IW'ERW.. D. NO FROZEN OR nMM«. Mo\TERIM. SIMI.I. IIE USED N A FU. E. CIMDil FLL 1M1ERML SIMI.I. CCNilST OF ON-SITE EXOWIJED SOLS FREE Of ORCW1C Nm DB.El'EIIOUS 11m1W,1,. AND OF suat SIZE NI> ~ DW' 1HE ~ CCUAICIION CHI IIE IBDI.Y .vrMED. ff ID5M£ r, cotAtON FU. IMIERW.. AT H TIE OF PUICDEff SIW..l. BE lffllN A MIG£ OF ONE PERCENT N1ICNE. TD 1WO PERC8fl' BELOW 11£ OPIIIUM MOISIUR£ CONl11lr FOR COlilPACIION. F. GMIEl. BORROW! PER SECIION 8-03.14(1) OF WSDOT. CONSTJIJC1ION NOISE NOTES 1. FOR Hl. C011E1CW., lll.JH"Ala.Y. AND ta SINQl.£_,,....Y HOllfS. CONS1RUCflDN-RE NOISE IS Ml.OWED 7 M 10 e PIii ON WEE1C1MYS NIJ I All 1tl e PIii ON SAJLRDA-.S • NO IEMJIES stW..L 8E sct£DUUD Pmt lO 7:00 Ml OR """ .... PU. 2. CONS1RUCflDN-RE NOISE IS NOi' ALlDIED OUISllE OF A1.1D1N1LE H0LRS. LEGH. HOLIDNl"S, QR - MOFI IZA 1ION/STOCKPI..E MEA N01E11 G. snu:nNL n.l. !IWJ. BE NOtf-CIRIWa: 90II., ACCEPrAi1..E 10 11£ OIIEl"S REPRESENrAIM. RACED N IMXIIUII ....cH LOOSE I.E1S. 'MDI DCM LFT IDIG ODIIPIICl'!D 10 "1 WSf tl5S Of 11£ IIIDHD PROCRR IMDUI DENSffY USINO ASlltD 1557. SIRUCllM. FI.L swt.L IE Pl.ACS) AND COW¥CJED .... 2S OF lHE DPml.a IIIISJlllE CONIENI'. 1D.OOIRCIIQIO RElllHD COIF#ICl1CN: CCIIPAC1' Fl.LS AND !1aCFW 10 ff Rll.UMtQ; .._... RDA1NE OllilW.ffM (PERCINl1GE OF liWllllll DRY DEIIIIY DElau& IN ACCOIIW«:E: 'MDI ASIII D15157). l.lllll1ml UIIJIV 1RENCIB LNJER IMUCS AND P#NIC: _,......, Pl.lflJWG AND UM:ISCN'E l«£AS: emu, ... 11.FELD GUMJ1Y CONJROL: BEPHPtNI. ... ... ... A Tt£ OINEltS TESIIG NBICt stW.L PERR1R11 1BflG. 11£ OWNER'S 1tS'IIG IS MY 10 \'fJIFY CDRIRIWI:[ wmt 11£ PROJECT PUNS. 1l£ ClOtllMCroR IS RESPONSII.£ RJR ODNFRaG THAT 11£ WORK lilE£rS 1l£ fEMEEfJS OF' THE SP!DFlCA1IOH$ WIJ 1l£ CIIY OF RENTON. GENERAL NOTES 1 8Wl'l'8 PLAN N01EII 1. NO IWARDOUS llQUI) PftClllUCIS. INCUaN8 IIUJ NOi' LlmD lO PEIROlElll PRODUC1S. RE.. SDlVENTS. 1EERE11S. PAINT, PE5ll:llES. CONCRETE AD111CR1U AND FCRf C11..S Stw.1 IE SIOIIED ON-SIJE: wmtCIUT PIIOR N'PIUIW.. F REQlUlm. 1HE CCINIR'CltlR stW..l. PRCMO£ FOR SPI.L COlffMIENT N IICCCJRIWa WIIH KING COUNTY Nm art OF RENl'ON RmURDIENIS. cotmMCl'OR Stw.1 PRCMlE A LIST OF 1HE TYPES NG SIZES Of llQtlDS 11"1' Ill. IIE SIORED/IWD.m ON SITE. CONllw:TOR II.I. M..SO SHOW 11£ PIIDFOSED LOCATION FOR S10lwiE ON A PRDJECr Sl'IE PlNil MID WI.L PROYllE A PROPOSED IIETHOD (JF SECOIDR't CCIIIMIOT. 11£ DINER'S REPRE'SENl'AJM: NI> KltG COUNn' SW.1 ... NI) APPRCM: 1l£ PlNil Plat 1tl Sl'OMQE. 2. CCINSIRUCllON 11\SJE SIWL IIE PRIOIPII.Y 1EKMD FROM 1HE SffE AND S1WL NOT BE S10aCPlfD. 1. Mt EXCAWOm IMJBIW. REM<MD FROM TI£ C0NSTRUCnoN SITE MD DEPOSIIID ON :S. NO SJ1l1IOIWff RIEL TNICS S1W.L BE M.UMED. = ~ ~~ ~~ ~: ~ ~ 4. FllElJNO OF CONSTIIJC1KIN ErMPIDT stW..L. BE 8 A IIOIIILE f\El. 1RUCK AND SM!. BE t A S11E a.EMIG MD SJRPPtfGI OF ORQfflC TOPSOIL FOR HJ. AREAS 1t1 RECENE ·llmJiUL IIJSI' IIE APP1KMD B'f TI£ art INSPECTOR AT lDSI' 24 HC11R N MNNtCE. 14..LOWED MY N PMD NIEJ& CONIIViCRIR stW..l.. PROWlE A PIM FOR FlE.JG Hf£A • S111JCR1W.. RL PM1EffS. OR FOJNDfflJNS. OF Nit IJC.UIIIB. SPU. CONWNMENI' lO TI£ aao'S REPRDEJfTIJNE MD CflY OF RENT'ON WITH A O 8 N01EII FW:POSeD IIIEIHOO Of SEllOIIMr CONTMGENT. H OWNER'S AEPRESENrA1M Nil art ! &. rur SlCft'S MR AXR FEEr 11Gt1. ii EL I SAW l«l Of 11:NJON. stW..L. Rf.YD ,,., AfllRC1t'E THE Pl.AN PRIOR m n.&Hl. AU. SPUS. ODNTMIENT, N ClFM UP SKtU. IE 1HE CONRtlCIOR'S RESPONSIBIJ1Y #I> /liT D1E1it C. BEJDINO FOR FU. 10 IIE PLM:ED ON SUJPIS. 1. ~~~~~~ IIGHT'-oF-wAY WID DIU' CMN EXPENSE. l D. NSPe::110N Of PROPOSED IFORI' RL 1MJER1A1... PRIOR 1t1 PUaMENT. S. FUEi.JiG OF aJIBIRUCIIDN EQlRENT stW..L ONLY EIE ALLOWED DtRG Di\YUliHT HClR. f 8. ff CONJRitCIOR stW..L. RDICJUE FROM H sm: Hl. EQll'NElfT 'THAT RE1UES I & ='1~~~-=-or............... DUST UPIEBSION :=.:."\'i.:-=.=.:i_~../:' :0~...:!.m~ I F. SU1Ci1tADES FOR RETANNO W.U.S, fOUNlWlJNS, N1J: FOR 11£ MSE OF 1. DUSr FROM a.£MN;, QWN, AND OHR OONSrRUC110N 1C1M1ES StW.L BE ~~~~~~~5Wl.~Of' l ROC1E1ES. t.aalZED Kl AU. 1IIIES. PRl[MJIE A PUN TD 11£ OWNER'S REPll£SENFATrt£ AND art Of RBfRJN RIR H C. NS11L1.A110N fl SUBSURFACE DRMWlE F.aJlD. 2. IF£RWlUS SURf'ACES ON ell !EAR 11£ CONSIRUC1ION Na StW..L E SWEPJ, ~ ~ ::i. 0:::-.4: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-VICUUMED. OR cmERWISE INflMIED 1tl SUPPAESS DUSr EJfflWNiEIT. H. UIIJIV TRENCH E1E1DNG MD 9'CICFI.I., 1D.UD1G OBSEJNQICIN r, PROPER IMlflBWtCE. 1 M01S1URE CCNIENI', LFT 111C1NSS, NI) ..._... COUPN::r1JM. :S. Nit DUSJ 5'FPRESSMfl'S USED stWJ. E N'f'IIICMD BY 11£ DIERIR.. 7. TRUCK MHlJr SHtU NOi' BE Ill.OWED ON S11E. Tl£ CONnW:RJR SIMI.I. PRCM:JE PEIROCtEICiM.. DUST SUH-hESSWS NE. PROtlllJED. wmRlm 1l£ SIIE 10 111UCK MHlJr OfT-SffE AT M Nlf'IIMD MD l.mtl. lOCA1ION. I L UllJIIES ON ..,_ a~ ..,. ......,. -....,,,.. _..,., a,-SlFPRESS DUST IS Al.SD PROHIITED UNLESS 11 CHI BE DONE II A •Y 1KtJ S. .. ,_.. ---.... .........c. ............, -, """ ---_.. ICEDIS SEDMENr <JJr OF' Tl£ PUBLIC CIWN,t,GE 5"SD. 8. OCiNlRtiCltJR SIWJ. PR£M>E 10 11£ OWNER'S REf'IIESENllllr NI) art OF R£NRlN 11£ I SWII..RA1ION. LDC\JION OF SPlL RESPONSE lMJERWS. CON1MC10R W1L ALSO 1DEN1Fr D1SPOS1i. J. Mt IJNUQW. SEDW:£. SUH. OR SIJBGIW)[ cotamti1 It$ IEJEATED 11 1l£ IEIIJDS FOR ~1ED WMIER MD SOL lf1Bt A SPI..L I 0E0mNCAL REPORI' ell IIISCCMRED IN TI£ FELD. I. Tl£ CONJRitCIOR stW..L. PIQ'IIE A REJIORT 10 Tl£ OWNER'S REPRESENWNE AND art 4. "11HE Ell> Of' COISTRUCIION. TI£ GEOlmllCIL ENGINEER SM!. wr A FN1.. :x="~~~~~~ ! SUUIM't l.£T1ER ~ 1KtJ ClllrM. srAGES OF CONSlRUClllf HAW: BEEN PERSC11NEL I NSPECIED AND ME. 1\1 cctRRWa: WITH GEDrmtNDL REPORr. 10.lHE CON1R1CR1R stW..L. PIIOWIE A D£!ICRPnON OF Tl£ fROCErUU" 10 IE USED II WIJIIIORIIQ 11£ PClWIIION PR£\9l'IICIN 1111'$ NG RESPOtlJIIQ 10 A IIF TKflT NEEDS I ,.,,,._ IIICUllllO RECOIIII-. ! 11.lHE cmmw:mR SIW..L PflCPtU A IIEPCln' 10 Tl£ OINER'S REPRESENl'A1l't NI> CflY NOT USED 4 QITY OF FENTON 1B:IC N01EII t. EIEFtlRE N« CONSIRUC1ION OR DMI..OPIENJ' IICIMIY OCCUR$,, A PftECONSIRUC1IO 1E1Ni MUST E 1-E..D WITH 1HE mY Of RENit1N, PlBJC WORKS DESIGN EMG1EER. 2. Hl. UllS OF Cl..fN9tG AND AREAS OF VEGETAlJON ~ l'5 PRESCRIIED ON ~ stw.L EE a.ENI.Y FtAGGED II THE FELD NI) OBSBMD DtRG 3. Hl. AEDIAAED SEmlEHt\TION/ER ODNIRll. FaJIES 111ST IIE CCINSIRUCJa> NI> N OPERAlDI PRIOR lO lNIJ aDIIIC AND/OR CONSJRUCnON 10 EN!QIE TMT SEllllENT LM:al ~ DOES NOT ENIER TI£ NAJ1NL DRMW1E S'l'S1EM.. Hl. EROSION AND SEDIENI' F/tCIJID stW..L BE liN«MB IN A S'11SF'ACl'ORY cotallON UNIL !llCH 1IIIE 11W' Q.ENill\lQ ,_/OR CCNmaJCOON IS COIIUIE AND POTBIJW... FOR ON-STE IROSllN IMS PI\SSED. 11£ llilPl.aENrA1IO wtffEtMCt. REf'l/allENT ,_, MIDlilJNS 10 ~ CONiRCl. S'l'S1'EMS stW..L E 1HE RESPON9IIIJIY OF 11£ -4. 1tE EROSION AND SEIIIMENTA1llN CONIROL SYSTEMS DEl'IC1ED ON lHIS D11tai1G MF. lflEllfD 1D BE ...... RB:MIRDIENTS 10 MEEI' NfflCPATED SJTE COIIJIIIONS. AS ODIISJRIJCIIDN PROOR£SSES MO UNEJCP£CIB) ell SEASCIW.. aJflJfflONS OK:rATE. TI£ P£RIIIEE stW..L Nft:IPATE THi\T YORE EROSION AND SEDM:NTA1ION CON1R01... Fla..fflES 'AL BE NECESSMY 10 ENSURE COIIUiE SI.D.'IDI CONIROl ON lHE PROPOSED SJTE. DI.IRI\IO 11£ COI.R5E OF CONSTIIJC1ION,, 11 SIW.L IIE 11£ 08I.JGQION MD IIESPONSIIIIJJY OF' 1l£ P£RlmE lO ADORE5S Nlf ID cotllfflONS THAT 1MY BE aaJED f1t ff ACIMnES AND 10 FWMlE MIOfflCIW.. FN:IJIIES. CM11 AND NJlN£. ....._.. RE.tlUIEIENTS, l'5 Mo\Y IE l&IIED. lO PROTECT IOMCENI' PROPERIES NI) IM.1ER QI.WJiY Of lHE RECDIIG llWfflGE S'tSIDL 5.. ll'PROYM. Of lHIS PIJfl IS FOR EROSION/SEmlENr CONJRCl. CN.Y. rr DOES NOi' CONSi1ME Nf N"PRO¥AL OF Si'ORII mNIAGE 0EStGN. SIZE NOR LOC\TICII or PftS, RESIIICIORS, QWNlS, (II AEJEHnoN FACIIJIES. e, DURIG Tl£ TIE PERIOD Of OCl'CIBER 1ST 'DflOUQH N'RIL JalH,. M.L. PRO.ECr DISllllllll'ED SOL MEJ5 GRE'A1ER nW4 5,.000 SQUME FEEr, 1KU lf1£. 10 EE LEFT llf-MIIKED FOR IIOR[ nw. 12 HOURS,. SIW.L EE CIMRED 8t IMJ:H, SOIIJIG OR PIAS!lCCOIIBIIIO. 7. II Nit NIEA MICH HMS EEEN SIRflPED Of' 'tSETAllON ,,,., WHE1E NO F1lffl:D WORK IS ANll:IPATED RlR A PERIOD :,0 M'S OR MOR£. M.L Dl5I\IR8fD RJ5 111ST BE IIIEMlB.Y SIABIJZ[D WIIH MU..C1111J. CRASS FWfilf; OR ODER APPIIMD EROSION CONIROt... 1R£A1IEfl' APPI.IC'8..E 10 THE TIE Of YFJiR. GRASS SEEIJlm AUN: ftL IE ACCEPTAII.E ON.Y DURltG 1HE MONiHS Of N'RIL THROur.tl SEPID&R. NlJJStL SEimG 1MY PROCEED. HQWEWR. IIENE\Ut 11 IS N 1HE lfflRESI' OF THE PERMffEE,. aur IIUST Bl! MIGMENTED WliH MUl..altG, 1£11116 OR ano 1RfAnlENT NftCNm BY lHE alY OF RENn:1H. OUlSIE Tl£ SPECFED llE PERIOD. CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES. WEAVER ARCHITECTS. INC. 1411 FOURTH AVENUE. SUITE BIO SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 P. 206.262.9~22 f. 206.262.9507 ,,.,._., _ __.,...._cJD'l4 I Sv,te42(1 L ml ,uw""'"'" Seattle, WA 9810<! p. 206.725.1211 f.206.973.5344 engineering pile--~ .. ;-·,,- ll'J: rna SWENSON SAY FACET A STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION :1.:"~"mr -~ 1f,. ...... ~ WA 18121 ,,__..,_,_-""" No. 1 ...... Dnoriptic,n ~. -l __________ _ <C-------~ ~ Drawn by: JLC R....t•--' k~ t >D ~ Pro/ec1 No: 06071-2015-01 co => U) TESC NOTES I-1 or RlNltlN 1DEN1FWG Tl£ PERSONE. RESPONS11..E RJR SPlL PR£YENnON. NC1.UDNO COlffACI' INFClfllM1ION,. NI) a.DA.Y I.BING Tl£ IEiPONSIIIJIES Of 1HESE PERSCHEL .'.2: t 12.11£ CONIIIIIC10R SWt.L M..SO PIKMIE A IIOCRPIION Of TIE PR0CmJRES 10 E 0:::: ffl t::t, 11 24·,. w. &ooll -=tt 1 -I USED N IICNTORIG 1tE SPI.L PREEfl10N EIFS NI> RE'SPOtl)IIQ 10 A SPI.L NCIIENT, ....................... 1 GRADING NOTES 5 CONSTRUCTION NOTES 6 SWPPS NOTES 7 CITY OF RENTON TESC NOTES 8 ~ C1 .2 .,._ _____________________ _. ______________________ .J.. ______________________ ,1.. _____________________ ....J 1 fi1 --~~0 1 -~ i ~~"11 ' I .iumtm'll:l'i'TBER.tm,h,ca1 ,i,.?Xfo ;r 1.r M£ 2 CATCH 9'SII' RJll.2J.M £8H.I» !J' IDP(II) c~ra·!#JP(N} £-2(}.(/ 18" HOP($) ! . ... ,- 1 ,.,,,,,,,,,., " t 1-- I r l • Lj l"""" I I I , I • 1 I l I . I 8 I \I "}", i. \ j l\ ~ . 1 I / l ~,~Gi'· ll M ) I -f--~ ~ I I /t __ _ ,r·1f " iw<'J> "'f'-, IN I ,u,s, ~ ~ ,. I " I I I-"· " f t ~-~ I I I +Al I 7':}JL ~ I I I I 4· < ! ;1 • "',or "''"°'ss ctJNq?[TF "·. """"' /, • •. • ~ ... 2&00 E 22.10 !12" Q Ill E 23.00 6° S) IN E 23.00 4° S) IN E 23.00 4• SW) IN E 22.10 12" W) 00T / NrmNM_ nTrsl!'TT.ll<"ar" .,.._..-. fflCni'D ~--~ (840 Cf ""· ... '81 PR<MJED) WQ stff"ACE 24.50 TOP OF SEDIIEHJ Sl'ORAGE 18.50 FP ll'I> ~186 Lf 4" FOOTII Ii!.> """' (\\'P) RII 21.80 'EY E neo ta 11' r ROOF' 01.0X YN. --ROClf ..... - WIOT lfHfJJOfl5 "'""" 1. 'ii !, : r: •' I i 1'/(/4( I ll#IJl/1J21S to 0 ~ 10 "' I -·-·---- ~-- Scale 1'-10' I...EOEN) PROP£R1Y LIE ..,.. -Jo --EX CONT'OUR ON>EX) _,.--2s----EX CONTOUR --»-_ PROPOSED CONJOUR (NlEIO ---»---PROPOSE> CONTOUR m...._ . SPOT ElEVATKlN ---.._ """" EXIS1\IIO GRADE lltf-.... mp .. CU08/PA\9IENT .......__ EXISTING GROINl {FOR REFE!ENCE) FP :MO FNSHED fUXJR ELEVATION /f/f/r/J EXBUUIIIO 'll(W«Wa PROPOSED IU..DINQ b ' . ·· j CONCREIE PAVEMENT k-f <--) '....:] PERNWI.E PAV£RS t~ )~~-•~1 ASPtW.T (}/;) PAVEMENT ®\.~SI =&¥"' ASAW.T (AC) (i) SITE WN.I. YER\IGII. CURB CURB AND GUTTER CATCH BASIN TYPE 2 L-!-CATCH BASIN TYPE 1 """"'""""""'-FOOTIG.,l'SUISllFACE DRMI """"' -ClEAHOUT ~~ =:: .... --------SEWER CWNOUT :-----._..,. SEWER CONNECTION t==FIIE Hl1lRANT """' FIT1\NOS WA'reR SEMCE I.Jr4ES / EARTHWOII( ClUANTTTB3= MIA OF WORIC 21.flOO SF sr111PPN& 243 er (laLIJES 1r EX IM.1INlil • Pi1 a,, ,r EX MINJ • M er, ..., ,r EX UHllSCAPNil e 12 C'r) am «111 c, n.l.J 704 r:, (N:U.IIE3 ........ sa:nt'ffS #1) -EMIIMORIC QWMIID IIE RIR PEllffllC OIIY'. CONIRflCRlR SIW.l. NIEPfJIJElffl.Y 'tOfY PWt QWtfflJEI RIR -""' CIINIIUfflCH. CallW~Den ~~-·---·- A CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES. WEAVE;, A;,CHIHCTS. INC. 1411 FOURfH AVENUE, SUITE e10 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 1'8101 P. 206.262.9622 F. 206.262.9507 M..,,......alnflllocld~llghll-c:ID14 I m m """'~"· SLite42D se~ttle, WA 98104 ~-206Jl5.1211 f. 205.973.5:wt engineeling pile"""'"";,..•·= ~ ,,. SWcNSON SAY FAGcT ~ STRUCTURAi.. ENctNEERINC CCfif>ORATIOH ~·~"m'f-~,~~WA 11121 ........... ~.am Na. li!loue Dllocription - _J, _________ _ j:5~------ 1--°"'""' t,y. JLC ~ by: UP ~ Proj,,cl NC>: Dfl071-2015-(11 m ::::, Cf) GRADING AND I-DRAINAGE ~eit::::::,•~·,s.--==·- ~ C2.0 :: : : : 1:: .. :::.: 1::·· ,. 1:· 1:· ••••••••• : !!, .... :,:.: ·~·· ::i:.:~:: i ' I .. /' ········~ ... .. e.i. .... ~8 ... . ' ~~ ... . ~: .. . ·:::c:· ::::<?: : ;;.iii: :iJ. :vv·132:: 03: :;.I·6z: ::.,;i: :sni: 03: :~-a·:::.,·: :sni: 03: ·s,;:·or· o:r c:s·sc:. 03 :~1hil'. b": :g,;·Ez::03: :So·Dr:o:i: :v9·ec:: 03: : "{"i)t: b.J: ;99·,i;:::03: :~ ·-~ . b": ?~·e;,;: ~'?: ' ,, ' -g ~~ ~* ' a ' 1· J, 1. ,. ' ti ' . 0 .. ,,.,I~···.·.· . ,:: 1 ·:1 I -·--···--:.,i ii I U.~ ! ~ ' ' ' 0 z <( ,I ii! 11·· ., • 1!1 N t ~ I l • ----P••• .1.u••.a11au --= ~-~ . )·~· =:==--=-.:=... -_,...,...,, -....,·--------- ----- I. ===""F-....::,1:-=?..s:::.;; .. __ .. ____ ,,_ ..... ...__,,,. ==:-~ ___ ..,. .. _ ..... .......... _ t. ,... ___ ,,., .. __ 'IV -- -·--.. r-tolE--•U" =-==-~==~ :L ,.. ___ ... __ .,,,.._,.,._ __ ,._ . ...... --.----......... -. ---,. ,.. ____________ _ llo ....... ll•-ol1'41fm._ ..... _.,. ____ ... __ ... __ _ 1 ..... ,..... __ .. .,....u_._ ___ .....,i IL=--:::::-""•.,-•-- ,._ ____ __ COR STD PlAN 200.00 -CB TYPE i 1 -·-Ii ,o;;;:".,ji!/' L lei ... -• -=--•....,....lO-"llr•;t<"~m I .. l ti) l ~---..... --.. -.,"'O""'-l :r.r:;"!'"::..1:..i-=.=-.._ .. _____ _ - ·-.. -__, ...... ,"121 ... _ -· --------..... -~~.=r~ ................... _.,. --· 2·~. ~r.i·.< ~ "'<!::,~-11 ., ·. . Ii. . . ' ..... -==::. ----. ~~-~-=- CAHN &UIII •t-.. 11• -=----1-1----1-= -·--------1-.- .... ~ No ... _ ...... _....,.,, .. -. . __ ., ... ____ .. _,,_-. , ----------a..-___ .. __ .... __ _ L---·--d:ll'-.. .. ~,--a1.r--==:-... ---... --.... -=-:_,. .... _ .... ...,..._ .. __ _ - " ::-+-~=·-· ~ ·~-_ ,_ ""'-"' ""'I ... I w .. ------..-· .. -·-·---~!).OU. i=E'5" ___ ,__,,.,.. "' COR STD PLAN 201.00 -CB TYPE 2 - ()','? ,,-/'-_7 I"',~,~~ ~;-;:. ~~~·~,~~-- ( ///,0· \'~~:;~ t~~~l '/W0 ~~~~ ~/i'i.0 l',\.~~ ... --- . -11111<1-in .. gi.-... _........,...,... ...... _ ..... _ --------. -.. --...-..-0$.,!IP:llot-- 2 • --~-,.. -----~ ---~--. ~--· ·----... ----i. - ----COUEAOR_,_a,i,e.m,, _ __,__ '°'BROUm>mFIMI.-UiffLTI.ffr-_lHW.nn.tJl11<f.-, (llllffl:t!IITQI.ORllhEWMJCll_ff .. TOlllPUt:SJ .... IIEl'llffl-.OUlQ.!'E,_,,.f!IBIEH'JEIII0"'"'81irt tM;~1QQllllJTll"-Aa11~--Jr-~TJ:;"111r-ffU _......._""1f .. UliElfflllU-fflQfl.UlE._...,.a, __ _ ~ttlNlllUOU&txrEROF~SIWJ.IIEfl.ACB)IIEnlllll~-.c!IIM«J8'11:XSl'Mlllll)~. ~=~~f:.,~~~~~~---lilil,l!UtlllUU.llilfllt.THITl!ll/T _...;1'l'PIE<RltffJ,El:ff'8'1Mf~~.um.,t5)f'EA-ST-~Tatf.llUFOR -·---3'1119'10TI1Slilil!.11Ej/llll-ATTMl'PER_GT _ COR STD PLAN 202.00. CB INSTALLATION 3 r ___ , . .,,._. __ _. ......... -....... ··------r:~ rt1Ji~ L___:J_ ,;:.. L ~ ~ - --- CITY OF 11:NTON DRANAOE NOTES ,. ~ 1 ~ ~ ... 7. .. BEFORE Nit CONSJRlJCTXIH OR DEVEUIPIIDIT ICIMIY 00CURS. A PR£CCNSTRUCIIOH MEEIIG MUST BE HELD WITH 'THE Cffl OF RENTON ~ R£VIEWER. ALL cacsTRUCIION SHAU. BE ~ ACCORDNtCE WITH THE 2012 STNO.RD SPECIFICAllJNS FOR ~. EIRllGE NCI MUtlCPAL CONSTRUCTION PR£PMED Eh' WSOOT N«J 'THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WORICS ASSOaAlklN (APWA), ,S AMDUD EJ'f THE Cm' OF ROff'ON PUeUC WORkS DEPNmlENT. THE SIM"ACE WATER DRtHGE S'l'SIDt SIW.L BE C06TRUCTED ACCORDIIG 10 1HE APPRCMD Pl.ANS. WHIQi ME ON Fl£ ti THE PUBLIC WORKS DOWmENT. N« DEWilJJN FROM THE N'f'ftCMD Pl.MS Wl.L REOIH WlmEN ff'PfllNN. FROM TI£ CfTY OF RENroN P\IIUC WORKS DEPARJMENT, SWFACE WAmt UTIUTY SECTION. A COPY OF THESE APPIIOVED Pl/NS MUST EIE ON TitE JOB SIT[ Wl£NEVER C0NSTRUCTKJN IS IN PROGflESS. 111\TIM FOR VERJl:H. OON1ROL stWJ. BE NORTH MIERICAN VER1lCAI. MlUM 1988 MEJERS. NIJ FOR HORIZONTH. CQrfTROL SlWJ. BE NCfiJH AMERICAN Dt.l\llil 1983/1991 MEIERS IK.£SS CJTHERWISE N'f'RO'iED, BY TitE CITY OF RENTON PllllJC WOftKS DEPNmlENT, REJEREJ«:E BENCtWRK NI> ELEVATIONS ME N01ED ON 1t£ PI.NCS. AU. ~TJJN/EROSION FN1JTES MUST BE IN OPERAOON PRIOR TO CIEMING NI> BUI.DltG CONSIRUCnDN, Nffl 1l£'f 11.JST BE ~TISFACIORILY WJNTNNED UNJL COHSJRUCOON IS COIIIPlETED NI) TitE POJDl1W.. FOR ON-SIT[ EROSION 1-M PASSED. AU. REl'ENTION/DETE FH:lJllES 11.JST BE INSTM.LED N«J IN OPDII\TION PRIOR 10 OR IN CONJIMCIJJN wmt ALL CONSJRIJCOON 1CIMTY UNlESS OJHERWISE ~ B'f THE P\.aJC WORKS DEPNmENT, SURFICE WATER UTI.JIY SECOON. GRASS SEED !MY 8E ff'PI..ED BY Hl'ORCl5EEDNG. 1t£ GRASS SEED MIXTURE, OlllER 1IWI CfTY Of RENTON APPROVED STANlMD ll)(ES, stW.L BE SIJBYTTED B'f A LNl>SC,tE'E ARCtlTECT No!D APPROYED B'f THE PUii.JC WORKS DEPNmlENT, SURF/CE WAlER UTIUTY """"'- 9. AU. PIPE Nil> N'Pl.fflEJWfCES stW.L 8E lAI> ON A PROPERLY PREPARED FOUHDit.TION IN ACOORCWK:E WITH SECOON 7-02.3(1) OF Tl£ CURRENT STATE OF WASHN:.roN Sl"ANllMD SPECFD.1D4 FOR ROH> NI> ll!IJGE OONSIRUCTION. lltS stW..l N:l.UDE NEtE5S,f,R'1' LEVBJNG Of Tl£ TRENCH earrt>M OR 11£ TOP OF THE FOI.JDJ10N MI\TERW,, /IS WEll. ~ PI.ACDIDfT HI) COMPIICOON OF RBlJRED 8EDDNG IM'TERW.., TO utlft:RM GRADE SO TWJ THE ENTRE LENG1H OF THE Pl'E WU. BE SUPPORTED ON A IJHIFORI.I...Y DENSE. llN'IE.OOG BASE. ALL PIPE 8EilOIIG stW..l BE N'WA a.ASS "C", WITH Tl£ DCEPTIOff OF ~ Pl'E. ALL TRENCH BICl(fl.L 51-W.L BE COMPACTm TO Mt4NUM 95X FOR PAVEMENT AND STRLJCI\IIW. FIL MD iOX OIHERWlSE PER AS1M 0-15'7-70. PEA GRAVEL EIEDOING SH.1U BE 6 lfrD£S OYER Nil UM>ER PYC PIPE. 10. G,+,l.YAHIZEO Sim. Pl'E N-10 Al.llMNZED S1m. PFE FOR AIJ. DIWM\GE FACIJTES SHALL IMVE ASPHALT TR£AlMENT fl OR l£JlER INSIDE Nil OVTSEE. 11. Sl'RUCTIJA£S SIW.L NOT BE PERWITED WIT1IN 10 FEET OF THE SPRING LINE OF N« STORII DRAW« PIPE,. OR 15 FEET FROM lllE TOP OF N« CH,t,NNa EW41C. 12. AIJ. CATCH BASIN QR4.TES SW.U. BE DEPRESSED 0.10 FEET BELDl'I PAVEMENT LEVEL 13. OP£N CUT RC»,[) CROSSINGS TlmJGH EXIST1NQ PUBLIC RQ{J OF WAY WLL NOT BE M..LOWm utl.ESS SPECFICHJ.Y APPRO¥ED S'f CITY Of REMTON PI.NNNG/llUII.DltG/PUBUC WORKS AIHNISTRATOR. 1•. ROCK FOR: EROSION PROTtC'TION OF RQIIOSIDE DITCHES, WHERE REQUIRED, SHALL BE Of SOUND QUARR'I' ROCK PlJCED TO A DEPlH OF ONE (1) FOOT ANO MUST MEET THE FOLlOWING SPECIFlCATIONS: • -8 INCH ROC1C / 40 -7(!J(. PASSING; 2 -• INCH ROC1C / 30 -,4o,r; PASSING; ANO LESS rnAN 2 INCH ROCK / 10 - io,:: PASSING. 15. All BUILDNG OClWNSPOVTS AHO FOOTII«. ORAl(S SHALL BE COHNEClED TO THE STORM DINWlE SYSIEM, I.H.ESS APPROYED IJ'f lHE CITY PUH REVIEWER OR SURFACE MTER UTIJTY SECl10N. AN IGCI.R\TaY CMNSIONEO, tumfEI AS-BUILT DRAWING OF ntS ORAIW.ilE S1'SlDI WU BE St.alTTED TO TI£ CITY l.f'ON COMF\.EJDl 16. 1SS1.WU OF TiiE BUlDING OR O'JNS1RUCTION PERMITS IJ'f THE CITI' OF RENTON DOES NOT RD.D£ Tl-£ OWNER OF TI£ CONIHJING lEGM. 0£UGATION AND/OR LW31UTY COflilECTED WITH STORM SIAIFH:E 'IP.TER DISPOSfTJON. FURTttER. 1HE CfTY OF RENTON DOES NJT .ciccEPT Nff OEllD.1ION Fat Tl£ PROPER AMCJJONH. Atl> IWfIDWa Of THE S'l'SIEN PROYl>ED DURING CONSTRUCOON. 17. THE CONTPICRlR stW..l BE RESf'ONSIBl.E FOR PRO'mlNG ADEQUATE SAFEGI..WID, S'lETY DEVICES. PfiOJ(CJJY[ EQUIPMENT, FUa.ERS, AND Nff OTHER NEEDED M:110NS TO PROTECT Tl-£ L.FE, HfAI...TH. AND WETY OF 1t£ PUii.JC, No!D TO PROT[C'f PROPERJY IN cotlECl10N WITH 1l£ PERf'ORIMNCE OF WORK CO\IERED EJ'f THE cotnRACT. N« WORK Wl'THIN THE TRAVELED RIGHT OF WAY THAT !MY INTERRUPT NORMAi. TIWF1C FLOW SI-W.L R[QURE A TIWFJC C0NJR0L Pl.NI N>PROYE EJY 11£ PU3UC WORKS DEPARTMENT, TRANSPOm'ATJJN SYSTEMS DMSION. ALL SECTKINS Of lHE WSOOT STANOMO SPECR:AlllHS 1-07-23 1PNFIC CONIROL SIW.L APPLY. 18. SPECW. DRAlfl\GE MEASURES W1.L BE REQUIRED If Tl£ PROJECT LOC'ATION tS wm. TI£ AQUFER PROTECTION ""8 (APA), A CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES • WEAVER ARCHITECTS. INC. 1411 FOURTH AVENUE. SUITE B\0 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 P. 206.262.9622 F. 206.262.9507 ................ -~~--G21J14 L m 11 >HW"'m'" Su~E 410 Seattle, WA 98104 p.206.725.1211 f. 206.973.5344 engineering pile·-·'"";""'•·= ~ f/ill sw:_:\ SG\J :_~:\ ,, _:-:\1~tT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION 212:4 11*-d It.._...• -Sulta 100 -S...tll .. Wit. 11111%1 pt,, :ZOS.443.1:lt2 1-20&.443.4870 ...... .... ~ ND. "'3ue D=ript,;Dn ~ .. il -e I::.-:::::.:::::.=.:::____ ~ I ----I I_J ..... ____ ... _____ ...... _ -------- -----------~ - ~ I lie=-;_. II 1- ~~~~ -------T-==- -1 : ·--I ~ ----.,,.. ~ _._ .... _..._.._.., ______ ..__ DIITAL ® NLT ..... NTAL _....._ ~ 'l Ct::?:te:::: -., ;,, z•·, 5ff"_ Sco1o ,nUII«, """"*'~ ~ ,-.1oc«1 ! COR STD PlAN 204.00. RECTANGULAR FRAME 5 COR STD PLAN 204.40. RECTANGULAR GRATE 6 COR STD PLAN 204.50. ROUND FRAME AND COVER 7 CITY OF RENTON DRAINAGE NOTES 8 ~ C2.2 . ..._ _______________ _._ _______________ ...._ _______________ ...... _______________ __. t § ! l t 1 l ! f 1 ! t 1 t O ._,._ r .... ""'~i r ' ~-:-.!= ii .. .-iT ~ ,Cb' I]-(.-' ~-~--0 . -.. '---R]i _:.L ' 71-b,_ 'IT ........... - --___ .,_ ---~·•·-··-iI[\ ~~·~· I H I "' -t.;:--. ----·-··---- ~ 1 ......... --~"=" ... '° I • I ~ ----~i "~ - Cl-------,011a .. ___ ,,__, __ .-,o, 1TW1m.-r .... o10.1211q"""'-.,P"'l:a.""'I'""""" ror~-- "' COR STD PIAN 204.60 -MISCELIANEOUS DRAINAGE DETAILS l II F CLEANOUT IS IN CONCRETE PAVED SURFACE, PRCMDE THICKENm EDGE ,t POUR CONCRETE IIONOUIHIC . T 1i· C6ST IRON COVER NID RING """'" ioc:o• FOR FOOTING DRAINS "SDco• FOR STORM LINES "SSCO" rOR SANITARY SEWER "' CLEAN-OUT TO GRADE 2 Fl.OCR N«J CN'I..LMY EIREN( ... STRIJCIUW. """"""' /; BUI.DING FCIO'J'NG • WAU. P£R """"""'-- DO NOT DISTURB FOOTfiG ~ ZONE WHEN INSTNJ..N6 FOOTING DRAIN "" FOOTING DRAIN 3 4 "' NOT USED A CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES . RENTON, WA9BOS_s ______ _ WEAVER ARCHITECTS. INC. 1411 FOUHH AVENUE. SUITE 810 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 P. 206.262.9622 F. 206.262.9507 ... ..-.. -~~-•2D14 gmm ,,,._,_, Suite ~20 ~ttle,Wll.9810<! p. 206.72S.l~U f. 206.97l.5344 engineering pile,_,..,,-,.- ~ ,. 5WLNS0h Si\'r .\I.:':~ A SffiUCTlJRAL ENGINEERING CORPORAllON ~Z4~4Q.~• -s..:, 1~:-~ WA -.... .._...yi..,.t."'"' Ne. l•3ue Doscriplion ~· Doto _J ________ _ ~------- 1--O....wn by: JLC R...,ieHd by: UP ~ Proje,ol No: 06071-2015-01 al => U) DRAINAGE DETAILS ~ ~9:'t::"h:::,;,u·,:se· Soo•tnt-:e:::::,z~mu,td !1 NOTUSED 5 ' I I I I NOTUSED 8 I~ C2.3 NOTUSED 6 NOTUSED 7 ~ • wwr ~ ""-:::. -. . . . • ' • Ly "'"""" ··'°'""'" .• : l : 11 / :U,r I .. -'. . i:: ,,..,,,, /. ELEV.~2875 ... · IHt-• < ~ u & . , .; ·-, DS1: . .,, ID "-I 7 •· mtCE !:!!!:'\. ' 1 JO"f/OW]J, 0 . ' AT IBREST .......... I 'I': l3 MICH DIGS ' . ·-I . -1 ..;;, . . · 11 ·-··1·-·-\I IW "I.. I . I .. IMIA.Tl/11/KHJ"l.!z --...!.J -1...,_ W -tt:lf !lJfH 4-NT/f Fil /,IJ!/>:[!)';{/1. Tiff 2 Cll!CII iJllSII -m c~xot111"IO'('I) £..JflJI /B"IO'(/¥) E~2C.II !6"HIJP(S) llff f 04/r:H- 1111-il:fil Jt"-Xlll IJ° !D'(1) 1 I I ! 1 I I \ t' I Ir I \' ~~ .J.i:r.: "! \ Ct) )~ ~~'8' . ;A •[ 1! g -°-l.-L. i· ... ·. 1~ [r~~ --·--""15Nt>RMS """""'"""' @l'EIIIEMIE • 4 20.87' - . -• I ,., J/11' IMIJOtmS ~ L ASl'IW.T """""" ffJI.£ EDGE TO EX ·-aRl ___ G-=-=- / l 1p I} I} 19 .. ------. -Scale T"'IO' LEGEN) -----"""""""LNE --.30 --EX CONRltll (lil>EX) ---2e ----EX CONIOUR --JO------PROPOSED CONl'OUR (INDEX) --2t---......__ ............. ltt--... .......... FF'80 PROPOSED CONl<llll """' El..lVA11DN Wln::H EJOSIINQ ~ TOP OF CURB/PAVEMENT EXlffllO GIIDUNll (FcR - FI\IISIED FLOOR EI.E.VA1ION / < < / < < /} EX EIIJII.DINQ ~««<<«««4 PROf'OSED IUJIINQ b: ,. . ·· ] IXltCRET'E PAYDIEKT [-"-J'..__:)1,_....:] WAa.E PAYERS ~~i,1--ASPIW.T "") Pll'IENENT f)1'z®¥M) ~ ASPIW.T "") @ ..,, :-!_ SITE '""1. 1IER1IC.<I. CURB CURB AND GUTTER CATCH ~ TYPE 2 CAn:H EIASl'il TYPE 1 .,_,.,...... .... --..... .,_ """" ClEN«>Ur ~ • :-=" .... ..... ~ SIDE SEWER ~ECTION J==FIIII: H\1lRANT WAlER FITTINGS WA1Bt SERVICE UNES Ms CLIENT· ATS AUTOMATION OlD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION WEAVER ARCHITECT$, INC . 1411 FOURTH AVENUE, SUITE 010 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 P. 206.262.9622 F. 206.262.9507 ,........., • .......,.l'Nl'"'1lr .... -c2D14 I m l ouw,.,m,., Surte ~20 Seat!Se, WA 98101 p. 206-725.1211 f,206.m.m4 engineering pile""·"""-'"'·°' ~ ra1 SWENSON SAY F AGtT A S1RUC1URAI. ENGINEERING CORPORATii;:t,1 ~24~44.3."fflr -~ 1~....= Wit. 11111%1 __ ............,..a,m No. laue Deecriptlon ~- i~-'r~-- 11" \ 1 IE 27 ... ~.:;..s: _J<(i----------- \ ..._.. Of 15 1ICRKING W UIT t ~ 111£ {)[J>Mll/Od a:rM"CrM'tS PRIOR TO IIW(IG lfHfJ/)(mS I--I cotlECIION I--Crown by. JLC R--I>)" LIP II --I IWI!(£!) ~ SIRIPIG~ ::a: Pn:,Jlld Na: Dfl071-201S-01 • e., CD f POIID """"' 8/JW/Kl ::) 1 • Cf) UTILITIES AND l ~ ex EliCIRICOI. CII 3 -~. Dan I-PAVING ......,._.,. -~--1 t11.· 8[ lNIWIED -: 1 ... 4 ..... O:. .. _.... ~Qrloh,le":711:z.l.",W.--=t:tr:W- < · • w C3 0 I ·-~__:.-r''ct?' 4-• ~ • ~ Q_ • I pm,l]/lt/$!J12 ----------- ~-----r" tlM. a.ASS 1/r ASPHH.T CONCREIE '-------~ ""'""" ........... PER WSDOT SB:IDI I-OU(>), COMPN:T TO B YAX DEll!iiW ..... 1. F EX MtM!NI' SECIION IS TI«ICER. IMltH EX SECTION. 01lDWISE CONSIRUCI' ...... - 2. SM'--M FULL DEPTH Wt£RE trer PMMENT AIMS EmlllQ NI) ll'Pt.Y TACK COloJ. :,. Pl.ACE ASPtW.T II ~ WITH WSDOT AN\ SEC11DN 5-04.. 4. PROOF ROil. NI> REM1M ltff SOFT SPOIS. REPlACE 11EM<MD IMfEIK. WITH GM\E.. BORROW. CONIRillCJOR SIW.L TESI' AND 't'ERfY SUBGIWJE IEEIS CCIPACIION IIEQUIRENENIS PRIOR TO PMt'NG. "' All'IW..T PA't'Bl:NT 1 ......... -.......... .....,_ - ..... ·EX UIIDl!mRIED PA\'EIENT --'"' CCll¥CTED TO ISi IMX. DEN5ffY PER A.!111 D1551 ~-----·· .. a.a 1/r ASPIW.T cat«Jl:ETE """""' ~-------r CRUSHED stllF1iCll9 MSE COLRSE PER WSDOT SECIION ~-,.- 1. F EX PIWDENT se:mN IS 'ltCICER, tMTat EX SEC1ION. 01IGlWISf. OONSrRUCI' SEOIION """"- 2. SM-CUT Rl..L DEPTH 'lt£RE NEW PAmEfJ' A8Ul'S EXISIIG AND APPlY TACK 00\1'. 3. PUCE ASPtWJ' IN ACCORIWICE WITH WSOOT ,,,.,._ SECTION 5--04. 4.. PROOF ROLL NI) REIICM:: Mt SOFT SPOtS. REf'lM:E RfllCMD IM1tRW. wmt GR#tU. BORROW. OONlRIICJ'CIR S1W.1 TESI' NCD \fRl'Y SlllGIWE MEE1S OCIIIPICIION REGIJIIEIENTS PRIOR 11) MNJ. IEAVY llU1Y All'IW..T PAVBB« 2 I I I AD,\ Sl'H..L AIDll.OCKOUT SIIRtQ 5 l«>TllED 6 Dlllff JOlfT • 20' o.c. 3/ll'x tJr PRDD..DED can l"5TK. J011T ~ JDlfl' 0 CONfJWmlrS """' : . :•.• ::, ·"'· ..... ---n. .......... -I, ....... cot«iRETE JODO P.5.L (S 1/2 w:ic). 1. PU« lOOl JDlffS e 5' o.c. 3. F 1W.K IS <MR 7' WEE. P1M:E LOl«mDW.. IUllt' JON ND¥; CENTER rE WALK. 4. MERE REPtACND EJIISIIG WAI.JC,. srMT PD' MJC KI EXIS'IIG JOlfT. II\TCJI ECISTH; SCORIG PATTERN • CCNCIIETE FDEH. l • ..i 12: I MAX SI.DPE 3' -o• l,IJN WllTit cw -JOINT .............. j ===:::::::::::: cw CONC"""""-a.oo cot«:IEIE WIU. 3 CONC -,. 'i!il CONC TIWFIC CUii! !fiiIDI B--ft ca«:IEIE PM 7 lfl!I PPS[ MUES; t. MEW. POSIS SfWJ. 8E 1ElfSPM QUICK Nl:H POS1'. 2. RIR IHIDMJC INSTMJ.RIIE,, aJRE 4• IIWt. HCU. ANCHOR lBCIH 1W IE DBJIEASED TO tr. 1 POST SIW.l. B£ ADUED rAIEDI Sim' srm. A5III Ni10 GIWE l50 NI> BE ta DFPED MW1ZED MH'O ~120 'VE.D SlliENCfflt ll),.000 PSI ..._ POSr stWJ.. HMi£ 7/tr DE-PIMCtlD ICNOCIOIIS ON 1• C8IIERS fW. LEtlfflt,, fOllt SllES. 4. ANCHOR StW.L. M.'E 4 7/1r ta.ES ONE L'at SEE 2" RIOII 1UP END. FIISH SfW.L IE ZIC HOf DIPP£D Ql4JWIZED 1M1E11W. TD MEEr ASTII ...., ....... & DRM RNEl1 TD BE Tl.3alMI 3/r "' 9. CORID BOLTS TO BE TLCB511111. 6fQI fWIKIG SPACE IIESSMD RIA PERSONS alH PtrtSIIW. Dl!NI.IIE'S SfWJ. BE llENIFED En' A. IIE1I.B:l'DRIZE SIGH PEIIWENTLY POSIEI) IIIEIMlE.Y ADMCENr 1D NI) Will.£ ,-fliCH SWJ.. OR SPACE CXNISIIC OF A PAOFlE WW OF A WEELaNI wmt DCa.PMT II MITE ON 1W1C Bl.LIE IMCIO'lROl 111. 11£ SIGN stWJ. Hal' 8E SMMJ.fR 1tMN 70 SQlWIE NHS N Na IIIJ stWJ.. IE C8IJl1IED ON NI> JUST 8EYON) H FIDIT EDGE OF 1t£ PMICNI S11iL SIGNS IM'I' It.SO El£ II.NG ON Tt£ al. /fl 1HE INl!RIOR END OF ff PM1C11G SNCE. SIGN MOllfflG HEIGHT SIW.1 BE 80 IKHS M1M 11£ PNICIG SPACE FNSHED ...... 1H MOTIOM. SIGN SIW.L ILSO 8E P0STm. II A CONSPICUOUS PUC[,, AT 6fQI ENTIWi ,. c,r.......,. ............... "' IIIEIMTB.Y ADJMlENT TO NI) \1Sil£ FROM EAa1 SrAL1. OR SPACE. THE SIGN stW.1. BE NOT U:SS Tlwt 17 NHS B'f 22 NHS II SIZE wnH l.£'IIERM: NOi' LBS 11Wf 1 IDt N tDIIT, 1t1CH a.DiRLY NI> CONSPICUOUSlY 5m1ES THE RIU.DIING: i.wLITHORIZED VEIIClES 1W11CED II DESIGll\1ED !BIi.ED PMIONO 9WB NOi' DISPIAYIND lll5TIG.ISflllO PIArMDS OR I.ICfNSE PlA1ES ISSlED FOR PH'r!r.AU..Y DIS&m PERSONS IMY IE 10WED NIIAY AT OWNER's EJIF'Ell!iE. lOIED \9ICU:s MlY BE ...,._,,., "' ----!"t 11'1' TWPHONN9 -- ::t'~o~ 1 • I 7 QlilJGE, 24• LEN111H SEE NCIIE O : :r·.-....-.... wae-.rPOSl'~x = 0 O lll.J (rtP) 0 0 o o STOP FOR o o POST P'lE'1E 'fEW 'fSPf SPfJ"flCtDJt§ -PEBH2ft £ PtlfBS """"' ........ 2 DIM: Rl'EIS SEE NCIIE O ADA ID W/Parr 4 PERlllE'AII.E MOS PRCMlE A. SOI.I) SURFACE BUT Al.LOW "'1l.M. IJl¥iNGE: Ml> ~ OF' WiUER NIO It£ £MTH 8'I' PEJUF1IG WA.YER 10 ~ 1IRJUGH lt£ SFWD 1EWEEN THE PMDS. U!B: SllEMJCS. MnOS. PNnlG lllEJ,S., NI) CRtUM'l'S. 1. A. MIIIMI OF 8 NHS OF' FREE-DINING !WI) OR GRAKI... IMS£ IS R£QllR£D UtlJER lt£ JlaDJS CUDIEl'E SUJl='ACE. 2. THE FREE-DRl!NtQ IMSE SIW.l. 1M LESS 1Wfl 5S FIES (MATERN. PASSltG M: #200 SIEW) 1MSED ON TtE ~ PA.BG M: f4 Sl£','E, :S. M: POROUS MIERS SIW..L BE PERll£ABLE ENOUGH lO Ml50III wmR A.T A. ...._.. IM1E OF 10 INCHES PER HOLR IIIIElMTE..Y AFIER M: PMDEfT Slff'ACE HAS BEEN WEnED a»fTNJOUStY Rift AT I.EIISI' 10 liNl1ES. CCll'LWICE ant 111$ ...... Rm: stWJ. BE Cl£aCED PRIOR TO ODNSIIUCIION liPF'IIJVlt. OF M: PMIUI'. COIFLWK:E IM.Y BE aEaCED USIIG A. SIRE BIJCl<ET TfSJ It IIICH II Gt.1.1.0NS OF' 1lmR NE. POURED ON10 1HE PA.W11ENr SURFACE ALL AT OHCE FROM A ~ BUCICEI'. F NlffllNG llJT A SCNfl' AMDIM Cf' 4. WA.1ER PUDCUS OR Rll6 <ff ll£ Sllf'N::E, 1lEN D£ PAmENT IS CCNSaRED 10 liEEI' 1HE UNill.ll MrE OF' MISORPIION. F MS TfSJ IS NOJ OXlUSl't'E. llEI A &-NJt IIIIO SF/UD Ar TIE IMSE 10 ntE PAIOENT SUl"ACE SIW..L BE USED TO IB9JI£ Tf£ ACRW. RATE Cf' MISORP1ION.. 0. SIEWXS ANl PA.1IOS ON ~ PROP£RIY NOi' SI.It.ET 10 VE11CUS SfW..L. IE A. ...... Cf' 4 IICIES 1ltCK NI> Sft:ltl.D l"1l'E A. aDIUM 28-Di\Y COIFRESSN£ SIIEGl'H OF 2000 PSI. •• , ____ _.." ,~.,. S,L .------~.a.-.-"'!ii- ----~---··or•-~ -. ---"'-=-=---:•F--:0..""i I "<'*:-ell'\.. ... --~--.-~ ~~~~-=~"'"''"-~ ~·----:o.,.,r~ --_.,.,.,.. __ ._.. ..,~=--..._ ~--..31:c,,,...:-::..---":#'~ ..... ~----.. ,.,,-.:,,:.:..,lf>!! A CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATIUCK AVENUES. WEAVER A~CHITECTS. INC • 1411 FOURHI AVENUE. SUITE 810 SEATTLL \'<ASHINGTON 96101 P. 206.262,9622 F. 206.262.9507 • .............. ., -111-11'....,.. _ c21114 I II I 911W .. mA~ Suite ~20 Seattle, WA9S104 p.206.725.1211 f. 206.973.SWt engineering pile-~.,,,.,,-·°' IPJ ,. SWENSON SAY FAGcT A STRtJCTURAl. ENGINEERING ceff'ORATION t24~"mr -~ 1~~~ WA ........... ~.com tio. l""YO DoM<:rip!lon ... """ __J ________ _ ~------- 1--Drawn by: JtC R.,..e....:! by: UP ~ Praj,,d: No: 06071-2015--01 m ::::, U)PAVING NOTES AND I-DETAILS ~P:':t:'="24"•lf',9oolo-==f-c::: j 8 jlf C3.1 ... l'BIEAllE PAWHI t ~ ! l I l I 1 ! I I ' • ;:_l;t_ - /.}··~·:--' ... ·-·"'- 82r? ., . . • ·~ Cli.r-EfJ OONCRliJE ""'"COi.Mi NCI~ ~-- ·~ . . ~z.v:,, .... "" '-t1-.· ..,;.,:-, ·~ u~~-·:._J .,. _,! ... ~n:t'~ -"""""" ........_ ..... ~ .. ....._., __ ~, 1..:i!>l"_<'I_ ·.••.;'_-· --~tto.•*'""-•-•""-"!..'·""'>-t"' H<,.(d~-,---~ . Bi=t· : . . ., .. ~ ~•st .. _ -=~~_,_. -·-.. (·· :'· .•. /; I .'' · ___ ..i,.... ' -•I"• 8: =.to .. ___ -_·_,·.' . ._• ,... '.:f _:::..:.:~t' • o~··~-, DEPRESSEBClRII SECTION u,v ..... -.. '~.t..;:t.=-~ -~---,$-....... ~ -·"""'""'°'""" ..... l(.;i.A'"','.t ~-t ' :~ Ol': • -rl·:/ ~~·ex,,.. ,,, _,i,-. - :J.:-. -· ~ ,1,0-,.ai,,,, '[-_-1-··' -~~ .. -, . W-- ! :_ 1:-0:._ aMOft Ot'JNtlilllt'" ,,....,..,c,.,,o .... -~·-----·et ......... . ~ .. -........ "" COR SID PLAN 1l1-ca.ENT COl«::IETE aR!S 1 ,--[~ PA'IEMOO ·-~··-., '.>,.';.o.•·.;_f,.. '., -........,,, £:_,,_,,,.,..,.t, 'imr~, _.,'":".~~~-·-·.~:..":ti .!Z,~ -~--_,· ~ ... ntiur:c ~ ~ . -<mr,1t,E =:.;:#;,,;.;1· ,,_'.,r.""i' t· J-~-. -~--_: ----._ ... f~ "c.., -i ......... . :,:'r, !, ' . ,q-;•, I[! - ·.·•,-c -·+.ibJ_.-.. -.. o.:~ ;;;,_.:;.~',·,:~..;_;; IIIS COR SID PLAN 1l2-ca.ENT~ SOEWAU< 2 [ICIS'IWO ASl'ttAlT I f.:l"... ! J-~-P,\-.{ME>IT (SE( MOTE ~J ·~-~·=1 } ~} MUN SJffil 1 ab r t1t1" (..-.a, a-. eJ (SEE: Nill£') . .:r,n 5" CAUSKJ;: ,ROD( = IAJST Y,\'l'Qt Elll$TNii ~ F GIIEA'IDt 2. SAWCUT SHAU. II£ P05lll0N£0 1' -fr IIEYCNO El>CE: O" DJ.MAGGI FA'Ot.MIDIT. i "l'-E illl£NT ar THS IIE!iGN IS lO Dl':!iCRIIE PA'IOIDtT PUCOmH "T 'II-IE QJTl[l'I F""::f: SU: ST.-...:JMD PI..A1'I FOR cae!T COl'ICRETE CIJREIS. ) COR SID PLAN IXl -CUii AN) GITTER FEl'I.Ace.eir 3 ~"=-5% HOlE a: FU W/ EPOxY ,. CD CONCRE1[ """"' ,SCLOB t~::;~:.::._.::_~.-1. ,-. ...... ;. ,. .. _,. .. , '. ij ·-._....-.:~~ ;:ew : ~ t ·, .,!1 ·~--. . <!' I ,.~r;J:_I .f ~~ A '~~./ \.? . ')~~~~ f~~ ... ,.;. .,!. 4c ' . I ,,.--·~- '('"t_-:;;~Y!i'fit~.'~-' " '\.~ _,..._ 't!'~ I>~·>;.;/; ·~::-,.~=!-. f, -;;-/C '7:7"~}-. -, ~m-;.-.. -: ..... ~ .. r;,, ,~ __ , __ r,_; ~.:.t...:_;--,-;,-.,..,,:.·~~ ... :·-. .. _: -t ~:~ _.:.'-,'"":,:.,:-:=:·:.:-~--,.~~iii;;,;}}'f"t!'!~-;(·:·· ,_·""· .... ,..,,. •· moz.·@ ,., ____ ,~-~--.·' . ~-7'' -•. ,;--~, -,: ,-';, •··., .,_,.t:· .,Pf /\:'. COR SID PLAN 1l4 -DIMWAY ENTRANCE 4 lM;~ 1~~r ~· 11,1:+::,1 2" CLASS '8' -· L.,~,,_J 2" OCPTII OC Gll:1NO OR SAWCUT M<O RCMOVC C AQ °" cu~ OH EDGE OF i"A\IEI.IENT l ,rnrn< "" oe LAN€. UN€. ACP CLASS• CRUSHED ROCK, FLOWABc..E fiLL OR AS REOU,REJ BY HICINEER e· C:RIJSH£0 SURflliCM> TOP C:OIJRSE: Ms CLIENT: ATS AUTOMATION OLD MILWAUKEE SUBSTATION 450 SHATTUCK AVENUES • WEAVER ARCHITE'CTS. INC. 1411 FOURTlt AV£NUE. SUITE 810 HATTLE. WASHINGTON ?8101 P. 206.262.9622 F. 206.262.9507 •....-•--",lgMo-o:!014 I m m .. ,..-, .. Sutte 420 Seattle. WA 98104 p. 20c.m.1211 f.206.973.S:wl engineering pile ... _, • .,,_.,.oo• ~ ,,. ~;\'·.'·_:r--lSDN '::.>\', i .. ,\(_;.:'.:1 A STRUCTURAL ENQNEERlt.JG CORP~ATION ;:.,24~~~· -su:, ,~M$.S.::~ 'IL\ lila\Z, -·--'-"""" No ls,wo Oosc,;pt;oo Dole _J ________ _ ;::--- 1--D<ow-n ny: JLC Rev;ewed t,y: UP :a: Project N<l: 06071-20\S-01 co => U) PAVING AND FRONTAGE II _,_m s I MM.,,.w s I -ow 71 .... .,. __ _,,_,,.., a I~-~~;_;-~·- • Hlt-1 l.tl~!l.4lJl,i SIAMl.l.Hll!i, SI:.~ OY.'Gf H~-0!:i. <:P ""GE tiOJ2 Til'ICil TI!UIS\'DISE P..lTOI FOR fl£llfllJ!: P..ll'Ellfill't 1--DETAILS I _j '-----::: --~---· .,tf ~ !, ! ~~ oj f 3~~~ ;I ,,1, t :Hi!i-:. , mi! I mt! ' ' ' . ' I ~ ; :1i X , .. 1m· -•;l,! -~ ... E ll' '".,~ ., .. ,m J 1 ~_JI ii i ' I ' ~ 2::::i: ' 0 -< ~"' :::! I a -i i~~~s t • 0 u ~ ;;; i ~;~tt 1 z ~ 0,. ;: J; Sl :: -,z Fil! E ~ § I D"'· :: i <( :r: <'< 0 C u u :r: ~ : ~ ~ I g-~ ., ~ .. ,,t r;; ~~~5: l!!I"! . ; ;.: 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I --i~~"' ~. t.~.~ '"~8i5 H~~~ ,f}ef' ~:o,~~ ~\:;!~ ~< c.:i~ <>. i ; • ~1;.~ ·-, ... ;. !i l,_::::---.... ~"~> _l_ e;~ ~<~8Zi DJl,t! ~ !!! -:~., !~ ... :m ·i''i~ 'LU a , • ·,~ ~' , ~ 'I ,i i" '• 1i? 1ll1 I !; ' 11 ! ·i·· l j ,, ;,q,, .. , ~~i,:i!a ,II! !". ~ ~ ,~~ :t 1'' ,,· j ,i 'Id I'! I r\_J··I 1:iif l I' ':i~~~ 1•1~ •I r,i j • "1 i ~ ! ilej'!1 1 !1 I ~'".!.1rli!:a' rJ !''II ''!l! I i,, 111 jl !, 'l~l°!i! 1, l1!,l,,,J;l I! p·•11•r I 8~~"' ' ~... ~ 111,;1:i1 Iii,, j., .... ~ .. "" i • I II I ·!· J ii II 11 11 1 ulll 1 '1i IU ill 11;111 11111 lnln HI 1111,11 3 1 • I I 1H • ! • I 11'1 lh I 1t 1 il1 I II I I I •1 I I 1~!1 di I 1111!111 ~I l!I lillil~ 11111111111111111111 " ' • ' ..._.. ~§ 5 I I ' i ~ ~ § C') ~i I ~ ' ~ ~ ~ § CN ~~ r !i ' ~ ~ ~ § ...... . 0 " !, (JJ ~ f ...., ~ ~ 0 s ' >-.... ~ I-i z ::J i I l M • 'M . (.) ., l ! t § Tv11fll\Jsns 11ll\J~3d co ....... Iii § (0 LO !flow Control Exemption input.exc KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\Kc_DATA\ [CJ CREATE a new Time Series ST 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 PREDEV.TSF T 1.00000 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 [CJ CREATE a new Time series ST DEV.TSF T 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 1.00000 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest 0.000000 Till Pasture 0.000000 Till Grass 0.000000 outwash Forest 0.000000 outwash Pasture 0.000000 outwash Grass 0.000000 Wetland 0.000000 Impervious 0.000000 Till Forest 0.000000 Till Pasture 0.000000 Till Grass 0.000000 outwash Forest 0.000000 Outwash Pasture 0.000000 outwash Grass 0.000000 wetland 0.000000 Impervious [TJ Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [PJ compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies predev.tsf PREDEV.pks [PJ compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies dev.tsf DEV.pks [RJ RETURN to Previous Menu [XJ exit KCRTS Program Page 1 !Existing Site Conditions !Developed Site Conditions I Flow Control Exemption: Existing Site Conditions Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:predev.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.063 5 2/09/01 2:00 0.048 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.076 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.049 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.060 6 10/28/04 16: 00 0.066 4 1/18/06 16: 00 0.072 3 10/26/06 0:00 0.130 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks PREDEV .pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob 8!;;E:i) l!!:CSQ~ 1 0.990 t0.130 100.00 . .076 2 25. 0 0.960 0.072 3 10.00 0.900 0.066 4 5.00 0.800 0.063 5 3.00 0.667 0.060 6 2.00 0. 500 0.049 7 1.30 0.231 0.048 8 1.10 0.091 0.112 50.00 0.980 Page 1 Flow Control Exemption: Developed Site Conditions Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.083 6 2/09/01 2:00 0.070 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.100 3 12/08/02 18:00 0.079 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.095 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.088 5 1/18/06 16: 00 0.116 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.164 1 1/09/08 6:00 computed Peaks DEV. pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob ~CFS} I~ .Hi4 I Period mo. oo 1 0.990 0.116 2 25.00 0.960 0.100 3 10.00 0.900 0.095 4 5.00 0.800 0.088 5 3.00 0.667 0.083 6 2.00 0. 500 0.079 7 1.30 0.231 0.070 8 1.10 0.091 0.148 50.00 0.980 Page 1 ATS Office Expansion -432 Shattuck Ave S Conveyance Analysis Spreadsheet 5/4/2015 !Conveyance -outlet from site Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.149 6 8/27/01 18:00 0.104 8 9/17/02 17:45 0.298 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.120 7 8/23/04 14: 30 0.163 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.172 4 10/27 /05 10:45 0.205 3 10/25/06 22:45 0.407 1 1/09/08 6:30 computed Peaks DEV.pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob 1 0.990 2 0.960 0.900 0.172 4 5.00 0.800 0.163 5 3.00 0.667 0.149 6 2.00 0. 500 0.120 7 1.30 0.231 0.104 8 1.10 0.091 0. 371 50.00 0.980 Page 1 Sediment Sizing Calculations Per Section D.3.5.1 of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual Project Name: A TS Office Expansion 432 Shattuck Ave S Required Sediment Trap Surface Area (SA): SA=2*QNsed Where: Calculation: Q = 2-year developed flow rate from KCRTS with 15-minute time steps Vsed = Settling Velocity (0.00096 ft/sec) multiplier = 2 Q= 0.15cfs Vsed = 0.00096 fps ._..;.R.;;.;e=a,u;.;;irc.:ec:dc.;S:.;A..:....=--~----=-3..c12:c.=5 square feet Equivalent Sediment Trap Volume: To determine the minimum sediment trap volume, an equivalent sediment trap was sized based upon the required surface area. Length of Top Surface Area= Width of Top Surface Area= Surface Area Provided = Side Slope= Total Depth of Sediment Trap= om Length of Sediment Trap = Bott B ottom Width of Sediment Trap = I Total pond Volume= 18 f eel eel 18 f 324 square feet H:1V) 3 ( 3.5 -3 -3 582.75 4358.97 feet feet feet cubic feet gallons Sediment Volume provided with detention vault: Vault Interior Dimensions: 24'x6'x8' Total Volume provided: 1,152 CF (8,617 gallons) !TESC Sizing I Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.150 6 8/27/01 18:00 0.105 8 9/17/02 17:45 0.299 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.121 7 8/23/04 14:30 0.163 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.172 4 10/27/05 10:45 0.205 3 10/25/06 22:45 0.408 1 1/09/08 6: 30 computed Peaks DEV.pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.408 1 100.00 0.990 0.299 2 25.00 0.960 0.205 3 10.00 0.900 0.172 4 5.00 0.800 0.163 5 3.00 0.667 I 0.150 6 2.001 0.500 0.121 7 1.30 0.231 0.105 8 1.10 0.091 0. 371 50.00 0.980 Page 1 lll ATS Office Expansion Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill Piao Hay 4, 2015 ATS OFFICE EXPANSION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION AND SPILL PLAN MAY4,201S The following report is in accordance with the City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual Section 2.3.1.4 for the Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill (SWPPS) Plan. The following is a summary of the items to be addressed on the TESC Plan of the contract documents and an indication of their applicability to this project. PART A: ACTIVITY SPECIFIC INFORMATION REQUIRED Storage and Handling of Liquids: No petroleum products, fuel, solvents, detergents, paint, pesticides, and concrete admixtures are expected to be stored on site. There may be small quantities of paint or form oil stored on site during construction. They are expected to be stored in a protected area such as inside a construction trailer, or inside a fenced enclosure in the contractor's work area. Exact quantities and storage locations are not known at this time. Storage and Stockpiling of Construction Materials and Wastes: Construction materials and waste may be stockpiled temporarily but shall be hauled off regularly. Refer to Note 2 below for additional information. Fueling: No stationary fuel tank will be allowed on site during construction. Fueling will be allowed on site during daylight hours only by a mobile fuel truck, and only in paved areas. Refer to notes 3, 4, and 5 below for additional information. Maintenance, Repairs, and Storage of Vehicles and Equipment: Equipment that requires significant repair will be removed from the site to repair. Minor repairs or maintenance may be allowed on site only in an approved area. Refer to note 6 below for additional information. Concrete Saw Cutting, Slurry, and Washwater Disposal: The project anticipates limited concrete saw cutting. All concrete saw cutting slurry shall be controlled such that it does not contaminate onsite storm water. Concrete truck washout will not be allowed on site. Refer to note 7 below. Handling of pH Elevated Water: Because construction stormwater runoff will be routed to a sediment settling tank, monitoring for elevated pH can be conducted as necessary by sampling from the tank. Page I I.II Application of Chemicals including Pesticides and Fertilizers: No chemicals are expected to be used in this project. PART B:SWPPS SITE PLAN All Office Expansion Stonnwater Pollution Prevention and S~II Plan Hay 4, 2015 Refer to Sheet Cl .I of the drawings. Also, per Section 2.3.1.4.B of the Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM: I. Liquids including petroleum products, fuel, solvents, detergents, pesticides, and concrete admixtures are not anticipated to be stored on site. If products such as fuel are required, these items will be brought in small quantities, used, and removed from the site. Items such as paint or form oils, if needed, will be delivered to the site in small quantities and stored inside a construction trailer prior to use. A note is included on the plan as follows: "No hazardous liquid products including but not limited to petroleum products, fuel, solvents, detergents, paint, pesticides, concrete admixtures and form oils shall be stored on- site without prior approval. If requested, the Contractor shall provide for spill containment in accordance with City of Renton requirements. Contractor shall provide a list of the types and sizes of liquids that will be stored/handled on site. Contractor will also show the proposed location for storage on a project site plan and will provide a proposed method of secondary containment. The Owner's Representative and the County shall review and approve the plan prior to storage." 2. The proposed improvements will require demolition of a small existing building. Any demolished material will be removed immediately upon demolition. All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur onsite shall be handled and disposed of in a manner that does not cause contamination of stormwater. Good housekeeping and preventative measures will be taken to ensure that the site will be kept clean, well-organized, and free of debris. A note is included in the SWPPS notes as follows: "Construction waste shall be promptly removed from the site and shall not be stockpiled." 3. No stationary tanks will be used for this project. A note is included in the SWPPS notes as follows: "No stationary fuel tank shall be allowed." 4. If required, a mobile fuel truck will be brought to the site to fuel the excavation equipment. A note is included in the SWPPS notes as follows: "Fueling of construction equipment shall be by a mobile fuel truck and shall be allowed only in paved areas. Contractor shall provide a plan for fueling area spill containment to the Owner's Representative and City of Renton with a proposed method of secondary containment. The Owner's Representative and City of Renton shall review and approve the plan prior to fueling. All spills, containment, and clean up shall be the contractor's responsibility and at their own expense." Page l ATS Office E,p,.sion ltonnwater Pollution Prevention and Spill Plan May 4, 2015 5. Equipment will only be fueled during daylight hours. A note is included in the SWPPS notes as follows: "Fueling of construction equipment shall only be allowed during daylight hours." 6. Equipment that requires significant repair will be removed from the site to repair. Minor repairs or maintenance may be allowed on site only in an approved area. A note is included in the SW PPS notes as follows: "The Contractor shall remove from the site all equipment that requires significant repair. Minor repairs or maintenance may be allowed on site in an approved area. The Contractor shall submit a plan for the proposed location of vehicle maintenance and repair and shall indicate the proposed method of containment for possible leaking vehicle fluids. The contractor shall also provide a plan to the Owner's Representative and City of Renton for the collection, storage, and disposal of the vehicle fluids. The Owner's Representative and City of Renton shall review and approve plan prior to any on-site maintenance." 7. Truck washout will not be allowed on site. A note is included in the SWPPS notes as follows: "Truck washout shall not be allowed on site. The Contractor shall provide truck washout off-site at an approved and legal location." 8. No chemicals are anticipated to be required for this project. 9. Selected Contractor shall provide location for spill response materials, and identify disposal methods for contaminated water and soil. A note is included in the SWPPS notes as follows: "Contractor shall provide to the Owner's Representative and City of Renton the location of spill response materials. Contractor will also identify disposal methods for contaminated water and soil after a spill." PART C: POLLUTION PREVENTION REPORT The project will be bid thus no excavation contractor is currently under contract. The possible sources of pollution are limited and are addressed above. In addition to the above information provided on the contract documents, the following notes are included to specifically address pollution prevention: • "The Contractor shall provide a report to the Owner's Representative and City of Renton identifying the personnel responsible for pollution prevention, including contact information, and clearly listing the responsibilities of these personnel." • "The Contractor shall also provide a description of the procedures to be used in monitoring the pollution prevention BMPs and responding to a BMP that needs attention, including record keeping." PART D: SPILL PREVENTION AND CLEANUP REPORT Due to the public bid process, an earthwork subcontractor is not yet under contract for this project. The personnel responsible for spill prevention and cleanup will be identified at the pre-construction meeting for the project. Spill prevention is addressed with notes on the contract documents as stated above. The sources of potential spills are limited and Page J All Office Expansion ltormwater Pollution Prmntion and Spill Plan Hay 4, 2015 have been addressed on the plan with notes. In addition to the above information provided on the contract documents, the following notes have been added in the SWPPS notes to specifically address spill prevention: • "The Contractor shall provide a report to the Owner's Representative and City of Renton identifying the personnel responsible for spill prevention, including contact information, and clearly listing the responsibilities of these personnel." • "The Contractor shall provide a description of the procedures to be used in monitoring the spill prevention BMPs and responding to a spill incident, including record keeping." Page 4 Ill AB Office Expan,ion Preliminary Construction SWPPP Narrative Nay 4, 2015 ATS OFFICE EXPANSION PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION SWPPP NARRATIVE MAY4,201S The following Preliminary Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Narrative for the ATS Automation project at 432 Shattuck Avenue Sin Renton supplements the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control drawings. This narrative and the drawings address the requirements of Section 3.3 of Volume II of the 2012 Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. I • CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION ELEMENTS I) Mark Clearing Limits: Clearing limits will be defined by erosion control components, and/or construction fencing, as shown on the TESC and Site Demolition plan. The actual limits of clearing will most likely be smaller than the limit of work area, but this identifies the maximum extent of the clearing limits. Areas impacted and not anticipated to be covered with final measures shall be stabilized using approved ESC methods. 2) Establish Construction Access: A temporary construction access (BMP Cl05) will be installed prior to construction. The quarry spall stabilized construction entrance will extend off Shattuck Avenue S in the north portion of the project area. The Contractor shall provide wheel wash if necessary. 3) Control Flow Rates: Storm water flow control during construction is anticipated to be mitigated by routing runoff to the proposed wetvault, which is to be utilized as a temporary sediment storage facility. Refer to the Sediment Sizing calculations and the King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) output included within Appendix B of the project's Stormwater Technical Information Report. 4) Install Sediment Controls: DOE approved BMPs for sediment controls are shown on the TESC plan. Sediment will be controlled using triangular silt dike (BMP C208), storm drain inlet protection (BMP C220), tree protection fencing, and the proposed sediment settling facility. 5) Stabilize Soils: It is possible that some of the earthwork and grading may occur in wet weather conditions. The site must be stabilized and no soils will be allowed to remain unstabilized for more than two days between October l" and April 30th. From May l through September 30, install cover measures to protect disturbed areas that will remain unworked for seven days or more. By October 8, seed all areas that will remain unworked from October l through April 30. Mulch all seeded areas. Exposed slopes will be protected by DOE-approved coverage methods. BMPs including, but not limited to: CIOI, Preserving Natural Vegetation; Cl21, Mulching; Cl 23, Plastic Covering; Cl30, Surface Roughening; Cl40, Dust Control; and TS.13 Post Construction Soil Amendment will be used to stabilize on-site soils during construction. 6) Protect Slopes: DOE-approved BMPs for slope protection will be utilized during construction. Concentrated discharges shall not be allowed to flow over the top of steep slopes. BMPs including, but not limited to CIOI, Preserving Natural Vegetation; Cl21, Mulching; Cl 23, Plastic Covering; Cl30, Surface Roughening; Cl 40, Dust Control; Page I lltl ATI Office Expansioo Preliminary Construction SWPPP Narrative Kay 4, 2015 C200, Interceptor Dike and Swale; C207, Check Dams; and C233, Silt Fence are to be utilized to protect slopes during construction. 7) Protect Drain Inlets: Drainage structures in areas where no work occurs will remain and will be protected; discharge points to the public storm drain main line will also be protected. To prevent discharge of turbid water downstream, all existing catch basins located within the disturbance area and outside of the disturbance area within approximately 300 feet downstream of the site will be protected with storm drain inlet protection (BMP C220). Proposed inlets will also be protected with catch basin inserts, and where feasible, their outlets will be temporarily plugged until the site is stabilized. The Contractor shall remove inlet protection at the end of the project without releasing captured sediment into the storm system. 8) Stabilize Channels and Outlets: This project is not expected to involve any channels or outlets. If necessary, DOE-approved BMPs for channel stabilization will be utilized during construction, including, but not limited to: C200, Interceptor Dike and Swale; and C207, Check Dams. 9) Control Pollutants: Temporary protection of the disturbed soils provides the first level of protection for pollution control, and perimeter measures downstream will mitigate the remaining pollutants. The temporary protection of disturbed soils may be mitigated with a temporary sump and pump facility to provide the second level of interception of pollutants. This collection system filters sediments prior to the pump system. The pump system will then route stormwater via force mains into the proposed wetvault to be utilized as a sediment facility. The sediment settling tank must provide at least 4,400 gallons of storage, and will be located north of the proposed warehouse addition. The wetvault does have adequate capacity to provide the needed storage. Construction debris will be removed from the site. Contractor will be responsible for managing their construction equipment per DOE-approved BMPs. The stabilized construction entrance is assumed to be sufficient for the construction period. If something more substantial is required, the Contractor is to coordinate with the Owner's Representative and the City of Renton inspector. If a truck wheel wash is required, truck wheel wash water and concrete truck washout water shall be collected and discharged to the public sanitary sewer (SS) system. To apply for SS release, contact the local sewer purveyor for authorization. For information regarding spill control, refer to the Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill Plan (SWPPS) plan/narrative, attached. 10) Control De-Watering: The majority of the earthwork on the project will be constructed during the dry season, therefore it is not anticipated that groundwater will be encountered in the excavations for this project. In the event that perched groundwater is encountered during any wet season construction, the Contractor shall route it to the sediment settling facility by pumping it out of the excavation. 11) Maintain BMPs: DOE-approved standard BMP maintenance will be required in accordance with the standard King County Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan and Notes. 12) Manage the Project: All phases of construction will be managed by the Contractor. The site must be stabilized and no soils will be allowed to remain exposed and unworked for more than two days between October I" and April 30th and for more than seven days between May I" and September 30th. The Contractor will provide maintenance and Page 2 AB Office Expansion Preliminary Construction IWPPP Narrative Nay 4, 2015 monitoring of TESC BMPs. Work of all contractors will be coordinated to minimize the duration of disturbance on the site. The best management practices shown on the TESC plan are minimum requirements. Failure to maintain SWPPP measures in accordance with adopted standards may result in the work being performed at the County's direction and the costs assessed as a lien against the property where such facilities are located. 13) Protect Low Impact Development BMPs: The Contractor must control erosion and avoid introducing sediment from surrounding land uses onto the permeable pavement on the patios southwest and southeast of the building addition. Pavements experiencing sediment issues or no longer passing an initial infiltration tests must be cleaned using procedures from the local storm water manual or the manufacturer's procedures. 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed improvements include a new warehouse/office building, constructed off the north side of the existing ATS Automation building. The existing commercial building directly north of the existing ATS building will be demolished. A paved parking lot will be established along the north and east sides of the building expansion, including a heavy duty asphalt driving lane to accommodate truck traffic. Access improvements will be made to ensure ADA compliance. The area of the site parcel (#7841300175) is about 0.95 acres. The project proposes 13,616 square feet (SF) of new plus replaced impervious area. The project is located within a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard Area as designated by the City of Renton. There will be no flow control facilities for the project; permeable pavers will be installed as a flow control Best Management Practice (BMP). Enhanced Basic Water Quality Treatment is required and will be addressed with a two-facility treatment train, consisting of a wetvault followed by a StormFilter structure with leaf compost (CSF) media. See the project's technical information report for more on the stormwater improvements. 3. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The existing project area consists of a small commercial building, with limited paved parking and a gravel parking area. The existing building is separated from the main ATS building by a drive lane and parking. Stormwater runoff generally sheet flows off the site and enters the existing storm system within Shattuck Avenue. The site is located within the Black River Drainage Basin. The existing topography within the project area is relatively flat, with slopes of around 0-2% throughout the project disturbance limits. 4. ADJACENT AREAS The project area is bounded by Shattuck Ave S to the west, a public alley to the east, a single- family residence to the north, and the existing A TS building to the south. Page J 5. CRITICAL AREAS All Office Expansion Preliminary Construction 5WPPP Narrative Hay 4, 2015 The site is located within the Cedar Valley Sole Source Aquifer. Based on City of Renton GJS and mapping, there do not appear to be any other environmentally sensitive areas within or in close proximity to the site. 6. SOILS According to the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, the site soils are mapped as Urban Land. The SCS Soil Type is recognized as Renton (RE), classified under the Hydrologic Soil Group D and is defined as Till in the project's stormwater calculations (Table 3.2.2.B, 2009 KCSWDM). A Geotechnical Engineering Report has been prepared by PanGeo, Inc. dated December 23, 2014; a copy has of been provided in Appendix E of the technical information report. Based upon the exploration pits, the underlying soils were generally described as silty clays. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 8 feet. 7. POTENTIAL EROSION PROBLEM AREAS Per the proposed contract documents, the contractor is to provide protection for soils to limit the exposure to erosion. The limitation of disturbance, adequate cover practices, and runoff control are the most effective methods for reduction of turbidity in stormwater runoff. Any runoff that does occur will be directed to a temporary sump and then pumped to the sediment settling facility. Areas that have not been permanently stabilized will be addressed using DOE-approved BMPs, per the construction documents. 8. CONSTRUCTION PHASING At this time it is not expected that the project will be formally phased. The contractor is responsible for coordinating work of all subcontractors to keep the duration of site disturbance limited to the maximum extent possible. 9. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Construction of project is expected to begin in July 2015 and be completed by March 2016. I 0. FINANCIAL/OWNERSHIP RESPONSIBILITIES The property is privately owned. Financial guarantees and liability for the proposed project will be completed by owner prior to permit issuance. I I. ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS A copy of any calculations performed during design of the project and relevant storm drainage modeling discussions is included in the project's Stormwater Technical Information Report. 12, CERTIFIED EROSION CONTROL SPECIALIST The contractor will name their Certified Erosion Control Specialist and provide contact information at the pre-construction meeting. Page 4 I 1 . I I ·I I I I I I I I I I I · I I I I • 4PPEND1XD Operation and Maintenance Guidelines • • ,, .. • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE RE()UIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Structure Sediment Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the Sump of catch basin contains no bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the sediment. lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the calch basin. Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than Y.i cubic foot which No Trash or debris blocking or is located immediately in front of the catch basin potentially blocking entrance to opening or is blocking capacity of the catch basin catch basin. by more than 10%. Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds No trash or debris in the catch basin. 1 /3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or vegetation odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within catch basin. gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which would volume. attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Damage to frame Corner of frame extends more than Y.. inch past Frame is even with curb. and/or top slab curb face into the street (If applicable). Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of holes and cracks. cracks wider than~ inch. Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of more than% inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks in waits or Cracks wider than 1.h inch and longer than 3 feet, Catch basin is sealed and bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch structurally sound. basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that catch basin is unsound. Cracks wider than 1h inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than 1 /4 inch wide at at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Settlement/ Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has Basin replaced or repaired to design misalignment rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. standards. Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than %-inch at the joint of the No cracks more than %-inch wide at inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of inlet/outlet pipes. the catch basin at the joint of the inleUoutlet pipes. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of , pollution as oil, gasollne, concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Inlet/Outlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe. lnlet/ouUet pipes dear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inleUoutlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than Yi-inch at the joint of the No cracks more than %-inch wide at inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. at the joints of the inlet'ouUet pipes. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1/9/2009 A-9 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS fLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FAClLfflES NO. 5 -CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate lMth opening wider than 7/8 inch. Grate opening meets design (Catch Basins) standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debns. of grate surface. footnote to guidelines for dispo~I Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design Any open structure requires urgent standards. maintenance. Manhole Cover/Lid Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is. missinij .W only partially in place. Cover/lid protects opening to Ariy open structure requires urgent structure. maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not work. Cover/lid drfficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover/lid can be removed and Remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift. reinstalled by one maintenance person. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-10 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE HQLJIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 6-CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Pipes Sediment & debris Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds Water flow~ freely through pipes. accumulation 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Vegetationfroots Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of Water flows freely through pipes. water through pipes. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source. control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Damage to protective Protective coating is damaged; rust or corrosion Pipe repaired or replaced. coating or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of pipe. Damaged Any dent that decreases the cross section area of Pipe repaired or replaced. pipe by more than 20% or is determined to have weakened structural integrity of the pipe. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from square feet of ditch and slopes. ditches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment accumulation design depth. and debris so that it matches design. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation constitute a hazard to County personnel or the removed according to applicable public. regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the public might nonnally be. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil. gasoline, concrete slurries or pai_nt. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through ditches. through ditches. Erosion damage to Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding. slopes Rock lining out of One layer or less of rock exists above native soil Replace rocks to design standards. place or missing (If area 5 square feet or more, any exposed native Applicable) soil. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1/9/2009 A-11 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FAClLITIES NO. 17 -WETVAUL T Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Site . Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulaled on facility site. Trash and debris removed from faclllty site. Treatment Area Trash and debris Any trash and debris accumulated in vault No trash or debris in vault. (Includes floatables and non-ffoatables). Sediment Sediment accumulation In vault botlom exceeds No sediment In vault. ac~umulatlon the depth of the sediment zone plus 6 Inches. . Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollullon such Materlals removed and .disposed of polluUon as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. source oontrol BMPs implemented If appropriate. No contaminants present other lhan a surface olf film. Vault Structure Damage to wall, Cracks wider than %-inch, any evidence of soil Vault is sealed and structurally frame, bottom, and/or entering the structure through cracks, vault does sound. top slab not retain waler or qualified lnspecUon personnel determines that the vault Is not struclu~lly sound. Baffles damaged Baffles corroding, cracking, warping and/or Repair or replace baffles or walls to showing signs of failure or baffle cannot be specifications. removed. VentilaUon Ventilation area blocked or plugged. No reduction of ventllatlon area exists. lnleVOutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment fllllng 20% or more of the pipe. Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. accumulatlon Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulaled In lnletlouUet No trash or debris In pipes. pipes (Includes floatables and non-floatables). Damag~ Cracks wider than %-inch at the joint of the No cracks more than Y..-inch wide at Inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soll entering the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. Gravity Drain Inoperable valve Valve wlll not open and close. Valve opens and closes normally. Valve won't seal Valve does not seal completely. Valve completely seals closed. Access Manhole Access cover/ltd Access cover/lid cannot be easily opened by one Access cover/lid can be opened by damaged or difficult to person. Corrosion/deformation of cover/lid. one person. open Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools. not working malnlenance person 'Mth proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locklng cover/lid does not work. Cover/lid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover/lid can be removed and remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs of lift. reinstalled by one maintenance person. Access doo'rs/plate Large access doors not flat and/or access Doors dose flat and covers access has gaps, doesn't opE!nlng not completely covered. opening complelely. cover completely Lifting Rings missing, Lifting rings not capable of llfllng weight of door Lifting rings sufficient to lift or rusted or plate. remove door or plate. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. Ladder meets design standards. Allows maintenance person safe access. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix: A 1/9/2009 A-23 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONIROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 21 -STORMFIL TER (CARTRIDGE TYPE) Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Perlormed Site Trash and debris Any trash or debris which Impairs lhe (unction of Trash and debris removed from the facility. facility. Conlamlnants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollutlon as oils, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable-regulalions. Source control BMPs Implemented If appropriale. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Life cycle System has not been Inspected for lhree years. Facility is re-inspected and any needed maintenance performed. Vaull Treatment Sediment on vault Greater than 2 inches of sediment. Vault Is free of sediment. Area floor Sediment on top of Greater than Y.: inch of sediment. Vault Is free of sediment. cartridges Multiple scum lines Thick or mulliple scum lines apove top of Cause of plugging corrected, above top of cartridges. Probably due to plugged canisters or canisters replaced If necessary. cartridges underdrain manifold. Vault Structure Damage to wall, Cracks wider than ~Inch and any evidence of Vault replaced or repaired to design Frame, Bottom, and/or soil particles entering the structure through the specifications. Top Slab cracks, or qualified inspection personnel determines the vault Is not structurally sound. Baffles damaged Baffles corroding, cracking warping, and/or Repair or replace baffles to showing signs of fallure as delermlned by specification. maintenance/inspection person. Fllter Media Standing water in 9 inches or greater of static water In the vault far No standing water Jn vault 24 hours vault more than 24 hours following a rain event and/or after a rain event. overflow occurs fcequenlly. Probably due to plugged filter media, underdrain or oullel pipe. Short clrculting Flows do not properly enter filter cartridges. Flows go through filler media. Underdrains and Sediment/debris Underdrains or clean-outs partially plugged or Underdrains and clean-outs free of Clean-Outs filled with sediment and/or debris. sediment· and debris. lnleVOutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20% or more of Ille pipe. lnleUoutlet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated In !nlel/outlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes Qncludes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than ~-Inch at the joint of the No cracks more than Y.-lnch wide al inleVoutlet pipes or any evidence of soll entering the joint of the Inlet/outlet pipe. at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. Access Manhole Cover/lid not In place Cover/lid is missing or only partially In place. Manhole access covered. Any open manhole requires immediate maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools. not working mainlenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking covernld does not work. Cover/tld difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover/lid can be removed and remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs of lift. relnstalled by one maintenance person. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs, misalignment, rust. or cracks. Ladder meels design standards. Allows maintenance person safe access. Large access Damaged or dlfflcult Large access doors or plates cannot be Replace or repair access door so It doors/plate to open opened/removed using normal equipment. can opened as designed. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-30 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 21 -STORMFILTER (CARTRIDGE TYPE) Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Gaps, doesn1t cover Large access doors not flat and/or access Doors close flat and cover access complelely opening not complelely covered. opening completely. Lifting Rings missing, Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door Lifting rings sufficient to lift or rusted or plate. remove door or plate. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1/912009 A-31 ' ' " r ; ~""' '"" Prepared for: ATS Automation GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ATS WAREHOUSE 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington 10 0 0 0 rr 2 "':;r/ 0 PROJECT NO. 14-269 December 23, 2014 ~ ' I N C O R P O R A T B D 3213 Eastlake Avenue E Suite B, Seattle, WA 98102 T. 206.262.0370 F. 206.262.0374 December 23, 2014 File No. 14-269 Mr. Brian Allen ATS Automation 450 Shattuck Ave S. Renton, WA 98057 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Allen, PanGE<t) 1•c••••••T•D Geotechnical & Earthquake Engineering Consultants Enclosed is our geotechnical report for the design of the foundations for the new 2 to 3 story warehouse that will be constructed immediately north of the A TS main building. We anticipate that column loads for the warehouse may be on the order of 100 kips. The site of the warehouse is underlain by moderately compressible soils as well as soils that may be susceptible to liquefaction in a strong earthquake. As such, use of conventional spread footing foundations without ground improvement may result in building settlements on the order of 3 to 4 inches under static loading and an additional 1 to 2 inches under seismic loading. Use of a preload will reduce static settlements to about 1 inch but dynamic settlements will be unaffected. Use of ground densification from Geopiers or stone columns extending to a depth of about 25 feet will likely reduce static and dynamic settlements to about 1 inch. Alternatively, 18" diameter augercast pile foundations installed to a depth of about 53 feet to support both the structure and floor slab will likely reduce settlements to about Y:, inch. Shorter augercast piles (i.e. about 25 feet long) with a lower design capacity may also be used with expected settlements on the order of 1 inch. Sincerely, Ll~J c ..... J W. Paul Grant, P.E. Principal Enclosure: Geotechnical Report 3213 Eastlake Avenue East Suite 8 Seattle, WA 98102-7127 Tel: (206) 262-0370 Fax:(206)262-0374 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 I. I SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................... 1 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK AND AUIBORIZATJON .......................................................................... 1 2.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE ........................................................................................ 1 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 2 3.1 SOILS .............................................................................................................................. 2 3.2 GROUNDWATER .............................................................................................................. 3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 3 4.1 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS ........................................................................................ 3 4.2 LIQUEFACTION ............................................................................................................... .4 4.3 PRELOAD FILL ................................................................................................................ .4 4.4 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................... .4 4.5 GROUND IMPROVEMENT ................................................................................................. 5 4.6 AUGERCAST PILE FOUNDATIONS .................................................................................... 6 4.7 STRUCTURAL FILL AND COMPACTION ............................................................................. 7 4.8 FLOOR SLABS .................................................................................................................. 7 4.9 STORMWATER INFILTRATION .......................................................................................... 7 4.lOPAVEMENT .................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................. 8 5.1 MATERIAL REUSE ........................................................................................................... 8 5.2 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERA TIONS .................................................... 8 5.3 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK .......................................................................................... 8 6.0 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES .............................................................. 9 7.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................... 10 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 12 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc PanGEO. Inc. LIST OF FIGURES AND APPENDIX (FOLLOWING TEXT) Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Generalized Subsurface Profile Section A-A' Figure I Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Lateral Pile Capacity, 18-inch Augercast Pile, 40 kip Lateral Load -Static Lateral Pile Capacity, 18-inch Augercast Pile, 11 kip Lateral Load -Seismic LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Figure A-I Figure A-2 Figure A-3 Figure A-4 Figure A-5 Figure A-6 Summary Exploration Logs Terms and Symbols for Boring and Test Pit Logs Log of Test Boring BH-1 Cone Penetration Test Log CPT -I Cone Penetration Test Log CPT -2 Cone Penetration Test Log CPT -3 Cone Penetration Test Log CPT -4 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc II PanGEO, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ATS WAREHOUSE 432 SHATTUCK AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 1.0 INTRODUCTION Pan GEO, Inc. (PanGEO) completed a geotechnical engineering study to provide foundation design parameters for the new A TS warehouse in Renton. The study included evaluating the subsurface conditions at the site and providing foundation recommendations for different suppott alternatives for the new warehouse. The following summarizes our findings and conclusions. 1.1 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The site of new warehouse encompasses the two parcels at 428 and 432 Shattuck Avenue South as shown on Figure 1. Current development on the parcels includes a single story commercial building on the south that will be demolished for the new construction and a graveled parking lot on the north. The ground surface on the combined properties is relatively level at about elevation 30 feet. As shown on Figure 2, the 2 to 3 story warehouse will have a length of 90 feet and a width of 40 feet. A truck drive lane and a loading dock will be located on the north side of the building. We anticipate that the main floor of the warehouse will be elevated about 3 to 4 feet above the existing grade to facilitate movement on the loading dock. We also anticipate that column loads from the new structure may be on the order of 100 kips 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK AND AUTHORIZATION Our work was accomplished in accordance with our proposal letter dated October 7, 2014, which was authorized by Mr. Brian Allen with ATS Automation October 15'\ Our work scope included reviewing existing geotechnical data for the site and advancing two cone penetrometer test (CPT) probes to explore subsurface conditions at the site of the warehouse from which we derived design recommendations as discussed in this report. 2.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE On November 25, 2014, we conducted a site reconnaissance to identify indications of differential settlement of existing buildings in the vicinity of the site. During our visit we observed about 2 to 3 inches of differential settlement of a wood framed garage immediately north of the 428 parcel and about 1 inch of differential settlement in the existing single story commercial building on the 432 parcel. Both structures are assumed to be supported on shallow spread footing foundations. The observed settlement confirms the presence of compressible soils ,mderlying the warehouse site. 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 SOILS Subsurface conditions at the site were inferred from the logs of two new CPT probes (CPT-3 and CPT-4) advanced at the site of the warehouse and three previous explorations that were advanced adjacent to the A TS building. The locations of the current and prior explorations are shown on Figure 2. With the exception of CPT-3 that encountered refusal at a depth of about 24 feet, the remaining 3 CPT explorations were advanced to a depth of about 52 feet where each probe encountered refusal. Boring BH-1 from our prior work was advanced to a maximum depth of about 78.5 feet. Consistent subsurface conditions were generally encountered in all explorations as reflected in about 48 feet of alluvium with zones of soft compressible soil and potentially Jiquefiable soil overlying dense to very dense bed load (i.e. sand and gravel) alluvial or outwash deposits. However, the warehouse explorations (CPT-3 and CPT-4) as well as CPT-2 located south of the warehouse site all encountered a dense to very dense upper bed load deposit between depths of about 22 and 32 feet. Subsurface conditions at the warehouse site are graphically depicted in Figure 3 and logs of all explorations are presented in Appendix A. The following describes the soils encountered in the explorations: Upper Alluvium -The materials within about 48 feet of the existing ground surface consist of interbedded sands, silts and clays that were deposited in a low energy environment. Sands within the upper alluvium are typically loose and the silty clays and clayey silts are typically soft. The CPT probes indicate that the upper alluvium may also contain sensitive or compressible materials such as peat. Upper Bed Load Alluvium or Outwash-An upper stratum of bed load deposits- consisting of dense to very dense sand and gravel was encountered between depths of about 22 and 32 feet in the explorations at the warehouse site. CPT-3 encountered refusal in this stratum a depth of about 25 feet whereas CPT-4 was able to advance through this stratum and back into underlying weaker alluvial deposits. Lower Bed load Alluvium or Outwash -With the exception of CPT-3 which encountered refusal at a shallow depth, all remaining site explorations encountered a lower bed load alluvial or outwash deposit at a depth of about 48 feet (El. --18 ft.). This deposit consists of dense to very dense, fine to coarse grained sand with some gravel. While the CPT probes encountered refusal in this stratum, boring BH-1 was able to penetrate this stratum to a depth of 78.5, at which point the boring was terminated. Standard Penetration Test N-values in this stratum typically varied between 35 and 80 bpf. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 2 PanGEO, Inc. 3.2 GROUNDWATER Groundwater was inferred at a depth about 8 feet based on the pore water pressure measurements from the CPT probes. However, groundwater seepage may be encountered closer to the ground surface as related to the interbedded nature of the near surface sands and silts. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The site of the new warehouse is underlain by compressible soils that may settle several inches under the weight of the anticipated 3 to 4 fill that may be used to elevate the floor slab of the building to the loading dock level. Additional settlement may also occur from the high column loads (i.e. -100 kips). Accordingly, ground improvement measures or deep foundations will likely be needed to reduce building settlements to acceptable levels. As a minimum, we recommend surcharging the building with at least 6 feet of soil extending above the planned elevation of the first floor slab to reduce static settlements to tolerable levels to allow the building to be supported on conventional spread footing foundations. The surcharge load, however, would not reduce earthquake induced settlements that may be on the order of I to 2 inches. Alternatively, ground improvement consisting or Geopiers or stone columns may be specified to support the floor slabs and footings of the building. These installations are typically contractor designed to support footing bearing pressures of about 4 ksf and floor slab loads. These elements would typically terminate in the upper bed load stratum at a depth of about 25 feet and should provide static settlements of less than about I inch and additional settlement of about I inch as related to potential liquefaction in the zone of lower alluvium. Finally, the least amount of building settlement (i.e. less than Yz inch) may be achieved with the use of augercast piles extending to the lower bed load deposits to support the building shell and the floor slabs. 18' diameter augercast piles extending at least 5 feet into to the lower bed load deposits would have an allowable compression load of about 120 kips. Augercast piles that terminate in the upper bed load deposits would have a reduced allowable compression capacity of about I 00 kips and settlement characteristics similar to those of the stone column ground improvements. Detailed design recommendations are presented below. 4.1 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS The following provides seismic design parameters for the site that are in conformance with the 2012 International Building Code (IBC), which specifies a design earthquake having a 2% probability of occurrence in 50 years (return interval of2,475 years), and the 2008 USGS seismic hazard maps: 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 3 PanGEO, Inc. Spectral Spectral Design Control Acceleratio Acceleratio Site Spectral Periods Site n at 0.2 sec. n at 1.0 sec. Coefficients Response Class Parameters (sec.) (g) (g) Ss S1 Fa Fv Sos SDI To Ts D 1.44 0.54 1.0 1.5 0.96 0.54 0.11 0.56 4.2 LIQUEFACTION The loose upper and lower alluvial soils underlying the site contain some zones of potentially liquefiable soil. These zones are typically thin and discontinuous such that ground settlements related to potential liquefaction are expected to be on the order of 1 to 2 inches. Because of the depth of these zones (i.e. greater than 10 feet), any liquefaction within these materials would only result in ground settlement which may cause some architectural damage and some structural distress of the building but not a foundation failure. 4.3 PRELOAD FILL The use of conventional shallow footings to support the building should be preceded by placing a static surcharge fill on the site to consolidate the underlying compressible soils. Static settlements may be reduced to about I inch by placing a preload fill that extends at least 6 feet above the elevation of the finished first floor slab. The top of the fill should extend at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the building. The fill should be left to consolidate the underlying soils for at least 4 weeks. Prior to placing the fill, settlement markers should be placed on the ground at 4 locations to allow monitoring the rate of ground settlement. Survey readings should be obtained twice weekly documenting the elevations of the survey markers to confirm the time at which the preload can be removed. While a preload will reduce static settlement, the building may still experience about I to 2 inches of settlement related to potential liquefaction of some of the loose, saturated sands that underlie the site. 4.4 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS Following the placement of the preload fill, conventional spread and strip footings may be constructed to support the building. All footings should be founded a minimum distance of 18 inches below the finished grade and should have a minimum width of 18 inches. Because it is quite likely that the design footing grades will be located over relatively weak cohesive soils, we recommend that all footing be over excavated to a 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 4 PanGEO, Inc. depth of 2 feet and the excavated material replaced with a compacted structural fill which will also serve as a working platform for the footing construction. All footing excavations should observed by PanGEO to confirm that the exposed footing subgrade is consistent with the expected conditions and adequate to support the proposed building. We recommend that the footings be sized using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2 ksf which may be increased by l /3 for transient conditions such as wind and seismic loadings. Total static settlements for the footings as constructed as described above and following placement of the surcharge fill are anticipated to be on the order of I inch with differential settlements of about half this amount. Most settlement will occur during construction as loads are applied. Total building settlements following a large earthquake are expected to be on the order of I to 2 inches. Lateral forces from wind or seismic loading may be resisted by the combination of passive earth pressures acting against the embedded portions of the foundations and by friction acting on the base of the foundations. Passive resistance values may be determined using an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pct). This value includes a factor safety of at least 2 assuming that the properly compacted structural fill will be placed adjacent to the sides of the footings. A coefficient friction of 0.5 may be used to determine the frictional resistance at the base of the footings. This coefficient includes a factor safety of approximate 1.5. 4.5 GROUND IMPROVEMENT In lieu of the surcharge fill, ground improvement consisting of the installation of Geopiers or stone columns that terminate in the upper bed load stratum at a depth of about 25 feet may be conducted to support the footings and floor slabs of the buildings. This type of ground improvement is a contractor design-built element to meet performance specifications for settlement and allowable footing bearing pressure. Contractors capable of conducting such work include Geopier Northwest, Hayward Baker, and Malcolm Drilling. These systems consist of compacting columns ofwell- graded stone to increase the bearing capacity of poor soils, mitigate liquefaction potential, and reduce settlement. In developing a performance specification for this work we recommend that the ground improvement elements be specified as being compatible with a footing allowable bearing pressure of 4 ksf and a maximum static building settlement of I inch. Again, because the design will not improve the soil underlying the upper bed load stratum, the building may experience I to 2 inches of settlement following a large earthquake. The performance of conventional footings may be improved by tying the individual footings together with concrete grade beams. The performance specification may include or exclude floor slab support for the ground improvement elements. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 5 PanGEO, Inc. Although liquefaction could occur during a rare !BC code level earthquake below the treated soils, it is our opinion that this will not result in a bearing failure of the building foundation due to the improved upper crust. 4.6 AUGERCAST PILE FOUNDATIONS Settlement may be reduced to less than Y, inch for both static and dynamic loading by supporting the building shell and floor slabs on 18-inch diameter augercast piles that extend into the lower bed load deposits which were encountered at about elevation -18 feet. Auger-cast piles are installed by drilling with a continuous flight hollow stem auger to the required depth, and pumping grout through the hollow stem of the auger as the auger is withdrawn. After the auger is completely removed, steel reinforcement is placed in the grout-filled hole. The rate at which the auger is withdrawn must be consistent with grout supply. If the auger is withdrawn too quickly, the pile will be under-grouted, resulting in "necking" of the pile or contamination of grout materials from caving soil. We recommend that the following design parameters for sizing the augercast piles: Minimum pile diameter: Minimum pile embedment in dense sand: IS-inches 5 feet (120 kip pile) IO feet (200 kip pile) Minimum Pile Tip Elevation: -23 feet (120 kip pile) -28 feet (200 kip pile) Compressive Capacity (18" dia.): 120 kips all./ 240 kips ult. (5' embed.) 200 kips all./ 400 kips ult. ( 1 O' embed.) Tension Capacity (18" dia.): 70 kip all./ 140 kips ult. (5' embed.) 140 kips all. / 280 kips ult. (IO' embed.) The augercast piles should be spaced a minimum distance of 3 times the pile diameter. Lateral loads acting on the building will be resisted by a combination of passive earth pressure acting on the pile caps and grade beams as well as from the lateral resistance of the augercast piles. The computer program ALLPILE was used to evaluate the lateral resistance of the augercast piles assuming a fixed head condition at the pile cap. The results of these analyses are presented in Figures 4 and 5. The analyses presented in Figure 4 represent the pile behavior up to the point where the underlying soils liquefy or experience significant degradation. These conditions would likely govern for most of the earthquake ground shaking. The analyses presented in Figure 5 reflect conditions of degraded or liquefied soil, which may be more reflective of conditions near the end of the earthquake or after cessation of strong ground shaking. Both analyses were conducted using lateral loads that would result in about Y, inch of pile deflection. Lower applied 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 6 PanGEO, Inc. loads would generally result in proportionately lower deflections. Because of the relatively wide pile spacing in the new addition, group effects are not expected to control pile capacities. As an alternative to the deeper piles, the augercast piles may be designed to bear within the upper bed load deposits at a design tip elevation of+ 3 feet. These piles would have an allowable compression capacity of I 00 kips and an allowable tension capacity of 50 kips. Augercast piles bearing within the upper bed load deposits would have the same settlement characteristics as the stone column ground improvement option. 4. 7 STRUCTURAL FILL AND COMPACTION We recommend using all weather material such as City of Seattle Mineral Aggregate Type 17 (2003 City of Seattle Standard Specifications, 9-03.12(3)) or WSDOT Gravel Borrow (9-03.14(1)) for structural till. The backfill should be moisture conditioned to within about 3 percent of optimum moisture content, placed in loose, horizontal lifts less than 8 inches in thickness, and systematically compacted to a dense and relatively unyielding condition and to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D 1557. 4.8 FLOOR SLABS Slab on grade floors (i.e. floors that are not structurally supported) should be constructed over subgrade that has been compacted to a dens€ and unyielding condition. We recommend use of a modulus of sub grade reaction of 100 pci for the floor slab design. All floor slabs should be constructed on a minimum 4-inch thick capillary break consisting of free-draining, crushed rock or well-graded gravel compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. The capillary break material should have no more than 10 percent passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 5 percent by weight of the material passing the U.S. Standard No. 100 sieve. City of Seattle Type 22 material meets this gradation requirement. We also recommend that a I 0-mil polyethylene vapor barrier be placed below the slab. 4.9 STORMW ATER INFILTRATION The cone penetrometer probes suggest that poor draining cohesive soils, such as silty clays, are the predominant materials that underlie the site. Consequently, we recommend that any infiltration scheme be based on a conservative infiltration rate of about 0.1 to 0.3 inches per hour. Any designs assuming groundwater infiltration should be confirmed with additional site explorations. 4.10 PAVEMENT We recommend that the pavement section for the truck lanes consist of 4 inches ofHMA overlying 9 inches of Crushed Surfacing Base Course (CSBC) (WSDOT 9-03.09(3)) over 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 7 PanGEO, Inc. the compacted subgrade. All materials within the pavement section should be compacted to 95% of the materials maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D 1557. A lesser pavement section consisting of 3 inches of HMA over 6 inches of CSBC may be used for auto parking and drive Janes. 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 MATERIAL REUSE Native on-site soils with silt contents in excess of about 5% may be difficult to handle and compact during wet weather. If use of the existing soils is planned, any excavated soil should be stockpiled and protected with plastic sheeting to prevent softening from rainfall. 5.2 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATIONS Surface runoff can be controlled during construction by careful grading practices. Typically, this includes the construction of shallow, upgrade perimeter ditches or low earthen berms to collect runoff and prevent water from entering excavations. Temporary erosion control may require the use of hay bales on the downhill side of the project to prevent water from leaving the site and potential storm water detention to trap sand and silt before the water is discharged to a suitable outlet. All collected water should be directed to a permanent discharge system such as a storm sewer. It should be noted that the site soils are prone to surficial erosion. Special care should be taken to avoid surface water on open cut excavations, and exposed slopes should be protected with visqueen. Temporary provisions may also be required such as the use of quarry spalls at the entrance to the construction site to reduce the possibility of the offsite transport of soil on the truck tires. Permanent control of surface water and roof runoff should be incorporated in the final grading design. All collected runoff should be directed into conduits that carry the water away from the pavement or structure and into storm drain systems or other appropriate outlets. Adequate surface gradients should be incorporated into the grading design such that surface runoff is directed away from structures. 5.3 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK General recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet conditions are presented below: • Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize subgrade exposure to wet weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil should be followed promptly by the placement and compaction of clean structural fill. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 8 PanGEO, Inc. The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. • During wet weather, the allowable fines content of the structural fill should be reduced to no more than 5 percent by weight based on the portion passing%- inch sieve. The fines should be non-plastic. • The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run-off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water. • Bales of straw and/or geotextile silt fences should be strategically located to control erosion and the movement of soil. Erosion control measures should be installed along all the property boundaries. • Excavation slopes and soils stockpiled on site should also be covered with plastic sheets. 6.0 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES The recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate program of tests and observations will be made during construction to verify compliance with these recommendations. These tests and observations should include, by not necessarily be limited to, the following: • Review final project plans and specifications • Verify implementation of erosion control measures • Monitor pile/ground improvement installations • Verify adequacy of slab and pavement subgrade • Confirm the adequacy of the compaction of structural backfill • Other consultation as may be required during construction Pending the completion of the final design drawings, we will provide you a proposal for construction monitoring services to address the above items. Geotechnical construction monitoring, by the geotechnical engineer of record, may be required by the City of Renton to obtain an occupancy permit for the building. We will provide the services necessary to assure you compliance with the Building Permit. 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 9 PanGEO, Inc. 7.0 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by the consultant team for the design of the proposed warehouse. Recommendations contained in this report are based on a site reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program, review of pertinent subsurface information, and our understanding of the project. The study was performed using a mutually agreed-upon scope of work. Variations in subsurface conditions may exist between the locations of the explorations and the actual conditions underlying the site. The nature and extent of soil variations may not be evident until construction occurs. If any soil conditions are encountered at the site that are different from those described in this report, we should be immediately notified to review the applicability of our recommendations. Additionally, we should also be notified to review the applicability of our recommendations if there are any changes in the project scope. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Additionally, the scope of our work specifically excludes the assessment of environmental characteristics, particularly those involving hazardous substances. This report has been prepared for planning and design purposes for specific application to the proposed project in accordance with the generally accepted standards of local practice at the time this report was written. No warranty, express or implied, is made. This report may be used only by the client and for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both off and on-site), or other factors including advances in our understanding of applied science, may change over time and could materially affect our findings. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after 24 months from its issuance. Pan GEO should be notified if the project is delayed by more than 24 months from the date of this report so that we may review the applicability of our conclusions considering the time lapse. It is the client's responsibility to see that all parties to this project, including the designer, contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 10 PanGEO, Inc. contractor's option and risk. Any party other than the client who wishes to use this report shall notify PanGEO of such intended use and for permission to copy this report. Based on the intended use of the report, PanGEO may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be reissued. Noncompliance with any of these requirements will release PanGEO from any liability resulting from the use this report. W. Paul Grant, P .E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer 14-269 ATS Warehouse Rpt.doc 11 PanGEO, Inc. REFERENCES International Building Code (!BC), 2012, International Code Council WSDOT, 2012, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridges, and Municipal Construction. 14-269 A TS Warehouse Rpt.doc 12 PanGEO, Inc. ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue So. VICINITY MAP PanGE@ I • C O R P O R A T E D Renton , Washington Project No. Figure No . 14-269 E) FlRE I CMI YDRAHT lrlf.WAY M (E) Wf.WAY Cl) w ~ L I .cJ -------- ~ ._.---,-- (.) IEiYED SHEET NOTES I 0 REQUIRED RECYCLING AND REFUSE AR£A. (y 15' SETBACK REQUIRED FOR BUILDING IF J.ESS. 1HAN 25 FEET IN. HBGHT. (V NEW PARKING SfAI.L (MAX. Al.LOWED, 1 SfAI.L PER 1,000 NET SQ. FT.). 0 LOADING ZONE. <v BUILDING ENJR.6NCE. (V A PEDESTRIAN TRUSS BRIDGE ,. ~I~ -, WHIT- WORTH 1ST. ¢::11 => I s I I I i_ ~AA\,A'\~AAAAv:l\AAA,d:.:<:.\., I ~ ~ " ~ ~ $i " I 1i: ;I :s .:, ~ EET :;HT :c: Cl) ~ "'- =1 ~ ;, Approximate Scale ~ 1":20' • B-1 PanGEO Boring e CPT-1 Cone Penetrometer Test \ PanGE@ I • C O R r O R A T I D \ \\ ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington PLAN SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN Project No. Figure No. ~ ~ t I ~ A40 SECTION A-A' 35 30 ,----~c~~----, Proposed Warehouse CPT4 ! 25 20 15 10 Clay and Silt beds ?-------------------j--___________ ? . ---' Dense Sandy Alluvium occasional Silty to Clayey interbeds ---·--·-·· ?--------------r-------------------::1:: lnterbedded fine Sand, Silt and Clay, scattered organics and peat 5 ? -----~-----------------c::::=:=:=:::: ---? ---------------------------------? ----------------------------------? Dense Sand and Gravel Bedload Deposit 0 0 -5 Q) .l!! §.-10 C: ,g -15 "' > ~ -20 w -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 -60 -65 L 0 10 20 Note: All soils under the site are interpreted as Alluvium. Dense sand layer at depth is interpreted as bedload alluvium, but may be of marine or outwash origin. 0 100 200 300 400 500 Qc (TSF) 30 40 50 ?----------------c -----------------7 lnterbedded fine Sand, Silt and Clay Dense Sand and Gravel Bedload Deposit ?----------------------------------------? 60 Legend: CPT-2 Dense, Coarse Bedload Alluvium or Outwash ,--,---,----,-----.-------- 70 80 Distance in Feet 0 100 200 300 400 500 Qc (TSF) 90 100 Notes: 110 120 1. Site topography interpreted from King County GIS data. ~;.;c;;----T'-T"op,-:oe,ographic Surface Groundwater 1 Level A' 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 -5 Q) .l!! C: -10 '=- C: 0 -15 :;::, m > -20 a> w -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 -60 -65 130 140 • • i s.;i1-u~;; =,- eo~n~~~ PanGE<+> ATS Warehouse 432 Shattuck Avenue South Renton, Washington GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE SECTION A -A' ~ ~ .:t Project No. Figure No. ;! 14-269 3 I • C O • P O K A T a D ~? ti t; ::0 "' <D (/j :, ::,-)> S" ~ -I :, C: (/j • n :E :E )>"" .. ., ~ "' < <D ::,-<D ::,- -·::::, 0 :, C: C: cs_ CD en 0 (/j <D :, 0 " ..Q. a z C: -::,- ~It ~I.S~r .J:i,. "tJ I )> "-' rz""' o, )>Om CD -1::C~ !lJ l> r ~ ~ ~ ;g ,;om Ooo z l>)>l> ~ C en "tJ ' ... )> •1cn,:,Q --1--1 l>'-< ... m 0 Depth (z} rrom Pite Top-fl 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 .Q.50 'r1=0.49' St=0.000455 Pile Tip Yl=0.000 St==0.000000 DEFLECTION, yt -in 0 -+0.50 yt=Oat14.7-f! St=O at 18.5-fl Head 'r1=0.499 Max. Yl=0.499 Head St=0.002470 -200 v' MOMENT -kip-ft 0 Head M:imente-186.7 Max. t.-'£iment=186.7 +200 -50 SHEAR-kip 0 Head Shear-40.0 Max Shear=40.0 +50 y -lbffl3 ¢, C--kiplft2 k-lb/in3 e50-% 110 30 0 45 Saod 52.6 30 0 30 Saod 62.6 40 0 140 "'"" E-kip/h2=3000 l-in4=5153 Elevation rrom Pile Top-ft 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -SO ~? Ii Depth (Z) DEFL.ECTION, yt -In MOMENT -kip.ft SHEAR -kip Elevation from trom Pile Top-ft -0.50 0 +0.50 'v -100 0 +100 -20 0 +20 y -lblft3 ,ti C-kiplft2 k-lb/in3 e50-% Pile Top-ft ~ 0 Yl=0.47:;I I I ijiiiiltlllJlll71 111~111111111111111 ,,1,,1,,1, 1 ,,,,r,111n 47.6 0 0.2 5 0 St=0.000303 Solt Clay .i,. "' N I f-10 I I I\ I I I I -10 ;u (J) .. ::r > am~ 0 ::i: (J) :::l C • n ::E ::e ,.. ., ., > ~ ti)< .. I f'o 1 I I / I I I -20 ::r .. ::r -:::10 :::l CC yt=O at 23.0-ft cc .. ti) 6' (I) CD :::l 0 I f-I St:O at 27.2-ft C -::r I ~30 I I \I I I .30 .,, .Q_ " u z 0 l I ~40 I I I I I -40 ... ~ 1-;r; 23 ;; 5: a, ,, ' I t I I I I I 62.6 40 0 140 (0 > z .... Sood -ioi m ::c I f-50 I I I I I -50 ~~~~ E; r-G>r= l.o ro ,mm Pila Tip Head vt=0.472 Head >.bment=-75.3 Head Shea~11 ·:o z O ;u 0 Yt=0.000 0 >~> St=0.000000 Max. Yr-0.472 "'1ax. M:iment=75.3 l'Aax. Shear:11.0 E-~:3000 Head St=D.002576 1-in4=5153 "' C en ,;, -60 '-1> (J) ,, 0 m-:;! -r en m 31: 0 APPENDIX A Summary Exploration Logs RELATIVE DENSITY/ CONSISTENCY s Density SPT Approx. Relative Consistency SPT Approx. Undrained Shear N-values Density(%) N-values strength (psij Very loose <4 <15 Very Soft <2 <250 Loose 4to 10 15· 35 Soft 21o4 250. 500 Med. Dense 10 to 30 35-65 Med. Stiff 4to8 500 • 1000 Dense 30 to 50 65-85 Stiff Bto 15 1000 • 20DD Very Dense >50 85 -1DD Very Stiff 151030 2000 -40DD Hard >3D >40DD UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS Gravel 50% or more of the coarse fraction retained on the#4 sieve. Use duet symbols (eg. GP-GM) for 5% to 12% fines. GRAVEL (<5% flnes) : GRAVEL (>12% fines) GROUP DESCRIPTIONS . ~l'I j _l'lell-g_rade_d _GIIA_VEcL ............................ . GP: Poo~y-graded GRAVEL ···························································· -~~L.~!111'.~IIA~·L····································· GC: Clayey GRAVEL .......................•.•..........•...••.....••••..•.••••••.••.••••. ·····-····················································· Sand 50% or more of the coarse fraction passing the #4 sieve. Use dual symbols (eg. SP-SM) for5%to 12% fines. Silt and Clay S0%or more passing #200 sieve SAND (<5% fines) : SAND (>12% flnes) Liquid Limit< 50 Liquid Limit> 50 Highly Organic Soils tf . ~I'/ j_ .l'/ell-g.rade_d .s~N.D ............................... . . ~P. j_ .P~orl_Y;S'.~~.~ 5:'~D ...............•.....••.....•. -~j__SiliY,~A.N°. ....................................... . SC j Clayey SAND ·····-····················································· ML: SILT ·····•······················································ .~L. ].L~~~.SIL~ ••....•......•....•............•.•....... == .?~.i .. ?.r~~~-i~-~I~-~-~~-~~! .............•....•......•.. MH : Elastic SILT ..... ~ ................ ~ ................................... . -~H. ].FatC.LA_Y···· ..................................... . . -~~ .1.. ~~~~~i~ ~I-~~-~~-?-~: ................... . "' PT j PEAT Notes: 1. Soil exploration logs contain material descriptions based on visual observation and field tests using a system modified from the Uniform Soil Classification System {USCS). 'Nhere necessafY laboratory tests have ·been conducted (as noted in the "Other Tests" column), unit descnptions may include a classification. Please refer to the discussioos in the report text for a more complete description of the subsurface cooditions. 2. The graphic symbols given above are not inclusive of all symbols that may appear on the borehole kxls. other symbols may be used where field observatioos indicated mixed soil constituents Of dual constituenl materials. DESCRIPTIONS OF SOIL STRUCTURES Layered: Units of material distinguished by color and/or composition from material units above and below Laminated: Layers of soil typically 0.05 to 1mm thick, max. 1 cm Lens: Layer of soil that pinches out laterally lnterlayered: Alternating layers of differing soil material Pocket: Erratic, discontinuous deposit of limited extent Homogeneous: Soil with uniform cdOf and composition throughout Fissured: Breaks along defined planes Slickensided: Fracture planes that are polished ct glossy Blocky: Angular soil lumps that resist breakdown Disrupted: Soil that is broken and mixed Scattered: Less than one per foot Numerous: More than one per foot BCN: Angle between ~ding plane and a plane nOi'hlal to core axis COMPONENT DEFINITIONS COMPONENT SIZE / SIEVE RANGE COMPONENT SIZE / SIEVE RANGE Boulder: J > 12 inches Cobbles: 3 lo 12 inches Gravel Coarse Gravel: 3 to 314 inches Fine Gravel: j 3/4 inches to #4 sieve !PanGE<+> ~ I N C O R P O R A T & D § Phone: 206.262.0370 Sand : Coarse Sand: #4 to #10 sieve (4.5 to 2.0 mm) Medium Sand: #10 to#40 sieve (2.0 to 0.42 mm) Fine Sand: #40 to#200 sieye (0.42 to 0.074 mm) Sitt j 0.074 to 0.002 mm Clay <0.002 mm Terms and Symbols for Boring and Test Pit Logs TEST SYMBOLS for In Sttu and Laboratory Tests listed in "Other Tests" column. CBR California Bearing Ratio Comp Compaction Tests Con Consolidation DD Dry Density OS Direct Shear %F Fines Content GS Grain Size Perm PenneabHity pp Pocket Penetrometer R R-value SG Specific Gralrity TV Torvane TXC Triaxial Compression ucc Unconfined Compressioo SYMBOLS Samplenn Situ test types and intervals f\71 2-inch OD Spilt Spoon, SPT ~ (140Jb. hammer, 30" drop) ~ 3.25-inch OD Spilt Spoon ~ (300Jb hammer, 30" drop) I] Non-standard penelration [I last (see boring log for details) I Thin wall (Shelby) tube ~ Grab a Rockcore m VaneShear MONITORING WELL 5l.. Groundwater Level at time ofdnlling (ATD) :r, Static Groundwater Lev~ Cement/ Concrete Seal Bentonite grout/ seal Silica sand backfill Slotted tip Slough B0tt001 of Boring MOISTURE CONTENT Dry Dusly, dry to the touch Moist Damp but no visible water Wet. Visible free water Figure A-1 Project: Job Number: Location: Coordinates: ci " g C>-z (I) 1-- .<: a. " ci C. E E (I) 0 "' ., Cf) (/J 0 S-1 5 S-2 S-3 10 S-4 S-5 15 S-6 S-7 20 S-8 S-9 25 S-10 ATS Building Renovation Surface Elevation: -30 06-221 Top of Casing Elev.: N/A 450 Shattuck Avenue South, Renton, WA Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger Northing: , Easting: .S © -"' ~ 1ii 2 2 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 3 10 9 "' iii (I) 0 f-.c ~ E (I) >, .<: Cf) 0 'SJ_ Sampling Method: SPT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Base Course Loose, rusty brown SAND: moist becoming wet, fine to coarse grained, interbeds of gray silty clay at top, trace fine gravel, laminated. (Alluvium) Well graded sand, trace fine gravel, laminae of peat and silt at tip, 10° dip Soft, green gray, slightly Clayey SILT with SILT beds: wet, non-plastic and low plastic, rapid ditatancy, trace fine sand, wood and peaty material scattered throughout. sub-horizontal laminae. (Alluvium) Groundwater interpreted from CPT logs Soft, interbedded green-gray Silty CLAY and Silty fine SAND: wet. low plastic, 6" beds, laminated. (Alluvium) Grading to interbedded fine sand and silty clay, soft/loose, beds 1/4" to 4", sub-horizontal, laminated Loose, gray SAND: wet, fine to med!um grained, poor1y graded, sub-horizontally layered, 20% interbeds of silty clay. (Alluvium) Grading to loose, gray, fine to medium sand with occasional organic grains, laminated with occasional silty clay interbeds Loose, gray, fine to medium sand, wet, discrete silt interbeds, horizontal layering, non-plastic, rapid dilatancy, but slightly sticky Soft, green gray, Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT: wet, non-plastic to low plastic, rapid to slow dilatancy, laminated with occasional fine sand interlaminae, scattered organic bits along bedding. (Alluvium) Medium dense to loose, gray SAND: wet, fine to coarse, well graded but with finer/coarser interbeds, trace silt in fine beds, sub-horizontal layering. (Alluvium) PL I ~RQD 0 N-Value .A. Moisture LL • I Recovery~ 50 100 Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: 79.0ft 1/19/07 1/19/07 SHE Remarks: Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with an autotrip CME hammer mechanism. Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: ~ Drilling Company: Holocene Drilling !PanGE@ (!) , • c o R p o • A T I! D Fi"gure A 2 9.P.h .. o.ne .. : ... z.o ... s ... zs .. z ... o .. 3 .. 70 ..... ___________________________________ -_. LOG OF TEST BORING B-1 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 1 of 3 Project: ATS Building Renovation Job Number: 06-221 Surlace Elevation: Top of Casing Elev.: -30 NIA Location: 450 Shattuck Avenue South, Renton, WA Coordinates: Northing: , Easting: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Hollow Stem Auger SPT §: .c a. (I) Cl 35 40 45 50 55 ci ~ .£ "' z C. 1ii 0 co (I) Q) -I-.c a. ~ iii E MATERIAL DESCRIPTION E .,:: ?ii "' 0 en ii'i +---Hf-~+----1-t-1rrl~~-~=-~-~=~~~=-=~~----O Soft, gray SILT: wet, non-plastic to low plastic, rapid dilatancy, S-11 S-12 S-13 S-14 S-15 S-16 S-17 2 3 0 1 2 0 2 4 6 15 19 7 23 17 1 11 23 7 22 22 /(\ ······ !!{ :::::: !if ······ lit :::::: sub-horizontally laminated, 1" fine sand and brown peaty laminae at Up. (Alluvium) (Continued) Loose, gray SAND: wet, fine lo coarse grained, well graded, homogenous, occasional fine gravel, sub-horizontally layered, 3" silty clay bed at tip, sharp contact, scattered brown organics. (Alluvium) Soft, gray, Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT: moist to wet, interbedded, low to medium plastic or non-plastic, laminated with occasional peaty laminae, sand seam. (Alluvium) Grading to silty fine sand, laminated, homogeneous Dense, rusty brown SAND: wet, fine to coarse grained, well graded, moderately weathered, with subrounded fine to coarse gravel, sub-horizontal layering. (Bedload Alluvium) Mainly volcanic clasts, some other lithologies lnterbedded fine to medium sand with fine to coarse sand and gravel, moderately weathered with minor clayey matrix Heaving conditions, rusty brown return water, uneven drive indicates finer/coarser beds. Coal clast on auger from about this level PL I ~RQD N-Value • Moisture • LL I !}! ~ 65 -L._L..JL._ _ _1._ __ ..:.;:.:.i ______ ~---------------'----------........... --......... --......... ~ Completion Depth: 79.0ft Remarks: Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Date Borehole Started: 1119/07 Hammer operated with an autotrip CME hammer mechanism. Date Borehole Completed: 1119/07 Logged By: SHE ~ Drilling Company: Holocene Drilling §!i-==~~-~-'c,----=,-----~---~---------------------------------1 !PanGE@ (!) •• c o 11 • o II A T E D fi"gure A 2 g'"P:;.:h~o:::n:,e: .. 2:,:0:::6·.::2:::62~.0:=3~70:,_ ___________________________________ -... LOG OF TEST BORING 8-1 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 2 of 3 ~ ~ b " ci w Project: Job Number: Location: Coordinates: g ci " z a. >, QJ f-- .c i -0. a. E QJ E 0 "' ra <fl (/) 65 S-18 70 S-19 75 S-20 80 85 90 ~ 95 ATS Building Renovation Surface Elevation: -30 06-221 Top of Casing Elev.: NIA 450 Shattuck. Avenue South, Renton, WA Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger Northing: , Easting: .!: (!) -<I) ,: .Q "' 4 14 21 7 21 31 16 29 40 Sampling Method: SPT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Dense, rusty brown SAND: wet, fine to coarse grained, well graded, moderately weathered, with subrounded fine to coarse gravel, sub-horizontal layering. (Bedload Alluvium) (Continued) Dense, yellow brown, fine to coarse sand: wet, moderately weathered, subangular to subrounded, blocky to platy, minor matrix Very dense, brown sand with gravel, wet, well graded, bedded and laminated with aligned tabular grains Bottom of Boring PL I ~RQD 0 N-Value A Moisture • LL I Recovery~ 50 100 Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: 79.0ft 1119/07 1119/07 SHE Remarks: Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with an autotrip CME hammer mechanism. Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: ~ Drilling Company: Holocene Drilling !PanGE@ (!I 1 • c o R p o R A T • D Fi"gure A 2 g"'P'"'h,..o.,n,.e: ... 2.,0"'6."'2"'62:;;.0,:3a.70._ ___________________________________ -_. LOG OF TEST BORING 8-1 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. Sheet 3 of 3 PanGeo, Inc. Depth (fl) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Tip Resistance QcTSF --,-------T---,--- • 1 sensitive fine grained • 2 organic material •3 clay Operator: Dafni Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DSG0708 250 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 0 6 Maximum Depth= 51.18 feet • 4 silty clay to clay • 5 clayey silt to silty clay • 6 sandy silt to clayey silt •Soil behavior type and $PT based on data from UBC-1983 CPT Date/Time: 1/9/200710:23:47 AM Location: ATS Building Renovation Job Number: 06-221 Pore Pressure PwPSI Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 SPTN" 60% Hammer -20 50 0 12 ' ' :5,, : _ _L_I ~-:-~ I I I I I ' ' ' ' 0 50 ' '' '' _I __ I_ '' ' ' '' '' '' '' Depth Increment= 0.164 feet • 7 silty sand to sandy silt a 8 sand to silty sand •e sand Northwest Cone Exploration • 1 O gravelly sand to sand a 11 very stiff fine grained (") • 12 sand to clayey sand (") Fig. A-3 PanGeo, Inc. Depth (ft) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Operator: Dafni Sounding: CPT-02 Cone Used: DSG0708 Tip Resistance QcTSF I 250 1\-L--, ----:----i---~ ---- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '---,--C? ' > <::: __ ' I __L-.---__J I 1___,-J I I ct--~ ' ' ' -=:> I f-?'--:-------T----,---- ~ ~: L ' -= '' >• ~~----: r , ~ ' ' I --- ' --- I I I I L I I I r---0----:----+ ---, ---- c...._ I I I >' ..::::-" ~ ',_ ' ~-~' ' -=1----===- c-[_ __ i ' ___ _J ____ I --------r---+, --, ' ___ , __ _ -~zc---:---- ---.---~= 0 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 6 • 1 sensitive fine grained • 2 organic material •3 clay Maximum Depth= 52.33 feet silty clay to clay clayey silt to silty clay sandy silt to clayey silt Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 CPT Date/Time: 1/9/2007 11 :59:45 AM Location: ATS Building Renovation Job Number: 0&-221 Pore Pressure PwPSI Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 SPTN" 60% Hammer -10 25 0 12 '' '' ''' ''' ''' 0 50 '' 1,,,-1-1- 1 I I I I I I I I I '' ' '' ' I I I I I ~, I I I I I I I I 1L1 I I I I 1,J\ I I I I 1'1-,_I 11111~ ·x1,,1 I I I I I I <1(1 I I I I I I 'r¥1 • I I I I I I LI I I I , "1 I --.-1-1- ~ " " " ' I I I I I '' '' ,c~ : I i°ll I I I : ,ri I 6 : :: ' '' ' ' :~--!-)_: f ''' '' ' ' '' ' :{ ,J (: ! Ci ' 'J I 1;.l I~ I : 1'-~ I I I ~I I I I 1"'w_,1 1~,1 I(~ I I I i~ I I I I '' '' '' '' _I_ - ' '' ' '' I I I I Depth Increment= 0.164 feet • 7 silty sand to sandy silt • 10 gravelly sand to sand f'.iii 8 sand to silty sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (') •9 sand • 12 sand to clayey sand (·) Northwest Cone Exploration Fig. A-4 Pangeo Depth (ft) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Tip Resistance QcTSF ' ---,--T--r---,--r· ' ' -,- ,. ' -_I_ - ' ' ' _L _ _J __ J ____ l __ _.l __ L_ a 1 sensitive fine grained • 2 organic material •3 clay lnSitu Engineering Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-03 Cone Used: DDG1254 800 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 0 6 ' -, ' '-- ' L_I__J_.J_l. Maximum Depth= 24.44 feet a 4 silty clay to clay a 5 clayey silt to silty clay • 6 sandy silt to clayey silt *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 CPT Datemme: 1112512014 8:00:34 AM LocaUon: 432 Shattuck Ave Job Number. 14-279 Pore Pressure PwPSI Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 SPTN" 60% Hammer -10 60 ' -,- __ J ' ' ' ' I_J_ _ .l _L ..l 0 12 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' 1-1- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' L_I_I_J_J_JJ.l_ '' 0 100 ' ' ' ' '' ' '' I I I I ' I I I I I I I I ' ' ' ' ' ' -1---' ' _1 ___ _ ' '' ' ' J.J_J_j __ l_l_ ' '' '' '' '' Depth Increment= 0.164 feet • 7 silty sand to sandy silt • 8 sand to silty sand •s sand • 10 gravelly sand to sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (") a 12 sand to clayay sand (") Fig. A-5 Pangeo Depth (ft) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 Tip Resistance QcTSF ' ' 1--T--,----,---,- ' ' ' -i--,--T--r--,--,--r- .!_ -- -' Ill 1 sensitive fine grained • 2 organic material • 3 clay lnSitu Engineering Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-04 Cone Used: DDG1254 800 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 0 6 ,.::r-,--,,1 1 ' -' Maximum Depth = 51.18 feet silty clay to clay clayey silt to silty clay sandy silt to clayey silt Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 CPT Date/Time: 11/25/2014 8:42:57 AM Location: 432 Shattuck Ave Job Number: 14-279 Pore Pressure PwPSI Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 SPTW 60% Hammer -10 60 ,- 0 12 ' '' ' ''' ''' 0 100 '' ' '' ' '' '' I I I 1 ' ' ' I I I I I I I TL---i-1-1--,-,' '' '' '' IC.' J. J. _J _J _I_ Depth Increment= 0.164 feet • 7 silty sand to sandy silt r!, 8 sand to silty sand •9 sand • 10 gravelly sand to sand • 11 very stiff fine grained (*) • 12 sand to clayey sand (·J Fig. A-6