Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Technical_Information_Report_250317_v1 Technical Information Report Project: Oakesdale Avenue Storm Replacement Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055 SWP 27-4030 PREPARED BY: Jack Witecki City of Renton, Civil Engineering Intern REVIEWED BY: Jared McDonald, PE City of Renton, Civil Engineer III Date: December 2021 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Project Overview ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Post-Development Conditions ...................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Conditions and Requirements Summary .......................................................................................... 1 2.1 Core Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 1 2.1.1 CR 1 – Discharge at the Natural Location ............................................................................. 2 2.1.2 CR 2 – Offsite Analysis ........................................................................................................... 2 2.1.3 CR 3 – Flow Control Facilities ................................................................................................ 2 2.1.4 CR 4 – Conveyance System ................................................................................................... 2 2.1.5 CR 5 – Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention ........................................................ 2 2.1.6 CR 6 – Maintenance and Operations .................................................................................... 3 2.1.7 CR 7 – Financial Guarantees and Liability ............................................................................. 3 2.1.8 CR 8 – Water Quality Facilities .............................................................................................. 3 2.1.9 CR 9 – On-Site BMPs ............................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Special Requirements ................................................................................................................... 3 2.2.1 SR 1 – Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements .............................................................. 3 2.2.2 SR 2 – Flood Hazard Area Delineation .................................................................................. 3 2.2.3 SR 3 – Flood Protection Facilities .......................................................................................... 3 2.2.4 SR 4 – Source Controls .......................................................................................................... 4 2.2.5 SR 5 – Oil Control .................................................................................................................. 4 2.2.6 SR 6 – Aquifer Protection Area ............................................................................................. 4 3.0 Offsite Analysis .................................................................................................................................. 4 4.0 Flow Control, Low Impact Development (LID) and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design ...... 4 4.1 Flow Control .................................................................................................................................. 4 4.2 Water Quality System (Part E) ...................................................................................................... 4 5.0 Conveyance System Analysis and Design .......................................................................................... 5 6.0 Special Reports and Studies .............................................................................................................. 5 7.0 Other Reports.................................................................................................................................... 5 8.0 CSWPP Plan Analysis and Design ...................................................................................................... 5 ii 9.0 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant .............................................. 10 10.0 Operations and Maintenance Plan ................................................................................................. 10 11.0 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 10 Appendices Appendix A Section 1.0 Figures Figure 1-1……….TIR Worksheet Figure 1-2……….Vicinity Map Figure 1-3……….Drainage Basin Figure 1-4……….Soils Map Appendix B Section 2.0 Figures Figure 2-1……….Conveyance Calculations Figure 2-2……….WWHM 25-Year/100-Year Conveyance Flows Technical Information Report 1 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report accompanies the civil engineering plans and documents for the replacement and upsizing of storm drain pipe 165404 located at Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, Washington. The site includes storm conveyance improvement along the right-of-way of Oakesdale Avenue SW. The project site is approximately 0.25 acres in size. See Appendix A, Figure 1-1 for the TIR Worksheet and Figure 1-2 for a Site Location Map. The site is located within the City of Renton, which adheres to the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (RSWDM). 1.2 Existing Conditions The current right-of-way site is developed with a concrete road, a sidewalk on the Northwest side of the street, street lighting, and water, sewer, power, and communication utilities. The site is adjacent to five residential homes, three with driveways connecting to the street near the anticipated job site. The site generally slopes to the southwest, with an elevation change of approximately 10 feet over the 140-foot run of the pipe, going from 170 ft elevation to 160 ft. There are slopes present onsite ranging from 1 to 8 percent. Downstream of the site, there is a steep slope down to the Black River wetlands. Though water properly conveyed from the site does not flow over the 63% slope that makes up the steepest portion of this larger slope, the water is ultimately discharged into a gully with a 20% slope. The soil onsite is composed of Urban land- Beausite complex soils, though the drainage basin also features significant areas of Arents and Alderwood soils. The depth to the water table is estimated to be greater than 80 inches. See Appendix A, Figure 1-4, for more in-depth soil information. The site is encompassed in a single threshold discharge area (TDA A), that generally sheet flows to the southwest and is collected either in a catchbasin on the northern side of the street (Facility ID: 185068) located at the intersection of Oakesdale Ave SW and SW Sunset Blvd, or in the drainage ditch that runs along the south side of Oakesdale Ave SW. 1.3 Post-Development Conditions The project proposes to replace the existing degraded 18” storm conveyance pipe (Facility ID: 165404) with a new 18” pipe. The new stormwater conveyance pipe will convey stormwater flows from upstream pipes and ultimately discharge into the Black River wetland. Runoff collection will not be altered by the replacement, and the drainage basin served by the pipe can be seen in Appendix A Fig 1-3. All surfaces impacted by the construction will be replaced back to the original existing conditions. See section 2.0 for further discussions regarding stormwater requirements 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Core Requirements Per RSWDM Figure 1.1.2.A the Oakesdale Avenue Storm Replacement SW Storm Replacement Project triggers a Targeted Drainage Review. The project shall require approximately 7,000 sf of land disturbing area. However, all the proposed work is utility work that shall be replacing any impacted surfaces to their Technical Information Report 2 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement existing condition. Because the proposed work is considered utility work, all impervious surfaces replaced are not considered to be “replaced impervious surfaces” per the definitions in Chapter 1 of RSWDM. 2.1.1 CR 1 – Discharge at the Natural Location The project site in the existing condition drains to the street curb and gutters on the north side of the street and then sheet flows southwest along the street to the existing catch basin located at the intersection of SW Oakesdale Ave Pl and SW Sunset Blvd. On the south side of the street, stormwater is collected in an open drainage ditch. This conveyance system collects surface water and discharges into Thunder Hills Creek. The proposed project will upgrade a piped conveyance system that conveys surface water from upstream of the site and ultimately discharges it to flow through a ravine into the Black River riparian forest/wetlands. Surface water collection at the site will not be modified by this project. The project site in the existing condition drains downstream of the damaged 18-inch pipe that the project proposes to replace. The proposed project will replace the 18-inch pipe with a new pipe of the same size in the same location as before. It will not modify the discharge point for the flow. 2.1.2 CR 2 – Offsite Analysis The project is exempt from Core Requirement #2 because the project does not change the rate, volume, duration, or location of discharges to and from the project site per section 1.2.2 Exemption #3 of the RSWDM. 2.1.3 CR 3 – Flow Control Facilities The project is exempt from Core Requirement #3 because the project meets the Basic Exemption in section 1.2.3 of RSWDM. The proposed project meets the following exemption criterion: 1) Less than ¾ acres of new pervious surface will be added. 2.1.4 CR 4 – Conveyance System Per Section 1.2.4.1 in the RSWDM, new pipe systems must be designed to contain the 25 -year peak flow. The project has designed all new conveyance systems to contain the 100-year storm event without overtopping. The design and calculations for the new conveyance system are included in Section 5.0 and Appendix B. The project will not be changing the flow characteristics of the existing conveyance system because the new conveyance system will be collecting and discharging the same flows that were being collected and discharged by the existing pipe. 2.1.5 CR 5 – Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Technical Information Report 3 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement An erosion and sediment control plan has been developed for this site in accordance w ith the RSWDM. The full erosion and sediment control plan is described further in Section 8.0 and in the project plans. 2.1.6 CR 6 – Maintenance and Operations The proposed project is a City of Renton project that will be maintained by the city in accordance with the maintenance standards in Appendix A of the RSWDM. Therefore, a project specific Maintenance and Operations Manual is not required. 2.1.7 CR 7 – Financial Guarantees and Liability The project is a public City of Renton project, therefore financial guarantee and liability requirements are not applicable. 2.1.8 CR 8 – Water Quality Facilities The project is exempt from Core Requirement #8 because it meets the Surface Are Exemption per Section 1.2.8 of the RSWDM. The proposed project meets the following exemption criteria: 1) Less than 5,000 sf of new plus replaced PGIS that is not fully dispersed will be created, and 2) Less than ¾ acres of new PGPS that is not fully dispersed will be added. 2.1.9 CR 9 – On-Site BMPs The project is exempt from Core Requirement #9 because it is a utility project which does not trigger the need for on-site BMPs. 2.2 Special Requirements 2.2.1 SR 1 – Other Adopted Area -Specific Requirements There are no area-specific regulations that apply to the project. Therefore, the project is exempt from Special Requirement #1. 2.2.2 SR 2 – Flood Hazard Area Delineation The project is not within a flood hazard area. Therefore the project is exempt from Special Requirement #2. 2.2.3 SR 3 – Flood Protection Facilities Technical Information Report 4 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement The proposed project does not rely on an existing flood protection facility and will modify or construct a new flood protection facility. Therefore the project is exempt from Special Requirement #3. 2.2.4 SR 4 – Source Controls The proposed project does not require a commercial building or commercial site development permit. Therefore the project is exempt from Special Requirement #4. 2.2.5 SR 5 – Oil Control The proposed project site is not a high-use site, is not a redevelopment project proposing $100,000 or more of improvements, and is not a redevelopment project that results in new plus replaced pollution generating impervious surfaces of 5,000 square feet or more or new pollution generating pervious surface of ¾ acre or more improvements to an existing high-use site. Therefore the project is exempt from Special Requirement #5. 2.2.6 SR 6 – Aquifer Protection Area The proposed project is not located within an aquifer protection area. Therefore the project is exempt from Special Requirement #6. 3.0 OFFSITE ANALYSIS As discussed in section 2.1.2, the project is exempt from requiring an offsite analysis. 4.0 FLOW CONTROL, LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Flow Control As stated in section 2.1.3, the project is exempt from Core Requirement #3 because the project meets the Basic Exemption in section 1.2.3 of RSWDM. The proposed project meets the following exemption criteria: 2) Less than 5,000 sf of new plus replaced impervious surface will be created, and 3) Less than ¾ acres of new pervious surface will be added. 4.2 Water Quality System (Part E) As stated in section 2.1.8, the project is exempt from Core Requirement #8 because it meets the Surface Are Exemption per Section 1.2.8 of the RSWDM. The proposed project meets the following exemption criteria: 3) Less than 5,000 sf of new plus replaced PGIS that is not fully dispersed will be created, and 4) Less than ¾ acres of new PGPS that is not fully dispersed will be added. Technical Information Report 5 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The conveyance analysis and design has been based upon the worst case scenario to ensure that there is adequate capacity in the storm system. The conveyance system has been designed to convey and contain calculated flows resulting from the 25-year event, and to prevent a severe flood from the 100-year event. To be conservative, the 25-year and 100-year flows have been calculated based upon the maximum allowable impervious surface area in the upstream drainage basin based on City of Renton zoning codes, and the soil has been modeled as hydrologic group C. Please see Figure 1-3 for the collected drainage basin and the existing areas measurements. The pervious and impervious areas noted in Figure 1-3 were then used to calculate the 25-year (16.57 CFS) and 100-year (20.83 CFS) flow event using WWHM, see Figure 2-2. With the flow information the proposed storm conveyance system was analyzed to determine capacity. Conveyance calculations were analyzed for a new pipe in the same location and of the same size (18-inch diameter) as the existing pipe. To further ensure a conservative model, the proposed conveyance system was analyzed by inputting the entire 25-year and 100-year flows into the upstream catch basin (Facility ID: 505717) instead of modeling lag in the upstream system. See Figure 2-1 for the proposed conveyance system assumptions and information collected. The information from Figure 2-1 was then inputted into the Storm Water Management Model program to ensure conveyance and containment of the 25-year storm. See Figure 2-1 for the Storm Water Management Model analysis. As seen in the analysis, the flow elevation partially fills the upstream catch basin, but does not overtop for the 25-year storm. 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES There are no special reports or studies that were required or used in the preparation of the project plans or TIR. 7.0 OTHER REPORTS There are no other reports that we required or used in the preparation of the project plans or TIR. 8.0 CSWPP PLAN ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The proposed improvements will comply with guidelines set forth in the 2017 RSWDM. The plan includes erosion/sedimentation control features designed to prevent sediment-laden runoff from leaving the site or from adversely affecting critical water resources during construction. A stormwater pollution prevention and spill plan has been developed. 8.1 ESC Plan Analysis and Design (Part A) The erosion potential of the site is influenced by four major factors: soil characteristics, vegetative cover, topography, and climate. Erosion/sedimentation control is achieved by a combination of Technical Information Report 6 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement structural measures, cover measures, and construction practices that are tailored to fit the specific site. The following measures, if applicable, will be used to control sedimentation/erosion processes: 1) Clearing Limits: All areas to remain undisturbed during the construction of the project will be delineated prior to any site clearing or grading. 2) Cover Measures: Disturbed areas will be covered, as required in Section D.2.1.2 of the 2016 RSWDM. 3) Perimeter Protection: The project will install perimeter filter fabric silt fencing and other erosion control BMPs to prevent the transportation of sediment from the site to adjacent properties. If needed, the project will install perimeter ditches and rock check dams that will prevent construction stormwater runoff from entering adjacent properties and direct the storm water runoff to a temporary sediment trap if necessary. 4) Traffic Area Stabilization: Traffic Area Stabilization is not expected to be necessary. If needed, a stabilized construction entrance will be provided at the access points to the site. If additional protection is needed to prevent construction vehicles from tracking sediment onto adjacent streets, then a wheel wash will be installed to prevent transport of sediment from vehicles onto the public roadways. 5) Sediment Retention: The project will install storm drain inlet protection and other Erosion Control BMPs to prevent sediment from transferring downstream. 6) Surface Water Collection: The project will install swales and ditches (if needed) to collect on- site construction stormwater and direct it to the temporary storm drain inlet protection. If necessary, upstream surface water flows will be intercepted and conveyed to a discharge point downstream of the disturbed area. 7) Dewatering Control: If needed, the contractor shall secure the required permits prior to dewatering activities. All de-watering shall be discharged to the sanitary sewer or hauled offsite to an approved discharge location. 8) Dust Control: If needed, the project will implement the use of water and/or water trucks to minimize the wind transport of soils from being deposited in water resources. Dust control will be applied when exposed soils are dry to the point that wind transport is po ssible and roadways, drainage ways, or surface waters are likely to be impacted. When using water for dust control, the exposed soils shall be sprayed until wet, but runoff shall not be generated by spraying. 9) Flow Control: Flow Control is not expected to be necessary. If needed, the project will install a temporary sediment trap to allow sediment to settle out of onsite runoff prior to discharging from the site. If the construction site does not easily allow for a sediment trap, the contractor may use a movable storage tanks. The sediment trap will release the sediment treated Technical Information Report 7 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement stormwater using a gravel filter window. Alternatively, the contractor can elect to haul the construction stormwater offsite to be release to an approved discharge location. 10) Control Pollutants: All construction debris will be promptly removed from the site to minimize demolition and construction impacts on the site. The contractor shall implement additional BMPs as required and/or recommended by the City inspector or other agencies as required to prevent demolition and construction debris, waste material, fuel, oil, lubricants, and other fluids from discharging from the site. All construction debris will be promptly removed from the site to minimize demolition and construction impacts on the site. 11) Protect Existing and Proposed Stormwater Facilities and On-site BMPs: The contractor shall protect all existing and proposed infiltration BMPs onsite. The contractor shall protect the area of any drainage facilities during excavation to ensure sediment does not build up in the proposed infiltration area; and shall keep all heavy equipment off existing soils under Low Impact Development (LID) facilities that have been excavated to final grade to retain the infiltration rate of the soils. Inlet protection will be also be used on all on-site and adjacent downstream catch basins to reduce sediment-laden water from entering the storm system during construction 12) Maintain Protective BMPs: The contractor shall maintain all temporary erosion and sediment control measures as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. The contractor shall also remove all temporary erosion and sedimentation control BMPs within 30 days of achieving final site stabilization or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. 13) Manage the Project: The contractor shall conduct regular inspection and monitoring to ensure the installed erosion and sediment control measures are functioning as intended. The inspection shall occur at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours of any discharge from the site. The project is expected to be a straight forward construction project with no phasing of construction for the short plat improvements. However, Best Management Practices and Good Housekeeping procedures during construction will be employed by the project contractor. 8.2 Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill (SWPPS) Plan Design (Part B) The Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill (SWPPS) Plan includes three elements: a site plan, a pollution prevention report, and a spill prevention and cleanup report. This report includes identifying the expected sources of potential pollution and spills that may occur during construction, and works to develop a plan to prevent pollution and spills. It also develops a plan to mitigate spills that may occur. The SWPPS Plan will be kept onsite at all times during construction. The general contractor will be responsible to ensure that subcontractors are aware of the SWPPS Plan and a form or record will be provided stating that all subcontractors have read and agree to the SWPPS Plan. Updates or revisions to the SWPPS plan may be required by the City Inspector at any time during project construction if it is determined that pollutants generated on the construction site have the potential to contaminate surface, storm, or ground water. The contractor is required to designate an ESC Lead/Supervisor who is possess a CESCL. The ESC Lead/Supervisor is responsible Technical Information Report 8 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement for installing, inspecting, and maintaining BMPs included in the TESC Plan, and updating the ESC plan and SWPPP to reflect current field conditions. The ESC Lead/Supervisor is also responsible for ensuring that the project is in compliance with the State of Washington NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit and the ESC Standard in Appendix D of the 2017 Renton SWDM. The SWPPS Site Plan, Pollution Prevention Report, and Spill Prevention and Cleanup Report have been developed and BMPs have been selected based on Section 2.3.1.4 of the RSWDM. (The below plan can be updated with input from the contractor.) 8.2.1 Pollution and Spill Prevention Source Controls and BMPs The sources of pollution and spills have been identified below, and the BMPs to be used for each source for prevention of both pollution and spills have been listed below: Liquids that will be handled or stored onsite are still being assessed by the owner. Tight-fitting lids shall be placed on all containers containing liquids. Containers shall be covered with plastic sheeting during rain events. Drip pans or absorbent materials shall be placed beneath all mounted container taps and at all potential drip and spill locations during filling and unloading of containers. Containers shall be stored such that if a container leaks or spills, the contents will not be discharged, flow, or be washed into the storm drainage system, surface water, or groundwater. Appropriate spill cleanup materials shall be stored and maintained near the container storage area. Storage area shall be swept and cleaned as needed. Area shall not be hosed down such that water drains to the storm drainage system or neighboring areas. Containers shall be checked daily for leaks and spills and replaced as necessary. All spilled liquids will be collected and disposed of properly. Spill control devices shall be routinely inspected on a weekly basis. Dry pesticides and fertilizers, if stored onsite, shall be covered with plastic sheeting or stored in a sealed container. Materials shall be stored on pallets or another raised method to prevent contact with stormwater runoff. Alternatively, the materials shall be contained in a manner such that if the container leaks or spills, the contents will not discharge, flow, or be washed into the storm drainage system, surface waters, or groundwater. Maintenance requirements are the same as liquid materials described above. Soil, sand, and other erodible materials shall be stored onsite as directed by the contractors approved CESCL. Fueling shall not occur onsite. If fueling does occur onsite, the Contractor shall develop a containment plan for spills and provide lighting and signage if fueling occurs at night in conformance with the RSWDM. Maintenance and repair of vehicles shall not occur onsite. If maintenance or repair of vehicles does occur onsite, the Contractor shall develop a spill prevention plan in Conformance with the RSWDM. Technical Information Report 9 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement Truck wheel washing is not expected at a large scale due to the small area of disturbance for the project. All other vehicle washing shall occur in a controlled manner, such that runoff is collected and disposed of in a legal manner. Rinsing of hand tools shall occur as directed by the contractors approved CESCL. Water for washing shall be collected and disposed of in a legal manner. Contaminated soils are not expected. If encountered, contaminated soils will be covered with plastic to prevent stormwater from carrying pollutants away to surface or ground waters. Appropriate spill cleanup materials, such as brooms, dustpans, vacuum sweepers, etc., shall be stored and maintained near the storage area. Storage area shall be swept and cleaned as needed. Area shall not be hosed down such that water drains to the storm drainage system, groundwater, surface water, or neighboring areas. During concrete and asphalt construction, the contractor shall provide the following BMPs or equivalent measures, methods or practices as required: 1. Drip pans, ground cloths, heavy cardboard or plywood wherever concrete, asphalt and asphalt emulsion chunks and drips are likely to fall unintentionally, such as beneath extraction points from mixing equipment. 2. Storm drain inlet protection is being provided as shown on TESC plans. Storm drains shall be covered to prevent concrete and asphalt from entering the storm system. 3. Concrete, concrete slurry and rinse water shall be contained and collected and shall not be washed or allowed to discharge into storm drain, ditch, or neighboring parcels. All collected runoff shall be properly disposed of. 4. Contractor shall designate an area where application and mixing equipment cleaning will be conducted. Rinse water and slurry shall be collected, contained, and disposed of in a legal manner. 5. Routine maintenance: the pouring area shall be swept at the end of each day or more frequently if needed. Loose aggregate chunks and dust shall be collected. Areas shall not be hosed down. The contractor may provide the following optional BMPs if the above do not provide adequate source controls: 1. Cover portable mixing equipment with an awning or plastic sheeting to prevent contact with rainfall. 2. Provide catch basin inserts configured for pollutant removal. PH elevated water shall not be discharged from the site. Contractor shall monitor stormwater for pH prior to discharging from the site. Contractor shall implement a pH treatment plan if pH is not within the natural range. Technical Information Report 10 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECL ARATION OF COVENANT This project is a public project that will be publicly-maintained, therefore bond quantities, facility summaries, and a declaration of covenant are not required. 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN The stormwater facilities constructed for this project will be publicly maintained by the City of Renton. The City of Renton has its own existing operation and maintenance standards for publicly maintained stormwater facilities (Appendix A of the RSWDM). Therefore, an operation and maintenance plan for this specific stormwater system is not required. 11.0 CONCLUSION The project stormwater infrastructure has been designed to meet the 2017 RSWDM. The new stormwater improvements consist of a replacement pipe to better convey surface runoff under Oakesdale Ave SW into its ultimate discharge point in the Black River wetlands. The EPA’s Storm Water Management Model was used for sizing the new stormwater conveyance pipe. Pipe networks have been designed to be of adequate size to effectively convey and contain the 25- year storm event and to prevent severe flooding or erosion resulting from the 100-year event. This analysis is based on data and records either supplied to or obtained by the City of Renton. The TIR has been prepared to City of Renton and/or industry accepted standards. Based on the TIR the City of Renton concludes that this project will not create any new problems within the downstream drainage system. City of Renton Jack Witecki Jared McDonald, PE Civil Engineering Intern Civil Engineer III December 2021 December 2021 Technical Information Report 1 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement Appendix A Section 1.0 Figures Figure 1-1……….TIR Worksheet Figure 1-2……….Vicinity Map Figure 1-3……….Drainage Basin Figure 1-4……….Soils Map Technical Information Report 2 SWP 27-4030 Oakesdale Ave SW Storm Replacement Appendix B Section 2.0 Figures Figure 2-1……….Conveyance Calculations Figure 2-2……….WWHM 25-Year/100-Year Conveyance Flows CITY OF RENTON SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 8-A-1 REFERENCE 8-A TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner _____________________________ Phone ___________________________________ Address __________________________________ _________________________________________ Project Engineer ___________________________ Company _________________________________ Phone ___________________________________ Project Name __________________________ CED Permit # ________________________ Location Township ________________ Range __________________ Section _________________ Site Address __________________________ _____________________________________ Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS  Land Use (e.g., Subdivision / Short Subd.)  Building (e.g., M/F / Commercial / SFR)  Grading  Right-of-Way Use  Other _______________________  DFW HPA  COE 404  DOE Dam Safety  FEMA Floodplain  COE Wetlands  Other ________  Shoreline Management  Structural Rockery/Vault/_____  ESA Section 7 Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type of Drainage Review (check one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final:  Full  Targeted  Simplified  Large Project  Directed __________________ __________________ __________________ Plan Type (check one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final:  Full  Modified  Simplified __________________ __________________ __________________ CITY OF RENTON N/A, SWP # 27-4017 Oakesdale Avenue SW Storm Replacement Project (425) 430-6400 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98057 JARED MCDONALD CITY OF RENTON (425) 430-7293 23 N 4E, W.M. 13 Oakesdale Avenue SW RENTON, WA 98058 11/02/21 22/03/21 FIGURE 1-1 TIR WORKSHEET REFERENCE 8: PLAN REVIEW FORMS AND WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 8-A-2 Part 6 SWDM ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): Standard / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Approved Adjustment No. ______________________ Date of Approval: _______________________ Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes / No Start Date: _______________________ Completion Date: _______________________ Describe: _________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ Re: SWDM Adjustment No. ________________ Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan: ____________________________________________________________________ Special District Overlays: ______________________________________________________________ Drainage Basin: _____________________________________________________________________ Stormwater Requirements: _____________________________________________________________ Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS  River/Stream ________________________  Lake ______________________________  Wetlands ____________________________  Closed Depression ____________________  Floodplain ___________________________  Other _______________________________ _______________________________  Steep Slope __________________________  Erosion Hazard _______________________  Landslide Hazard ______________________  Coal Mine Hazard ______________________  Seismic Hazard _______________________  Habitat Protection ______________________  _____________________________________ NO FLOW CONTROL, NO WATER QUALITY, CONVEYANCE CALCS REQUIRED HONEY CREEK BLACK RIVER REFERENCE 8-A: TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 Ref 8-A-3 Part 10 SOILS Soil Type ______________________ ______________________ ______________________ ______________________ Slopes ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ Erosion Potential _________________________ _________________________ _________________________ _________________________  High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet)  Other ________________________________  Sole Source Aquifer  Seeps/Springs  Additional Sheets Attached Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE  Core 2 – Offsite Analysis_________________  Sensitive/Critical Areas__________________  SEPA________________________________  LID Infeasibility________________________  Other________________________________  _____________________________________ LIMITATION / SITE CONSTRAINT _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________  Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Threshold Discharge Area: (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply): Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharge Locations: Offsite Analysis Level: 1 / 2 / 3 dated:__________________ Flow Control (include facility summary sheet) Standard: _______________________________ or Exemption Number: ____________ On-site BMPs: _______________________________ Conveyance System Spill containment located at: _____________________________ Erosion and Sediment Control / Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention CSWPP/CESCL/ESC Site Supervisor: _____________________ Contact Phone: _________________________ After Hours Phone: _________________________ Urban Land Beausite 8-15% n/a, see report n/a, see report n/a, see report n/a drainage basin 1 n/a n/a tbd tbd tbd tbd REFERENCE 8: PLAN REVIEW FORMS AND WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 8-A-4 Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Maintenance and Operation Responsibility (circle one): Private / Public If Private, Maintenance Log Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Liability Provided: Yes / No Water Quality (include facility summary sheet) Type (circle one): Basic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basic / Bog or Exemption No. _______________________ Special Requirements (as applicable): Area Specific Drainage Requirements Type: SDO / MDP / BP / Shared Fac. / None Name: ________________________ Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type (circle one): Major / Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): _______________ Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: Source Control (commercial / industrial land use) Describe land use: Describe any structural controls: Oil Control High-Use Site: Yes / No Treatment BMP: _________________________________ Maintenance Agreement: Yes / No with whom? _____________________________________ Other Drainage Structures Describe: n/a n/a n/a REFERENCE 8-A: TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 Ref 8-A-5 Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION  Clearing Limits  Cover Measures  Perimeter Protection  Traffic Area Stabilization  Sediment Retention  Surface Water Collection  Dewatering Control  Dust Control  Flow Control  Control Pollutants  Protect Existing and Proposed BMPs/Facilities  Maintain Protective BMPs / Manage Project MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION  Stabilize exposed surfaces  Remove and restore Temporary ESC Facilities  Clean and remove all silt and debris, ensure operation of Permanent BMPs/Facilities, restore operation of BMPs/Facilities as necessary  Flag limits of sensitive areas and open space preservation areas  Other _______________________ Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facility Summary and Sketch) Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description  Detention  Infiltration  Regional Facility  Shared Facility  On-site BMPs  Other ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________  Vegetated Flowpath  Wetpool  Filtration  Oil Control  Spill Control  On-site BMPs  Other ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS  Drainage Easement  Covenant  Native Growth Protection Covenant  Tract  Other ____________________________  Cast in Place Vault  Retaining Wall  Rockery > 4′ High  Structural on Steep Slope  Other _______________________________ REFERENCE 8: PLAN REVIEW FORMS AND WORKSHEET TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 8-A-6 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 and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Signed/Date jared mcdonald, pe 12/01/2021 9,028 752 Figure 1-2: Vicinity Map This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Figure 1-2: Vicinity Map for Asset 165404 Replacement Project at Oakesdale Avenue Southwest 11/4/2021 Legend 5120256 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Feet Notes 512 WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Jack Witecki JWitecki@Rentonwa.gov City and County Labels Parcels City and County Boundary <all other values> Renton Environment Designations Natural Shoreline High Intensity Shoreline Isolated High Intensity Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy Jurisdictions Streams (Classified) <all other values> Type S Shoreline Type F Fish Type Np Non-Fish Type Ns Non-Fish Seasonal Unclassified Not Visited Wetlands Streets Parks Waterbodies 4,514 376 Exhibit A: Aerial View of Service Area for Pipe 165404 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Collection Basin for asset 165404. 1/2021 / 9 Legend 256 0 128 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Feet Notes 256 WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Jack Witecki JWitecki@Rentonwa.gov 5 ' Primary 5 ' Intermediate Network Structures Access Riser Inlet Manhole Utility Vault Clean Out Unknown Control Structure Detention Facilities Pond Tank Vault Bioswale Wetland Other Surface Water Main Culvert Open Drains Legend Color Description %Impermeable Area (ac) Green Zone R-8 65% 20.3 Blue Zone R-10 70% 0.2 Yellow Right-Of-Way 80% 2.8 Red Boundary - - 165404 121,446 sft Right-of-Way 885,751 sft R-8 Residential 8,268 sft R-10 Residential Soil Map—City of Seattle, Washington, and King County Area, Washington (Drainage Basin for Asset 165404) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 11/4/2021 Page 1 of 4 52 5 8 6 9 0 52 5 8 7 8 0 52 5 8 8 7 0 52 5 8 9 6 0 52 5 9 0 5 0 52 5 9 1 4 0 52 5 9 2 3 0 52 5 8 6 9 0 52 5 8 7 8 0 52 5 8 8 7 0 52 5 8 9 6 0 52 5 9 0 5 0 52 5 9 1 4 0 52 5 9 2 3 0 557490 557580 557670 557760 557850 557940 558030 558120 558210 558300 558390 557490 557580 557670 557760 557850 557940 558030 558120 558210 558300 558390 47° 29' 2'' N 12 2 ° 1 4 ' 1 3 ' ' W 47° 29' 2'' N 12 2 ° 1 3 ' 2 9 ' ' W 47° 28' 43'' N 12 2 ° 1 4 ' 1 3 ' ' W 47° 28' 43'' N 12 2 ° 1 3 ' 2 9 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,220 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at scales ranging from 1:12,000 to 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: City of Seattle, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 5, Sep 1, 2021 Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 17, Aug 23, 2021 Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries. Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 6, 2020—Jul 20, 2020 Soil Map—City of Seattle, Washington, and King County Area, Washington (Drainage Basin for Asset 165404) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 11/4/2021 Page 2 of 4 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—City of Seattle, Washington, and King County Area, Washington (Drainage Basin for Asset 165404) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 11/4/2021 Page 3 of 4 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 3056 Urban land-Alderwood complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes 6.3 8.4% 5016 Urban land-Beausite complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes 3.1 4.1% 5017 Urban land-Beausite complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes 14.0 18.6% 5018 Urban land-Beausite complex, 12 to 35 percent slopes 19.9 26.5% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 43.3 57.6% Totals for Area of Interest 75.2 100.0% Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 3056 Urban land-Alderwood complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes 1.7 2.3% 5016 Urban land-Beausite complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes 7.1 9.4% 5017 Urban land-Beausite complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes 14.8 19.7% 5018 Urban land-Beausite complex, 12 to 35 percent slopes 5.9 7.8% 5020 Beausite-Alderwood-Urban land complex, 12 to 35 percent slopes 1.0 1.4% PITS Pits 1.3 1.8% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 31.9 42.4% Totals for Area of Interest 75.2 100.0% Soil Map—City of Seattle, Washington, and King County Area, Washington Drainage Basin for Asset 165404 Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 11/4/2021 Page 4 of 4 City of Seattle, Washington 3056—Urban land-Alderwood complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbd • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Alderwood and similar soils: 15 percent • Minor components: 25 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Alderwood Setting • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift and/or glacial outwash over dense glaciomarine deposits Typical profile • A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 7 to 21 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 21 to 30 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bg - 30 to 35 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2Cd1 - 35 to 43 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2Cd2 - 43 to 59 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities • Slope: 5 to 12 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to densic material • Drainage class: Moderately well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.01 in/hr) • Depth to water table: About 18 to 35 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.7 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: A • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Ecological site: F002XA007WA - Puget Lowlands Wet Forest • Hydric soil rating: Yes Everett • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Kitsap • Percent of map unit: 5 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Linear • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No 5016—Urban land-Beausite complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbr • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Beausite and similar soils: 20 percent • Minor components: 20 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 0 to 5 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes Alderwood • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Hydric soil rating: No 5017—Urban land-Beausite complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbs • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Beausite and similar soils: 20 percent • Minor components: 20 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 5 to 12 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Alderwood • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Hydric soil rating: No Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes 5018—Urban land-Beausite complex, 12 to 35 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbt • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Beausite and similar soils: 20 percent • Minor components: 20 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 12 to 35 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes Alderwood • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Hydric soil rating: No King County Area, Washington 3056—Urban land-Alderwood complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbd • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Alderwood and similar soils: 15 percent • Minor components: 25 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Alderwood Setting • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift and/or glacial outwash over dense glaciomarine deposits Typical profile • A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 7 to 21 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 21 to 30 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bg - 30 to 35 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2Cd1 - 35 to 43 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2Cd2 - 43 to 59 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities • Slope: 5 to 12 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to densic material • Drainage class: Moderately well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.01 in/hr) • Depth to water table: About 18 to 35 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.7 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: A • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Everett • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Ecological site: F002XA007WA - Puget Lowlands Wet Forest • Hydric soil rating: Yes Kitsap • Percent of map unit: 5 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Linear • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No 5016—Urban land-Beausite complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbr • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Beausite and similar soils: 20 percent • Minor components: 20 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 0 to 5 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes Alderwood • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Hydric soil rating: No 5017—Urban land-Beausite complex, 5 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbs • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Beausite and similar soils: 20 percent • Minor components: 20 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 5 to 12 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes Alderwood • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Hydric soil rating: No 5018—Urban land-Beausite complex, 12 to 35 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbt • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Urban land: 60 percent • Beausite and similar soils: 20 percent • Minor components: 20 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 12 to 35 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes Alderwood • Percent of map unit: 10 percent • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Hydric soil rating: No 5020—Beausite-Alderwood-Urban land complex, 12 to 35 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • National map unit symbol: 2xtbw • Elevation: 20 to 540 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 40 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 240 days • Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition • Beausite and similar soils: 50 percent • Alderwood and similar soils: 25 percent • Urban land: 20 percent • Minor components: 5 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Beausite Setting • Landform: Hillslopes • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Convex • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift mixed with colluvium and/or residuum derived from sandstone or conglomerate Typical profile • Oi - 0 to 2 inches: slightly decomposed plant material • Oe - 2 to 3 inches: moderately decomposed plant material • A - 3 to 5 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 5 to 9 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 9 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw3 - 17 to 25 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • C - 25 to 36 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2R - 36 to 59 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities • Slope: 12 to 35 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock • Drainage class: Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (1.42 to 7.09 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e • Hydrologic Soil Group: B • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Alderwood Setting • Landform: Hills • Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope • Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest • Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Convex • Parent material: Glacial drift and/or glacial outwash over dense glaciomarine deposits Typical profile • A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly sandy loam • Bw1 - 7 to 21 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bw2 - 21 to 30 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • Bg - 30 to 35 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2Cd1 - 35 to 43 inches: very gravelly sandy loam • 2Cd2 - 43 to 59 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities • Slope: 12 to 35 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to densic material • Drainage class: Moderately well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.01 in/hr) • Depth to water table: About 18 to 35 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.7 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e • Hydrologic Soil Group: A • Ecological site: F002XA004WA - Puget Lowlands Forest • Hydric soil rating: No Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mckenna • Percent of map unit: 5 percent • Landform: Terraces • Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, dip • Down-slope shape: Concave • Across-slope shape: Concave • Hydric soil rating: Yes PITS—Pits Map Unit Composition • Pits: 100 percent • Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Pits Interpretive groups • Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified • Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 • Hydric soil rating: No Calculations for Sizing Replacement for Storm Drain 165404 Jack Witecki, 09/01/2021 AREA CALCULATION: Measured the distance between two assets in CORMaps in feet, Measured again in pixels with a picture of CORMaps open in GIMP. Length: 130.76 ft = 61.7 px 1 pixel = 2.119 ft, or 4.491 ft^2 Used layered image in GIMP to count number of pixels in Right of Way and Zone R-8 Residential Pixels R-8 Residential = 197,228 px Square Feet R-8 = 197,228 px * 4.491 sft/px = 885,751 sft Acres R-8 = 885,751 sft * 2.2957E-5 acre/sft = 20.3 acres R-8 Pixels R-10 Residential = 1,841 px Square Feet R-10 = 348,565 px * 4.491 sft/px = 8,268 sft Acres R-10 = 8,268 sft * 2.2957E-5 acre/sft = 0.2 acres R-10 Pixels ROW = 27,042 px Square Feet ROW = 27,042 * 4.491 sft/px = 121,446 sft Acres ROW = 27,042 sft * 2.2957E-5 acre/sft = 2.8 acres ROW Assume the worst case scenario, ROW 80% impermeable, R-8 Residential 65% impermeable, and R-10 Residential 70% impermeable based on zoning requirements. (https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Renton/#!/Renton04/Renton0402/Renton0402110A.ht ml#4-2-110A) Impermeable Surfaces R-8: 13.2 acres Permeable Surfaces R-8: 7.1 acres Impermeable Surfaces R-10: 0.2 acres Permeable Surfaces R-10: 0.0 acres Impermeable Surfaces ROW: 2.2 acres Permeable Surfaces ROW: 0.6 acres Total Impermeable: 15.6 Acres Total Permeable: 7.7 Acres WHHM Output: Flow Frequency Flow(cfs) 0501 15m 2 Year = 9.2019 5 Year = 11.9707 10 Year = 13.9348 25 Year = 16.5712 50 Year = 18.6510 100 Year = 20.8330 SWWM Input: Input from CORMaps: Diameter (165404): 18 in Diameter (125457): 18 in Length (125457): 65.32 ft Lowest/Outfall Elevation (125457/134167): 140.29 ft Input from WHHM: 25 Year Flow: 16.5712 cfs 100 Year Flow: 20.8330 cfs Input from Survey: Upper Manhole (185065) Invert: 160.65 ft Upper Manhole (185065) Rim: 169.90 ft Upper Invert Elevation (165404): 161.80 ft Lower Invert Elevation (165404): 153.46 ft Lower Manhole (133951) Invert: 152.76 ft Lower Manhole (133951) Rim: 158.16 ft Length (165404): 139.85 ft Upper Elevation (125457): 153.26 ft Misc Input: Manning’s Roughness Coefficient – 0.022 for Corrugated Metal Pipe SWWM Assumptions: Tailwater conditions: Modeled 18” downstream pipe 125457, assumed tailwater conditions for that pipe to be 1/2 Full, as downstream 36” pipe 128119 has approx. 20% slope, and this pipe is the primary inflow. Routing Calculation: Dynamic Wave routing Output: 25 Year Profile, Existing Diameter (18”): 100 Year Profile, Existing Diameter (18”): The current 18” pipe can flood at the 100-year storm event, but is fully contained for the 25-year event. This is sufficient by the 2017 RSWDM, as the overtopping of the pipe does not create a severe flooding problem, rather any flooding water will sheet-flow into the downstream catch basin. WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT ___________________________________________________________________ Project Name: Flow Model 165404 Site Name: Drainage Basin of Asset 165404 Site Address: 367 Oakesdale Ave SW City : Renton Report Date: 09/15/2021 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/01 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.17 Version Date: 2019/09/13 Version : 4.2.17 ___________________________________________________________________ Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year ___________________________________________________________________ High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year ___________________________________________________________________ PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin of Asset 165404 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Mod 7.7 Pervious Total 7.7 Impervious Land Use acre ROADS MOD 15.6 Impervious Total 15.6 Basin Total 23.3 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ___________________________________________________________________ MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Mod 7.7 Pervious Total 7.7 Impervious Land Use acre ROADS MOD 15.6 Impervious Total 15.6 Basin Total 23.3 ___________________________________________________________________ Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration ___________________________________________________________________ Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:7.7 Total Impervious Area:15.6 ___________________________________________________________________ Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:7.7 Total Impervious Area:15.6 ___________________________________________________________________ Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 9.201923 5 year 11.970682 10 year 13.934822 25 year 16.571224 50 year 18.651017 100 year 20.832978 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 9.201923 5 year 11.970682 10 year 13.934822 25 year 16.571224 50 year 18.651017 100 year 20.832978 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 12.630 12.630 1950 11.584 11.584 1951 7.382 7.382 1952 5.896 5.896 1953 6.686 6.686 1954 7.480 7.480 1955 8.727 8.727 1956 7.615 7.615 1957 9.088 9.088 1958 7.274 7.274 1959 7.473 7.473 1960 8.306 8.306 1961 7.738 7.738 1962 6.199 6.199 1963 8.258 8.258 1964 7.363 7.363 1965 9.295 9.295 1966 6.522 6.522 1967 11.416 11.416 1968 14.286 14.286 1969 8.619 8.619 1970 8.579 8.579 1971 10.334 10.334 1972 10.821 10.821 1973 5.969 5.969 1974 9.819 9.819 1975 9.094 9.094 1976 7.836 7.836 1977 7.975 7.975 1978 10.572 10.572 1979 12.715 12.715 1980 15.538 15.538 1981 8.916 8.916 1982 13.322 13.322 1983 10.081 10.081 1984 6.688 6.688 1985 8.614 8.614 1986 7.573 7.573 1987 11.351 11.351 1988 7.401 7.401 1989 11.367 11.367 1990 17.010 17.010 1991 14.571 14.571 1992 6.950 6.950 1993 8.320 8.320 1994 6.772 6.772 1995 7.801 7.801 1996 10.975 10.975 1997 8.536 8.536 1998 8.695 8.695 1999 19.610 19.610 2000 8.788 8.788 2001 10.193 10.193 2002 11.348 11.348 2003 11.788 11.788 2004 18.862 18.862 2005 7.127 7.127 2006 6.872 6.872 2007 17.837 17.837 2008 13.474 13.474 2009 12.068 12.068 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 19.6098 19.6098 2 18.8624 18.8624 3 17.8366 17.8366 4 17.0102 17.0102 5 15.5382 15.5382 6 14.5706 14.5706 7 14.2860 14.2860 8 13.4744 13.4744 9 13.3222 13.3222 10 12.7154 12.7154 11 12.6302 12.6302 12 12.0682 12.0682 13 11.7876 11.7876 14 11.5840 11.5840 15 11.4160 11.4160 16 11.3670 11.3670 17 11.3508 11.3508 18 11.3481 11.3481 19 10.9748 10.9748 20 10.8207 10.8207 21 10.5720 10.5720 22 10.3342 10.3342 23 10.1926 10.1926 24 10.0813 10.0813 25 9.8188 9.8188 26 9.2953 9.2953 27 9.0943 9.0943 28 9.0877 9.0877 29 8.9161 8.9161 30 8.7879 8.7879 31 8.7273 8.7273 32 8.6952 8.6952 33 8.6189 8.6189 34 8.6141 8.6141 35 8.5792 8.5792 36 8.5363 8.5363 37 8.3205 8.3205 38 8.3056 8.3056 39 8.2583 8.2583 40 7.9755 7.9755 41 7.8359 7.8359 42 7.8012 7.8012 43 7.7379 7.7379 44 7.6148 7.6148 45 7.5735 7.5735 46 7.4799 7.4799 47 7.4726 7.4726 48 7.4010 7.4010 49 7.3822 7.3822 50 7.3633 7.3633 51 7.2738 7.2738 52 7.1268 7.1268 53 6.9497 6.9497 54 6.8722 6.8722 55 6.7720 6.7720 56 6.6879 6.6879 57 6.6858 6.6858 58 6.5222 6.5222 59 6.1991 6.1991 60 5.9687 5.9687 61 5.8955 5.8955 ___________________________________________________________________ Stream Protection Duration POC #1 The Facility PASSED The Facility PASSED. Flow(cfs) Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 4.6010 1215 1215 100 Pass 4.7429 1107 1107 100 Pass 4.8848 1009 1009 100 Pass 5.0267 927 927 100 Pass 5.1686 836 836 100 Pass 5.3106 757 757 100 Pass 5.4525 672 672 100 Pass 5.5944 618 618 100 Pass 5.7363 563 563 100 Pass 5.8782 521 521 100 Pass 6.0202 482 482 100 Pass 6.1621 451 451 100 Pass 6.3040 422 422 100 Pass 6.4459 389 389 100 Pass 6.5878 360 360 100 Pass 6.7298 326 326 100 Pass 6.8717 301 301 100 Pass 7.0136 274 274 100 Pass 7.1555 251 251 100 Pass 7.2974 240 240 100 Pass 7.4394 222 222 100 Pass 7.5813 206 206 100 Pass 7.7232 193 193 100 Pass 7.8651 181 181 100 Pass 8.0070 168 168 100 Pass 8.1490 160 160 100 Pass 8.2909 152 152 100 Pass 8.4328 145 145 100 Pass 8.5747 137 137 100 Pass 8.7166 127 127 100 Pass 8.8586 121 121 100 Pass 9.0005 117 117 100 Pass 9.1424 107 107 100 Pass 9.2843 102 102 100 Pass 9.4262 99 99 100 Pass 9.5682 95 95 100 Pass 9.7101 89 89 100 Pass 9.8520 82 82 100 Pass 9.9939 79 79 100 Pass 10.1358 72 72 100 Pass 10.2778 65 65 100 Pass 10.4197 60 60 100 Pass 10.5616 59 59 100 Pass 10.7035 54 54 100 Pass 10.8454 53 53 100 Pass 10.9874 46 46 100 Pass 11.1293 45 45 100 Pass 11.2712 43 43 100 Pass 11.4131 39 39 100 Pass 11.5550 35 35 100 Pass 11.6969 32 32 100 Pass 11.8389 30 30 100 Pass 11.9808 29 29 100 Pass 12.1227 27 27 100 Pass 12.2646 27 27 100 Pass 12.4065 25 25 100 Pass 12.5485 25 25 100 Pass 12.6904 22 22 100 Pass 12.8323 20 20 100 Pass 12.9742 19 19 100 Pass 13.1161 19 19 100 Pass 13.2581 18 18 100 Pass 13.4000 17 17 100 Pass 13.5419 16 16 100 Pass 13.6838 16 16 100 Pass 13.8257 16 16 100 Pass 13.9677 15 15 100 Pass 14.1096 15 15 100 Pass 14.2515 15 15 100 Pass 14.3934 13 13 100 Pass 14.5353 13 13 100 Pass 14.6773 10 10 100 Pass 14.8192 10 10 100 Pass 14.9611 9 9 100 Pass 15.1030 8 8 100 Pass 15.2449 8 8 100 Pass 15.3869 8 8 100 Pass 15.5288 8 8 100 Pass 15.6707 6 6 100 Pass 15.8126 5 5 100 Pass 15.9545 4 4 100 Pass 16.0965 4 4 100 Pass 16.2384 4 4 100 Pass 16.3803 4 4 100 Pass 16.5222 4 4 100 Pass 16.6641 4 4 100 Pass 16.8061 4 4 100 Pass 16.9480 4 4 100 Pass 17.0899 3 3 100 Pass 17.2318 3 3 100 Pass 17.3737 3 3 100 Pass 17.5157 3 3 100 Pass 17.6576 3 3 100 Pass 17.7995 3 3 100 Pass 17.9414 2 2 100 Pass 18.0833 2 2 100 Pass 18.2253 2 2 100 Pass 18.3672 2 2 100 Pass 18.5091 2 2 100 Pass 18.6510 2 2 100 Pass _____________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #1 On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. ___________________________________________________________________ LID Report LID Technique Used for Total Volume Volume Infiltration Cumulative Percent Water Quality Percent Comment Treatment? Needs Through Volume Volume Volume Water Quality Treatment Facility (ac-ft.) Infiltration Infiltrated Treated (ac-ft) (ac-ft) Credit Total Volume Infiltrated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% No Treat. Credit Compliance with LID Standard 8 Duration Analysis Result = Passed ___________________________________________________________________ Perlnd and Implnd Changes No changes have been made. ___________________________________________________________________ This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2021; All Rights Reserved.