HomeMy WebLinkAbout03820 - Technical Information ReportINSIGHT ENGINEERING CO.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
For
LEGACY RENTON
(015002518)
Prepared for
City of Renton
Renton City Hall - 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Project Site Location:
1300 Lake Washington Boulevard N.
Renton, WA 98056
Applicant:
Legacy Hospitality, Inc.
6501 America's Parkway NE -Suite 1050
Albuquerque, NM 87110
Contact: Fazel Kassam
Ph. (505)243-6000
Tax Id: 3344500007
IECO Project: 13-0623
Contact:
IECO
P.O. Box 1478
Everett, WA 98206
425-303-9363
Certified Erosion and Sedimentation Control Lead:
To be named by contractor
Stormwater Site Plan Prepared By:
Jacob D. Mealey, E.I.T.
TIR Preparation Date:
December 19, 2014
Date Revised: August 18, 2015
Approximate Construction Date:
September 1, 2015
P.O Box 1478 • Everett, WA 98206 • P: 425.303.93
F: 425.303.9362 • info@insightengineering.net
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Project Overview 3
2.0 Conditions and Requirements Summary 6
2.1 Conditions 6
2.2 Requirements Summary 7
3.0 Offsite Analysis 13
3.1 Upstream Analysis 13
3.2 Downstream Analysis 13
4.0 Flow Control and Water Quality Analysis and Design 16
4.1 Existing Basin Summary 16
4.2 Developed Basin Summary 16
4.3 Water Quality 16
5.0 Conveyance Analysis and Design 18
6.0 Special Report and Studies 19
7.0 Other Permits 20
8.0 CSWPPP Analysis and Design 21
9.0 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant 22
10.0 Operations and Maintenance Manual 23
Figures
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map 4
Figure 2 - Soil Map 6
Figure 3 - Downstream Analysis Map 11
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-1-
Acronyms and Abbreviations
BMP Best Management Practices
DOE Department of Ecology
EDDS Engineering Design and Development Standards
ESC Erosion and Sediment Control
IECO Insight Engineering Company
MR Minimum Requirement
SCDM Snohomish County Drainage Manual
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWMMWW Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington
TESC Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control
WWHM Western Washington Hydrology Model
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-2-
1.0 Project Overview
The proposed project "Legacy Renton" is located at 1300 Lake Washington Boulevard
N. in King County, Washington. More generally, the project site is located in Section 6,
Township 23 North, and Range 5 East of the Willamette Meridian in King County, Washington.
Please refer to the Vicinity Map attached later in the section. This report will follow the
Technical Information Report requirements, per the 2010 City of Renton's Amendments to the
King County Surface Water Design Manual.
The site is currently developed with a small building with an asphalt drive aisle. The
remainder of the site exists as a combination of grassy and forested areas. The site contains one
drainage basin that slopes to the southwest. Please refer to the downstream analysis map for
more details. There are no critical areas located on the site. Per SCC survey of King County, the
project site contains AkF (Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep). Please refer to the soils map
and descriptions attached later in this report for more details.
The site contains 1.31 Acres, with 0.62 Acres to be undisturbed native vegetation. The
total onsite disturbance area for the site will be 0.69 Acres, which is less than 1 acre. The
proposal is to construct a new hotel, parking garage and approximately 175-1f of asphalt drive
aisle for access with associated utilities. The access for the site will be from Lake Washington
Blvd. N.
The project is located within the Lake Washington E drainage basin. The project is
subjected to the peak flow rate flow control standard. An underground vault that is 10.75 -ft deep
and provides a detention volume of 8,601 CF will be located underneath the drive aisle to meet
the flow control requirements conforming to the 2010 City of Renton's Amendments to the King
County Surface Water Design Manual. The detention vault was sized using KCRTS with level 1
plus 100 -yr peak matching flow control. Therefore the flow control standard maintains the
predevelopment peak flow rates for the 2 -year, 10 -year and 100 -year runoff storm events. The
outflow from the detention facility will be tight lined to a storm system on Lake Washington
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-3-
Blvd. N. that discharges into Lake Washington to continue its natural drainage path. The
northeast portion of the site will remain undisturbed. The runoff from the undisturbed area
currently drains to the southwest and will be collected into a drainage swale with yard drains and
an 8 -inch conveyance system to be bypassed to proposed public drainage system along Lake
Washington Blvd. N. The project is exempt for water quality because the total pollution
generating impervious surface (PGIS) is 3,982 SF which is less than the threshold of 5,000 SF
per section 1.2.8 of the KCSWDM. All covered parking areas will be connected to the sanitary
sewer.
The project is subject to the flow control BMP's per section 5.2.1.3 — Large Lot High
Impervious BMP Requirements. Per section C.2.1 of the KCSWDM the project site does not
meet the requirements for full dispersion. Full dispersion requires a vegetated flowpath segment
that would be impractical for the commercial site. Full infiltration (C.2.2 of the KCSWDM) is
not feasible for the project site because per the SCC survey of King County, the depth to the
water table is about 18 to 37 inches. Therefore a combination of permeable pavement and
vegetated roof will meet the flow control BMP requirement for the site. The total area required
for the BMP is 10% of the developed portions of the site (0.1 x ((1.31 acres — 0.62 acres) x
43,560 sf /ac)) = 3,006 sf). A 1,150 SF vegetated roof per section C.2.8 will be provided on a
portion of the roof of the building, 1,450 SF of permeable will be provided for the frontage plaza
on Ll, and 500 SF of permeable pavement will be provided for the plaza off of the pool on L2 to
meet the flow control BMP requirements for the site. The total provided area that will meet the
flow control BMP will be 3,100 SF. Refer to the Road and Drainage Plan and the landscape
plans for more details.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-4-
/ LAC WANG. BLVD
0
131•
/
/
J.
44
z
z
Z
7€g
13
--i
----r-�" �4) i
I/I)J)) /
//////1////1///
-J///////i////
I- o o <:
apcm
Z A z r
v ...
.!
s'
-
y
p
RENTON HOTEL
1300 LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD NORTH
RENTON, WA 98056
"O /,=AV y
FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP
Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park
:'eyrazr Ca'e
.00thpert :vacs
bi bing
1
(5
0
<'
a
z
Lakeside Boat $
service
--tve otn rt
a
TAKEN FROM THE BING MAPS
Kennewick Ave NE
NE 14th St
z
c
G
Q
C
NC16t1
Monterey Ave NE
tiE Park
Swedish
Medical h
INSIGHT ENGINEERING CO.
P.O. Box 1478 Everett, WA 98206
425-303-9363, 425-303-9362 f.
Info@insightengineering.net
Figure 1 -Vicinity Map
Legacy Renton
Renton, Washington
SCALE:
NTS
DATE: 8/18/15
JOB #: 13-0623
BY: JDM
FILE NAME:
13-0623/doc/drainage report
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report
-5-
8/18/15
2.0 Conditions and Requirements Summary
2.1 Conditions
Refer to the following pages for the conditions of approval.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 6 -
Denis Law
Mayor
City Clerk - Jason A. Seth, CMC
April 21, 2015
Scott Clark
Clark Design Group
169 Western Ave W, 263
Seattle, WA 98119
Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision
RE: Renton Hampton Inn and Suites, LUA-14-000061
Dear Mr. Clark:
The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Final Decision dated April 16, 2015.
These documents are immediately available:
• Electronically on line at the City of Renton website (www.rentonwa.gov);
• To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055
South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the above
project number; and
• For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the
Hearing Examiner Documents is $4.65, plus a handling and postage cost (this
cost is subject to change if documents are added).
APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the Hearing
Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires
appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days
from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing
together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady
Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be
obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510.
RECONSIDERATION: A request for reconsideration to the Hearing Examiner may also be
filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8-
100(G)(9). Reconsiderations must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner, City of
1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov
Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding
the reconsideration process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City
Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence
upon the issuance of a reconsideration decision.
I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 orjseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you.
Sincergly,
on A. Seth
y Clerk
cc: Hearing Examiner
Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner
Jennifer Henning, Planning Director
Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager
Steve Lee, Development Engineering Manager
Craig Burnell, Building Official
Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division
Ed Prince, City Councilmember
Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison
Faizel Kassam, Legacy Renton, LLC., Owner
Parties of Record (14)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 MOD, VA -A, VA -H
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
CITY OF RENTON
APR 21 2015
RECEIVED
CITY CLERICS OFFICE
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
Renton Hampton Inn and Suites
Master Site Plan, Site Plan, Parking
Modification, Street Modification,
Setback Variance & Critical Areas
Variance
LUA14-000061, SA -M, SA -H, ECF,
25
26
FINAL DECISION
SUMMARY
The applicant has requested a Master Site Plan Review, Site Plan Review, Environmental Review, a
Parking Modification, Street Modification, Setback Variance and a Critical Area Variance in order
to construct a 105 guest room hotel and structured parking area. The applicant has further requested
a modification to the conditions of approval to reduce the transportation impact fee to reflect credit
for construction of improvements (Ex. 22) pursuant to RMC 4-1-190(J) and (L). The Master Site
Plan Review, Site Plan Review, Environmental Review, Parking Modification, Setback Variance
and Street Modification are approved with conditions. The requested transportation impact fee
reduction is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
TESTIMONY
Staff Testimony
Rocale Timmons, senior planner, described the history of the project and the progress to date (Ex.
19). She described the site characteristics and the modifications and variance requests by the
applicant. Ms. Timmons noted the applicant had worked to achieve a design that is acceptable to the
City after a lengthy design and review process. She described the proposed pedestrian plaza and
recessed entry. Both are designed to provide pedestrian amenities and improve the appearance of the
project. There will be a roof deck with views to Lake Washington. The applicant has provided a step
back design which transition well with the mixed use property to the north.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
There have been several requests for review including master site plan review, site plan review,
design review, setback variance, critical areas variance, a parking modification, and a right of way
dedication street modification. The City has worked with the applicant on the orientation and scale
of the building to provide transitions to surrounding development at an appropriate scale for the
neighborhood. Staff was very concerned about critical slopes. The original proposal had a very large
parking garage which essentially eliminated the critical area. The revised proposal is for
underground parking which will preserve most of the critical area.
The staff focused on three categories of conditions: zoning, design standards, and infrastructure.
Most of these issues are fine details that can be resolved as part of the engineering review. Staff
recommends approval of the project with conditions.
In response to the Examiner, Ms. Timmons stated with respect to the right of way dedication, the
applicant requested a modification to allow for a reduction in dedication. The transportation
department has determined the extra right of way is unnecessary except for a 4.5 ft dedication. That
is sufficient to provide the proper right of way and infrastructure improvements in the subject
vicinity. Additionally, the pedestrian plaza will provide an additional amenity that would not be
possible without the right of way dedication reduction.
With respect to storm drainage, Ms. Timmons said the applicant originally proposed to drain storm
drainage to the north. The City would prefer the drainage go south, which is the original discharge
point. The proposed drainage could potentially flood an adjacent park. However, the applicant could
create a drainage detention vault which would serve to remove any need for alterations to the system
downstream. The applicant has the option to either provide a vault or improve the system
downstream.
Ms. Timmons stated the City's recommendations for parking is the proposed 105 spaces. The City is
supportive of the requested variance because the applicant has adequately demonstrated the reduced
parking will meet the project's demands. The City is concerned the refuse system might be blocked
by a parking stall.
With respect to the traffic impact analysis, Ms. Timmons stated the City's working on a new
Comprehensive Plan which will address traffic concurrency issues.
Applicant Testimony
Jessica Clawson, the applicant's attorney, stated the process has been involved. She stated they are
concerned about Staff Condition of Approval #11.
Brad Lincoln PE, the applicant's traffic consultant, gave a brief history of the project. He described
the applicant's response to the Perteet peer review (Ex. 8-9). The peer review recommended
pedestrian improvements south of the development. They also addressed comments from the
neighbor (Ex. 10-11). Mr. Lincoln stated the SEPA mitigation required the applicant to pay a pro -
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
rata share of the intersection improvement at Lake Washington Boulevard N. and Gene Coulon Park
entrance. He noted they were being double charged for these improvements because they are being
asked to pay both a proportionate share and the full traffic impact fee which includes the intersection
improvements. Mr. Lincoln requested the conditions of approval reflect a credit toward the
transportation impact fees to reflect the applicant's pro -rata costs for the Lake Washington
Boulevard N. at Gene Coulon park entrance intersection improvements.
With respect to parking, Mr. Lincoln stated the ITE standard for hotels is an average occupancy of
63% with a peak of 72% in June and July. At one space per room, they need about 75 spaces plus
spaces for staff parking (6 spaces). They need about 80-90 spaces during peak occupancy, rather
than the 105 proposed and 111 required. They are also planning on doing a shuttle service, but there
is not data available to estimate the impact of a shuttle service on parking need.
9 Mr. Lincoln talked about the transportation impact analysis (Ex. 8). He stated the analysis had
followed the City's guidelines with respect to intersection impact. The project will not increase
10 traffic impacts at any area intersections in excess of 5%.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Lauren Nestrud, the applicant's architect, discussed Staff condition #11. This item discussed
transparency of windows and a continuous canopy that mimicked the roof line. They have specific
design concerns about this condition because of structural concerns and creating a cohesive facade.
There are also significant water intrusion concerns. They want to work with the City and also
proposed to expand the canopies and increase the window glazing.
Ms. Timmons stated staff has no issue with the applicant's request. She proposed elimination of the
second sentence in the condition to allow the applicant's proposed revisions and to give flexibility
for the staff and applicant to work together. The applicant concurred.
Ms. Nestrud stated the applicant has resolved the parking issue with regard to the refuse and
recycling area (Ex. 20). There is no longer a conflict. They will expand the square footage of the
trash and recycling to meet the conditions of approval. They will meet the 105 parking spaces. Staff
concurred with the revision.
Scott Clark, the applicant's architect, stated the applicant has revised the storm drainage system to
include a new detention vault (Ex. 21). They have repurposed a storage area to accommodate a new
vault which will discharge at the lowest portion of the lot. No further improvements to the existing
public drainage system are anticipated.
In response to the examiner, Mr. Clark stated meeting the 111 required parking spaces would require
additional parking to be placed in the existing critical areas. This is both a sensitive area and the
most expensive area on site to build. The requested parking reduction is adequate for serving the
needs to the project while minimizing impacts to critical areas.
Mr. Ray Coglas, the applicant's geotechnical engineer, stated his role in the project began with an
initial site investigation (Ex. 7). There are steep slopes on the project. They analyzed the parking
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
versus the slope areas. They drilled deep borings and performed stability analysis to determine the
impact of construction on the slope areas. The property has been historically disturbed. It might have
been an old gravel pit. When the I-405 off ramp at Sunset was constructed, the steep slopes were
created. At one point the site was entirely cleared. The site is inherently stable. The post construction
stability will be safe, even with the small encroachment into the critical areas.
In response to the examiner, Mr. Coglas stated they identified groundwater and monitored the levels
to determine how that might interact with the building structure. The groundwater does have discreet
perched zones which might create shallow seeps. At depth, the groundwater table is about 2.5 to 3
feet above the bottom of the structure. The deposit is very compact and the porosity of the soil is
low. They will have to provide drainage under the slab post construction and deposit into the vault.
They feel they have been conservative. The slope will be stable post construction and groundwater
will be managed.
Staff Rebuttal
Ms. Timmons stated she had four outstanding items. With respect to parking, Ms. Timmons stated
staff presented this proposal, along with others to the City Council in late 2014. She wanted to relay
the Council's concerns with parking in the immediate vicinity and their desire to have 1:1 stalls per
room. There are major parking concerns in the area. Council wanted to see 105 spaces to go with
105 rooms. This is what the applicant proposed.
With respect to the traffic impact fee, Ms. Timmons stated the request for the fair share proportion
of the intersection improvements is a SEPA mitigation measure, not a condition of approval for this
project. She stated the fair share costs will be very small because there are very few trips from this
project.
Ms. Timmons discussed the public comment letter. She said many of the conditions in the
recommendation require the applicant to shore up their transportation analysis. In general, the
provided TIA is adequate.
The City feels the site will work from a geotechnical perspective. There will be additional review at
the engineering stage.
Mr. Steve Lee, the City's development engineering manager, spoke to the credit towards the
mitigation fee. He suggested there needs to be a rate study from the applicant. SECO is bearing the
full share of the intersection improvement and are interested in a Latecomers Agreement. The traffic
mitigation fees take into account the entire area, rather than just this specific intersection. The City
does not usually require both a regional transportation impact fee and local improvements. This is
why they made the SEPA mitigation measure to capture both.
The City will approve a discharge downstream of the vault for just the groundwater.
Ms. Timmons stated the impact fees ordinance allows no credits for construction improvements
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 4
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
toward impact fees. Though Southport had this arrangement in their development agreement, the
code has since changed. Ms. Timmons encouraged the examiner to read the specific ordinance. They
do not believe there is an opportunity for credit.
Applicant Rebuttal
Brad Lincoln, provided a response to the SEPA mitigation and a requested to apply credit for the
intersection improvements (SEPA Mitigation Measure #4) to the transportation impact fee (Ex. 22).
Even with all the pipeline developments, only Southport triggers the threshold for improvements at
the Lake Washington Boulevard N. at Gene Coulon entrance intersection. Under the code, there
would be no need for the present development to improve the intersection. They should not have to
pay for the intersection improvement but are required by the SEPA migration measure which cannot
be changed now since there was no appeal. Therefore, they are requesting a credit for the pro -rata
share toward their transportation impact fees so that they are not double charged. No other
development is being required to pay a pro -rate share of the intersection. This is an unfair impact
that is arbitrary.
EXHIBITS
The April 7, 2015 staff report Exhibits 1-15 identified at page 2 of the staff report itself were
admitted into the record during the hearing. The staff PowerPoint was admitted as Exhibit 19
during the hearing. The following additional exhibits were also admitted during the hearing:
Exhibit 20:
Exhibit 21:
Exhibit 22:
Revised Parking Plan
Drainage Plan
Traffic Response to SEPA Mitigation Measures
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. The applicant is Faizel Kassam of Legacy Renton.
2. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on April 7, 2015 at 11:00
am in the City of Renton Council Chambers.
3. Project Description. The applicant is proposing to construct a 105 guest room hotel and
23 structured parking area. The subject property is located on the east side of Lake Washington Blvd N
24 just north of Houser Way N at 1300 Lake Washington Blvd N. The project site totals 55,000sf feet
in area and is located within the Urban Center North - 2 (UC -N2) zone and Design District 'C'. The
25 majority of the site is currently undeveloped. However, there is a paved espresso stand drive-thru
26 which exists on the site and is proposed for demolition. Access to the site would be via a single curb
cut from Lake Washington Boulevard N.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 5
The total square footage of the proposed building is 108,800sf (including parking garage square
2 footage). The proposed hotel height is 5 stories above the front ground floor grade. A total of 105
3 parking stalls would be primarily provided in a two-level below grade parking garage with two stalls
provided at grade in a small surface parking area. The applicant is requesting a modification from
4 RMC 4-4-080 in order to reduce the number of required parking stalls from 111 to 105 stalls. Access
5 is proposed via Lake Washington Blvd N.
6
7
8
9
0
1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
There are approximately 42 significant trees located on site. The applicant proposes to retain 34
trees. The site contains critical and sensitive slopes. Additionally, the site is located in an erosion
hazard area and a moderate landslide hazard area. The site is located within a High Erosion Hazard
area and an unclassified Landslide Hazard Area. Moderate and protected slopes, which exceed a
40% grade, are also located on site. The steep slopes occupy most of the northeast portion of the site.
The protected slopes make up an approximate 24,000sf area, representing 56% of the subject site.
The applicant is requesting a variance in order to encroach into critical slopes on site (4,185 square
feet).
Approximately 40,000cy of material would be cut on site and approximately 5,000cy of fill is
proposed to be brought into the site. Following construction, the impervious cover would be
approximately 44%.
The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-6-060 in order to reduce the amount of
right-of-way dedication from 11.5 feet to 2.5 feet along Lake Washington Blvd N. Another variance
is requested in order to increase the maximum front yard setback from 5 -feet to 22 feet and 9 -inches.
The City's Environmental Review Committee issued s SEPA Determination of Non -Significant
Impact — Mitigated on March 16, 2015. The DNS -M included six mitigation measures. No appeals
of the threshold determination were filed.
The City received a public comment letter (Ex. 10), which commented on transportation impacts and
mitigation. The City's Staff Report recommended Conditions of Approval in the Staff Report (Ex.
18) attempt to address the issues raised in the comment letter.
4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate
infrastructure and public services as follows:
A. Water and Sewer Service. The site is served by the City of Renton for all water and sewer
service. There are existing water and sewer mains and partial storm drainage improvements in
Lake Washington Boulevard N. The water main is 12 inches. The sewer main is 8 inches and is
of sufficient size to support the proposed development. The system development fee for sewer
is based on the size of the new domestic water to serve the project. The preliminary fire flow
demand for the proposed development is 2,500 gpm.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 6
2 B. Fire and Police. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to
3 furnish services to the proposed development; if the applicant provides Code required
improvements and fees. A Fire Impact Fee, based on the new square footage of non-residential
4 area is required in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to City emergency services.
5 The applicant would be required to pay an appropriate Fire Impact Fee.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
C. Drainage. Storm drainage is adequately addressed by the proposal. The site is located within
the Lake Washington Drainage basin. Runoff from the site currently drains to the southwest of
the project site and then travels along Lake Washington Blvd N. before it eventually heads
north via roadside ditches and several culverts eventually discharging directly into Lake
Washington.
The applicant submitted a preliminary drainage plan and drainage report (Ex. 6) and a revised
drainage report (Ex. 21). Though the applicant had initially intended to utilize the City's
existing storm drainage system, the applicant has revised the drainage plan to route stormwater
into an on-site detention vault which eventually discharges into the City's drainage system.
D. Transportation. Traffic impacts are adequately mitigated by the proposal. Level of service
standards will not be reduced below adopted levels for the proposal and traffic impact fees will
be assessed to pay for proportionate share transportation system impacts.
The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (Ex. 8) and a Traffic Response to SEPA
Mitigation Measures (Ex. 22) which addressed concerns expressed by the City's third party
reviewer and by staff in the Staff Report (Ex. 18).
Staff note there are several proposed developments in the project vicinity which together will
reduce the level of service (LOS) at the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard North and
Houser Way at the entrance to Gene Coulon Park. The proposal itself will not significantly
reduce the intersection LOS. The intersection fails (LOS F) only under the circumstance
wherein the traffic from the Southport Development is included at conservatively high traffic
volumes. When more realistic projections from the Southport development are included in the
analysis, the LOS at this intersection is LOS E or better. The proposed development by itself is
not expected to impact the LOS at this intersection. No other nearby intersection service levels
will see an increase of more than 5% in PM peak hour volumes and therefore no further
analysis is required for other nearby intersections.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Despite the anticipated lack of project level impacts from this project on the Lake Washington
Boulevard North and Houser Way intersection, the City's Environmental Review Committee
imposed a SEPA mitigation measure requiring the applicant to pay a pro -rated share of the
traffic signal and roadway improvements costs for the intersection, which is currently being
constructed by SECO Development. The proposed project is required to pay its pro -rata share
based on the ratio of the number of trips added by the project to the number of future baseline
trips at the Southport/Gene Coulon Park Entrance/Lake Washington Boulevard N. intersection.
The applicant anticipates the proposed development will account for approximately 2.69% of
trips.
The applicant has requested a hearing examiner Condition of Approval that would reduce the
required traffic impact mitigation fees to remove the duplicate fees imposed by the SEPA
condition. The City testified that though this is exactly what they did for Southport, they are no
longer able to provide a traffic mitigation fee reduction to account for physical construction of
improvements or payment towards physical construction by a third party because they are
prohibited by the RMC from doing so. They note the relevant code was enacted after the
Southport Development Agreement. Contrary to the City's testimony, RMC 4-1-190(3)(1) does
in fact allow for credit towards impact fees based on the value of system improvements paid for
by the applicant provided the applicant receives administrative or Hearing Examiner approval
(RMC 4-1-190(L)).
E. Parking. The RMC requires a total of 111 parking spaces (one per guest room and one for every
three employees). The applicant and staff have agreed to a proposed parking modification to
allow for 105 parking spaces based on a revised parking plan (Ex. 20) and the ITE Manual's
occupancy rates projections. The ITE Manual anticipates average demand of approximately
57% of the required spaces based on average anticipated occupancy rates (Ex. 14). The 105
parking spaces represent a 5% reduction from the RMC required number of spaces.
F. Bicycle Stalls. Eleven bicycle stalls are required and proposed, however it is unclear if the
proposal provides fixed structures for locking individual bikes. The applicant will be required to
submit a bicycle parking detail during building permit approval.
G. Vehicular Access and Internal Circulation. The proposal provides for a single curb cut on Lake
Washington Boulevard N at the south end of the site. The location of the curb cut minimizes
conflict with adjacent uses by placing the entrance as far as physically possible from adjoining
uses. Parking will be accomplished almost entirely via an underground structured parking
garage with an entrance at the rear of the building, thus funneling on-site traffic in an orderly
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 8
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
manner. There is also a porte-cochere for guest drop off and pick up. Service elements are
located within the building (Ex. 20) to reduce conflicts with parking and pedestrian circulation.
H. Pedestrian Circulation. There are existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the subject vicinity
including bike lanes on both sides of Lake Washington Blvd N and existing contiguous
sidewalk to the north of the project (Exhibit 8). The applicant will construct sidewalks along the
site frontage connecting to the existing sidewalk system to the north. There is a lack of
pedestrian facilities between the site and the intersection of Lake Washington Blvd N at the
Gene Coulon Park entrance/Houser Way intersection. A SEPA mitigation measure was
requires the applicant to provide a surety device to provide pedestrian improvements between
the site and the Lake Washington Blvd at the Gene Coulon Park entrance /Houser Way. If,
within two years, the pedestrian connection is constructed as part of the development of the
abutting parcel to the south, the provided surety device will be released. If the pedestrian
connection is not constructed prior to the termination of the two year period, the funds will be
released to the City of Renton for the construction of the pedestrian connection.
Landscaping. The applicant submitted a proposed landscaping plan that substantially meets the
code requirements (Ex. 3). However, the plan did not specify the vegetation proposed for use in
planters in common areas and the proposed green screens separating patios on the upper floors.
More significantly, the plan did not include landscaping for the critical slope areas proposed for
clearing. Prior to engineering permit approval, the applicant will be required to submit a revised
landscaping plan depicting significant landscaping along the street frontage, within planters
adjacent to the building or within common open spaces, and roof patio screens. The landscape
plan will also include a planting plan for cleared areas which enhance slope stability.
Refuse Enclosure. The code requires a total of 201sf of recycle area and 402sf of refuse area
based on a total of 66,929sf of hotel space. The applicant has proposed only 338sf of the
required 603sf total refuse and recycling area. A condition of approval will require the applicant
either to comply with the code or request an administrative variance prior to building permit
approval. A conflict between the proposed refuse and recycling area and the parking area has
been resolved (Ex. 20).
K. Building Entries. The applicant has proposed to construct a pedestrian plaza along Lake
Washington Boulevard North. This will serve as a focal point for the development and create a
visually prominent entry. The main entrance of the building will be under a porte-cochere. Prior
to building permit approval, the applicant will provide a detailed common open space/plaza
plan detailing the proposed urban amenities (art, lighting, fixtures, landscaping).
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 9
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
L. Building Facades. As noted in the Staff Report (Ex. 18), the building largely complies with the
City's design standards for modulation, articulation, defined entrances and display windows.
The building is well modulated to give a less bulky appearance and to provide visual interest.
Staff expressed concern related to how the HVAC units will integrate into the window frames
and whether these will provide a monotonous appearance to the facade. Prior to building permit
approval, the applicant will be required to provide a more detailed window design plan.
M. Building Materials. Though the applicant has proposed the use of a variety of materials, the
elevations the applicant provided are too conceptual in nature. Prior to building permit
approval, the applicant will be required to provide a materials board for various elements of the
proposed facade and structures such as retaining walls for review and approval by the Current
Planning Project Manager.
N. Ground Level Details. As proposed, the entry to the building is not prominent and does not
meet the overall building design in the UC -N2 zone and design district. Some human scale
elements are provided, and as noted elsewhere, more detailed plans will be required for the
building entries and urban amenities. In addition to these features, the applicant will be required
to present more detailed elevations depicting added architectural detailing elements along the
ground floor and street facing facade.
O. Roof Lines. The proposed design for the building has morphed throughout the review process.
The most recent iteration depicts a flatter shed roof than previous designs. To provide a more
visually appealing roof line, the applicant will be required to submit building plans depicting a
higher pitched roof prior to building permit approval.
P. Recreation and Common Open Spaces. The building is over 30,000sf and therefore a pedestrian
oriented space is required. As noted above, the applicant proposes a plaza along the street
frontage. There will be a total of 3,700sf of passive and active open space on site which will
accommodate both hotel patrons and the public. Landscaping along the edge of the plaza will
soften the sidewalk and complement the entry plaza. As noted above, a more detailed plan for
the proposed urban amenities will be required prior to building permit approval.
Q. Equipment Screening. Prior to building permit approval, the applicant will be required to
provide details for screening of surface and roof mounted equipment.
R. Signage. Though .the applicant provided a proposed sign package, the plan the applicant
provided is too conceptual in nature. Prior to building permit approval, the applicant will be
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 10
required to provide a signage package indicating the location of all exterior building signage
2 and which demonstrates compatibility with the building's architecture and exterior finishes.
3
S. Lighting. It appears through various elements of the submittal package that the applicant intends
4 to comply with the City's lighting standards. However, the applicant did not provide a specific
5 lighting plan. The applicant will be required to submit a lighting plan at the time of building
permit review.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project. Few
adverse impacts are anticipated. Adequate infrastructure serves the site as determined in Finding of
Fact No. 4. The SEPA MDNS mitigation measures in the Environmental Report (Ex. 1) are adopted
as Conditions of Approval. Adoption of Ex. 18 encompasses both the Findings of Fact and the
Conclusions of Law of Staff. All other adverse impacts discernible from the record are also fully
mitigated. Impacts are more specifically addressed as follows:
A. Reduced Frontage Setbacks. The UC -N2 zone has a maximum front yard setback of five feet.
The proposed building would have a 22 ft, 9 in front setback. The setback is necessary to
accommodate an existing 15 ft wide utility easement and to allow for a better, more functional
design for the pedestrian plaza. The proposal minimizes, to the extent possible, impacts to the
protected slopes on the northeastern portion of the site. The proposed building setback is also in
keeping with surrounding development patterns for building massing.
B. Right of Way Dedication. The existing right of way on Lake Washington Boulevard N. is 60
feet. The RMC (4-6-060) requires a right of way dedication to increase the right of way width to
83 feet. However, the City's actual plans for this location do not match the code requirements.
The City's Transportation Department has a specific corridor plan for Lake Washington
Boulevard N. that includes a minimum right of way width of 69 feet, rather than 83 feet. Instead
of the general code required dedication of 11.5 feet, the applicant has requested a 4.5 foot right
of way dedication to meet the more specific corridor plan. The City plans require only 17 feet
from the roadway centerline to match the existing curb on the north side of the subject site
while still providing for adequate sidewalk width and landscaping. Staff concurs with the
applicant's request and note that the reduced right of way dedication serves to reduce the impact
on critical area slopes by pushing the building as far forward as feasibly possible.
C. Reduced Critical Areas Setbacks. There are 24,000sf of critical slopes on the site. These were
created by WSDOT during the 1-405 widening project. The applicant is proposing to encroach
into 4,185sf of the critical slopes. The applicant provided a geotechnical report (Ex. 7) which
demonstrated no signs of recent large scale erosion or slope stability issues as the subject site.
There were signs of steep to near vertical reliefs, all of which proved stable. Subsurface soils
demonstrate strength. The City does not anticipate any detriment to the public welfare or safety
provided the building's structural foundations are constructed according to the proposed plan.
The plan will likely result in increased safety at the site. As noted above in FOF 5A, the
proposed building is situated as far forward as possible while still failing to encroach on the
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
existing utility easement and provide for a functional pedestrian amenity. The proposed setback
is the minimum amount necessary to meet the objectives of the UC -N2 zone while protecting
the critical slopes. To ensure adequate safety, the applicant will be required to submit a revised
geotechnical report prior to engineering approval. The report will note proposed impacts to the
slopes and any changes to the recommendations to ensure safety, slope stability, and flow
control.
Conclusions of Law
1. Authority. Master Site Plan Approvals, Site Plan Review and Variances associated with
Hearing Examiner Review are each Type III decisions determined by the hearing examiner (RMC 4-
8-080(G)). The site plan, variance and modification applications of this proposal have been
consolidated. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under "the
highest -number procedure". The site plan and variance applications have the highest numbered
review procedures, so all three applications must be processed as Type III applications. As Type III
applications, RMC 4-8-080(G) grants the Examiner with the authority to hold a hearing and issue a
final decision on them, subject to closed record appeal to the City Council.
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The property is zoned Urban Center North — 2
(UC -N2). The Comprehensive Plan designation is Urban Center North.
3. Review Criteria. Master Site Plan Review and Site Plan Review are required in the UC -N2
zone (RMC 4-9-200(B)(1) and RMC 4-9-200(B)(2)(a)). Master Site Plan and Site Plan Reviews are
governed by RMC 4-9-200(E)(3). Variance approval is governed by RMC 4-9-250(B)(5).
Modifications are governed by RMC 4-9-250(D)(2). The review of the appeal of the administrative
decision is governed by RMC 4-8-110(E)(12)(b). All applicable criteria are quoted below in italics
and applied through corresponding conclusions of law.
Master Site Plan/Site Plan
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to be in
compliance with the following:
a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals,
including:
i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and
policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community Design
Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan;
ii. Applicable land use regulations;
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 12
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and
iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC -1-3-
100.
4. The proposal is consistent with applicable comprehensive plan policies, City of Renton
zoning regulations and design guidelines as outlined in Findings 19, 20, and 25 of the staff report,
which is adopted by this reference as if set forth in full, including the findings and conclusions.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off -Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses, including:
1. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a
particular portion of the site;
ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways
and adjacent properties;
iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities,
rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from
surrounding properties;
iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility
to attractive natural features;
v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and
surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance
the appearance of the project; and
vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid
excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
5. As noted above in Finding of Fact No. 4(K -O), the building has been designed to reduce the
apparent bulk and provide visual interest through the use of varied materials and modification of the
facade. The building uses less of the site than would otherwise be required by code and places
parking in a structured garage underground. The building is placed to reduce the impact on on-site
critical slopes while providing for a pedestrian plaza and other urban amenities along the property's
frontage. As noted in Fining of Fact No. 4(G and H), the proposal involves a single curb cut on Lake
Washington Boulevard North while also providing frontage improvements to match the existing
curb line. The pedestrian plaza and porte-cochere will enhance the pedestrian experience. As noted
in Finding of Fact No. 4(J and Q), loading and storage areas, refuse collection and roof equipment
will be screened and will not interfere with pedestrian circulation or parking. There are not
significant views from this property. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 4(I), landscaping will be
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 13
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
provided on the critical slopes, around the building, in the pedestrian plaza and on the frontage. As
noted in Finding of Fact No. 5(S), lighting will be designed to avoid glare on to adjacent properties
or streets while providing safe illumination for site users.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On -Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including:
i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement,
spacing and orientation;
ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural
characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian
and vehicle needs;
iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation
and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious
surfaces; and
iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide
shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to
enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection
of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian
movements.
6. As noted in the Staff Report (Ex. 18), the entrance to the proposed hotel is located as far away
as feasible from existing residential uses. The building also steps back from the north property line
to provide a transition to the live/work area to the north. The building setback and orientation will
provide privacy to guests and existing residents. Once operational, no noise impacts are anticipated.
The proposed building is smaller in scale than what is allowable under the code and is designed to
reduce the visual bulk of the building through varied materials and facade modulation. The
pedestrian plaza will be visually appealing from the property's frontage. The proposal does impact
the on-site steep slopes, but the impact is the least feasible to allow development of the site.
Adequate landscaping in the pedestrian plaza and frontage is proposed. Parking will be structured.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all
users, including:
i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets
rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the
site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties;
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 14
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system,
including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points,
drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways;
iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and
pedestrian areas;
iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and
v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas,
buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
7. The proposal provides for adequate access and circulation as required by the criterion above
for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(E -H).
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project
focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users
of the site.
8. The proposal provides for common open space that serves as a distinctive project focal point
and also provides for passive recreation as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4(N and P). A primary
feature of the proposal is a pedestrian plaza.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to
shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines.
9. There are no view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural
systems where applicable.
10. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 5(C), the proposal impacts critical slopes, though the impact
is the minimum necessary to allow feasible development of the site. As conditioned, the project
provides for adequate public safety and welfare. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, the
drainage system has been designed as a vault system which will allow the project to discharge into
natural drainage courses via the City's existing storm drainage system.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and
facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
11. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No.
4(A and B).
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 15
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
12
13
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases
and estimated time frames, for phased projects.
12. The project is not phased.
Urban Design Regulations
RMC 4-3-100(E)(1)(I) Building Location and Orientation:
1. The availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun exposure to
nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be considered when siting
structures.
2. Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk.
3. The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscaped pedestrian -
only courtyard.
4. Buildings with residential uses located at the street level shall be set back from the
sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (102 and feature substantial landscaping between the
sidewalk and the building or have the ground floor residential uses raised above street
level for residents privacy.
14 13. The proposed structure is located in the only location on the site that is feasible for
development given the constraints of the critical areas and existing utility easement. The building
15 will feature a pedestrian plaza accessible from the frontage sidewalk and a porte-cochere with
16 pedestrian amenities. As conditioned, this criterion is satisfied.
17 RMC 4-3-100(E)(1)(2) Building Entries:
18 1. A primary entrance of each building shall be:
19 a. located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street,
connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human -scale elements.
20 I
21 overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting.
b. made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade
22
23
24
25
26
2. Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural
elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least
four and one-half feet wide. Buildings that are taller than thirty feet (30') in height shall
also ensure that the weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level.
4. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to a street or
pedestrian -oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features should be
incorporated.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 16
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
14. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 4(K), the building's primary entrance is proposed to be
located along the site's only road frontage. The primary entrance will be a porte-cochere adjacent to
a pedestrian plaza with landscaping and urban amenities. The applicant has stated that canopies,
architectural elements and ornamental lighting will be employed at the entrances to clearly identify
them as the primary pedestrian entry points into the building. The applicant has proposed a variety
of materials to enhance the ground level effect. As noted in FOF No. 4(K -M), as conditioned, these
criteria are satisfied.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(1)(3) Transition to Surrounding Development:
1. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to
surrounding uses:
(a) Building proportions, including step -backs on upper levels;
(b) Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or
(c) Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to• reduce apparent bulk and transition
with existing development.
Additionally, the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or
designee may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk
and scale of larger buildings and/or so that sunlight reaches adjacent and/or abutting yards.
15. As conditioned and described in Findings of Fact No. 4(L and 0), this criterion is satisfied.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(1)(4) Service Element Location and Design:
1. Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian
environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where
they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use.
16. As noted in Findings of Fact No. 4(J), the proposed refuse and recycle deposit areas are
located within the proposed structure and will not impact parking. No impacts to the pedestrian
environment or adjacent uses are anticipated.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(2)(2) Structured Parking Garages:
1. Parking structures shall provide space for ground floor commercial uses along street
frontages at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the building frontage width.
17. This criterion is satisfied as the entire use is commercial in nature.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 17
RMC 4-3-100(E)(2)(3) Vehicular Access:
2
1. Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. If not available,
3 access shall occur at side streets.
4
5
6
7
8
2. The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized, so that pedestrian circulation
along the sidewalk is minimally impeded.
18. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4(G), all access is from a single curb cut. This criterion
is satisfied.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(3)(1) Pedestrian Circulation:
1. A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect
9 buildings, open space, and parking areas with the sidewalk system and abutting properties
10 shall be provided.
11 a. Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety.
12 b. Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users
13 and complementary to the design of the development.
14 19. As noted above in Finding of Fact No. 4(H), pedestrian circulation to and throughout the site
will be enhanced by the pedestrian plaza, porte-cochere and the placement of parking in a structured
15 underground garage. As conditioned, this criterion is satisfied.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
RMC 4-3-100(E)(3)(3) Pedestrian Circulation:
1. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to
accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically:
a. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings one hundred
(100) or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least
twelve feet (12) in width. The pathway shall include an eight foot (8) minimum
unobstructed walking surface.
b. Interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The
widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no smaller than five feet (5')
and no greater than twelve feet (12).
20. The proposed hotel use is neither mixed use nor retail in nature. As proposed, this criterion is
met.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 18
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
RMC 4-3-100(E)(4) Recreation Areas and Common Open Space:
2. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30, 000) square feet of
nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian -
oriented space.
a. The pedestrian -oriented space shall be provided according to the following formula:
1% of the site area + 1 % of the gross building area, at minimum.
b. The pedestrian -oriented space shall include all of the following:
i. Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier free access) to the abutting
structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; and
ii. Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; and
iii. On-site or building -mounted lighting providing at least four (4) foot-candles
(average) on the ground; and
iv. At least three (3) lineal feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one
individual seat per sixty (60) square feet of plaza area or open space.
c. The following areas shall not count as pedestrian -oriented space.
i. The minimum required walkway. However, where walkways are widened or
enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian -
oriented space if the Administrator determines such space meets the definition
of pedestrian -oriented space.
21. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4(H, N and P) above, the applicant is proposing a
pedestrian plaza adjacent to the project frontage and accessible from the street. The plaza meets the
size, access and materials requirements. Other urban amenities are proposed. As conditioned, these
criteria are satisfied.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(5)(1) Building Character and Massing:
1. All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than
forty feet (40).
2. Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2') deep, sixteen feet (16') in height, and eight
feet (8') in width.
3. Buildings greater than one hundred sixty feet (160) in length shall provide a variety of
modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade; or provide
an additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering
area.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 19
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
22. As noted in Finding of Fact 4(L), and as proposed and conditioned, these criteria are satisfied.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(5)(2) Ground -Level Details:
1. Human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be
provided along the facade 's ground floor.
2. On any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are required to
comprise at least 50 percent of the portion of the ground floor facade that is between 4 feet
and 8 feet above ground (as measured on the true elevation).
3. Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into and out of the
building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The
minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50 percent.
4. Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than
permanent displays.
5. Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing.
6. Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror -type) glass and film are prohibited.
23. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 4(M, N, P, R and S) above, human -scaled elements such as
lighting fixtures or other landscape features are proposed. However, the elements are not apparent
on the provided elevations (Exhibit 4). Additional human scale elements are needed in order to
reinforce a pedestrian oriented development and enhance the commercial portion of the project at
the street front. Conditions of approval require the applicant to submit revised elevations addressing
window HVAC units, lighting, signage, urban amenities and building materials.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(5)(3) Building Roof Lines: Buildings shall use at least one of the following
elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles:
a. Extended parapets;
b. Feature elements projecting above parapets;
c. Projected cornices;
d. Pitched or sloped roofs
e. Buildings containing predominantly residential uses shall have pitched roofs with a minimum
slope of one to four (1:4) and shall have dormers or interesting roof forms that break up the
massiveness of an uninterrupted sloping roof
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 20
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
24. The applicant has proposed a shed style roof. As noted in Finding of Fact 4(0) above, the
applicant will be required to provide a roofline with a greater pitch. As conditioned, this criterion is
satisfied.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(5)(4) Building Materials:
1. All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be
finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if
different, with materials of the same quality.
2. All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns or
textural changes.
3. Materials shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with more traditional urban
development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre -finished metal, stone,
steel, glass and cast -in-place concrete.
25. The applicant has proposed a building exterior with varied colors, textures, and profiles.
However, the applicant did not provide sufficient detail to allow the City to envision the final look
of the structure. The applicant will be required to provide a materials board for City review as noted
above in Finding of Fact No. 4(M).
Acceptable materials include a combination of brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre -
finished metal, stone, steel, glass, cast -in-place concrete, or other high quality material. Full brick -
sized material should be encouraged for at least the street level facade to ensure durable materials
are applied in high traffic pedestrian locations. Any non -brick masonry finishes proposed at the
ground level that may be accessible to humans should be anti -graffiti coating applied to ensure easy
removal of graffiti. If this condition of approval is met, the proposal would satisfy this standard.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(6) Signage:
1. Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development.
2. Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location.
3. In mixed use and multi -use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building
design.
4. Freestanding ground -related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry signs, shall
be limited to five feet (5) above finished grade, including support structure.
5. Freestanding signs shall include decorative landscaping (ground cover and/or shrubs) to
provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage may
incorporate stone, brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Director.
6. All of the following are prohibited:
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 21
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
a. Pole signs;
b. Roof signs; and
c. Back -lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet (can signs or illuminated cabinet
signs). Exceptions: Back -lit logo signs less than ten (10) square feet are permitted as area
signs with only the individual letters back -lit (see illustration, subsection G8 of this
Section).
26. Signage has not yet been fully designed for the proposed project. As described in Finding of
Fact No. 4(R) and as a condition of approval, the applicant is required to submit a comprehensive
signage package. Locations and supports are required to be compatible with the building's
architecture and exterior finishes. The signage package shall be submitted to and approved by the
Current Planning Manager prior to sign permit approval. As conditioned, this criterion is met.
RMC 4-3-100(E)(7) Lighting:
1. Pedestrian -scale lighting shall be provided at primary and secondary building entrances.
Examples include sconces on building facades, awnings with down -lighting and decorative
street lighting.
3. Accent lighting shall also be provided on building facades (such as sconces) and/or to
illuminate other key elements of the site such as gateways, specimen trees, other significant
landscaping, water features, and/or artwork.
4. Downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement,
unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is
specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On -
Site (i.e., signage, governmental flags, temporary holiday or decorative lighting, right -of -
way -lighting, etc.).
27. As noted in Findings of Fact No. 4(S), building lighting will be utilized to complement the
architecture of the building. However, a lighting plan was not provided with the application. A
condition of approval requires the Applicant to provide a lighting plan which complies with the
Design District standards. The plan shall indicate the location of exterior/ornamental lighting to be
attached to the building, including specifications and photo samples of the light fixtures. The
lighting plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit approval. If this condition of approval is met, the proposal would satisfy this
standard.
Setback Variance
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(a): That the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship
and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 22
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges
enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification;
28. As noted above in Finding of Fact No. 5(A), the maximum front setback in the UC -N2 zone is
five feet. The proposed building would have a 22 ft, 9 in front setback. A five foot setback is
impossible in the subject's case because of an existing 15 ft electrical utility easement. The proposal
minimizes, to the extent possible, impacts to the protected slopes on the northeastern portion of the
site by pushing the building as far forward as possible and placing parking in an underground
structure. The proposed building setback is also in keeping with surrounding development patterns
for building massing. The criterion is met due to both the critical areas in the rear of the property and
the existing easement along the frontage.
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(b): That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject
property is situated;
29. As noted above in Conclusion of Law No. 28, the proposed setback is similar to other
11 buildings and sites within the subject's vicinity. The greater setback also facilitates placement of a
12 pedestrian plaza along the subject's frontage, an urban amenity. The public welfare will be improved
by construction of the new plaza as facilitated by the increased setback. As determined in Finding of
13 Fact No. 5, no significant adverse impacts will be created by the proposal. In the absence of any
significant impacts and the likely improvement in public welfare, the impacts of the variance will
14 not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity and zone.
15
6
17
18
19
20
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(c): That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject
property is situated;
30. Many of the buildings adjacent to the subject have similar setbacks due to the utility
easement. There is no special privilege.
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(d): That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum
variance that will accomplish the desired purpose.
21
31. The requested variance is the minimum necessary while still allowing the construction of the
22 public plaza.
23 Critical Areas Variance
24 RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(a): That the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship
and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property,
25 including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict
application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges
26 enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification;
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 23
2 32. The steep slopes on the subject property were created by WSDOT during the I-405
construction. The applicant has minimized to the greatest extent feasible the impact to the slopes by
3 placing the building as far to the front of the site as possible and providing underground structured
4 parking. The impact to the slopes is the minimum necessary to allow for feasible development of the
subject site. The criterion is met as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(C).
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(b): That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the
6 public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject
property is situated;
5
7
8 33. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(C), no significant adverse impacts will be created by
the proposal. The applicant's geotechnical engineer has adequately demonstrated the slopes are
9 stable and will remain so post -construction. As conditioned, the slope impact will not result in any
adverse impacts to the public health or safety. In the absence of any significant impacts, the impacts
10 of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone.
1
12
13
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(c): That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject
property is situated;
14 34. There is no special privilege.
15
16
17
18
9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(d): That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum
variance that will accomplish the desired purpose.
35. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow development of the project site as
contemplated in the UC -N2 zone.
Street Modification
RMC 4-9-250(D)(2): Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the
provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases
provided he/she shall first find that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical,
that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan is met
and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such
modification:
a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the
proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and
objectives;
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 24
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and
maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment;
c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity;
d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code;
e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and
f Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity.
36. The criterion above are met for the requested modification to RMC 4-6-060 for the reasons
identified in Finding of Fact No. 5(B). The City's corridor plan for this location requires less right
of way dedication than that required by strict application of the code. The City can create adequate
right of way, sidewalks, Landscaping and curbs with the reduced right of way dedication. No adverse
impacts are anticipated from the proposed modification.
Parking Modification
10 RMC 4-9-250(D)(2): Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the
provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases
11 provided he/she shall first find that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical,
12 that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan is met
and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such
13 modification:
14 a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the
15 proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and
16 objectives;
b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and
17 maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment;
c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity;
18 d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code;
e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and
f Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity.
37. The criterion above are met for the requested modification to RMC 4-6-060 for the reasons
identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(E). Though the RMC requires 111 parking spaces, the applicant
has reasonably proved that 105 spaces are more than adequate to meet expected demand. Both the
applicant and the City testified to the adequacy of the reduced number of spaces. Though there is a
regional parking shortage, the reduced number of spaces is not anticipated to create adverse impacts
to other properties in the vicinity as the proposed parking will more than meet the demand created
by the project.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 25
2
3
4
5
Impact Fee Reduction
RMC 4-1-190(G)(1): The City shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in the City's fee
schedule, from any applicant seeking development approval from the City for any development
activity within the City, when such development activity requires the issuance of a building
permit or a permit for a change in use, and creates a demand for additional public facilities.
6 RMC 4-1-190(J)(1):. A feepayer may request that a credit or credits for impact fees be
7 awarded to him/her for the total value of system improvements, including dedications of land
and improvements, and/or construction provided by the feepayer. Credits will be given only if
8 the land, improvements, and/or the facility constructed are:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
a. Included within the capital facilities plan or would serve the goals and objectives of the
capital facilities plan;
b. Determined by the City to be at suitable sites and constructed at acceptable quality;
c. Serve to offset impacts of the feepayer's development activity; and
d. Are for one (1) or more of the projects listed in the Rate Study as the basis for calculating
the transportation impact fee.
RMC 4-1-190(L):
1. The Administrators determinations with respect to the applicability of the impact fees to a
given development activity, the availability or value of a credit, the Administrator 's decision
concerning the independent fee calculation which is authorized in subsection H of this Section,
as it exists or may be amended, or any other Administrator's determination pursuant to this
Section may be appealed by the feepayer to the provisions of RMC 4-8-110E, as it exists or may
be amended. No building or change of use permits will be issued until the impact fee is paid or
the signed and notarized deferred impact fee application and acknowledgement form and
deferral fee have been received and accepted by the City; provided, however, that the feepayer
may pay the fee under protest pending appeal to avoid delays in the issuance of building
permits or change of use permits.
2. Appeals to the Hearing Examiner shall be taken in accord with the processes set forth in
RMC -l -8-110E, as it exists or may be amended.
3. The Hearing Examiner is authorized to make findings of fact regarding the applicability of
the impact fees to a given development activity, the availability or amount of the credit, or the
accuracy or applicability of an independent fee calculation. There is a presumption of validity
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
of the Administrator's determination. The feepayer has the burden of proof during any appeal
of the Administrator's determination or decision.
4. The Hearing Examiner may, so long as such action is in conformance with the provisions of
this Section, reverse, affirm, modify or remand, in whole or in part, the Administrator's
determinations with respect to the amount of the impact fees imposed or the credit awarded.
RMC 4-8-110(E)(12)(b): Hearing Examiner Decision Options and Decision Criteria: The
Hearing Examiner may affirm the decision or remand the case for further proceedings, or it
may reverse the decision if the substantial rights of the applicant may have been prejudiced
because the decision is:
1. In violation of constitutional provisions; or
H. In excess of the authority or jurisdiction of the agency; or
iii. Made upon unlawful procedure; or
iv. Affected by other error of law; or
v. Clearly erroneous in view of the entire record as submitted; or
vi. Arbitrary or capricious.
38. The applicant has requested a credit towards their transportation impact fees (Ex. 22)
resulting from the SEPA mitigation condition requiring them to pay a pro -rata share of the
intersection improvements at Lake Washington Boulevard North and the entrance to Gene
Coulon Park (Ex. 1, SEPA Mitigation Condition #4). RMC 4-1-190(J)(1) allows credits to be
given if the project is included within or would serve the goals of the capital facilities plan, is
included in the Rate Study, is at a suitable location, and serves to offset the impacts of the
feepayer's development activity.
At the hearing the City staff testified they could not offer the applicant credit as was done with
Southport because the ordinance that previously allowed the credit had changed. Staff argued
the new ordinance specifically prohibited allowing credit for improvements to go towards
transportation impact fees. Staff asked the examiner to review the ordinance. RMC 4-1-190 was
last amended by Ord. 5670 on October 8, 2012. The examiner could find no more recent
ordinances which amended the impact fees.
RMC 4-1-190(L)(1) allows decisions by the administrator with respect to the applicability of
the impact fees to a given development activity or the availability or value of a credit to be
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 27
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
appealed to the examiner. The applicant presented their appeal to apply credit for the SEPA
mitigation measure's intersection improvements to the transportation mitigation fee at the
hearing as Ex. 22. Staff testified the credit could not be given because they erroneously believed
they were specifically prohibited by code from doing so. However, no formal administrative
decision has yet been given regarding the proposed transportation impact fee reduction. As no
formal administrative decision on the matter has been issued, the examiner does not yet have
jurisdiction to consider an appeal on the matter.
DECISION
The Master Site Plan Review, Site Plan Review, Parking Modification, Street Modification,
Setback Variance, Critical Area Variance are approved subject to the following conditions.
1. The applicant shall comply with the six mitigation measures issued as part of the
Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated, dated March 16, 2015.
2. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan depicting significant landscaping
along the street frontage, within planters adjacent to the building or within common open
spaces, and roof patio screens. The landscape plan shall also include a planting plan for
cleared areas which enhance slope stability. The landscaping plan shall be submitted to,
and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit
approval.
3. The applicant shall provide a detailed plan identifying the location and screening
provided for surface and roof mounted equipment. The screening plan shall be submitted
to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
approval.
4. The proposal shall be revised to include an additional 285 square feet of area dedicated to
refuse and recyclables. Alternatively, the applicant may request an Administrative
modification, pursuant to RMC 4-9-250, in order to reduce the square footage required.
The revised floor plan or Administrative Modification request shall be submitted to, and
approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
5. The applicant shall be required to demonstrate there is adequate area for refuse pickup
within the parking structure which may require the relocation of a parking stall(s). The
revised floorplan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit approval.
6. The applicant shall be required to revise the parking plan to include a total of 105 stalls
and the following: relocation of proposed stalls which would preclude refuse and recycle
pickup; the provision of adequate ADA accessible parking stalls; and the replacement of
tandem parking spaces with direct access stalls. The revised parking plan shall be
submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building
permit approval.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 28
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
7. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan depicting a 4.5 foot (subject to a final
survey) right-of-way dedication along Lake Washington Blvd N. The revised site plan
shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit
approval.
8. A revised Geotechnical report shall be submitted prior to engineering permit approval
noting proposed impacts to steeps slopes and any changes in recommendations
accordingly. The geotech report would also be required to include information regarding
the stability for soil infiltration, with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP
options. If infiltration is proposed, then falling head permeability rates are required to be
provided.
9. The applicant shall submit a detailed common open space/plaza plan which includes
specifications for pedestrian amenities that add to the pedestrian experience and the
human scale intended for the development. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved
by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
10. The applicant shall submit a revised elevation depicting some recess depth for each
window, in which the HVAC unit is abutted directly below the window and within a
frame that gives the appearance that ifs an integrated window system. The revised
elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit approval.
11. The applicant shall submit revised elevations depicting added architectural detailing
elements along the ground floor of the Lake Washington Blvd N facade. The revised
elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit approval.
12. The applicant shall increase the pitch of the shed roof element in order to strengthen the
building design to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager. Revised
elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit approval.
13. The applicant shall submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The board shall include
color and materials for the following: guardrails, facade treatments, retaining walls,
raised planters, metal screens, sunshades, windows/frames, and columns. Acceptable
materials include a combination of brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre -
finished metal, stone, steel, glass, cast -in-place concrete, or other superior materials
approved at the discretion of the Administrator.
14. The applicant shall be required to submit a conceptual sign package which indicates the
approximate location of all exterior building signage. Proposed signage shall be
compatible with the building's architecture and exterior finishes and contributes to the
character of the development. The conceptual sign package shall be submitted to, and
approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
15. The applicant shall provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety
without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; at the time of building permit
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 29
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe
pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been
approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in
RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site.
16. The applicant shall submit bicycle parking detail demonstrating compliance with the
bicycle requirements outlined in RMC 4-4-080F.11.c for fixed structures. The bicycle
parking detail shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit approval.
17. The applicant shall submit a revised Drainage Report and Plan in compliance with Core
Requirement No. 1. Specifically, the applicant would be required to redesign the
discharge of stormwater from the subject site to the natural discharge location to the
south. A detention vault or downstream capacity improvements would be required if the
downstream quantitative analysis reveals downstream capacity is not adequate and/or the
Direct Discharge exemption criteria is not met.
18. The TIA shall be revised to include a detailed table for each pipeline project. The revised
11.A. shall be submitted to the PIan Reviewer prior to engineering permit approval.
19. The applicant shall revise the transportation study prior to engineering permit approval to
change the horizon year to the year that the project will be constructed (currently
proposed for 2016).
20. The applicant shall submit a revised TIA which includes a discussion of the AM peak
hour trips and/or a justification for the exclusion of the AM peak hour trips from the
analysis. The revised TIA shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Plan Reviewer
prior to engineering permit approval.
DATED this 16th day of April, 2015.
Emily Te 1
City of Re •n
Hearing Examiner Pro Tem
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the
Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to
be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A
request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal
period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day
SI 1'E PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 30
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information
regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th
floor, (425) 430-6510.
SITE PLAN, CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION, STREET
MODIFICATION, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT- 31
2.2 Requirements Summary
1.2.1 Core Requirement #1: Discharge at the Natural Location
The outflow from the detention facility will be tight lined to a storm system on Lake Washington
Blvd. N. that discharges into Lake Washington to continue its natural drainage path.
1.2.2 Core Requirement #2: Off-site Analysis
Refer to Section 3 for the level one downstream analysis.
1.2.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control
The project is located within the Lake Washington E drainage basin. The project is subjected to
the peak flow rate flow control standard. An underground vault that is 10.75 -ft deep and
provides a detention volume of 8,601 CF will be located underneath the drive aisle to meet the
flow control requirements conforming to the 2010 City of Renton's Amendments to the King
County Surface Water Design Manual. The detention vault was sized using KCRTS with level 1
plus 100 -yr peak matching flow control. Therefore the flow control standard maintains the
predevelopment peak flow rates for the 2 -year, 10 -year and 100 -year runoff storm events. The
outflow from the detention facility will be tight lined to a storm system on Lake Washington
Blvd. N. that discharges into Lake Washington to continue its natural drainage path. The
northeast portion of the site will remain undisturbed. The runoff from the undisturbed area
currently drains to the southwest and will be collected into a drainage swale with yard drains and
an 8 -inch conveyance system to be bypassed to proposed public drainage system along Lake
Washington Blvd. N.
1.2.4 Core Requirement #4: Conveyance System
Site runoff will be collected by means of yard drains, catch basins and roof drains. Collected
runoff will be conveyed to the within pipelines designed to 25 -year peak flows and checked for
flooding conditions at the 100 year event.
1.2.5 Core Requirement #5: Erosion and Sediment Control
During construction of the infrastructure for Legacy Renton hotel, temporary erosion control
methods will be implemented to prevent sedimentation and erosion using those methods as
outlined in section 1.2.5.1 of the KCSWDM.
1.2.6 Core Requirement #6: Maintenance and Operations
This requirement will be fulfilled by the property owner until bonds have been released and
public drainage system(s) have been conveyed to City of Renton.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-7-
1.2.7 Core Requirement #7: Financial Guarantees and Liability
Bond and insurance in accordance with City of Renton requirements will be provided by or at the
behest of the owner during site construction and until the drainage facilities in public street
rights-of-way have been accepted by City of Renton for ownership.
1.2.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality
The project is exempt for water quality because the total pollution generating impervious surface
(PGIS) is 3,982 SF which is less than the threshold of 5,000 SF per section 1.2.8 of the
KCSWDM.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-8-
Special Requirements — Section 1.3 of KCSWDM
1.3.1 Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area Specific Requirements
Not applicable to this project
1.3.2 Special Requirement #2: Flood Plain / Floodway Delineation
Not applicable to this project
1.3.3 Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities
Not applicable to this project
1.3.4 Special Requirement #4: Source Controls
Not applicable to this project
1.3.5 Special Requirement #5: Oil Control
Not applicable to this project
1.3.6 Special Requirement #6: Aquifer Protection Area
The project is located within a Zone 2 Aquifer Protection Area. All proposed drainage facilities
and conveyance systems are closed systems. No open systems are proposed, therefore the project
should not impose any negative impacts to the Aquifer Protection Area. Refer to the appendix for
the Groundwater Protection Areas map.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
9
FIGURE 2. SOIL MAP
SOILS LEGEND
AkF—Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep
Ur—Urban land
INSIGHT ENGINEERING CO.
P.O. Box 1478 Everett, WA
98206
425-303-9363, 425-303-9362 f.
Info@insightengineering.net
Figure 2 - Soil Map
Legacy Renton
Renton, Washington
SCALE:
NONE
DATE: 8/18/15 I JOB #: 13-0623
BY: JDM
FILE NAME:
13-0623\docs\drainage report
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 10 -
King County Area, Washington
AkF—Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep
Map Unit Setting
• Elevation: 50 to 800 feet
• Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches
• Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
• Frost free period: 160 to 220 days
Map Unit Composition
• Alderwood and similar soils: 50 percent
• Kitsap and similar soils: 25 percent
Description of Alderwood
Setting
• Landform: Moraines, till plains
• Parent material: Basal till with some volcanic ash
Properties and qualities
• Slope: 25 to 70 percent
• Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 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 0.06 in/hr)
• Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches
• Frequency of flooding: None
• Frequency of ponding: None
• Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
• Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
• Land capability (nonirrigated): 7e
• Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Typical profile
• 0 to 12 inches: Gravelly ashy sandy loam
• 12 to 27 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam
• 27 to 60 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam
Description of Kitsap
Setting
• Landform: Terraces
• Parent material: Lacustrine deposits with a minor amount of volcanic ash
Properties and qualities
• Slope: 25 to 70 percent
• Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
• Drainage class: Moderately well drained
• Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20
in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches
Insight Engineering Co. – Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 11 -
• Frequency offlooding: None
• Frequency of ponding: None
• Available water capacity: High (about 11.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
• Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
• Land capability (nonirrigated): 7e
• Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Typical profile
• 0 to 5 inches: Ashy silt loam
• 5 to 24 inches: Ashy silt loam
• 24 to 60 inches: Stratified silt to silty clay loam
King County Area, Washington
Ur—Urban land
Map Unit Composition
• Urban land: 100 percent
Description of Urban Land
Interpretive groups
• Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
• Land capability (nonirrigated): 8
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 12 -
3.0 Offsite Analysis
A site reconnaissance was performed by Brian R. Kalab of Insight engineering on
November 23, 2013 to verify the downstream flow paths and observe any drainage problems
downstream of the site. The sky was overcast with a temperature of 45 degrees.
The site is currently developed with a small building with an asphalt drive aisle. The
remainder of the site exists as a combination of grassy and forested areas. The site contains one
drainage basin that slopes to the southwest.
3.1 Upstream Analysis
Based on the site reconnaissance and the topographic survey of the site, the upstream
flows appear to be minimal. Refer to the Downstream Analysis Map attached in the next page for
more details.
3.2 Downstream Analysis
Refer to the Downstream Analysis Maps 1 and 2 attached to the next pages for a visual
description of the downstream flow.
Existing Conditions
The existing site appears to drain to the southwest of the project site and then travels
south along Lake Washington Blvd. N. The drainage continues to travel south and crosses
railroad tracks and a roadway and enters a slight depression. The drainage continues south
underneath roadway via a 12" dia. culvert. The drainage then travels southwest along a roadside
ditch along Lake Washington Blvd. where it then travels northwest underneath Lake Washington
Blvd. N. via four separate culverts (two 54" dia. and two 48" dia. culverts). The drainage then
travels northeast within a roadside ditch along Lake Washington Blvd. N and then travels
northwest underneath railroad tracks via several culverts. The flows continue to flow northwest
through a ditch and then underneath a roadway via several culverts. The drainage flows north
and then enters a box culvert that flows to the north to a stream that eventually discharges to
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 13 -
Lake Washington. This is where the 1 mile downstream observations were stopped. It is our
understanding that there is theoretical 100 year flooding at the box culvert. Because of this
flooding and the lack of a downstream conveyance system the proposed downstream from the
site will be redirected as described in the developed conditions below.
Developed Conditions
Refer to the Downstream Analysis Maps 1 and 2 attached to the next pages for a visual
description of the downstream flow.
The outlet from the detention vault will be connected to the proposed drainage system to
be located within the public right-of-way. The proposed drainage system flows to the south
through a 12 -inch, closed pipe system for about 372 -ft and connects to an existing catch basin.
The existing 12-inich, closed pipe system flows to the southeast for 191 -ft and flows into an
existing catch basin. From the catch basin, the flows travel northwest through an 18 -inch pipe to
a "T" with a 24 -inch pipe. The 24 -inch pipe flow to the southwest and discharges into a
vegetated area. The drainage then travels northwest underneath Lake Washington Blvd. N. via
four separate culverts (two 54" dia. and two 48" dia. culverts). The drainage then travels
northeast within a roadside ditch along Lake Washington Blvd. N and then travels northwest
underneath railroad tracks via several culverts. The flows continue to flow northwest through a
ditch and then underneath a roadway via several culverts. The drainage flows north and then
enters a box culvert that flows to the north to a stream that eventually discharges to Lake
Washington. This is where the 1 mile downstream observations were stopped. There did not
appear to be any restrictions or erosion problems within 1 mile of the site.
The proposed detention vault will store water that is currently flowing in an unrestrained
manner and will meter a restricted flow into the downstream channel at smaller flow rates, which
theoretically existed in the pre -developed condition. Therefore the downstream public channel
should not experience any future flooding problems.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 14-
FIGURE 3. DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS MAP
azip
INSIGHT ENGINEERING CO.
P.O. Box 1478 Everett, WA 98206
425-303-9363, 425-303-9362 f.
Info@insightengineering.net
Figure 3 - Downstream Analysis Map
Legacy Renton
Renton, Washington
SCALE:
NONE
DATE: 8/18/15 I JOB #: 13-0623
BY: JDM
FILE NAME:
13-0623\docs\drainage report
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical information Report 8/18/15
- 15 -
4.0 Flow Control and Water Quality Analysis and Design
The proposed analysis parameters are as follows:
KCRTS methodology with level 1 flow control plus 100 -yr matching
Seatac Rainfall region with a scale factor of 1.0.
Alderwood and Kitsap Soils have a hydrologic classification of "C". This corresponds to Till
soils of AkF soil group.
4.1 Existing Basin Summary
Total site area
Undisturbed Site Area (-)
Offsite Frontage Area (+)
Total Area Included in the Analysis
= 1.31 Acres
= 0.62 Acres
= 0.08 Acres
= 0.77 Acres
The total existing site was modeled as forested.
Refer to the Existing Basin Map attached later in this section for more details.
4.2 Developed Summary
Total site area = 1.31 Acres
Undisturbed Site Area (-) = 0.62 Acres
Offsite Frontage Area (+) = 0.08 Acres
Total Developed Site Area = 0.77 Acres
Impervious area:
Roof area = 0.39 Acres (17,015 SF)
Interior road = 0.08 Acres (3,454 SF)
Walkways and Frontage Road = 0.08 Acres (3,313 SF)
Total Impervious = 0.55 Acres
Pervious Areas = 0.22 Acres
Required Detention Volume = 8,529 CF
Detention Volume provided = 8,601 CF
The detention vault is 10.75 -ft deep with 8 -inch concrete vertical walls.
The vault will provide 1/2 -ft of freeboard, and an average depth of 1/2 -ft at the floor of the vault
has been provided to accommodate for sediment storage.
Please refer to the following pages and Developed Basin Map for more details.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 16 -
00 15/ CPEP=39.55
076
- SD
CUP /842824,
48' 71142. 8 S0//H
894.57.67
NE=5.3.91
15'0PP t4=49.59
15' ( 017)W=49.39
12'CPEP 0,62.29
8/761 s=50.17
/2'688P E=52.32
(14(s.0
CE - TAPE 2 - 48'
RIO 5420
8' PAC 6-0 1.E=51.76
6' PVC SW 76=51.84
6' RC /48 LE=51.23
6' PIC E. 4E=52.40
o9°
CB - TAPE 1
RN 61.94
1761 54.53
6' MC 561 46=59.69
8" PVC:1>.---"---- 6' PVC 0 7E=59.83
74078 44040/0/0
/09 .23
8" PVC S 7E1=51239
14638 E -W LE=51.3.3
8084141 OF 74209=46.19
56 004061007
RN 61.45
061.076 TO war
004=51.35
LE 8' PVC 54=45.5578
E 24' 801140,30.04
50t49 54' - SSD 01496207
010=
/6 5/ PVC /8=
/0/ 8' /761 8=
CZ1. OF R/W
C/L OF RD
60'
tya-o REC. 80. 10.35005
DATED 12/2971915
RZINg:
r ,C5 1,./79./7'
k EX. SEWER LINE
R.aw
ID NE CM'
808 SP
ssrn
BM
54'-S02
12140.70.
/00 4.94' cavcRET RIP 540MA05IT
UP 1.9'
0.6' SW X 0.2' SE
VSITED WV 2012
FOUID 172' P354?? .0 CAP STAYPEJ
02 14 X 0.2' W.
SFOS SEWER
0' 0 P4 7E2998
( If Offle
fir /110
a.
8'
700/40 1 ' 5484
488/4/
0.4' NW X 0.2' W.
EXISTING BASIN
(0.77 AC)
SCALE: 1" = 40'
0
20
EXISTING BASIN MAP
40
1E 15- CFE77=39.55
- SD
cup 6=2a
69 - TYPE 2 - 48"
RAI 54.28
8" PVC 700 LE=51.76
6" PIC SW LE -51.84
6" PVC NC 3.E=51.50
6" PIC E 16.=52.40
"
VC
48" TYPE 8 50W1
TPM=5767
6P46 NE=53.91
88846 Sw50.17
121020 7=52.32
12T74.74 11452.29
rosr (14(0°
1517E7 11842.50
75 (07/6 =45.30
554 54.53
8" PVC NE
77403.77 426705
MU .2
6" 766 S LE=51.36
WEIR E-8 1.6.=51.33
BORON OF 77)3ULI446.19
CD - TYPE f
309 61.84
6" FYC 86 1.E7050.68
6" RC 5 LEN59.93
SD CLEAVOUT
8114 61.45
UNABLE TO OPEN
3.\ \
E 24" c0136.30,44
88633 54' -
5013 01
BA4N
1.7 .6" PVC MN
1E. 0 7746 S.N
CI,L OF R/W
C/L OF RD
60'
Dam REC. NO. 1035005
12/29/1915
L.179.17^
EX. SEWER LINE
71671507758
5' 0 FL 4E457.8
(02 LE We
it WE 1.30
i
,eilWr
, IMAM
trait
.1111 :Ulf
1 i imin
el11111111
111 ilitirlt
• 1 la IF
.....
I
11 NMI
IIIIIIIR
1 111:1111
JJ
ll'Z' IBM
II rallEr
1 1101111111
NW MI
lall MS
1111 NUILTRIIIIiiiWri
IVIIIIIIIRMUMMIIIE
..., JIMINIPIIIIIIIILP
lIjiIfitt..m11111‘11111111111111:ammiummailimummansuall
mai son tismannumumnumanim
an.Lart ammuir akapiraka
Nitirairra-
Finusannownin prAtkil
UNDEVELOPED BASIN
(0.62 AC)
FOUND 414e CONCRETE 11/"6 MOMIINENT
UP 1.0.
0.6 568 0.2' SE
658700 NOV. 2072
FOUND 1/2. REav & 6835 STAMPED 8.5
12698"
0.2" 14. X 0.2" 44.
winatitammatinia.
imisimmumnomir
01111111111111111111111M111111101111111111111r
ill • -
1111111111111111111111.111111111111111111111111r
1110
II
..{ ..... , -4-...-1--..--,,., ,_........., . ............---,,, --",----,,,,,:--
1-r. 4 '''' - 211!!!! illill siiii-iii
FLN4
(1ltW TO D175 1.919)
DEVELOPED BASIN
(0.77 AC)
SCALE: 1" = 40'
1111E11
INNS
0
20
40
DEVELOPED BASIN MAP
RECORD. TXT
KCRTS Command
CREATE a new Time Series
Production of Runoff Time Series
Project Location : Sea -Tac
Computing Series : EX.tsf
Regional Scale Factor : 1.00
Data Type : Reduced
Creating Hourly Time Series File
Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTF6OR.rnf
Till Forest 0.77 acres
Total Area : 0.77 acres
Peak Discharge: 0.062 CFS at 9:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Storing Time Series File:EX.tsf
Time Series Computed
KCRTS Command
Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module
Analysis Tools Command
Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies
Flow Frequency Analysis
Loading Stage/Discharge curve:ex.tsf .
Time Series File:ex.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:EX.pks
Analysis Tools Command
RETURN to Previous Menu
KCRTS Command
CREATE a new Time Series
Production of Runoff Time Series
Project Location : Sea -Tac
Computing Series : DV.tsf
Regional scale Factor : 1.00
Data Type : Reduced
Creating Hourly Time Series File
Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTG6OR.rnf
Till Grass 0.22 acres
Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STE16OR.rnf
Impervious 0.55 acres
Total Area : 0.77 acres
Peak Discharge: 0.306 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Storing Time Series File:DV.tsf .
Time Series Computed
[x] eXit KCRTS Program
Page 1
Retention/Detention Facility
Type of Facility: Detention Vault
Facility Length: 28.17 ft
Facility Width: 28.17 ft
Facility Area: 793. sq. ft
Effective Storage Depth: 10.75 ft
Stage 0 Elevation: 33.25 ft
Storage Volume: 8529. cu. ft
Riser Head: 10.75 ft
Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches
Number of orifices: 2
Full Head Pipe
Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter
(ft) (in) (CFS) (in)
1 0.00 0.56 0.028
2 8.50 0.92 0.034 4.0
Top Notch Weir: None
Outflow Rating Curve: None
Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation
(ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs)
0.00 33.25 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.01 33.26 8. 0.000 0.001 0.00
0.02 33.27 16. 0.000 0.001 0.00
0.03 33.28 24. 0.001 0.001 0.00
0.04 33.29 32. 0.001 0.002 0.00
0.05 33.30 40. 0.001 0.002 0.00
0.23 33.48 183. 0.004 0.004 0.00
0.41 33.66 325. 0.007 0.005 0.00
0.59 33.84 468. 0.011 0.007 0.00
0.78 34.03 619. 0.014 0.008 0.00
0.96 34.21 762. 0.017 0.008 0.00
1.14 34.39 904. 0.021 0.009 0.00
1.32 34.57 1047. 0.024 0.010 0.00
1.50 34.75 1190. 0.027 0.010 0.00
1.69 34.94 1341. 0.031 0.011 0.00
1.87 35.12 1484. 0.034 0.012 0.00
2.05 35.30 1626. 0.037 0.012 0.00
2.23 35.48 1769. 0.041 0.013 0.00
2.42 35.67 1920. 0.044 0.013 0.00
2.60 35.85 2063. 0.047 0.014 0.00
2.78 36.03 2206. 0.051 0.014 0.00
2.96 36.21 2348. 0.054 0.015 0.00
3.14 36.39 2491. 0.057 0.015 0.00
3.33 36.58 2642. 0.061 0.016 0.00
3.51 36.76 2785. 0.064 0.016 0.00
3.69 36.94 2928. 0.067 0.016 0.00
3.87 37.12 3070. 0.070 0.017 0.00
4.06 37.31 3221. 0.074 0.017 0.00
4.24 37.49 3364. 0.077 0.018 0.00
4.42 37.67 3507. 0.081 0.018 0.00
4.60 37.85 3650. 0.084 0.018 0.00
4.78 38.03 3792. 0.087 0.019 0.00
4.97 38.22 3943. 0.091 0.019 0.00
5.15 38.40 4086. 0.094 0.019 0.00
5.33 38.58 4229. 0.097 0.020 0.00
5.51 38.76 4371. 0.100 0.020 0.00
5.70 38.95 4522. 0.104 0.020 0.00
5.88 39.13 4665. 0.107 0.021 0.00
6.06 39.31 4808. 0.110 0.021 0.00
6.24 39.49 4951. 0.114 0.021 0.00
6.42 39.67 5093. 0.117 0.022 0.00
6.61 39.86 5244. 0.120 0.022 0.00
6.79 40.04 5387. 0.124 0.022 0.00
6.97 40.22 5530. 0.127 0.023 0.00
7.15 40.40 5673. 0.130 0.023 0.00
7.33 40.58 5815. 0.134 0.023 0.00
7.52 40.77 5966. 0.137 0.023 0.00
7.70 40.95 6109. 0.140 0.024 0.00
7.88 41.13 6252. 0.144 0.024 0.00
8.06 41.31 6395. 0.147 0.024 0.00
8.25 41.50 6545. 0.150 0.025 0.00
8.43 41.68 6688. 0.154 0.025 0.00
8.50 41.75 6744. 0.155 0.025 0.00
8.51 41.76 6752. 0.155 0.025 0.00
8.52 41.77 6759. 0.155 0.026 0.00
8.53 41.78 6767. 0.155 0.026 0.00
8.54 41.79 6775. 0.156 0.028 0.00
8.55 41.80 6783. 0.156 0.029 0.00
8.56 41.81 6791. 0.156 0.030 0.00
8.57 41.82 6799. 0.156 0.031 0.00
8.58 41.83 6807. 0.156 0.031 0.00
8.76 42.01 6950. 0.160 0.037 0.00
8.94 42.19 7093. 0.163 0.041 0.00
9.12 42.37 7235. 0.166 0.044 0.00
9.31 42.56 7386. 0.170 0.046 0.00
9.49 42.74 7529. 0.173 0.049 0.00
9.67 42.92 7672. 0.176 0.051 0.00
9.85 43.10 7815. 0.179 0.053 0.00
10.03 43.28 7957. 0.183 0.055 0.00
10.22 43.47 8108. 0.186 0.057 0.00
10.40 43.65 8251. 0.189 0.059 0.00
10.58 43.83 8394. 0.193 0.061 0.00
10.75 44.00 8529. 0.196 0.062 0.00
10.85 44.10 8608. 0.198 0.371 0.00
10.95 44.20 8687. 0.199 0.935 0.00
11.05 44.30 8767. 0.201 1.660 0.00
11.15 44.40 8846. 0.203 2.460 0.00
11.25 44.50 8925. 0.205 2.740 0.00
11.35 44.60 9005. 0.207 3.000 0.00
11.45 44.70 9084. 0.209 3.230 0.00
11.55 44.80 9163. 0.210 3.450 0.00
11.65 44.90 9243. 0.212 3.660 0.00
11.75 45.00 9322. 0.214 3.850 0.00
11.85 45.10 9401. 0.216 4.040 0.00
11.95 45.20 9481. 0.218 4.210 0.00
12.05 45.30 9560. 0.219 4.380 0.00
12.15 45.40 9639. 0.221 4.550 0.00
12.25 45.50 9719. 0.223 4.710 0.00
12.35 45.60 9798. 0.225 4.860 0.00
12.45
12.55
12.65
45.70
45.80
45.90
9877. 0.227 5.010
9957. 0.229 5.150
10036. 0.230 5.290
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage
Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft)
1 0.31 0.06 0.06 10.75 44.00 8529. 0.196
2 0.15 ******* 0.06 10.08 43.33 7993. 0.183
3 0.21 0.04 0.04 8.79 42.04 6972. 0.160
4 0.16 ******* 0.02 7.86 41.11 6235. 0.143
5 0.18 ******* 0.02 7.67 40.92 6083. 0.140
6 0.17 0.02 0.02 5.64 38.89 4477. 0.103
7 0.13 ******* 0.02 4.11 37.36 3264. 0.075
8 0.14 ******* 0.02 3.49 36.74 2773. 0.064
Route Time Series through Facility
Inflow Time Series File:dv.tsf
Outflow Time Series File:rdout
Inflow/Outflow Analysis
Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.306 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.062 CFS at 11:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Reservoir Stage: 10.75 Ft
Peak Reservoir Elev: 44.00 Ft
Peak Reservoir Storage: 8529. Cu -Ft
0.196 Ac -Ft
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:rdout.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Frequency Analysis
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period
0.055 2 2/09/01 20:00 0.062 10.75 1 100.00 0.990
0.017 7 12/28/01 18:00 0.055 10.07 2 25.00 0.960
0.024 5 2/28/03 19:00 0.038 8.79 3 10.00 0.900
0.016 8 8/26/04 6:00 0.024 7.86 4 5.00 0.800
0.020 6 1/05/05 16:00 0.024 7.67 5 3.00 0.667
0.024 4 1/19/06 0:00 0.020 5.64 6 2.00 0.500
0.038 3 11/24/06 8:00 0.017 4.11 7 1.30 0.231
0.062 1 1/09/08 11:00 0.016 3.49 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks 0.060 10.47 50.00 0.980
Discharge (CFS)
Ln -
10 -2
o rdout.pks in Sea -Tac
0
Return Period
2 51
10 20 50 100
•
R
00
0 0
0
Ln -
1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
Cumulative Probability
4.3 Water Quality
The project is exempt for water quality because the total pollution generating impervious
surface (PGIS) is 3,982 SF which is less than the threshold of 5,000 SF per section 1.2.8 of the
KCSWDM.
Insight ngineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 17 -
5.0 Conveyance Analysis and Design
The proposed conveyance consists of a 12 -inch pipe system. The total onsite 100 -yr developed
flow 0.76 cfs, and the 100 -yr flow for the upstream area is 0.07 cfs. The flows were calculated
within KCRTS using the 15 -minute time step interval. A conveyance analysis was performed in
Flowmaster by Haestad Methods, Inc. and the proposed 12 -inch pipe will be sufficient enough to
carry the combined 100 -yr flow of 0.83 cfs with a minimum slope of 0.5%. Therefore the
proposed and downstream system is adequate to convey the developed runoff. Refer to the
following pages for the preformed calculations.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 18-
Legacy renton Downstream pipe capacity
Worksheet for Circular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\program files\haestad\fmw\projectl.fm2
Worksheet pipe capacity
Flow Element Circular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.5000 %
Diameter 12.00 in
Discharge 0.83 cfs
Results
Depth 0.40 ft
Flow Area 0.29 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 1.36 ft
Top Width 0.98 ft
Critical Depth 0.38 ft
Percent Full 39.51
Critical Slope 0.005707 ft/ft
Velocity 2.88 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.13 ft
Specific Energy 0.52 ft
Froude Number 0.93
Maximum Discharge 2.71 cfs
Full Flow Capacity 2.52 cfs
Full Flow Slope 0.000543 ft/ft
Flow is subcritical.
08/18/15
11:27:03 AM
FlowMaster v5.15
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
RECORD
KCRTS Command
CREATE a new Time Series
Production of Runoff Time Series
Project Location : Sea -Tac
Computing Series : EX.tsf
Regional Scale Factor : 1.00
Data Type : Reduced
Creating Hourly Time Series File
Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTF6OR.rnf
Till Forest 0.77 acres
Total Area : 0.77 acres
Peak Discharge: 0.062 CFS at 9:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Storing Time Series File:EX.tsf
Time Series Computed
KCRTS Command
Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module
Analysis Tools Command
Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies
Loading Stage/Discharge curve:ex.tsf .
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:ex.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:EX.pks
Analysis Tools Command
RETURN to Previous Menu
KCRTS Command
CREATE a new Time Series
Production of Runoff Time Series
Project Location : Sea -Tac
Computing Series : DV.tsf
Regional Scale Factor : 1.00
Page 1
RECORD
Data Type : Reduced
Creating Hourly Time Series File
Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTG60R.rnf
Till Grass 0.22 acres
Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI60R.rnf
Impervious 0.55 acres
Total Area : 0.77 acres
Peak Discharge: 0.306 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Storing Time Series File:DV.tsf
Time Series Computed
KCRTS Command
Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module
Analysis Tools Command
Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies
Loading Stage/Discharge curve:dv.tsf .
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:dv.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
Page 2
6.0 Special Reports and Studies
A. Sensitive Areas Map
B. Groundwater Protection Areas Map
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 19 -
Sensitive Areas
Lake Washington
1.E 2-
D3,
r I
NE 2381 ST
NE 25TH ST
NE .23RD
NE22NO ST
n'
NE 21ST ST T
1:1
.14 c:!
`a
� C S.
`1 E XI, I ST a, <
W
y 41
:11 V K
NE 19TH P 6 <
NE VDI ST s
NE 1TTi1 ST2
NE17TH� T S
to
Z < <
IdMI 6
y T NE.. 101-1 ST 7, ', f
< n
lal
Li < T Z
z
I4 .. s Nc15TiiST
NE 147.1 ST v=1AT'IST
Renton
Y :AVCIVG WAY
N ST•t ST
2
1ti
jC
2
Y
cia
tib
-1
41
III— 12TelST 1.11
g 117
6 4010.654.. �y „,01.00t_tK
-17
g.
Nr 13TH Si
'.1
•
NE 10Tei?
NE 10Tot ST
NE 43T11 ST
BTei n,
Nems,
NE ere,. f
ir
NE FfyCIR
0 I 1890ft
i
f
i
The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King
County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information.
This document is not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential
damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of
this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County.
Date: 1/16/2014 Source: King County iMAP - Sensitive Areas (http://www.metrokc.gov/GIS/iMAP)
King County
Sensitive Areas
Lege nd
Highlighted Feature / Roadway
1 County Boundary ED 100 Year Floodplain
.w Mountain Peaks ED
Highways
Incorporated Area
Streets
iiighway
Arterials
Law!
Parcels
Wildlife Network
SAO Stream
Afclass 1
Class 2 Panama!
Mass 2 Salmon rd,
,111/ Class 3
• lxtclassthod'
nLakes and Large Rivers
Strearns
r'kR�
.❖�
iimemi
Channel Migration Hazard
Areas
MODERATE
SEVERE
Sole Source Aquifer
SAO Wetland
SAO Landslide
SAD Coa.I Mine
SAO Seismic
SAO €T05 ion
Chi nook Distribution
Sensitive Area Notice on Title
Drainage Com,pla ints
Areas Susceptible to
Groundwater Contam ination
Law
(cont)
Medium
High
Shaded 'Relief
The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King
County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information.
This document is not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, Indirect, incidental, or consequential
damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of
this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County.
Date: 1/16/2014 Source: King County iMAP - Sensitive Areas (http://www.metrokc.gov/GIS/iMAP)
King County
Reference 11-B
Wel!field Capture Zones
One Year Capture Zone
Five Year Capture Zone
QTen Year Capture Zone
Aquifer Protection Area Zones
Zone 1
Zone 1 Modified
Zone 2
Cedar Valley Sole Source Network Structure
Aquifer Project Review Area • production Well
Streamflow Source Area • Springbrook Springs
Cedar Valley Sole Source Aquifer L.._.l Renton City Limits
Potential Annexation Area
,SITE
i
z
ON \<Z
N 8th St
\•.<:e♦♦Ot♦e <e♦e♦ebe� Y♦�`e.♦ee♦0e .lea •i�lr
_s♦0!e°b°< �o �e4♦e°e®e0_. i�Gi �!�•e°♦°e°♦"e!♦��°♦eA°!°• eae°e°e°� 't1
::.eee ee♦♦e ♦e♦eeeeeee♦•.e,ree-
e�e<ee ♦♦eee♦e♦e♦e ee•♦e•
♦ee<: �!♦eee♦♦♦eee♦♦c �♦♦
>•. �.!♦�4+�' ♦e♦eee♦e♦e♦e• a♦.
<♦e♦! ♦�♦eeeeee♦eee♦ ♦♦e<
v`' %� :eee.♦♦♦°e°e°♦°♦°eee°eee°eee°eee :O°eiei L
1‘;
101h S1'_. .!.!♦fie♦e<. :�•
♦♦eee♦.r♦e♦
�°�°�e�e�e�♦OHO°�,
' >•e°eee°♦pe♦p°O.
♦ep♦°eepe0ee�ee�.
ieiei'i •�.� � � ♦Dei°i°seieiei°e°ieiei♦ie
♦♦ee e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦ee♦>
i♦ee �e♦eeseeeeeeeeeee
♦,tee; .eeeeeee♦e♦eeee♦ee
°fiOeJ i i !O♦�Aei°Di°i°i°i!!°lei°lei°i°i°i
t♦�• ♦ s+.sa♦eeeee. e hwe♦.
♦♦.. �e'♦.'e. •eeeee♦♦♦♦ec♦m<ve NE 4th St
� ee' .°♦ Di°i0'� <!:.r> �i°lei°i°i°i°i°i°i°i°i°i°lei•'°'
m` , °� o• >�•:R_ ,.. !e°� eee°e°♦°ecce°°e°♦°eee°�!,
E1V-3 t , ♦0-v r ♦� eee♦♦e♦e♦e.
♦♦01• 'ee f♦0e♦0e0ee♦
e eee .e1♦ �•+rr a►e ee0e•
RWJ•♦.. ♦•°•e•. ate• ♦� :Oa �� •e•♦®eee•
;. !.. w�. • i s ♦ �. •ice �ee.�♦��eeeee°i.
.eee! eeeeeeeeee ♦ e,.�<. Q �•s `L♦•• �• �•e•♦•wa♦•♦♦�
♦te ♦e♦ec
•<�•�•�•�,�e!'o!�•♦'..lo PW-12.PW=12 f
♦♦0ete♦0e08
♦♦♦eeeeeeee0
♦♦eeeeeeeeeee♦e:.�'
♦♦eee♦eeeeleete•.
°♦•eeeeeeeeee♦e.a ♦♦e
°♦e♦eeeee♦eee♦e.♦ ♦e.
♦♦eeeeeeeleee♦0 ♦ PW-17� ••
•eeeeeee♦♦eee♦• ♦ �/. ♦•.
♦cele♦♦e♦♦ee♦♦e t7 •. .
eeeeeee♦eee♦eee. PW -10'
\eee°•°♦°♦eeeee°°eeeeeeeeee°°C •- i"w 1
�•e•♦•♦•eeeieeiee•♦•ei♦•. j •eee•♦•♦•♦<
,♦eeeeeeeeeee• - ♦eee♦
♦♦eeeeeeeeeee. bw,♦!1
a•°eeeeeee°•eeeee°°•e°•e°� � ••�°<
♦eeeeeeeleee♦♦
�°e°e°e°e°e°♦ee•eeeee°•O.
♦♦eeeee♦e♦ee♦♦°
¢'� �♦eeeeeeeeeee♦♦• ,�••
. � O�5 �°•�♦°e°e°e°i°eel°♦e♦°e.♦.e.1 �..
l
-� S 128th si-
h
Groundwater Protection Areas
w
0
2
Miles
Date: 01/0912014
7.0 Other Permits
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 20 -
8.0 CSWPPP Analysis and Design
Erosion and sedimentation control will be provided by utilization BMPs selected from the
2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. These BMPs will likely include, but are not
necessarily limited to, sediment pond(s) and/or trap(s), silt fencing, construction safety fencing,
interceptor v -ditches, rock check dams, plastic sheeting of stockpiles, straw mulch, hydro -
seeding, catch basin protection, and rocked construction entrance, etc.
Refer to the Temporary Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan attached in the
construction documents detailing the means by which sediment and erosion control will be
handled during construction.
Refer to the following pages for SWPPP.
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
-21 -
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Owner
Legacy Hospitality, Inc.
6501 America's Parkway NE -
Suite 1050
Albuquerque, NM 87110
For
LEGACY RENTON
Prepared For
City of Renton
Renton City Hall - 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Developer
Legacy Hospitality, Inc.
6501 America's Parkway NE -
Suite 1050
Albuquerque, NM 87110
Project Site Location
1300 Lake Washington Boulevard N.
Renton, WA 98056
Operator/Contractor
Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead
Contractor to provide
SWPPP Prepared By
Insight Engineering Company (IECO)
PO Box 1478
Everett, WA, 98206
425-303-9363
SWPPP Preparation Date
April 2, 2015
Date Revised: August 18, 2015
Approximate Project Construction Dates
September 1, 2015
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Site Description 3
2.1 Existing Conditions 3
2.2 Proposed Construction Activities 3
3.0 Construction Stormwater BMPs 5
3.1 The 12 BMP Elements 5
3.1.1 Element #1 — Mark Clearing Limits 5
3.1.2 Element #2 — Establish Construction Access 5
3.1.3 Element #3 — Control Flow Rates 6
3.1.4 Element #4 — Install Sediment Controls 6
3.1.5 Element #5 — Stabilize Soils 8
3.1.6 Element #6 — Protect Slopes 9
3.1.7 Element #7 — Protect Drain Inlets 9
3.1.8 Element #8 — Stabilize Channels and Outlets 10
3.1.9 Element #9 — Control Pollutants 10
3.1.10 Element #10 — Control Dewatering 13
3.1.11 Element #11 — Maintain BMPs 13
3.1.12 Element #12 — Manage the Project 13
3.2 Site Specific BMPs 16
3.3 Additional Advanced BMPs 16
4.0 Construction Phasing and BMP Implementation 17
5.0 Pollution Prevention Team 19
5.1 Roles and Responsibilities 19
5.2 Team Members 20
6.0 Site Inspections and Monitoring 21
6.1 Site Inspection 21
6.1.1 Site Inspection Frequency 21
6.1.2 Site Inspection Documentation 22
6.2 Stormwater Quality Monitoring 22
6.2.1 Turbidity 22
6.2.2 pH 23
7.0 Reporting and Recordkeeping 24
7.1 Recordkeeping 24
7.1.1 Site Log Book 24
7.1.2 Records Retention 24
7.1.3 Access to Plans and Records 24
ii
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
7.1.4 Updating the SWPPP 24
7.2 Reporting 25
7.2.1 Discharge Monitoring Reports 25
7.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance 25
7.2.3 Permit Application and Changes 26
Appendix A — Site Plans 267
Appendix B — Construction BMPs 28
Appendix C — Alternative BMPs 29
Appendix D — General Permit 30
Appendix E — Site Inspection Forms (and Site Log) 31
Appendix F — Engineering Calculations 33
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
1.0 Introduction
This Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been prepared as part of the
Construction stormwater permit requirements for the Legacy Renton in Renton, Washington.
The site is located at 1300 Lake Washington Boulevard N. in King County, Washington. The site
is currently developed with a small building with an asphalt drive aisle. The remainder of the site
exists as a combination of grassy and forested areas. The site contains one drainage basin that
drains to the west. Per Soils Survey of King County area, the majority of the project site contains
AkF (Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep) soils. The project contains approximately 1.31
acres. The proposal is to construct new hotel, parking garage and approximately 300-1f of asphalt
road for access with associated utilities. The access for the site will be from Lake Washington
Blvd. N.
The purpose of this SWPPP is to describe the proposed construction activities and all temporary
and permanent erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures, pollution prevention measures,
inspection/monitoring activities, and recordkeeping that will be implemented during the
proposed construction project. The objectives of the SWPPP are to:
Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and
sedimentation, and to identify, reduce, eliminate or prevent stormwater
contamination and water pollution from construction activity.
2. Prevent violations of surface water quality, ground water quality, or
sediment management standards.
3. Prevent, during the construction phase, adverse water quality impacts
including impacts on beneficial uses of the receiving water by controlling
peak flow rates and volumes of stormwater runoff at the Permittee's
outfalls and downstream of the outfalls.
This SWPPP was prepared using the Ecology SWPPP Template downloaded from the Ecology
website on February 19, 2007. This SWPPP was prepared based on the requirements set forth in
the Construction Stormwater General Permit and in the Stormwater Management Manual for
Western Washington (SWMMWW 2005). The report is divided into seven main sections with
several appendices that include stormwater related reference materials. The topics presented in
the each of the main sections are:
■ Section 1 — INTRODUCTION. This section provides a summary
description of the project, and the organization of the SWPPP document.
■ Section 2 — SITE DESCRIPTION. This section provides a detailed
description of the existing site conditions, proposed construction activities,
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
and calculated stormwater flow rates for existing conditions and post—
construction conditions.
■ Section 3 — CONSTRUCTION BMPs. This section provides a detailed
description of the BMPs to be implemented based on the 12 required
elements of the SWPPP (SWMMEW 2004).
■ Section 4 — CONSTRUCTION PHASING AND BMP
IMPLEMENTATION. This section provides a description of the timing
of the BMP implementation in relation to the project schedule.
Section 5 — POLLUTION PREVENTION TEAM. This section identifies
the appropriate contact names (emergency and non -emergency),
monitoring personnel, and the onsite temporary erosion and sedimentation
control inspector
■ Section 6 — INSPECTION AND MONITORING. This section provides a
description of the inspection and monitoring requirements such as the
parameters of concern to be monitored, sample locations, sample
frequencies, and sampling methods for all stormwater discharge locations
from the site.
Section 7 — RECORDKEEPING. This section describes the requirements
for documentation of the BMP implementation, site inspections,
monitoring results, and changes to the implementation of certain BMPs
due to site factors experienced during construction.
Supporting documentation and standard forms are provided in the following Appendices:
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E —
Appendix F —
— Site plans
— Construction BMPs
— Alternative Construction BMP list
— General Permit
Site Log and Inspection Forms
Engineering Calculations
2
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2.0 Site Description
2.1 Existing Conditions
The proposed project "Legacy Renton" is located at 1300 Lake Washington Boulevard N. in
King County, Washington. More generally, the project site is located in Section 6, Township 23
North, and Range 5 East of the Willamette Meridian in King County, Washington. The project
contains approximately 1.31 acres. The proposal is to construct new hotel, parking garage and
approximately 300-1f of asphalt road for access with associated utilities. The access for the site
will be from Lake Washington Blvd. N. The site contains one drainage basin that drains to the
west. Per Soils Survey of King County area, the majority of the project site contains AkF
(Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep) soils.
2.2 Proposed Construction Activities
The project is located within the Lake Washington E drainage basin. A 9 -ft — 800 SF
underground vault located underneath the drive aisle is proposed to meet the flow control
requirements conforming to the 2009 KCSWDM and the city of Renton's requirements. The
detention vault was sized using KCTRS with level 1 flow control. The outflow from the
detention facility will be tight lined to a storm system on Lake Washington Blvd. N. that
discharges into Lake Washington to continue its natural drainage path. The project is exempt for
water quality because the total pollution generating impervious surfaces (PGIS) is 3,982 SF
which is less than the threshold of 5,000 SF per section 1.2.8 of the KCSWDM. All covered
parking areas will be connected to the sanitary sewer. The following summarizes details
regarding site areas:
■ Project development area: 0.77 acres
■ Percent impervious area before construction: < 5 %
■ Percent impervious area after construction: 72 %
• Disturbed area during construction: 0.77 acres
• Disturbed area that is characterized as impervious (i.e.,
access roads, staging, parking): 0.77 acres
• 2 -year stormwater runoff peak flow prior to construction
(existing): 0.02 cfs
■ 10 -year stormwater runoff peak flow prior to construction
(existing): 0.04 cfs
3
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
• 2 -year stormwater runoff peak flow during construction: 0.10 cfs
■ 10 -year stormwater runoff peak flow during construction: 0.13 cfs
• 2 -year stormwater runoff peak flow after construction: 0.15 cfs
■ 10 -year stormwater runoff peak flow after construction: 0.18cfs
All stormwater flow calculations are provided in Appendix F.
4
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
3.0 Construction Stormwater BMPs
3.1 The 12 BMP Elements
3.1.1 Element #1 — Mark Clearing Limits
To protect adjacent properties and to reduce the area of soil exposed to construction, the limits of
construction will be clearly marked before land -disturbing activities begin. Trees that are to be
preserved, as well as all sensitive areas and their buffers, shall be clearly delineated, both in the
field and on the plans. In general, natural vegetation and native topsoil shall be retained in an
undisturbed state to the maximum extent possible. The BMPs relevant to marking the clearing
limits that will be applied for this project include:
• High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C103)
Install orange barrier fencing along the clearing limits, according to the approved
construction plans, prior to any construction activities. Maintain until all
construction activities are completed.
Alternate BMPs for marking clearing limits are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool
for the onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or
inappropriate during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES
Permit (Appendix D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a
violation(s) of the NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the
Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or
more of the alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are
ineffective or failing.
3.1.2 Element #2 — Establish Construction Access
Construction access or activities occurring on unpaved areas shall be minimized, yet where
necessary, access points shall be stabilized to minimize the tracking of sediment onto public
roads, and wheel washing, street sweeping, and street cleaning shall be employed to prevent
sediment from entering state waters. All wash wastewater shall be controlled on site. The
specific BMPs related to establishing construction access that will be used on this project
include:
• Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP C105)
5
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Install the temporary construction entrance, according to the approved
construction plans, prior to any clearing or grading activities. Maintain until the
access road is paved.
Alternate construction access BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool for the
onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate
during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix
D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a violation(s) of the
NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or more of the
alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are ineffective or
failing.
3.1.3 Element #3 — Control Flow Rates
In order to protect the properties and waterways downstream of the project site, stormwater
discharges from the site will be controlled.
Flow control BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool for the onsite inspector
in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate during construction
to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix D). To avoid
potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a violation(s) of the NPDES
Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or more of the
alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are ineffective or
failing.
In general, discharge rates of stormwater from the site will be controlled where increases in
impervious area or soil compaction during construction could lead to downstream erosion, or
where necessary to meet local agency stormwater discharge requirements (e.g. discharge to
combined sewer systems).
3.1.4 Element #4 — Install Sediment Controls
All stormwater runoff from disturbed areas shall pass through Wet vault#1 which will be used as
a sediment pond during construction. The specific BMPs to be used for controlling sediment on
this project also include:
• Silt Fence (BMP C233)
Install silt fencing, according to the approved plans, prior to any clearing or
grading activities. Maintain until all construction activities are completed.
• Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220)
6
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Install catch basin filters, according to the approved construction plans, as catch
basins are installed and become operable. Maintain until all construction
activities are completed.
Alternate sediment control BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool for the
onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate
during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix
D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a violation(s) of the
NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or more of the
alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are ineffective or
failing.
In addition, sediment will be removed from paved areas in and adjacent to construction work
areas manually or using mechanical sweepers, as needed, to minimize tracking of sediments on
vehicle tires away from the site and to minimize wash -off of sediments from adjacent streets in
runoff.
Whenever possible, sediment laden water shall be discharged into onsite, relatively level,
vegetated areas (BMP C240 paragraph 5, page 4-102).
In some cases, sediment discharge in concentrated runoff can be controlled using permanent
stormwater BMPs (e.g., infiltration swales, ponds, trenches). Sediment loads can limit the
effectiveness of some permanent stormwater BMPs, such as those used for infiltration or bio-
filtration; however, those BMPs designed to remove solids by settling (wet ponds or detention
ponds) can be used during the construction phase. When permanent stormwater BMPs will be
used to control sediment discharge during construction, the structure will be protected from
excessive sedimentation with adequate erosion and sediment control BMPs. Any accumulated
sediment shall be removed after construction is complete and the permanent stormwater BMP
will be re -stabilized with vegetation per applicable design requirements once the remainder of
the site has been stabilized.
The following BMP will be implemented as end -of -pipe sediment controls as required to meet
permitted turbidity limits in the site discharge(s). Prior to the implementation of these
technologies, sediment sources and erosion control and soil stabilization BMP efforts will be
maximized to reduce the need for end -of -pipe sedimentation controls.
• Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241)
Construct the temporary sediment pond, according to the approved construction
plans, prior to any grading activities. Maintain until site grading is completed and
the detention vault is operable
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
3.1.5 Element #5 — Stabilize Soils
Exposed and un -worked soils shall be stabilized with the application of effective BMPs to
prevent erosion throughout the life of the project. The specific BMPs for soil stabilization that
shall be used on this project include:
• Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120)
Apply temporary hydro -seed to exposed and un -worked soils, according to the
approved construction plans, as needed to prevent erosion during site grading.
Apply permanent hydro -seed to areas at final grade as site grading is completed.
• Mulching (BMP C121)
Apply mulching to exposed and un -worked soils, according to the approved
construction plans, as needed to prevent erosion during site grading. Maintain
until site grading is completed and permanent hydro -seed is applied.
• Plastic Covering (BMP C123)
Cover stockpiles with plastic sheeting, according to the approved construction
plans, as needed to prevent erosion during site grading. Maintain until stockpiles
are removed from site.
• Early application of gravel base on areas to be paved
Place gravel base on roadways, according to the approved construction plans,
after roadways are graded to sub -grade. Maintain until roads are paved.
Alternate soil stabilization BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool for the
onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate
during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix
D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a violation(s) of the
NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or more of the
alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are ineffective or
failing.
The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, no soils shall remain
exposed and unworked for more than 7 days during the dry season (May 1 to September 30) and
2 days during the wet season (October 1 to April 30). Regardless of the time of year, all soils
shall be stabilized at the end of the shift before a holiday or weekend if needed based on weather
forecasts.
8
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
In general, cut and fill slopes will be stabilized as soon as possible and soil stockpiles will be
temporarily covered with plastic sheeting. All stockpiled soils shall be stabilized from erosion,
protected with sediment trapping measures, and where possible, be located away from storm
drain inlets, waterways, and drainage channels.
3.1.6 Element #6 — Protect Slopes
All cut and fill slopes will be designed, constructed, and protected in a manner than minimizes
erosion. The following specific BMPs will be used to protect slopes for this project:
• Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120)
Apply temporary hydro -seed to cut and fill slopes, according to the approved
construction plans, as needed to minimize erosion during site grading. Apply
permanent hydro -seed to cut and fill slopes at final grade as site grading is
completed.
Alternate slope protection BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool for the
onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate
during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix
D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a violation(s) of the
NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or more of the
alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are ineffective or
failing.
3.1.7 Element #7 — Protect Drain Inlets
All storm drain inlets and culverts made operable during construction shall be protected to
prevent unfiltered or untreated water from entering the drainage conveyance system. However,
the first priority is to keep all access roads clean of sediment and keep street wash water separate
from entering storm drains until treatment can be provided. Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP
C220) will be implemented for all drainage inlets and culverts that could potentially be impacted
by sediment -laden runoff on and near the project site. The following inlet protection measures
will be applied on this project:
Drop Inlet Protection
• Catch Basin Filters
Install catch basin filters, according to the approved construction plans, as
catch basins become operable. Maintain until all construction activities are
completed.
9
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
If the BMP options listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate during construction to
satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix D), or if no BMPs are
listed above but deemed necessary during construction, the Certified Erosion and Sediment
Control Lead shall implement one or more of the alternative BMP inlet protection options listed
in Appendix C.
3.1.8 Element #8 — Stabilize Channels and Outlets
Where site runoff is to be conveyed in channels, or discharged to a stream or some other natural
drainage point, efforts will be taken to prevent downstream erosion. The specific BMPs for
channel and outlet stabilization that shall be used on this project include:
• Outlet Protection (BMP C209)
Place rip -rap pad at the temporary sediment pond outfall, according to the
approved construction plans, before the pond becomes operable. Maintain until
the pond is removed or made in -operable.
Alternate channel and outlet stabilization BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference
tool for the onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or
inappropriate during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES
Permit (Appendix D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a
violation(s) of the NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the
Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or
more of the alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are
ineffective or failing.
The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, all temporary on-site
conveyance channels shall be designed, constructed, and stabilized to prevent erosion from the
expected peak 10 minute velocity of flow from a Type 1 A, 10 -year, 24-hour recurrence interval
storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10 -year, 1 -hour peak flow rate indicated by
an approved continuous runoff simulation model, increased by a factor of 1.6, shall be used.
Stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent
stream banks, slopes, and downstream reaches shall be provided at the outlets of all conveyance
systems.
3.1.9 Element #9 — Control Pollutants
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. If required, BMPs to be implemented to control specific
sources of pollutants are discussed below.
10
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Vehicles, construction equipment, and/or petroleum product storage/dispensing:
■ All vehicles, equipment, and petroleum product storage/dispensing areas
will be inspected regularly to detect any leaks or spills, and to identify
maintenance needs to prevent leaks or spills.
On-site fueling tanks and petroleum product storage containers shall
include secondary containment.
Spill prevention measures, such as drip pans, will be used when
conducting maintenance and repair of vehicles or equipment.
■ In order to perform emergency repairs on site, temporary plastic will be
placed beneath and, if raining, over the vehicle.
■ Contaminated surfaces shall be cleaned immediately following any
discharge or spill incident.
Chemical storage:
Any chemicals stored in the construction areas will conform to the
appropriate source control BMPs listed in Volume IV of the Ecology
stormwater manual. In Western WA, all chemicals shall have cover,
containment, and protection provided on site, per BMP C153 for Material
Delivery, Storage and Containment in SWMMWW 2005
■ Application of agricultural chemicals, including fertilizers and pesticides,
shall be conducted in a manner and at application rates that will not result
in loss of chemical to stormwater runoff. Manufacturers'
recommendations for application procedures and rates shall be followed.
Excavation and tunneling spoils dewatering waste:
■ Dewatering BMPs and BMPs specific to the excavation and tunneling
(including handling of contaminated soils) are discussed under Element
10.
Demolition:
■ Dust released from demolished sidewalks, buildings, or structures will be
controlled using Dust Control measures (BMP C140).
Storm drain inlets vulnerable to stormwater discharge carrying dust, soil,
or debris will be protected using Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220
as described above for Element 7).
11
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
■ Process water and slurry resulting from saw -cutting and surfacing
operations will be prevented from entering the waters of the State by
implementing Saw -cutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention measures
(BMP C152).
Concrete and grout:
■ Process water and slurry resulting from concrete work will be prevented
from entering the waters of the State by implementing Concrete Handling
measures (BMP C151).
Sanitary wastewater:
■ Portable sanitation facilities will be firmly secured, regularly maintained,
and emptied when necessary.
Solid Waste:
Other:
Wheel wash or tire bath wastewater shall be discharged to a separate on-
site treatment system or to the sanitary sewer as part of Wheel Wash
implementation (BMP C106).
Solid waste will be stored in secure, clearly marked containers.
■ Other BMPs will be administered as necessary to address any additional
pollutant sources on site.
The facility is transportation -related and therefore not subject to the Federal requirements of the
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
If applicable, the Contractor shall prepare an SPCC Plan according to the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Requirements (see the WSDOT Standard
Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction 2004).
A SPCC plan is required for this site.
As per the Federal regulations of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and according to Final Rule 40
CFR Part 112, as stated in the National Register, a Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan is required for construction activities. A SPCC Plan has been
prepared to address an approach to prevent, respond to, and report spills or releases to the
environment that could result from construction activities. This Plan must:
■ Be well thought out in accordance with good engineering;
12
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
• Achieve three objectives - prevent spills, contain a spill that occurs, and
clean up the spill;
• Identify the name, location, owner, and type of facility;
■ Include the date of initial operation and oil spill history;
• Name the designated person responsible;
■ Show evidence of approval and certification by the person in authority;
and
■ Contain a facility analysis.
3.1.10 Element #10 — Control Dewatering
No dewatering is anticipated for this project. If dewatering occurs, Baker tanks are proposed for
dewatering.
Alternate dewatering control BMPs are included in Appendix C as a quick reference tool for the
onsite inspector in the event the BMP(s) listed above are deemed ineffective or inappropriate
during construction to satisfy the requirements set forth in the General NPDES Permit (Appendix
D). To avoid potential erosion and sediment control issues that may cause a violation(s) of the
NPDES Construction Stormwater permit (as provided in Appendix D), the Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead will promptly initiate the implementation of one or more of the
alternative BMPs listed in Appendix C after the first sign that existing BMPs are ineffective or
failing.
3.1.11 Element #11 — Maintain BMPs
All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and
repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Maintenance and
repair shall be conducted in accordance with each particular BMP's specifications. Visual
monitoring of the BMPs will be conducted at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours
of any rainfall event that causes a discharge from the site. If the site becomes inactive, and is
temporarily stabilized, the inspection frequency will be reduced to once every month.
All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after the
final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped
sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil resulting from removal of BMPs
or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized.
13
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
3.1.12 Element #12 — Manage the Project
Erosion and sediment control BMPs for this project have been designed based on the following
principles:
• Design the project to fit the existing topography, soils, and drainage
patterns.
■ Emphasize erosion control rather than sediment control.
• Minimize the extent and duration of the area exposed.
• Keep runoff velocities low.
■ Retain sediment on site.
• Thoroughly monitor site and maintain all ESC measures.
• Schedule major earthwork during the dry season.
As this project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest, the project will be managed
according to the following key project components:
Phasing of Construction
■ The construction project is being phased to the extent practicable in order
to prevent soil erosion, and, to the maximum extent possible, the transport
of sediment from the site during construction.
■ Re -vegetation of exposed areas and maintenance of that vegetation shall
be an integral part of the clearing activities during each phase of
construction, per the Scheduling BMP (C 162).
Seasonal Work Limitations
■ From October 1 through April 30, clearing, grading, and other soil
disturbing activities shall only be permitted if shown to the satisfaction of
the local permitting authority that silt -laden runoff will be prevented from
leaving the site through a combination of the following:
Site conditions including existing vegetative coverage, slope, soil
type, and proximity to receiving waters; and
❑ Limitations on activities and the extent of disturbed areas; and
14
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
❑ Proposed erosion and sediment control measures.
■ Based on the information provided and/or local weather conditions, the
local permitting authority may expand or restrict the seasonal limitation on
site disturbance.
The following activities are exempt from the seasonal clearing and grading
limitations:
O Routine maintenance and necessary repair of erosion and sediment
control BMPs;
O Routine maintenance of public facilities or existing utility
structures that do not expose the soil or result in the removal of the
vegetative cover to soil; and
O Activities where there is 100 percent infiltration of surface water
runoff within the site in approved and installed erosion and
sediment control facilities.
Coordination with Utilities and Other Jurisdictions
■ Care has been taken to coordinate with utilities, other construction
projects, and the local jurisdiction in preparing this SWPPP and
scheduling the construction work.
Inspection and Monitoring
■ All BMPs shall be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed to assure
continued performance of their intended function. Site inspections shall
be conducted by a person who is knowledgeable in the principles and
practices of erosion and sediment control. This person has the necessary
skills to:
O Assess the site conditions and construction activities that could
impact the quality of stormwater, and
O Assess the effectiveness of erosion and sediment control measures
used to control the quality of stormwater discharges.
■ A Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead shall be on-site or on-call
at all times.
■ Whenever inspection and/or monitoring reveals that the BMPs identified
in this SWPPP are inadequate, due to the actual discharge of or potential
15
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
to discharge a significant amount of any pollutant, appropriate BMPs or
design changes shall be implemented as soon as possible.
Maintaining an Updated Construction SWPPP
■ This SWPPP shall be retained on-site or within reasonable access to the
site.
■ The SWPPP shall be modified whenever there is a change in the design,
construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has, or
could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters of
the state.
■ The SWPPP shall be modified if, during inspections or investigations
conducted by the owner/operator, or the applicable local or state
regulatory authority, it is determined that the SWPPP is ineffective in
eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater
discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall be modified as necessary to
include additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems
identified. Revisions to the SWPPP shall be completed within seven (7)
days following the inspection.
3.2 Site Specific BMPs
Site specific BMPs are shown on the TESC Plan Sheets and Details in Appendix A. These site
specific plan sheets will be updated annually.
3.3 Additional Advanced BMPs
16
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
4.0 Construction Phasing and BMP
Implementation
The BMP implementation schedule will be driven by the construction schedule. The following
provides a sequential list of the proposed construction schedule milestones and the corresponding
BMP implementation schedule. The list contains key milestones such as wet season
construction.
The BMP implementation schedule listed below is keyed to proposed phases of the construction
project, and reflects differences in BMP installations and inspections that relate to wet season
construction. The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, the dry
season is considered to be from May 1 to September 30 and the wet season is considered to be
from October 1 to April 30.
• Estimate of Construction start date: September 1, 2015
• Estimate of Construction finish date: February 30, 2015
Site inspections and monitoring conducted weekly and for
applicable rain events as detailed in Section 6 of this
SWPPP. Implement Element #12 BMPs and manage site
to minimize soil disturbance during the wet season.
• Dry Season started: May 1, 2015
• Mobilize equipment on site September 1, 2015
• Mobilize and store all ESC and soil stabilization products September 1, 2015
• Install ESC measures: September 1, 2015
• Install stabilized construction entrance: September 1, 2015
• Wet Season begins: Oct 1, 2015
• Implement Element #12 BMPs and manage site to minimize
soil disturbance during the wet season: Oct 1, 2015
• Begin clearing and grubbing: October 15,2015
• Site grading begins: October 25,2015
• Grade road and stabilize with gravel base October 25,2015
• Begin excavation for new utilities and services November 10,2015
• Soil stabilization on excavated side slopes (in idle, no work
areas) November 25, 2015
• Temporary erosion control measures (hydro -seeding) September 1, 2015
• Site grading ends: November 10, 2015
• Begin pouring concrete curbs & sidewalks and implement
BMP C151: November 25, 2015
17
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
• Pave asphalt roads December 5, 2015
• Final landscaping and planting begins: February 10,2015
• Permanent erosion control measures (hydro -seeding): February 25, 2015
18
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
5.0 Pollution Prevention Team
5.1 Roles and Responsibilities
The pollution prevention team consists of personnel responsible for implementation of the
SWPPP, including the following:
■ Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) — primary
contractor contact, responsible for site inspections (BMPs, visual
monitoring, sampling, etc.); to be called upon in case of failure of any
ESC measures.
■ Resident Engineer — For projects with engineered structures only
(sediment ponds/traps, sand filters, etc.): site representative for the owner
that is the project's supervising engineer responsible for inspections and
issuing instructions and drawings to the contractor's site supervisor or
representative.
■ Emergency Ecology Contact — individual to be contacted at Ecology in
case of emergency.
Emergency Owner Contact — individual that is the site owner or
representative of the site owner to be contacted in the case of an
emergency.
■ Non -Emergency Ecology Contact — individual that is the site owner or
representative of the site owner than can be contacted if required.
Monitoring Personnel — personnel responsible for conducting water
quality monitoring; for most sites this person is also the Certified Erosion
and Sediment Control Lead.
19
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
5.2 Team Members
Names and contact information for those identified as members of the pollution prevention team
are provided in the following table.
Title
Name(s)
Phone Number
Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL)
TBD
xxx-xxx-xxxx
Resident Engineer
Brian Kalab / Insight Engineering
425-303-9363
Emergency Ecology Contact
Tracy Walters
425-649-7000
Emergency Owner Contact
Fazel Kassam
505-243-6000
Non -Emergency Ecology Contact
Tracy Walters
425-649-7000
Monitoring Personnel
TBD
xxx-xxx-xxxx
20
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
6.0 Site Inspections and Monitoring
Monitoring includes visual inspection, monitoring for water quality parameters of concern, and
documentation of the inspection and monitoring findings in a site log book. A site log book will
be maintained for all on-site construction activities and will include:
■ A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit
requirements;
■ Site inspections; and,
■ Stormwater quality monitoring.
For convenience, the inspection form and water quality monitoring forms included in this
SWPPP include the required information for the site log book. This SWPPP may function as the
site log book if desired, or the forms may be separated and included in a separate site log book.
However, if separated, the site log book but must be maintained on-site or within reasonable
access to the site and be made available upon request to Ecology or the local jurisdiction.
6.1 Site Inspection
All BMPs will be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed to assure continued performance
of their intended function. The inspector will be a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead
(CESCL) per BMP C160. The name and contact information for the CESCL is provided in
Section 5 of this SWPPP.
Site inspection will occur in all areas disturbed by construction activities and at all stormwater
discharge points. Stormwater will be examined for the presence of suspended sediment,
turbidity, discoloration, and oily sheen. The site inspector will evaluate and document the
effectiveness of the installed BMPs and determine if it is necessary to repair or replace any of the
BMPs to improve the quality of stormwater discharges. All maintenance and repairs will be
documented in the site log book or forms provided in this document. All new BMPs or design
changes will be documented in the SWPPP as soon as possible.
6.1.1 Site Inspection Frequency
Site inspections will be conducted at least once a week and within 24 hours following any
rainfall event which causes a discharge of stormwater from the site. For sites with temporary
stabilization measures, the site inspection frequency can be reduced to once every month.
21
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
6.1.2 Site Inspection Documentation
The site inspector will record each site inspection using the site log inspection forms provided in
Appendix E. The site inspection log forms may be separated from this SWPPP document, but
will be maintained on-site or within reasonable access to the site and be made available upon
request to Ecology or the local jurisdiction.
6.2 Stormwater Quality Monitoring
6.2.1 Turbidity Sampling
Monitoring requirements for the proposed project will include either turbidity or water
transparency sampling to monitor site discharges for water quality compliance with the 2005
Construction Stormwater General Permit (Appendix D). Sampling will be conducted at all
discharge points at least once per calendar week.
Turbidity or transparency monitoring will follow the analytical methodologies described in
Section S4 of the 2005 Construction Stormwater General Permit (Appendix D). The key
benchmark values that require action are 25 NTU for turbidity (equivalent to 32 cm
transparency) and 250 NTU for turbidity (equivalent to 6 cm transparency). If the 25 NTU
benchmark for turbidity (equivalent to 32 cm transparency) is exceeded, the following steps will
be conducted:
Ensure all BMPs specified in this SWPPP are installed and functioning as
intended.
2. Assess whether additional BMPs should be implemented, and document
revisions to the SWPPP as necessary.
3. Sample discharge location daily until the analysis results are less than 25
NTU (turbidity) or greater than 32 cm (transparency).
If the turbidity is greater than 25 NTU (or transparency is less than 32 cm) but less than 250
NTU (transparency greater than 6 cm) for more than 3 days, additional treatment BMPs will be
implemented within 24 hours of the third consecutive sample that exceeded the benchmark
value. Additional treatment BMPs to be considered will include, but are not limited to, off-site
treatment, infiltration, filtration and chemical treatment.
If the 250 NTU benchmark for turbidity (or less than 6 cm transparency) is exceeded at any time,
the following steps will be conducted:
1. Notify Ecology by phone within 24 hours of analysis (see Section 5.0 of
this SWPPP for contact information).
22
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2. Continue daily sampling until the turbidity is less than 25 NTU (or
transparency is greater than 32 cm).
3. Initiate additional treatment BMPs such as off-site treatment, infiltration,
filtration and chemical treatment within 24 hours of the first 250 NTU
exceedance.
4. Implement additional treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but within 7
days of the first 250 NTU exceedance.
5. Describe inspection results and remedial actions taken in the site log book
and in monthly discharge monitoring reports as described in Section 7.0 of
this SWPPP.
6.2.2 pH Sampling
Stormwater runoff will be monitored for pH starting on the first day of any activity that includes
more than 40 yards of poured or recycled concrete, or after the application of "Engineered Soils"
such as, Portland cement treated base, cement kiln dust, or fly ash. This does not include
fertilizers. For concrete work, pH monitoring will start the first day concrete is poured and
continue until 3 weeks after the last pour. For engineered soils, the pH monitoring period begins
when engineered soils are first exposed to precipitation and continue until the area is fully
stabilized.
Stormwater samples will be collected daily from all points of discharge from the site and
measured for pH using a calibrated pH meter, pH test kit, or wide range pH indicator paper. If
the measured pH is 8.5 or greater, the following steps will be conducted:
1. Prevent the high pH water from entering storm drains or surface water.
2. Adjust or neutralize the high pH water if necessary using appropriate
technology such as CO2 sparging (liquid or dry ice).
3. Contact Ecology if chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging is planned.
23
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
7.0 Reporting and Recordkeeping
7.1 Recordkeeping
7.1.1 Site Log Book
A site log book will be maintained for all on-site construction activities and will include:
■ A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit
requirements;
Site inspections; and,
■ Stormwater quality monitoring.
For convenience, the inspection form and water quality monitoring forms included in this
SWPPP include the required information for the site log book.
7.1.2 Records Retention
Records of all monitoring information (site log book, inspection reports/checklists, etc.),
this Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and any other documentation of compliance
with permit requirements will be retained during the life of the construction project and
for a minimum of three years following the termination of permit coverage in accordance
with permit condition S5.C.
7.1.3 Access to Plans and Records
The SWPPP, General Permit, Notice of Authorization letter, and Site Log Book will be
retained on site or within reasonable access to the site and will be made immediately
available upon request to Ecology or the local jurisdiction. A copy of this SWPPP will
be provided to Ecology within 14 days of receipt of a written request for the SWPPP
from Ecology. Any other information requested by Ecology will be submitted within a
reasonable time. A copy of the SWPPP or access to the SWPPP will be provided to the
public when requested in writing in accordance with permit condition S5.G.
7.1.4 Updating the SWPPP
In accordance with Conditions S3, S4.B, and S9.B.3 of the General Permit, this SWPPP
will be modified if the SWPPP is ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing
24
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site or there has been a change in design,
construction, operation, or maintenance at the site that has a significant effect on the
discharge, or potential for discharge, of pollutants to the waters of the State. The SWPPP
will be modified within seven days of determination based on inspection(s) that
additional or modified BMPs are necessary to correct problems identified, and an updated
timeline for BMP implementation will be prepared.
7.2 Reporting
7.2.1 Discharge Monitoring Reports
Water quality sampling results will be submitted to Ecology monthly on Discharge
Monitoring Report (DMR) forms in accordance with permit condition S5.B. If there was
no discharge during a given monitoring period, the form will be submitted with the words
"no discharge" entered in place of the monitoring results. If a benchmark was exceeded,
a brief summary of inspection results and remedial actions taken will be included. If
sampling could not be performed during a monitoring period, a DMR will be submitted
with an explanation of why sampling could not be performed.
7.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance
If any of the terms and conditions of the permit are not met, and it causes a threat to
human health or the environment, the following steps will be taken in accordance with
permit section S5.F:
1. Ecology will be immediately notified of the failure to comply.
2. Immediate action will be taken to control the noncompliance issue
and to correct the problem. If applicable, sampling and analysis of
any noncompliance will be repeated immediately and the results
submitted to Ecology within five (5) days of becoming aware of
the violation.
3. A detailed written report describing the noncompliance will be
submitted to Ecology within five (5) days, unless requested earlier
by Ecology.
In accordance with permit condition S4.F.6.b, the Ecology regional office will be notified
if chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging is planned for adjustment of high pH water
(see Section 5.0 of this SWPPP for contact information).
25
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
7.2.3 Permit Application and Changes
In accordance with permit condition S2.A, a complete application form will be submitted
to Ecology and the appropriate local jurisdiction (if applicable) to be covered by the
General Permit.
Appendix A — Site Plans
Appendix B — Construction BMPs
Element #1 - Mark Clearing Limits
High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C103)
Element #2 - Establish Construction Access
Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP C 105)
Element #3 - Control Flow Rates
Detention Vault
Element #4 - Install Sediment Controls
Silt Fence (BMP C233)
Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220)
Interceptor Dike and Swale (BMP C200)
Element #5 - Stabilize Soils
Mulching (BMP C121)
Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120)
Element #6 - Protect Slopes
Plastic Covering (BMP C123)
Element #8 - Stabilize Channels and Outlets
Outlet Protection (BMP C209)
26
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Element #10 - Control Dewatering
Additional Advanced BMPs to Control Dewatering:
Element #11 — Maintain BMP's
Scheduling (BMP C 162)
Element #12 — Manage the Project
CESC Lead (BMP C160)
27
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Appendix C — Alternative BMPs
The following includes a list of possible alternative BMPs for each of the 12 elements not
described in the main SWPPP text. This list can be referenced in the event a BMP for a
specific element is not functioning as designed and an alternative BMP needs to be
implemented.
Element #1 - Mark Clearing Limits
Preserving Natural Vegetation (C101)
Element #2 - Establish Construction Access
Wheel Wash (C106)
Construction Road/Parking area stabilization (BMP C107)
Element #3 - Control Flow Rates
Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241)
Sediment Trap (BMP C240)
Element #4 - Install Sediment Controls
Triangular Silt Dike (BMP C208)
Element #5 - Stabilize Soils
Surface roughening (BMP C130)
Element #6 - Protect Slopes
Nets and Blankets (BMP C122)
Element #8 - Stabilize Channels and Outlets
Channel Lining (BMP C202)
Element #10 - Control Dewatering
Element #11 — Maintain BMP's
Element #12 — Manage the Project
28
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Appendix D — General Permit
29
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Appendix E — Site Inspection Forms (and Site Log)
The results of each inspection shall be summarized in an inspection report or checklist
that is entered into or attached to the site log book. It is suggested that the inspection
report or checklist be included in this appendix to keep monitoring and inspection
information in one document, but this is optional. However, it is mandatory that this
SWPPP and the site inspection forms be kept onsite at all times during construction, and
that inspections be performed and documented as outlined below.
At a minimum, each inspection report or checklist shall include:
a. Inspection date/times
b. Weather information: general conditions during inspection,
approximate amount of precipitation since the last inspection,
and approximate amount of precipitation within the last 24 hours.
c. A summary or list of all BMPs that have been implemented,
including observations of all erosion/sediment control structures or
practices.
d. The following shall be noted:
i. locations of BMPs inspected,
ii. locations of BMPs that need maintenance,
iii. the reason maintenance is needed,
iv. locations of BMPs that failed to operate as designed or
intended, and
v. locations where additional or different BMPs are needed, and
the reason(s) why
e. A description of stormwater discharged from the site. The presence
of suspended sediment, turbid water, discoloration, and/or oil
sheen shall be noted, as applicable.
f. A description of any water quality monitoring performed during
inspection, and the results of that monitoring.
g. General comments and notes, including a brief description of any
BMP repairs, maintenance or installations made as a result of the
inspection.
30
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
h. A statement that, in the judgment of the person conducting the site
inspection, the site is either in compliance or out of compliance
with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and the NPDES
permit. If the site inspection indicates that the site is out of
compliance, the inspection report shall include a summary of the
remedial actions required to bring the site back into compliance, as
well as a schedule of implementation.
i. Name, title, and signature of person conducting the site inspection;
and the following statement: "I certify under penalty of law that
this report is true, accurate, and complete, to the best of my
knowledge and belief".
When the site inspection indicates that the site is not in compliance with any terms and
conditions of the NPDES permit, the Permittee shall take immediate action(s) to: stop,
contain, and clean up the unauthorized discharges, or otherwise stop the noncompliance;
correct the problem(s); implement appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs),
and/or conduct maintenance of existing BMPs; and achieve compliance with all
applicable standards and permit conditions. In addition, if the noncompliance causes a
threat to human health or the environment, the Permittee shall comply with the
Noncompliance Notification requirements in Special Condition S5.F of the permit.
31
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Appendix F — Engineering Calculations
See Stormwater Site Plan dated August 18, 2015
32
9.0 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 22 -
Web date: 02/22/2013
c
a)
E
y
a)
CI w
Ea
C
(1.)
0
c
W 0 lfl
OZ,-i N ,--- i
N C N
0) as to T
COala :ej Ce
cm E i
L a) O
L y
O as un c'
V 4.. a5
Ocn 4.0 - CO O
= 0'c00
. £C 0 ai t0
YW •E
i Oa,
3oas
oN
t0
0
a (n N
0
c
as
ai
a▪ s
(1) ns -
a)
O N p
cn
uS
co
as O a)
cu cr)
E cC
.� a)
c ns
a)
E c
.� ami
.3
O c
JD
TS
=o
O u)
Q- • 0 0
O
E
Qj Q O
Z • Q O
Clearing greater than or equal to 5,000 board feet of timber?
O
X
y
T
Forest Practice Permit Number:
(RCW 76.09)
Bond Quantities w -sewer and water
Web date: 02/22/2013
-1, r
0
0
U
111021
150001
r
O
r
8851
(n
t-
O
O
r
CP
(n
10
rl'
(0
'V'
"Cr
r
59801
d'
10
„--
# of
Applications
r
x-
r
r
7-
r
r
r
r
r
Quantity
0o
r
co
100001
7401
15001
5001
20001
5201
2801
r
co
c
>-
0
Each
CY
CY
>-
0
W>-
J
1 LF
(n
>-
(n
>-
(n
>-
(D
ti
J
W
J
W
J
>-
(n
>-
0
0
co
W
0
cu
W
0
as
W
LF
W
J
>-
C/)
>-
U)
>-
U)
HR
1
W
Unit
Price
N
co
'0
64
64
r
t!7
N-
(0
VI
$ 85.45
$ 8.08
O
.-
64
00
M
r-
64
00
M
.-
64
$ 0.59
10
V
-
64
�-
O
N
64
M
LO
0
64
0
h
0
r
04
0
r
0N
r
64
$ 20.70
0
M
64
CO
O
O
co
64
�t
CO
4
(0
NI:
T--
64
$ 2,928.68
00
CO
0)
d'
6>
•,--
64
r'
0)
r-
r
64
$ 68.541
r
10
O(6
64
CO
O
64
$ 7.45
10
fes-
V'
N.
vi
to
t-
ti
0)
64
Reference #
SWDM 5.4.6.3
WSDOT 9-03.9(3)
SWDM 5.4.3.1
SWDM 5.4.2.4
SWDM 5.4.2.2
SWDM 5.4.2.1
SWDM 5.4.2.1
CO
N
1.4.5
2
0
WSDOT 9-13.1(2)
SWDM 5.4.4.1
SWDM 5.4.4.1
SWDM 5.4.5.2
SWDM 5.4.5.1
SWDM 5.4.5.1
SWDM 5.4.2.4 1
SWDM 5.4.2.5
SWDM 5.4.2.5
SWDM 5.4.7
Number
r
6
U)
w
N
0
CO�
w
M
0
w
ESC -4
ESC -5
CO
0
w
h
0
w
ESC -8
T
0
w
O
7
0
co
w
0
co
w
ESC -12
ESC -13
ESC -14
ESC -15
ESC -16
ESC -17
ESC -18
CO
r
U
w
O
0
Q)
w
ESC -21
ESC -22
CO
l
0
U)
W
ESC -24
to
N
0
N
W
ESC -26
IWRITE-IN-ITEMS **** (see page 9)
EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL
Backfill & compaction -embankment
Check dams, 4" minus rock
Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus
O
c
:"C-
.0
0
Excavation -bulk
Fence, silt
Fence, Temporary (NGPE)
Hydroseeding
Jute Mesh
Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep
Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep
Piping, temporary, CPP, 6"
Piping, temporary, CPP, 8"
....-..._..-_-.
Piping, temporary, CPP, 12"
Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged
Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes
Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1'
Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1'
Sediment pond riser assembly
Sediment trap, 5' high berm
Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section
Seeding, by hand
Sodding, 1" deep, level ground
Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground
ITESC Supervisor
Water truck, dust control
O
0)
O
O
tri
64
ESC SUBTOTAL:
co
00
N
O
10
O
N
oo
10
O ~ 2
Q 0
J 0 0
Ea w
0
06
}
U
Z
W
U'
Z
1-
Z
0
U
O
M
O
O
N
0)
0
Bond Quantities w -sewer and water
Web date: 12/02/2008
e Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Quantity Completed
(Bond Reduction)`
Quant.
Complete Cost
GENERAL ITEMS No.
Backfill & Compaction- embankment GI - 1 $ 5.62 CY
Private
Improvements
Unit Price Unit Quant. Cost Quant. Cost Quant. Cost
...........
O()
t()
co 0,
N
O
O
tO
�
1,576.521
2,039.201
3501
370001
N
s --
CO
Future Public
Right of Way
& Drainage Facilities
Existing
Right -of -Way
426.50
O
O
O
O
Lo
4,088.64
O
O
30001
co
-4-
>-
0
i-
fn
N
a
i'
0
0
LL
-J
U-
--I
0
w
LL
-I
>-
0
}
0
}
0
}
fn
}
CO
}
(n
}
(n
>-
0
CO
U
w
}
CO
0
"
Q=
X
}
U)
}
(n
>-
(n
{,L
CO
W
CO
$ 8.53
(..0
CO
O
Efl
_O
O
r—
EO
69
$ 1.50
$ 4.06
O
O
c
Ef3
$ 13.44 1
CO
0,
EA
N_
N
v—
EA
$ 22.57
CO
V00
to
N
GS
O
r
co
EA
CO
4
10
EFT
t0
CO
t
r
69
co
`ct
N
CO
EA
N
O
N
69-
(1)
0)
O
ER
$ 135.13 1
$ 2.88
CO
r
Efl
$ 788.26
$ 1,556.64
_M
10
CO
ER
O)
LC)
r
ER
CO
CO
O
E9-
0)
c0
69
CO
4-
V
O
0)
V
0)
ffil
N
C5
CO
C-5
V
C5
O
C9
CO
b
r
C7
00
C7
Q1
°
O
0
0
N
C6
CO
C5
V
C5
LO
C5
CO
C5
r
CO
CO
C 5
07
U
O
N
0
N
C5
N
N
C5
CO
N
N
C7
LO
N
Z.
O
N
r
N
0
CO
N
0
m
N
0
Backfill & Compaction- trench
Clear/Remove Brush, by hand
Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal
Excavation - bulk
Excavation - Trench
Fencing, cedar, 6' high
Fencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' high
Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 2
Fencing, split rail, 3' high
Fill & compact - common barrow
Fill & compact - gravel base
Fill & compact - screened topsoil
IGabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh
Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh
Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh
Grading, fine, by hand
Grading, fine, with grader
Monuments, 3' long
Sensitive Areas Sign
Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground
Surveying, line & grade
Surveying, lot location/lines
Traffic control crew ( 2 flaggers )
Trail, 4" chipped wood
Trail, 4" crushed cinder
Trail, 4" top course
Wall, retaining, concrete
N
Y
0
0
To
N 00
O O
N (0
N
Nr
Or -
SUBTOTAL
•V
O
EU
7 ;=
N �
0) N
0 N Ci
0) 0 a
0
o
cr,(0 Y CO
0_
Web date: 12/02/2008
mprovement Bond Quan
Bond Reduction*
Cost
Quant.
Complete
Private
Improvements
N
O
0
C
CE
O
0
7,500.001
O
0
CO
Future Public
Right of Way
& Drainage Facilities
Quant. Cost
Existing
Right-of-way
O
0
c
m
0
2,000.00
Cf)
N
N:
(1)
,-
106.25
0
O
O
O
0)
4.in
O
O
c-
CO
co
85
140
C
co
co
co
co
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
(n
(/)
(/)
Cn
(n
U)
COCO CO
W
(n
J
Unit Price
0
O
CO
N
E/T
O
O
CO
r
ER
O
O
f-
ER
0
U)
N
O
EH
$ 30.03
0
O
CC)
V
6/4
0
O
r
s-
ER
0
CO
N
1-
EH
0
O
W
EA-
0
Cn
CO
Efl
0
O
N:
64
ID
CO
.-
Efl
6)
CO
,-
Efl
t()
N
`-
64
ER
0
O
CO
ER
0
O
CO
CO
Ea
O
CO
O)
N
EA
0
CO
ad
CO
EA
0
ll)
N-
CO
E4
$ 85.28
N
CO
CO
Efl
W
CO
N
64
C!)
N
O
Ei)
N
CO
V
CO
O
I�
CO
CA
O
`-
,-
N
d'
LO
O
CO
O
O
N
N
N
N
CO
N
N
ROAD IMPROVEMENT
AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy
IAC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-200C
IAC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy
IAC Removal/Disposal/Repair
Barricade, type 1
Barricade, type 111 ( Permanent )
Curb & Gutter, rolled
Curb & Gutter, vertical
Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposal
Curb, extruded asphalt
Curb, extruded concrete
ISawcut, asphalt, 3" depth
Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth
Sealant, asphalt
Shoulder, AC, ( see AC road unit price )
Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick
Sidewalk, 4" thick
Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and dispos
Sidewalk, 5" thick
Sidewalk, 5" thick, demolition and dispos
Sign, handicap
Striping, per stall 1
Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk )
Striping, 4" reflectorized line
O
Lo
M
CO
SUBTOTAL
d)
C N
O
.n 3
U
O C
T L
C d)
0
(O
N
O
c 3
O 0
.c a)
c
m c
0) • =
p N 0
v 010
0 0 0
O y O
(CI
CO
d
Web date: 12/02/2008
ity Worksheet
mprovement Bond Quan
Bond Reduction*
Quant.
Complete Cost
ROAD SURFACING (4" Rock = 2.5 base & 1.5" top course) For '93 KCRS (6.5" Rock= 5" base & 1.5" top course)
For KCRS '93, (additional 2.5" base) add RS - 1 $ 3.60 SY 1
Private
Improvements
Quant. ) Cost
8,085.001
6,885.001
O
co
M
LP)
O
N
Future Public
Right of Way
& Drainage Facilities
Quant. 1 Cost
Existing
Right-of-way
Quant. Cost
1,365.00
O
O
C
CO
U)
(f)
(/)
U)
CO
U)
CO
CO
U)
U)
CO
CO
CO
CO
J
Unit Price
O
N
63
O
O
O
63
O
O
N
63
O
O
O
.-
V3
O
M
M
N
V3
O
O
.-
N
03
O
CO
t�
N
63
O
O
O
N
63
O
M
M
H3
O
O
O
CO
63
O
O
0
N
09
O
O
0
y-
63
$ 8.50
$ 27.00
$ 25.50
O
O
co
V3
N
COU)
C)
Ct
st
CO
1
O
CO
Ct
CO
CO
Ct
N.
CO
Ct
co
CO
o'
O)
U)
IX
.O-
U)
a
U)
Cra
y-
U)
y)
U)
o
V-
U)
a
r-)
U)
Ct
V..
U)
Et
r
U)
a
IAC Overlay, 1.5" AC
IAC Overlay, 2" AC
IAC Road, 2", 4" rock, First 2500 SY
IAC Road, 2", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500SY
IAC Road, 3", 4" rock, First 2500 SY
IAC Road, 3", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY
IAC Road, 5", First 2500 SY
IAC Road, 5", Qty. Over 2500 SY
IAC Road, 6", First 2500 SY
IAC Road, 6", Qty. Over 2500 SY
(Asphalt Treated Base, 4" thick
Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY
(Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY
PCC Road, 5", no base, over 2500 SY
PCC Road, 6", no base, over 2500 SY
Thickened Edge
co
O
O
O
M
SUBTOTAL
C
0
U
N
0
0
0
0
T
0
O
0
c
O
0
0
Web date: 12/02/2008
Worksheet
Bond Quan
Improvemen
Bond Reduction*
O
U
(CPP = Corrugated DRAINAGEPlastic Pipe, N12 or Equivalent) 9 p q ) For Culvert prices, Average of 4' cover was assumed. Assume perforated PVC is same price as solid oioe.
(CBs include frame and lid)
Quant.
Complete
Private
Improvements
Quant. Cost
1111!
224.191
533.201
1,088.501
300
40
501
Future Public
Right of Way
& Drainage Facilities
Quant. 1 Cost
Existing
Right-of-way
Quant. Cost
2,515.28
U)
co
co
O
N
7,510.651
N
U)
C)
M
'C
❑
>-
_c
0
O
W
L
0
CO
W
L
0
CO
W
L .G
0 0
O CO
W W
L
0
CO
W
H
LL
.0
0
CO
W
1—
U_
L
0
CO
W
F—
U
_c
0
CO
WWWW
L
0
CO
L
0
CO
L
o
CO
U..
J
U_
J
U_
J
U_
J
U_
J
U_
J
U_
J
U_
J
U
J
U
J
(,L
J
U.
J
U_
J
Unit Price
O
O
N
$ 240.74 1
V
CO
N
L
V'
64
64
(fl
t�
U7
N
.-
Cfl
CO n
U) U)
CO CO
CO CO
V O
e- N ',,
(/3 CA '..,
$ 436.52
V
U)
N
O
N
(!3
$ 486.53
N[-
LO
1C)
CO
CV -
CO
$ 536.54
$ 3,212.64
N
N
O
CO
63
O
O
O
CO
CO
64
$ 130.55
$ 174.90
$ 224.19
V
CO
W
(f3
O
CO
N
•-
(i3
CO
CO
co
(f3
N-
I"-
N
(f3
LC)
N
1-
r
64
U3CO
V
Co
N
69
N
0)
CR
V'
t�
CO
Cfl
CO
CO
co
tO
64
UO
tt
n
CH
.-
,-
N
64
$ 140.83
U)
U)
PO
N
CA
$ 302.58
❑
N
❑
CO
❑
❑
❑ ❑
r
❑
CO
❑
O
❑
O
0000000000000000000000
N
0)
NY
U)
CO
N
CO
0)
O
N
N
N
N
CO
N
V'
N
t()
N
CO
N
r
N
CO
N
O
N
O
CO
CO
Access Road, R/D
Bollards - fixed
Bollards - removable
(1)
(a
1-
m
0
CB Type IL
CB Type II, 48" diameter
for additional depth over 4'
CB Type II, 54" diameter
for additional depth over 4'
CB Type II, 60" diameter
for additional depth over 4'
CB Type II, 72" diameter
Ifor additional depth over 4'
Through -curb Inlet Framework (Add)
ICleanout, PVC, 4" 1
Cleanout, PVC, 6"
Cleanout, PVC, 8"
Culvert, PVC, 4"
Culvert, PVC, 6"
Culvert, PVC, 8"
Culvert, PVC, 12"
Culvert, CMP, 8"
Culvert, CMP, 12"
Culvert, CMP, 15"
Culvert, CMP, 18"
Culvert, CMP, 24"
Culvert, CMP, 30"
Culvert, CMP, 36"
Culvert, CMP, 48"
Culvert, CMP, 60"
Culvert, CMP, 72"
N 00
0 0
N CO
N
N
O
SUBTOTAL
0_
Web date: 12/02/2008
^W
W
tc
VJ
`f\O
c
z
0
M0
W
-F—+
W
nE
W
O
L
0
W
(
Bond Reduction*
Cost
Quant.
Complete
Private
Improvements
Cost
(n
to
O
C
N
3
0
Future Public
Right of Way
& Drainage Facilities
0
0
0
Quant.
Existing
Right-of-way
Cost
c
ca
0
0
CJ
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
0
J
J
_
(O
W
()
N
W
(N
W
(o
W
0
c6
W
c4
W
c
W
N
W
03
W
Unit Price
N
O
N
(A
$ 30.05
V'
CO
N:
co
63
r
(()
V
EA
h
O
r
co
0)
CO
r
c)
r
69
CO
CO
to
co
r
(A
$ 158.42
$ 175.94
0
r.
O
r
EA
0
r
(O
r
(A
0
t�
O
N
(fl
0
O
M
N
0)
$ 2T60
0
00
(O
M
0)
0
CO
Cd
V
(fl
0
N
L
(R
00
O
co
(A
0)
0)
(O
N
H}
0
CO
N
N
0)
0
V
N
EA
(f)
h
t (- �
0)
$ 1,605.40
r
00(00)
V'
r
0)
O)
(n
0
O
69-
CO
in
(c)
O
O
[A
CO
O
r
63
CO
O
CO
V>
O
O
0
O
(A
N-
r
N
(fl
$ 237.27
$ 268.89
$ 306.84
DRAINAGE CONTINUED
d
Z
N
0
CO
0
V
0
(O
0
CO
0
F-
0
CO
0)
0
0)
0)
0
0
0
0
N
V'
0
M
V'
0
ch
V'
0
(f)
V
0
(0
0
i,-
-
0
M
V
0
O)
V
0
0
(n
0
(O
0
N
(O
0
CO
(0
0
r!'
(n
0
(f)
(f)
0
(D
(0
0
N-
(0
0
00
(n
0
Cr)
(f)
0
0
CO
0
CO
0
N
CO
0
M
CO
0
V'
Culvert, Concrete, 8"
Culvert, Concrete, 12"
Culvert, Concrete, 15"
Culvert, Concrete, 18"
Culvert, Concrete, 24"
Culvert, Concrete, 30"
Culvert, Concrete, 36"
Culvert, Concrete, 42"
Culvert, Concrete, 48"
Culvert, CPP, 6"
CL
0_
U
r
a)
0
'Culvert, CPP, 12"
(Culvert, CPP, 15"
CL -
a
U
-E
oL
Culvert, CPP, 24"
Culvert, CPP, 30"
Culvert, CPP, 36"
0)
O
Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+) 1
French Drain (3' depth)
Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene
Infiltration pond testing
Mid -tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep
Pond Overflow Spillway
Restrictor/Oil Separator, 12"
Restrictor/Oil Separator, 15"
Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18" 1
Riprap, placed
Tank End Reducer (36" diameter)
Trash Rack, 12"
in
0
(a
CL
m
f`
Trash Rack, 18"
ITrash Rack, 21"
CA
0
SUBTOTAL
0 0
N CO
r N
N �=
0
0
N
0)
W
N
(0
0
O
f2
N
O
U
O
0
N
0
C a)
O
.n 3
o -o
o c
T
C
O 3
a, a)
N N
o N
L
(d
<
N 0
O -0
U C
• O
• CO
Web date: 12/02/2008
mprovement Bond Quantity Workshee
Bond Reduction*
Cost
PARKING LOT SURFACING
UTILITY POLES & STREET LIGHTING Utility pole relocation costs must be accompanied by Franchise Utility's Cost Statement
IWRITE-IN-ITEMS 1
Quant.
Complete
Private
Improvements
Quant. I Cost
70,000.00
Future Public
Right of Way
& Drainage Facilities
Quant. Cost
266.60
841.201
2,266.501
1_ 4,000.001
5,600.001
201
40
O
U) U)
A-
Existing
Right-of-way
Quant. Price
CO
U)
CO
U)
1 Lump Sum
Cd
W
CO
O
J
LU
J
J
0
co
N
0
O
cd
N
to
LO
V
,-
'V
Unit Price 1
O
0
O
0
O
O
r
co
CO
M
.-
C)
OC
N
co
10
V'
O
C.
0
O
0
V
$ 5,600.00
ZI
J
CL
N
J
d
CO
J
a
7N
J
a
d
D
d
D
OI
�-
1
N
§-§-§-§§
M
Lt)
CO
1-
CO
a)
o
12" AC, 2" top course rock & 4" borrow
12" AC, 1.5" top course & 2.5" base cour
4" select borrow
11.5" top course rock & 2.5" base course
Utility Pole(s) Relocation
'Street Light Poles w/Luminaires
(Such as detention/water quality vaults.)
Detention Vault
'side sewer 8"pvc
'DI Water Line 3"
DI Water Line 6"
13" Water Meter
Q
0
0
iO
SUBTOTAL
CO
CO
CO
CO
SUBTOTAL (SUM ALL PAGES):
L)
O
M
O
a)
30% CONTINGENCY & MOBILIZATION:
GRANDTOTAL:
W
0
m
Z
0
U
0
0
a
m
a
0 • 0)
o
a 3
O 0
O CO
T L
• d)
0
0
O
c • 3
o N
t • a)
c° c
0) r
p N 0
00 U a
0
) Y O
m m
0
Original bond computations prepared by:
/
/
Brian R. Kalab
E
]
425.303.9363
/
/
}
0
0
O.
478 Everett, WA 98206
PE Registration Number:
Firm Name:
k
§
ROAD IMPROVEMENTS & DRAINAGE FACILITIES FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS
WZ
/1-
\
/azs /
<
o/
0z
DI-
Z
BOND* AMOUNT
0!
Z
/
1-1 <
CL
wo
®o
<
§0
\§
Ce
0 R
j
0Z 2
k<
0
§
a
r-
\
a
2
//�
//\
/ 0 d Q \
\ -. / §
a § / \ /
®— =®\
2 $ . n s
f 8 / ƒ
52 &
0 ) co 0 /
c o % Q 7
0 0 /
r n 0 03
7
C � �\
\ \ k \ .
CO & o p `
o
I's / co
§
§ E \
.EyI-
o
��\\
2 2 m E
5 0 ƒ £
73
3)06-0
§ - E �) .'07-
o {2- 0
ƒa�/\c
2
/ 7 , (3 $
o \ §R
\ Q = /) \
\$\
§ 7 E as a co
*�S\\\
® E
0 0
Fli 0 k j { / 7c
_ o \ E % 0
) # \ / / /
\6cCaa) 2 •80 . '.
\ ; 0 ® 7
- o ®\ &
\ 7 7 $ 5
E / q co
_ . m.
E 0 f § 4 g
§ m •
_ E
0 co .-
/ \ \) § \
/ - a) 0 f E
o E a { DEC
7e--
\s / 7 \
•N CT a k k 7
0 _ / \ \
P $ $ 2 /
2 <) / 0 0
2
& t J U
0 0 m % 2
.c 0 .c \ c }
tii § § Ili
«
\
0co
\
/
ƒ
n
a
\
oo
(0
a
_
ƒ k 0 0
Stabilization/Erosion Sediment Control (ESC)
Existing Right -of -Way Improvements
Future Public Right of Way & Drainage Facilities
Private Improvements
Calculated Quantity Completed
\
co
Eft
Reduced Performance Bond* Total ***
Maintenance/Defect Bond* Total
NAME OF PERSON PREPARING BOND* REDUCTION:
0 z z
REQUI
k
\
z
0
§
Check out the DDES Web site at
Bond Quantities w -sewer and water
10.0 Operations and Maintenance Manual
Insight Engineering Co. — Technical Information Report 8/18/15
- 23 -
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 2 - INFILTRATION FACILITIES
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance Is Performed
Site
Trash and debris
Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot
per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the
amount of trash it would take to fill up one
standard size office garbage can). In general,
there should be no visual evidence of dumping.
Trash and debris cleared from site.
Noxious weeds
Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may
constitute a hazard to County personnel or the
public.
Noxious and nuisance vegetation
removed according to applicable
regulations. No danger of noxious
vegetation where County personnel
or the public might normally be.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Grass/groundcover
Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in
height.
Grass or groundcover mowed to a
height no greater than 6 inches.
Infiltration Pond, Top
or Side Slopes of
Dam, Berm or
Embankment
Rodent holes
Any evidence of rodent holes if facility is acting
as a dam or berm, or any evidence of water
piping through dam or berm via rodent holes.
Rodents removed or destroyed and
dam or berm repaired.
Tree growth
Tree growth threatens integrity of dams, berms or
slopes, does not allow maintenance access, or
interferes with maintenance activity. If trees are
not a threat to dam, berm, or embankment
integrity or not interfering with access or
maintenance, they do not need to be removed.
Trees do not hinder facility
performance or maintenance
activities.
Erosion
Eroded damage over 2 inches deep where cause
of damage is still present or where there is
potential for continued erosion. Any erosion
observed on a compacted slope.
Slopes stabilized using appropriate
erosion control measures. If erosion
is occurring on compacted slope, a
licensed civil engineer should be
consulted to resolve source of
erosion.
Settlement
Any part of a dam, berm or embankment that has
settled 4 inches lower than the design elevation.
Top or side slope restored to design
dimensions. If settlement is
significant, a licensed civil engineer
should be consulted to determine
the cause of the settlement.
Infiltration Pond,
Tank, Vault, Trench,
or Small Basin
Storage Area
Sediment
accumulation
If two inches or more sediment is present or a
percolation test indicates facility is working at or
less than 90% of design.
Facility infiltrates as designed.
Infiltration Tank
Structure
Plugged air vent
Any blockage of the vent.
Tank or vault freely vents.
Tank bent out of
shape
Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape more
than 10% of its design shape.
Tank repaired or replaced to design.
Gaps between
sections, damaged
joints or cracks or
tears in wall
A gap wider than '/2 -inch at the joint of any tank
sections or any evidence of soil particles entering
the tank at a joint or through a wall.
No water or soil entering tank
through joints or walls.
Infiltration Vault
Structure
Damage to wall,
frame, bottom, and/or
top slab
Cracks wider than''/z-inch, any evidence of soil
entering the structure through cracks or qualified
inspection personnel determines that the vault is
not structurally sound.
Vault is sealed and structurally
sound.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-3
1/9/2009
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 2 - INFILTRATION FACILITIES
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance Is Performed
Inlet/Outlet Pipes
Sediment
accumulation
Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe.
Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment.
Trash and debris
Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet
pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables).
No trash or debris in pipes.
Damaged
Cracks wider than '1/ -inch at the joint of the
inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering
at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes.
No cracks more than '/4 -inch wide at
the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe.
Access Manhole
Cover/lid not in place
Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place.
Any open manhole requires immediate
maintenance.
Manhole access covered.
Locking mechanism
not working
Mechanism cannot be opened by one
maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts
cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not
work.
Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Cover/lid difficult to
remove
One maintenance person cannot remove
cover/lid after applying 80 lbs of lift.
Cover/lid can be removed and
reinstalled by one maintenance
person.
Ladder rungs unsafe
Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks.
Ladder meets design standards.
Allows maintenance person safe
access.
Large access
doors/plate
Damaged or difficult
to open
Large access doors or plates cannot be
opened/removed using normal equipment.
Replace or repair access door so it
can opened as designed.
Gaps, doesn't cover
completely
Large access doors not flat and/or access
opening not completely covered.
Doors close flat and covers access
opening completely.
Lifting Rings missing,
rusted
Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door
or plate.
Lifting rings sufficient to lift or
remove door or plate.
Infiltration Pond,
Tank, Vault, Trench,
or Small Basin Filter
Bags
Plugged
Filter bag more than 1/2 full.
Replace filter bag or redesign
system.
Infiltration Pond,
Tank, Vault, Trench,
or Small Basin Pre -
settling Ponds and
Vaults
Sediment
accumulation
6" or more of sediment has accumulated.
Pre -settling occurs as designed
Infiltration Pond,
Rock Filter
Plugged
High water level on upstream side of filter
remains for extended period of time or little or no
water flows through filter during heavy rain
storms.
Rock filter replaced evaluate need
for filter and remove if not
necessary.
Infiltration Pond
Emergency Overflow
Spillway
Rock missing
Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in
area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of
native soil at the top of out flow path of spillway.
Rip -rap on inside slopes need not be replaced.
Spillway restored to design
standards.
Tree growth
Tree growth impedes flow or threatens stability of
spillway.
Trees removed.
1/9/2009
A-4
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 3 - DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Site
Trash and debris
Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot
per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the
amount of trash it would take to fill up one
standard size office garbage can). In general,
there should be no visual evidence of dumping.
Trash and debris cleared from site.
Noxious weeds
Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may
constitute a hazard to County personnel or the
public.
Noxious and nuisance vegetation
removed according to applicable
regulations. No danger of noxious
vegetation where County personnel
or the public might normally be.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Grass/groundcover
Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in
height.
Grass or groundcover mowed to a
height no greater than 6 inches.
Tank or Vault
Storage Area
Trash and debris
Any trash and debris accumulated in vault or tank
(includes floatables and non-floatables).
No trash or debris in vault.
Sediment
accumulation
Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10% of the
diameter of the storage area for Y2 length of
storage vault or any point depth exceeds 15% of
diameter. Example: 72 -inch storage tank would
require cleaning when sediment reaches depth of
7 inches for more than'1/ length of tank.
All sediment removed from storage
area.
Tank Structure
Plugged air vent
Any blockage of the vent.
Tank or vault freely vents.
Tank bent out of
shape
Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape more
than 10% of its design shape.
Tank repaired or replaced to design.
Gaps between
sections, damaged
joints or cracks or
tears in wall
A gap wider than'/2-inch at the joint of any tank
sections or any evidence of soil particles entering
the tank at a joint or through a wall.
No water or soil entering tank
through joints or walls.
Vault Structure
Damage to wall,
frame, bottom, and/or
top slab
Cracks wider than''/ -inch, any evidence of soil
entering the structure through cracks or qualified
inspection personnel determines that the vault is
not structurally sound.
Vault is sealed and structurally
sound.
Inlet/Outlet Pipes
Sediment
accumulation
Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe.
Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment.
Trash and debris
Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet
pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables).
No trash or debris in pipes.
Damaged
Cracks wider than %-inch at the joint of the
inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering
at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes.
No cracks more than''/ -inch wide at
the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-5
1/9/2009
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 3 - DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Access Manhole
Cover/lid not in place
Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place.
Any open manhole requires immediate
maintenance.
Manhole access covered.
Locking mechanism
not working
Mechanism cannot be opened by one
maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts
cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not
work.
Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Cover/lid difficult to
remove
One maintenance person cannot remove
cover/lid after applying 80 lbs of lift.
Cover/lid can be removed and
reinstalled by one maintenance
person.
Ladder rungs unsafe
Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks.
Ladder meets design standards.
Allows maintenance person safe
access.
Large access
doors/plate
Damaged or difficult
to open
Large access doors or plates cannot be
opened/removed using normal equipment.
Replace or repair access door so it
can opened as designed.
Gaps, doesn't cover
completely
Large access doors not flat and/or access
opening not completely covered.
Doors close flat and covers access
opening completely.
Lifting Rings missing,
rusted
Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door
or plate.
Lifting rings sufficient to lift or
remove door or plate.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-6
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 4 - CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Condition When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Structure
Trash and debris
Trash or debris of more than'/ cubic foot which
is located immediately in front of the structure
opening or is blocking capacity of the structure by
more than 10%.
No Trash or debris blocking or
potentially blocking entrance to
structure.
Trash or debris in the structure that exceeds 1/3
the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the
lowest pipe into or out of the basin.
No trash or debris in the structure.
Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in
volume.
No condition present which would
attract or support the breeding of
insects or rodents.
Sediment
Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the
bottom of the structure to the invert of the lowest
pipe into or out of the structure or the bottom of
the FROP-T section or is within 6 inches of the
invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the
structure or the bottom of the FROP-T section.
Sump of structure contains no
sediment.
Damage to frame
and/or top slab
Corner of frame extends more than % inch past
curb face into the street (If applicable).
Frame is even with curb.
Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or
cracks wider than 1/4 inch.
Top slab is free of holes and cracks.
Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e.,
separation of more than % inch of the frame from
the top slab.
Frame is sitting flush on top slab.
Cracks in walls or
bottom
Cracks wider than'/ inch and longer than 3 feet,
any evidence of soil particles entering structure
through cracks, or maintenance person judges
that structure is unsound.
Structure is sealed and structurally
sound.
Cracks wider than'/ inch and longer than 1 foot
at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence
of soil particles entering structure through cracks.
No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at
the joint of inlet/outlet pipe.
Settlement/
misalignment
Structure has settled more than 1 inch or has
rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment.
Basin replaced or repaired to design
standards.
Damaged pipe joints
Cracks wider than %-inch at the joint of the
inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering
the structure at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes.
No cracks more than''% -inch wide at
the joint of inlet/outlet pipes.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Ladder rungs missing
or unsafe
Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs,
misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges.
Ladder meets design standards and
allows maintenance person safe
access.
FROP-T Section
Damage
T section is not securely attached to structure
wall and outlet pipe structure should support at
least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure.
T section securely attached to wall
and outlet pipe.
Structure is not in upright position (allow up to
10% from plumb).
Structure in correct position.
Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight or
show signs of deteriorated grout.
Connections to outlet pipe are water
tight; structure repaired or replaced
and works as designed.
Any holes—other than designed holes—in the
structure.
Structure has no holes other than
designed holes.
Cleanout Gate
Damaged or missing
Cleanout gate is missing.
Replace cleanout gate.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-7
1/9/2009
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 4 - CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Condition When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Cleanout gate is not watertight.
Gate is watertight and works as
designed.
Gate cannot be moved up and down by one
maintenance person.
Gate moves up and down easily and
is watertight.
Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or damaged.
Chain is in place and works as
designed.
Orifice Plate
Damaged or missing
Control device is not working properly due to
missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate.
Plate is in place and works as
designed.
Obstructions
Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation
blocking the plate.
Plate is free of all obstructions and
works as designed.
Overflow Pipe
Obstructions
Any trash or debris blocking (or having the
potential of blocking) the overflow pipe.
Pipe is free of all obstructions and
works as designed.
Deformed or damaged
lip
Lip of overflow pipe is bent or deformed.
Overflow pipe does not allow
overflow at an elevation lower than
design
Inlet/Outlet Pipe
Sediment
accumulation
Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe.
Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment.
Trash and debris
Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet
pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables).
No trash or debris in pipes.
Damaged
Cracks wider than'/2-inch at the joint of the
inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering
at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes.
No cracks more than''/ -inch wide at
the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe.
Metal Grates
(If Applicable)
Unsafe grate opening
Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch.
Grate opening meets design
standards.
Trash and debris
Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20%
of grate surface.
Grate free of trash and debris.
footnote to guidelines for disposal
Damaged or missing
Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate.
Grate is in place and meets design
standards.
Manhole Cover/Lid
Cover/lid not in place
Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place.
Any open structure requires urgent
maintenance.
Cover/lid protects opening to
structure.
Locking mechanism
Not Working
Mechanism cannot be opened by one
maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts
cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not
work.
Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Cover/lid difficult to
Remove
One maintenance person cannot remove
cover/lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift.
Cover/lid can be removed and
reinstalled by one maintenance
person.
1/9/2009
A-8
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Condition When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Structure
Sediment
Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the
bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the
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 catch basin.
Sump of catch basin contains no
sediment.
Trash and debris
Trash or debris of more than % cubic foot which
is located immediately in front of the catch basin
opening or is blocking capacity of the catch basin
by more than 10%.
No Trash or debris blocking or
potentially blocking entrance to
catch basin.
Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds
1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the
lowest pipe into or out of the basin.
No trash or debris in the catch basin.
Dead animals or vegetation that could generate
odors that could cause complaints or dangerous
gases (e.g., methane).
No dead animals or vegetation
present within catch basin.
Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in
volume.
No condition present which would
attract or support the breeding of
insects or rodents.
Damage to frame
and/or top slab
Corner of frame extends more than % inch past
curb face into the street (If applicable).
Frame is even with curb.
Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or
cracks wider than'/4 inch.
Top slab is free of holes and cracks.
Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e.,
separation of more than' inch of the frame from
the top slab.
Frame is sitting flush on top slab.
Cracks in walls or
bottom
Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 3 feet,
any evidence of soil particles entering catch
basin through cracks, or maintenance person
judges that catch basin is unsound.
Catch basin is sealed and
structurally sound.
Cracks wider than ''A inch and longer than 1 foot
at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence
of soil particles entering catch basin through
cracks.
No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at
the joint of inlet/outlet pipe.
Settlement/
misalignment
Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has
rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment.
Basin replaced or repaired to design
standards.
Damaged pipe joints
Cracks wider than 12 -inch at the joint of the
inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering
the catch basin at the joint of the inlet/outlet
pipes.
No cracks more than '%-inch wide at
the joint of inlet/outlet pipes.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Inlet/Outlet Pipe
Sediment
accumulation
Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe.
Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment.
Trash and debris
Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet
pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables).
No trash or debris in pipes.
Damaged
Cracks wider than '%-inch at the joint of the
inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering
at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes.
No cracks more than ''h -inch wide at
the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-9
1/9/2009
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Condition When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Metal Grates
(Catch Basins)
Unsafe grate opening
Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch.
Grate opening meets design
standards.
Trash and debris
Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20%
of grate surface.
Grate free of trash and debris.
footnote to guidelines for disposal
Damaged or missing
Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate.
Any open structure requires urgent
maintenance.
Grate is in place and meets design
standards.
Manhole Cover/Lid
Cover/lid not in place
Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place.
Any open structure requires urgent
maintenance.
Cover/lid protects opening to
structure.
Locking mechanism
Not Working
Mechanism cannot be opened by one
maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts
cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not
work.
Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Cover/lid difficult to
Remove
One maintenance person cannot remove
cover/lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift.
Cover/lid can be removed and
reinstalled by one maintenance
person.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-10
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 6 - CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Pipes
Sediment & debris
accumulation
Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds
20% of the diameter of the pipe.
Water flows freely through pipes.
Vegetation/roots
Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of
water through pipes.
Water flows freely through pipes.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Damage to protective
coating or corrosion
Protective coating is damaged; rust or corrosion
is weakening the structural integrity of any part of
pipe.
Pipe repaired or replaced.
Damaged
Any dent that decreases the cross section area of
pipe by more than 20% or is determined to have
weakened structural integrity of the pipe.
Pipe repaired or replaced.
Ditches
Trash and debris
Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000
square feet of ditch and slopes.
Trash and debris cleared from
ditches.
Sediment
accumulation
Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the
design depth.
Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment
and debris so that it matches design.
Noxious weeds
Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may
constitute a hazard to County personnel or the
public.
Noxious and nuisance vegetation
removed according to applicable
regulations. No danger of noxious
vegetation where County personnel
or the public might normally be.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
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
through ditches.
Water flows freely through ditches.
Erosion damage to
slopes
Any erosion observed on a ditch slope.
Slopes are not eroding.
Rock lining out of
place or missing (If
Applicable)
One layer or less of rock exists above native soil
area 5 square feet or more, any exposed native
soil.
Replace rocks to design standards.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A 1/9/2009
A -I1
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 7 - DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS)
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Condition When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed.
Site
Trash and debris
Trash or debris plugging more than 20% of the
area of the barrier.
Barrier clear to receive capacity flow.
Sediment
accumulation
Sediment accumulation of greater than 20% of
the area of the barrier
Barrier clear to receive capacity flow.
Structure
Cracked broken or
loose
Structure which bars attached to is damaged -
pipe is loose or cracked or concrete structure is
cracked, broken of loose.
Structure barrier attached to is
sound.
Bars
Bar spacing
Bar spacing exceeds 6 inches.
Bars have at most 6 inche spacing.
Damaged or missing
bars
Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches.
Bars in place with no bends more
than % inch.
Bars are missing or entire barrier missing.
Bars in place according to design.
Bars are loose and rust is causing 50%
deterioration to any part of barrier.
Repair or replace barrier to design
standards.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-12
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 11 - GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING)
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Site
Trash or litter
Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot
per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the
amount of trash it would take to fill up one
standard size office garbage can). In general,
there should be no visual evidence of dumping.
Trash and debris cleared from site.
Noxious weeds
Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may
constitute a hazard to County personnel or the
public.
Noxious and nuisance vegetation
removed according to applicable
regulations. No danger of noxious
vegetation where County personnel
or the public might normally be.
Contaminants and
pollution
Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such
as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint.
Materials removed and disposed of
according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Grass/groundcover
Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in
height.
Grass or groundcover mowed to a
height no greater than 6 inches.
Trees and Shrubs
Hazard
Any tree or limb of a tree identified as having a
potential to fall and cause property damage or
threaten human life. A hazard tree identified by
a qualified arborist must be removed as soon
as possible.
No hazard trees in facility.
Damaged
Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or
broken which affect more than 25% of the total
foliage of the tree or shrub.
Trees and shrubs with less than 5%
of total foliage with split or broken
limbs.
Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or
knocked over.
No blown down vegetation or
knocked over vegetation. Trees or
shrubs free of injury.
Trees or shrubs which are not adequately
supported or are leaning over, causing exposure
of the roots.
Tree or shrub in place and
adequately supported; dead or
diseased trees removed.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A
A-16
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 24 - CATCH BASIN INSERT
Maintenance
Component
Defect or Problem
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Maintenance is Performed
Media Insert
Visible Oil
Visible oil sheen passing through media
Media inset replaced.
Insert does not fit
catch basin properly
Flow gets into catch basin without going through
media.
All flow goes through media.
Filter media plugged
Filter media plugged.
Flow through filter media is normal.
Oil absorbent media
saturated
Media oil saturated.
Oil absorbent media replaced.
Water saturated
Catch basin insert is saturated with water, which
no longer has the capacity to absorb.
Insert replaced.
Service life exceeded
Regular interval replacement due to typical
average life of media insert product, typically one
month.
Media replaced at manufacturer's
recommended interval.
Seasonal
maintenance
When storms occur and during the wet season.
Remove, clean and replace or install
new insert after major storms,
monthly during the wet season or at
manufacturer's recommended
interval.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A 1/9/2009
A-35
Return Address:
City Clerk's Office
City of Renton
1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
DECLARATION OF COVENANT FOR INSPECTION AND
MAINTENANCE OF STORMWATER FACILITIES AND BMPS
Grantor:
Grantee: City of Renton
Legal Description:
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#:
IN CONSIDERATION of the approved City of Renton permit
for application file No. LUA/SWP relating to the real property ("Property")
described above, the Grantor(s), the owner(s) in fee of that Property, hereby covenants(covenant) with the
City of Renton, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, that he/she(they) will observe, consent
to, and abide by the conditions and obligations set forth and described in Paragraphs 1 through 10 below
with regard to the Property, and hereby grants(grant) an easement as described in Paragraphs 2 and 3.
Grantor(s) hereby grants(grant), covenants(covenant), and agrees(agree) as follows:
1. The Grantor(s) or his/her(their) successors in interest and assigns ("Owners of the described
property") shall at their own cost, operate, maintain, and keep in good repair, the Property's stormwater
facilities and/or best management practices ("BMPs") constructed as required in the approved
construction plans and specifications on file with the City of Renton and submitted to the
City of Renton for the review and approval of permit(s) . The
property's stormwater facilities and/or best management practices ("BMPs") are shown and/or listed on
Exhibit A. The property's stormwater facilities and/or BMPs shall be maintained in compliance with the
operation and maintenance schedule included and attached herein as Exhibit B. Stormwater facilities
include pipes, swales, tanks, vaults, ponds, and other engineered structures designed to manage and/or
treat stormwater on the Property. Stormwater BMPs include dispersion and infiltration devices, native
vegetated areas, permeable pavements, vegetated roofs, rainwater harvesting systems, reduced impervious
surface coverage, and other measures designed to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff on the
Property.
2. City of Renton shall have the right to ingress and egress over those portions of the Property
necessary to perform inspections of the stonnwater facilities and BMPs and conduct maintenance
activities specified in this Declaration of Covenant and in accordance with RMC 4-6-030.
3. If City of Renton determines that maintenance or repair work is required to be done to any of
the stormwater facilities or BMPs, City of Renton shall give notice of the specific maintenance and/or
repair work required pursuant to RMC 4-6-030. The City shall also set a reasonable time in which such
Page 1 of 3 Form Approved by City Attorney 10/2013
work is to be completed by the Owners. If the above required maintenance or repair is not completed
within the time set by the City, the City may perform the required maintenance or repair, and hereby is
given access to the Property, subject to the exclusion in Paragraph 2 above, for such purposes. Written
notice will be sent to the Owners stating the City's intention to perform such work. This work will not
commence until at least seven (7) days after such notice is [nailed. If, within the sole discretion of the
City, there exists an imminent or present danger, the seven (7) day notice period will be waived and
maintenance and/or repair work will begin immediately.
4. If at any time the City of Renton reasonably determines that a stormwater facility or BMP on
the Property creates any of the hazardous conditions listed in RMC 4-4-060 G or relevant municipal
successor's codes as applicable and herein incorporated by reference, the City may take measures
specified therein.
5. The Owners shall assume all responsibility for the cost of any maintenance or repair work
completed by the City as described in Paragraph 3 or any measures taken by the City to address hazardous
conditions as described in Paragraph 4. Such responsibility shall include reimbursement to the City
within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the invoice for any such work performed. Overdue payments will
require payment of interest at the current legal rate as liquidated damages. If legal action ensues, the
prevailing party is entitled to recover reasonable litigation costs and attorney's fees.
6. The Owners are hereby required to obtain written approval from City of Renton prior to
filling, piping, cutting, or removing vegetation (except in routine landscape maintenance) in open
vegetated stormwater facilities (such as swales, channels, ditches, ponds, etc.), or performing any
alterations or modifications to the stormwater facilities and BMPs referenced in this Declaration of
Covenant.
7. Any notice or consent required to be given or otherwise provided for by the provisions of this
Agreement shall be effective upon personal delivery, or three (3) days after mailing by Certified Mail,
return receipt requested.
8. With regard to the matters addressed herein, this agreement constitutes the entire agreement
between the parties, and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, and all agreements whatsoever
whether oral or written.
9. This Declaration of Covenant is intended to protect the value and desirability of the real
property described above, and shall inure to the benefit of all the citizens of the City of Renton and its
successors and assigns. This Declaration of Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon
Grantor(s), and Grantor's(s') successors in interest, and assigns.
10. This Declaration of Covenant may be terminated by execution of a written agreement by the
Owners and the City that is recorded by King County in its real property records.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Covenant for the Inspection and Maintenance of
Stormwater Facilities and BMPs is executed this day of , 20
GRANTOR, owner of the Property
GRANTOR, owner of the Property
Page 2 of 3 Form Approved by City Attorney 10/2013
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF KING )ss.
On this day personally appeared before me:
, to me known to be the individual(s) described in
and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they signed the same as
their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein stated.
Given under my hand and official seal this day of
, 20
Printed name
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
residing at
My appointment expires
Page 3 of 3 Form Approved by City Attorney 10/2013