HomeMy WebLinkAbout03703 - Technical Information Report - Drainage m N E 7t" ShOrt PIatS i
� LUA13-000496; 13-000514; & 13-000867
� 3603 NE 7t" Street '
Renton, Washington 98056
�
� N� L �
v
�d
DRAINAGE REPORT 10 � ��
(Comb�ne three short plats)
July 29, 2013
Amended September 10, 2013
Prepared for:
KRRV Development, LLC � CITY OF RENTON �
Attn: Kyle Miller
� RECEIVED �
P.O. Box 908 SEP 2 4 2013
Ravensdate, Washington 98051
(425) 432-5932 office �VILDING D�vISION
Prepared by: � �. ,
� . �
Offe Engineers, PLLC �a WA�
Darrell Offe, P.�E. ` . , �G, `
13932 SE 159 Place �
Renton, Washington 98058-7832 � w
(425) 260-3412 office ��,q,� �
(425) 227-9460 fax � � ���
darre6t.ofife@comcaston�t ��i'�1► `�
_ � � � j
�
37��
Table of Contents
• Technicaf Information Worksheet
• Section 1: Project Ovenriew
• Section 2: Conditions and Requirements Summary
� Section 3: Offsite Analysis
• Section 4: Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design
• Section 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design
• Section 6: Special Reports and Studies
• Section 7: Other Permits
• Section 8: CSWPPP Analysis and Design
• Section 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant
• Section 10: Operations and Maintenance Manual
�
' � City of Renton
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
� Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND
PROJECT ENGINEER DESCRIPTION 'i
Project Owner: KRRV Development, LLC Project Name: NE 7th Short Plats II
Address: P.O. Box 908 '
Ravensdale,WA 98051 Location '
Phone: (425) 432-5932 Township: 23 North
Project Engineer: Darrell Offe, P.E. Range: 5 East
Company: Offe Engineers, PLLC Section: 10
Address/Phone: 13932 SE 159th Place
Renton, WA 98058
425 260-3412
Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS
APPLICATION
Subdivision
❑ DFW HPA _ Shoreline Management ,
X Short Subdivision ❑ COE 404 Rockery
❑ Grading ❑ DOE Dam Safety Structural Vaults
❑ Commercial ❑ FEMA Floodplain ❑ Other
❑ Other
❑ COE Wetlands
Part 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN
Community
Narth Renton
Drainage Basin
Maplewood Creek/ Cedar River/ Lake Washington
Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS
❑ River '� Floodplain
� Seeps/Springs
❑ Stream
� High Groundwater Table
❑ Critical Stream Reach
� Groundwater Recharge
❑ Depressions/Swales i �ther
❑ Lake
❑ Steep Slopes
i
Part 7 SOILS
Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities
Qgt 5— 10% minor
❑ Additional Sheets Attached
Part 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS
REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT
❑ Ch. 4—Downstream Analvsis Restrictive Covenant
❑ Limited Infiltration Design
�
J
J
�
�
❑ Additional Sheets Attached
Part 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS
I DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION
❑ Sedimentation Facilities ❑ Stabilize Exposed Surface
❑ Stabilized Construction Entrance ❑ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities
❑ Perimeter Runoff Control ❑ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris �
❑ Clearing and Grading Restrictions ❑ Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities
❑ Cover Practices ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space
❑ Construction Sequence preservation areas
❑ Other
❑ Other
. �
Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM
X Tank X Infiltration Method of Analysis
❑ Grass Lined Vauit
Channel ❑ Depression 2009 City of Renton
❑ Pipe System � Energy Dissipater � Flow Dispersal KCRTS
❑ Open Channel G Wetland � Waiver Compensation/Mitigati
' ' Stream on of Eliminated Site
❑ Dry Pond J ❑ Regional Storage
Detention
Brief Description of System Operation: Catch basins within curb line of street, conveyance
to existing City system downstream, limited infiltration on lots for house.
Facility Related Site Limitations
�, Reference Facility Limitation
I
Part 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Part 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS
Cast in Place Vault X Drainage Easement
❑ Retaining Wall ❑
X Access Easement
Rockery >4' High
❑ Structural on Steep Slope Tract
❑ Other ❑ Other
Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site
conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of
my knowledge the information provided here is accurate.
� �l
Signed/Dat
r � I
Section 1: Project Overview
The proposal is to create twelve individual single family lots from 3 separate short plats in the
Renton Highlands near the Renton Vocational College. The property addresses are: 3513, 3517,
and 3603 NE 7�' Street. These three short plats have been preliminary approved through the City
of Renton. The reasoning to combine the three for engineering construction plan approval is to
allow for the simplicity of construction of the utilities under one construction permit. The existing
residences, impervious areas, and out buildings on the property are currently being removed under
a separate demolition permit. These structures will be removed prior to the start of the utility
construction. The project area including all three pieces is 83,232 square feet (1.91 acres).
The existing King County Tax Parcel number is 801110-0130, -0120, & 0110.
There are no sensitive areas on the project site. The property has a gentle slope of approximately
4% towards the southwest corner of the property. The soils on the site have been identified by a
Geotechnical Engineers as'�glacial consolidated till"(Qgt). These soils are not suitable for Full
Infiltration of storm water runoff. The soil logs indicate moist silty sands with no ground water
within the holes at 4'. The proposal for storm water treatment for the project is: (A) provided
"limited infiltration systems"for the proposed houses and driveways; (B) provide a storm water
treatment vault for the access road and runoff from the new houses; (C) record a "Restrictive
Covenant" limiting the amount of impervious area to be allowed on the new lots.
The proposal is to combine three separate short plats into one storm water facility located on the
westerly short plat. The facility will be sized for these three short plats for detention and water
quality treatment.
f
.
Section 2: Conditions and Requirements Summary
2009 City of Renton Drainage Manual
C.�.3 LIVLITED INFILTR.A"I�I01�r
w
C.2.3 LIMITED INFILTRATION
Limited infiltration is the use of infiltrarion devices from Section C.2.2 in soils that are not as permeable
as the medium sands or coarse sands/cobbles targeted for full infiltration in Section C.2.2. These less
desirable soils include fine sands, loamy sands,sandy loams,and loams,which tend to be more variable in
permeability,more frequently saturated during the wet season,and more prone to plugging over tune.
While full infiltration may be possible under the best of these soil conditions, in the long rnn,these
condirions will conspire to limit average infiltration capacity to something much less than that of full
infiltration. Therefore,using limited infiltration as specified in this section will not be credited the same
as using full infiltration as specified in Section C.2.2.
Applicable Surfaces
Limited infiltration may be applied to any impervious surface (e.g., roof. drive���ay, parking area,or road)
subject to the minimum requirements and design specifications in this section.
Operation and Maintenance
See Section C.23.5(p.C-50).
C.2.3.1 REQUIRED SOILS REPORT
In order to properly design limited infiltration devices, a soils report is required to identify the de.pth to
impermeable layers(i.e.,hardpan)and to the ma�cimum wet season groundwater level. See Section
C.2.2.1 (p.C-41)for more details on this report. In many cases,this report will have akeady been
prepared as required in Sections C.13.1 and C.13.2 for lots where full dispersion is not feasible or
applicable to target impervious surface per Section C.2.1.
C.2.3.2 MINIMUM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION
The minimum requirements for limited infiltration are the same as those for full infiltration,except
infiltration depressions aze excluded and existing soils in the location of the infiltration device may be fine
sands,loamy sands,sandy loams,or loams as opposed to only medium sands or better. Note that gravel
and medium sand soils used for full inftltration correspond to Soil Types lA, IB, 2A and 2B in the Soil
Teztural Classifcation system used for onsite septic system design;fine sands are Type 3;and loamy
sands, sandy loams and loams are Type 4 soils. Silt and clay loams, and cemented till(hardpan)are not
suitable for limited infiltration systems.
C.2.3.3 USE OF GRAVEL FILLED TRENCHES FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION
The specifications for use of gravel filled trenches for limited infiltration are the same as those used for
full infiltration,except that every 1,000 square feet of tributary impervious surface requires different
trench lengths as follows:(a�75 feet if the soil is a fine sand/loamy sand,(b) 125 feet if the soil is a
sandy loam,or(c) 190 feet if t�ie soil is a loam.
C.2.3.4 USE OF DRYWELLS FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION
The specificarions for use of drywells for limited infiltration are the same as those used for full infiltration,
except that every 1,000 square feet of tributary impervious surface requires different gravel volumes as
follows:(a)230 cubic feet if the soil is a fine sand/loamy sand,(b)380 cubic feet if the soil is a sandy
loam,or(c)570 cubic feet if the soil is a loam.
'U09 Surface��'a�er De;ign'��lanual-Appendis C 1 �� =i�(14
� (�-�9
SECTION�C.2 FLOW CONTROL BMPs
M
C.2.3.5 MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR LIMITED INFILTRATION
If the limited infiltration flow control BMP is proposed for a project,the following maintenance and
operation instructions must be recorded as an attachment to the required declaration of covenant and
grant of easement per Requirement 3 of Section C.13.3 (p.C-18). The intent of these instructions is to
explain to future property owners,the purpose of the BMI'and how it must be maintained and operated.
These instructions are intended to be a minimum;DDES may require additional instructions based on site-
specific conditions. Also,as the County gains more experience with the maintenance and operation of
these BMPs,future updates to the instrucrions will be posted on King County's Surface Water Design
Manual website.
❑ TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS
Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice)called
"limited infiltration,"which was installed to mitigate the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of some or
all of the impenrious surfaces on your property. Limited infiltration is a method of soaking runoff from
impervious area(such as paved areas and roofs)into the ground. Infiltration devices, such as gravel filled
trenches, drywells,and ground surface depressions,facilitate this process by putting runoff in direct
contact with the soil and holding the runoff long enough to soak most of it into the ground. To be
successful,the soil condition around the infiltration device must be able to soak water into the ground for a
reasonable number of years.
The infiltration devices used on your property include the following as indicated on the flow control BMP
site plan: ❑ gravel fitled trenches, ❑drywells. The size, placement,and composition of these devices as
depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed
without written approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a
future development permit from King County.
Infiltrati�n devices must be inspected annualty and after major storm events to identify and repair any
physical defects. Maintenance and operation of the system should focus on ensuring the system's viabiliry
by preventing sediment-laden flows from entering the de�ice. Excessive sedimentation will result in a
plugged or non-func6ioning facility. If the infiltration device has a catch basin, sediment accumulation must
be removed on a yearly basis or more frequently if necessary. Prolonged ponding around or atop a device
may indicate a plugged facility. If the device becomes plugged, it must be replaced. Keeping the areas
that drain to infiltration devices well swept and clean will enhance the lor .��. - . . _
s�,-, p.,.♦ ..i { ,u� �;Ii ��a .-i ..,.,��} i�ia� . i�.;__ .�
_, . � . . � .3. .:-. . ._ _ . .. _ .,_ -.� _ ... ._
i 7;_���: _, , ��,�.a�c ��.i[.� v:.;��i:.i�u�ua: ;�p}��:tu..��
C-50
SECTIOi�C.2 FLOVb'CONTROL Bh1Ps
other types of soils or fill materials if designed by a civil engineer in accordance with the
infiltration faciliry standards in Section 5.4 of the SWDM.
b) For purposes of determining whether full infiltration of roof runoff is mandatory as outlined in
Secrion C.13,the depth of soil to the ma�cimum wet season water table or hardpan must be at
least 3 feet. For any optional or mandatory application of full infil ion,the depth of soil to the
aximum wet season water table or hardpan must be at least 1 f below the bottom of a gravel
ed infiltration system and at least 3 feet below the bottom round surface depression used
fo 11 infiltration.
2. For purp es of deternuning whether full infiltration of ro runoff is mandator}-as outlined in
Section C. ,one of the following infiltration devic ust be used in accordance with the design
specificario or each device set forth in Sections .23,C.2.2.4,and C.2.2.5. Note:full infiltration
may be possib using other types and sizes of in ation devices if designed by a civil engineer in
accordance wit e inftltration faciliry stand in Section S.4 of the SWDM.
• Gravel filled nches(see Section .23,p.C-42)
• Drywells(see Se 'on C.2.2.4,p. 3)
• Ground surface de essions ee Section C.2.2.5,p.C-43)
3. A minimum 5-foot setback � be maintained between any part of an infiltration device and any
structure or property line. r setbacks from structures may be specified in the design
specifications for each in ati device. Infiltration devices may not be placed in sensitive area
buffers. A 50-foot set is req d between an infiltrarion device and a steep slope hazard area or
landslide hazard ar this may be uced if approved by a geotechnical engineer or engineering
geolagist and DD �,
4. Infiltration de�' s are not allowed in criti azea buffers or on slopes steeper than 25%(4 horizontal
to 1 vertical nfiltration devices proposed lopes steeper than 15%or within 50 feet of a
landslide zard area or steep slope hazard ar must be approved by a geotechnical engineer or
enginee g geologist unless otherwise approved the DDES staff geologist.
5. For with septic systems,infiltration devices mus located downgradient of the primary and
re e drainfield areas. DDES pernut review staff can ' e this requirement if site topography
arly prohibits subsurface flows from intersecting the dr ' d.
6 e infiltration of runoffmust not create flooding or erosion im ts as determined by DDES. If
runoff is infiltrated near a landslide hazard area,erosion hazard area,steep slope hazard area,or a
slope steeper than 15%,DDES may require evaluation and approval of the proposal by a geotechnical
engineer or engineering geologist. �� ��� D
C.2.2.3 USE OF GRAVEL FILLED TRENCHES FOR iriii�.L INFILTRATION
Gravel filled trenches(also called"infiltration trenehes")are a good option where the depth to the
maximum wet-season water table or hazdpan is between 3 and 6 feet. Figure C.2.2.A(p.C�15)and Figure
C.2.2.B(p. C-46)illustrate the specifications for gravel filled trench systems as outlined below:
�i�/,� , ) . obbles, infiltration tre in length per
�'�Z�p��- 1,000 square feet ' ' ocated in medium sands,infiltration trenches
� 0 feet in length per 1,000 square feet o � ace served.
G �2 .3• � 2. Maximum trench length must not exceed 100 feet from the inlet sump.
3. The trench width must be a minunum of 2 feet.
4. The trench must be filled with at least 18 inches of 3/4-inch to 11/Z-inch washed drain rock. The
drain rock may be covered with backfill material as shown in Figure C.2.2.A or remain exposed at
least 6 inches below the lowest surrounding ground surface as shown in Figure C.2.2.B.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix C
C-42
SECTION,C.2 FLOW CONTROL BMPs
3. The depression overflow point must be at least 6 inches below any adjacent pavement area and must
be situated so that overflow does not cause erosion damage or unplanned inundation.
4. The depression side slopes must be no steeper than 3 horizontal to 1 vertical.
5. Spacing between multiple infiltration depressions shall be a minimum of 4 feet.
�` A b--I�3�Y�i'El�2Sii'�TfC'S92e�C'gCN7'tCI�fl��e(1S� r,�f..Pt frpm hnil�i •;a�- - ----� r haC 111211f
/v %A po .
f
7. Infiltration depressions may be any size or shape provided the above specifications and the minimum
requirements in Section C.2.2.1 are met.
8. The ground surface of the infiltration depression must be vegetated with grass or other dense ground
cover.
C.2.2.6 MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR FULL INFILTRATION
the full infiltration flow control BMI'is proposed for a project,the fo ing maintenance and operation
'� i uctions must be recarded as an attachment to the required decla 'on of covenant and grant of
ea ent per Requirement 3 of Section C.13.3(p.G18). The ' t ofthese instructions is to explain to
futur roperty owners,the purpose of the BMP and how it mu e maintained and operated. These
instruc ns are intended to be a minimum;DDES may requi additional instructions based on site-
��/� � specific c ditions. Alsq as the County gains more expe ' ce with the maintenance and operation of
��� O these BMPs, ture updates to the instructions will be ed on King County's Surface Water Design
lManual websi
n '�0 TEXT OF INST CTIONS
. t/•''!
GYour property contains stormwater manag ent flow control BMP(best management practice)called
"full infiltration,"which w installed to miti e the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of some or all
of the impervious surfaces your prop . Full inflltration is a method of soaking runoff from impervious
area(such as paved areas a roofs) ' o the ground. If properly installed and maintained,full infiltration
can manage runoff so that a m ri f precipitation events are absorbed. Infiltration devices, such as
gravel filled trenches, drywells, a round surFace depressions,facilitate this process by putting runoff in
direct contact with the soil and di the runoff long enough to soak most of it into the ground. To be
successful,the soil condition und t infiltration device must be reliably able to soak water into the
ground for a reasonable nu er of year ',
The infiltration devices ed on your prop indude the following as indicated on the flow control BMP
site plan: ❑ gravel fille renches, ❑ drywells, ground surface depressions. The size, placement,and '
composition of these vices as depicted by the ow control BMP site plan and design details must be �
maintained and m ot be changed without writt approval either from the King County Water and Land �
Resources Divisi or through a future developmen ermit from King County. ',
Infiltration devi s must be inspected annually and afte ajor storm events to identify and repair any
physical def s. Maintenance and aperation of the syst should focus on ensuring the system's viability I
by prevenf sediment-taden flows from entering the de�i Excessive sedimentation will result in a I
plugged non-functioning facility. If the infiltration device ha catch basin,sediment accumulation must
be rem ed on a yearly basis or more frequently if necessary. P onged ponding around or atop a device
may i icate a plugged faality. If the device becomes plugged, it m t be replaced. Keeping the areas
that ain to infiltration devices well swept and Gean will enhance the gevity of these devices. For roofs,
fr ent Geaning of gutters will�educe sediment loads to these devices.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manuat—Appendix C
C-44
� C.2.2 FULL INFILTR ATION
FIGURE C.2.2.A TYPICAL TRENCH INFILTRATION SYSTEM
�
I
t
roof �
�drain '
PLAN VIEW �
NTS �4"rigid or 6"flexible i
� pertorated pipe �
% j-------------------------•--------....__.��.. _ / � �
�/ i
---------•--- - -- ...--------- `
infiltration trench ��
—sump w/so�id lid
PLAN VIEW roof drain
NTS �
�
overflow —�`
4"rigid or 6"flexible splash bloc[c��,J I
�perforated pipe �
� ,���:�.:
hi�i�%Ii; ;i ii;�����y;���;i�j��%��%�i% �_ ��.:�'
6" �
y,�,i,i i..i, �'
.---�------�--..•--•-----------•---------------
_ o �
6^ `oG ,
---- eve--
„i '�=� =�_ washed rock `� J°� ��� r .��+.1'm� 5.0'min
12 I ~ 1 1/2"-3/4" �" �"' G�n�V�� J ,1'mm F
1—____ , .
�------ --------------------=_�-°-'�-----'Y I
� fine mE � . ,
crronn
i V21"12"
�i'' ;�
1 I
, compacted backfill
1 .��
6" ya 4 ,i
�— u - � 4"rigid or 6"flexible
�Vo � �
�,�� � c� perforated pipe
24" / �'"o �4��
� �i �'� '�° �fl�" washed rock
12" T �
, � �°°o oG� ��'� 1 1/2"-314„
i. - � _.�r,7 �� c`.
/{\`���t���"�v��
,�l.��/\���/\��\�/.
�—24"—�
�SECTION A
NTS
2U09 Surface R'ater Design Manual-Appendix C 1/9/2009
C-45
.
Section 3: Offsite Analysis
The downstream system was walked on Aprit 19th, 2013. The site drainage currently sheet flows
across the property to the west and eventually entering the City storm system in NE 7"' Place. The
proposed development is to convey the drainage form the site into NE 7th Street and then to the
west into the City storm system at Newport Court NE and NE 7th Street. This point of inflow is
approximately 500 feet above the current sheet flow point. The drainage system is completely
tight lined from Newport Court NE/ NE 7"' Street through the City storm piping to an apartment
site, Hilltop Homes Apartments downstream. The network of pipes runs 810 feet to a storm water
pond within the Hilltop Apartments. The storm pipe system was visually inspected in three
locations downstream; at CB #113111, CB #113118, and CB #113041. These are City of Renton
storm water codes for City catch basins. The system of pipes were 12"concrete entering into
Type II catch basins. There appeared to be no overtopping of the basins or capacity issues. The
roadway area above these catch basins had no indication of overtlow.
The storm water enters into a pond within Hilltop Apartments, City node #145531. This pond is
heavily over grown with trees and blackberries. A walk of the parameter of the pond shows no
signs of overtopping or erosion. The parking lot to the south of the pond is about 4' below the
pond berm. There were no signs of overtopping in this area either.
The drainage leaves the pond and enters into Monroe Avenue NE about 200 feet north of NE 4"'
Street. The storm system is within the centerline of the road and was not inspected. The storm
system continues to the south in Monroe Ave until it enters the City Shop Area at NE 2th Street.
E5NE - 09 T23N R05E NE 114 - Pg. 46
S�°� „I- . . ..:� Z g�p1 85, u - ,- �_. � .�.Z, �, . E9� �31t
. 7 �__�\ . 55 �d J Z 85��' - 651. 17 �� . . : - r .-._.... .
Cw - . . S]3 871 -.� � Z.0 ��� m� . `_.I � ,.��� �-el.. 8 �875j_ �B�4
$3�- S 2._. , 33 � __ .. .._`� sii�4,� �� 0 . o aiaS ati3��517 ��~ .e�+t - nces`3 i2 , . -
43E�01; 13cCC0� 7^.ia�' � � a ' ' �I � •, �� >. _�� � . '
, aai �oa . E'� aod asir �� s ac� �a s�ao j--''�: ,
_�8 ~, , � �4=�4� T #� E03 a> >S'� I S�"S'y �1.
135�8 �^ t SSSS�x 35 F4 � �7 3W4. n C9b ., _ o . . � 7F.!'e
� � 1'5163 ` �, a 7130.3� ' T� �Q�36 n3091'� . . -�- ..._ _ � . .� . . .
€ ` � 11_09&�- NF,L�r 6 �C95 • ► ` 3 .
_ �•4 ��'Oa' .135237�" Jt----�.�1130 2g� $e z e� 707� , . _ 3�7� 3..
� --- . it�,`�59�135762
' - . _ � 11 W� � �11 0u6+� _ ...J $. ; f m liSB 7fi� 3507.r3£Ci ?973 � . - T39 . �"� 72$ �
1"554 ` .,� �� a;� �a. �5z��aia}tt.az�. .r.w;,so� .y5ia 3:u� 3S6L1G�1j361� 7�{ s9
- ��1�2082 z"�-� '
'a59���; 97 F irh r�. e -�* � � �7��� -=�. n� - n� 0;225 r_o .
�-\� '� 7v F �� ��� • - -
�ta59:-6 � s�a ., I • � � ;1 1 ;p 7ss _ - ^� t35717=�_�_, .
I\ �3 � T'x.� � ':�� "i �� ���q,� . � - j 76n �IG3
'� .�.:� 763; �
� 135593� ?� `�x.� _ - . _ - .. �
76.. ,03� 3:02 `I ;� _��^�[$ J�0'
p� .�,.. �32 3:A6� �: 1��:�� _ j .� �no- 7+.34�3 �" .
135904 . . ' � - , . . � c- ?�:.
`k}n ��: 7J73. '. � 757.f - 57 ��4`� ' . �,.
� = S "'`� sszz! � � sts� �a6 - �5 . :- ;13qap9 - ��-�� ~ co� �..
, .
-.. 13�y,.01 '� � -- - ,. - � � - : �r� . � �c :ect , - --- . �
p :
!tn Stei�'� . �. --.. ..- - �- � -� _ �� �Z�� q , �'� ��n' �.c
��. 135a2 �� � � -- , +�� ' ---- t:„1510 '�` '�° _
2 ma�
'� �t� 134931.-..> _-�-.-- .. _�- --�.__.. . �"`� Q _ _ "'_e+� 7�' 135229.° .
__ s-
� _ .._ ,�s ' ;a
i � . -:c�, ,�I a.oa
o� E`3C � � esst ` � . -i //,r�� s9s��� 162545 ips;135270 81z- __
_ �%�;
� � + � ...: 3J09'1 ' t\�3513 ' "�J. _7 i 3 �. 6�6 fi.91 .�`- 6v2' �' -6?i� NE 7t
�fl 3A73-' � 7507� ' : �� .� . ..'-
� $J� � _" -
'� Qr� 113103� -�� 3G05' � r 688 t., 162545 .. 687� 6:s
13g4927'�,63922 ��: i02•.���71�2777°'W � ��� � � sso'. eaP.t. _ �sa; - . . �3. . anct:�p.� _ I
c'•T,} _ - 6�J �� �
792 'J3 i� Sy...113 Q� �"-, _" 679j i W �G"J f' ' ; 6E� , '
` � ._ �1 ik : � 651� _'__' _ 7a 134911�*p�i„C9' _ � a2- . 6 r ES�, �I
� . �� � __.. 5 1 :Q ` '� �6�f. � ETy :y6 I
1,t{ �_
13..9� �� � 65331 E 2 ��:3. ~+ � Z�� 1"430 664 67 361b 9 i p .7 / � �- ,.
'o� ��.. ' S..S�311 - . �.'� 350E' ,'',yc � ��j_:-� �a � 6711�~z��-�- d 0��" 11 �i
�QII34829� ..�-y��.� -�. JE 7�973107 �. .1531 O��p: ���6c7 1 sc6 ce7� ��-a + 6 � cs7� . y 6,: cPi �i9 �.11177Ht
�. .ae r
�, r-� >
�� � � � � � 1.3 -- .`�. _- 113111��; . � �sza 1351@8�. .-uie� �3 3. 6G2 � 663 i � �� � - f�_1 Q _ �� ;�n �_
7Eta -" 135f67. - a�:a- i' , . � • I � o
1 4 � �3�:1L^3' 37�hOL3� l73 19..a4'a � . . � ' 'S56 65� J 6�5 C� 653 . . .
� �`'�t, _ ' _ _ - � 3512,• . t35t69 1601Jfi Z�� 6 3i : .- -�._ . ) ._ L Nt S'{,, ..
� 9 �� � J� f -zs - w�_ 5} 655� ; W'p N -\g�'.=Y.6 I
c� , 734�`.25 '3-_ "� 1 �' � . � - .. 35.y:„y.� � - . . _ . I
�; ' �� ��,6 .- ' ii3 /� 657 550 sst� . .. .. NE 6th P! � _
� ' �� � -�ais' �a3aa as_'i��34 9 15 4 211 35�12 �'1J7 6y571 - � - oo i ]6063612 ��113120.]:.D9]--�. � �j � ' -ata-� /.
a _
/� 4 -- - ' " it4�. - t - I,
- _ ___ asi ,1' ;134913 3 s+a1, �T- ' ��"s°as
' :3L3 � -.�- .. _ ,
�9 713it8� •.3iV- 6lh �- - 13 ��113517G�--.. . - � -� -.,;, �----r--o�.
I �135 ._ ...._. . _- 5 k 13994. s11311P ' _ . �
t/ • _ � -- - � 6�s� l i 1 232�
�� � 1 V 67L } 6�i, ��.
I .`•3� 311 39 '11_LO 3..0=?.;13 A797{.a J
1 r ' ' asm���,�r52Y� �;cot-� }7fi19�625.�]G3i �- � �iSi e aao. � 6''$! 5u 13523 �
I+' � �__' �_"_ _ -.� .__. _ . .: -. ___- .. . ' : 619 3�73773 : . . . _ � �
� � -r- _1, -"��5 135211_"� 613'
f � \ a� t
� 1- . /� � _'�L- 616 69y. � II
1 '3C17 7ry 33 "# ���"' : � -.J �l � \ .
` '2�3 �31336 .18 4�4zi� 3�^1JSt03 1522: 8357j 6D4 7�S6F63fi22362SI�369.{ ��S V� e � �
�}s1 -. . _ _�_. '_ _ ��y�-- .-..113�7 � 1�5231 � V' 7349to �- \�_, 674. 057 Q�3�163..2..J861 ' J '- � .60 191 46 ` ' �
�� ��aa� 'O ' . . - � 13�.b20�135q6 135921 135234 ' 35a_�135235 ��-.---� 3`�-' 6GJ '
'` � a134916' � r� •�-- �O.`1-- _ - �.��
� . H_- \t NE F1ti St � - -� ..13624fi��-� •
� �,� -.. . . -- ,� � _... 13C919 �1,36839 ._ .
` - � '_-..�. 1_.. i1t0A8 D�S73E
_ 1 - %;
� �`33[3 l0 i 3 �, :p /-� 1 0507 Sr9.5 - 3�5 3 tt . ..�. '7G27 7635�1�� .- . _ . . - . .__ �
� s� _ _•cs;sst�_ - . _I 136247 -, aats agis� � -,er� s:es �.
! .� y�113090 r � � . ' � ae;i szs� _ - ��//13R840 �a�o �»� srn a�t �,
6aC9��s�--�-' _,..., t � + - -
--- � .��� �,c5 rs( . .- _� ..-- � NE 5th C� .. - 136245 - .. '--0 -.
713��1 3037:-- -� ',��J� � ) .- �13G1f, rt 57Q a66` 5�2 SSJ. S,l -5Si� ]i7� 3722 3740 J3 S 353d^SOS-39�G 391fi 1922�:9Y; 9 C.J�?
� -- ;13oxvEr. , �:-� --� -J' i . ,� � i362az, _i� ._ _
�5�-�� 5"n� . O- �5621 j ��i t � 3^�4., 113C45 ' -- , • :513--,t'136550'�_�a 136552 i � ��35240 93655E - .
` y�sa, se 5-z .�- -- '-". .-_--_ ��i13092� . ' . 5 � 013655t 7 0� � � 1352 Sr0 11J5241 ._. �136 � 36i65 7��
��� � . 1J �-.-.t "._.-N3A47 ssa i �1� �1 3 1�5260 135246 . 28 W 3sa?3 H� � � �0 53e� �d��
� p �o,� 113C44` - ` :,. ` C.�c Q_- 1-1. 5 1Z_;.�t36554 135244 szt u}'o�� 'astt +sn;:i a�r�e29 n; �
1 ��, - soo - ~ J ' �--�� _--.
11 5'�`t i :.�c " to�. ;� �� I s o d `.Szs sis'`�_szs:j�� r e� z N E 5 I h A ly _ ,__�---
� �•�`�g, g ��7� ��Z st�=c��� 13E555 �U .. i , � s
1�3995��a � soo f soa s st2 °' � � I � s�z � s�o� ,sza = t_5'
� � _ r_ szs ��\sj'a ��-� � - o��f ,
�f73647�'��1�5u0 /�' ���777,,, . ' . c- i�: m 136555�:O 5.�6 13c562�-' �s :� "
I p . 'sno i• ' szi s a 136258s l.��� s;a-�7_7352i8� � w�ufi56' � .
-�- ��: ( � / �_ � ,� sco. ._ _ r �p . ..`I 136557 135213� Y 136563�
\���� � A 5{ ��57 13c259 135219xt36252 �a� . �/ �--v`m-� aeu7 917�3919. 51 �s_r:
s ev-.- r'`f-i � r-3 _._.� t � ( S'-� 136558� - f35559 - l----r' �
� SOU; B S� SOC^ � 4J0 .' . -SQ5����18 � �-�.�p .Sj .,,-^ _ _. . _ti.. .
,, ! � �.ri o�o s,5, �.5��) E ,ssazo"..! ` ' , `
� ��! ..c��� - soo� � � 136254 5oi,�t �135251 -�`.. � 136258 ��t
713035 ��I �saa ` sao � �� ;; -.� �san 1 ; sis�f �s, �,I �f73fi255Tl13e25J- 136249 1138S0i736243-�' � �
� g___._� _( 145531 1 f
���ne tt3sas�o _ ' _�: � ' ; �145831� ' soi:�� 3on `
--- - '�a ----- � -- 1 548g�757� sz�'145830 --- `� -�_a-�a , �
� _ _.___. '�77?�
, � . . 4 .` � �`�_`�,, � 81 33�1� � __" '' _�_
� . , � : t7s � � '"Y- �, B 4 as t � _ ;
•113787
�i '. : t � ' -- � :�; �� - _ �_1_45&48..� a�aa ��� acmo�"03i��a ss.� 3s�= �
_ ,.� Z � � J:
�. ass��Fis-�[ - �f 0 9x��� � -136309:'735.,0?� �.a
aso � � �i✓ _ . 146928� �"-r..� .-L,'
� -n3os3 - . �t � . :� _. ] f' � _ ��om �^�145496�.-t�zsii�s�Ci �'+q�e '.
� .JS- - 3522 <54� �4i1 � � i !�� �� �
R 113034 � � asa � ... .��, � _. � � ,� � �.30261 � �;aa - J / , 136232, • 1353��� �$
�� soo '��m a'so ["a '. ;s� _ � J r _i _.. asa A651 i
s
tw � -- _" _' ��_:�� i ��_ �146929:y�5z5z"145859 �, j f �sa (Mo ( ac-.1353G5;aas.
r f'! � �,1Z- �189 Sj
- QQ�@4 � - ��Q�v �� ]Ste' 7GtZ'3�J�t�'�.- :j � ! f1r.e6392'
773654 _,--..a .. � zo �� I-�� � � se 3�Ea »sa � ...��"s? � 7 S 135?�3 H�..
.t j a612� 1 135223 �- � j r � -�'-- q5 �� ¢ / �_�J
�'� 0���� 172 � �I `O_ :>. .��� �3672�3612. 612�u�E�y ' . i� . 49�� <50 1�1 �13 di3z 4
, 1303n .� __-._,--, . ' I � � ' � � a617s5]2 ,g J'�_��...,-' � f 77¢a �1�62..StF� 4:6 = -a:.a°
I S71 I �T � � f J �71 �67�2 -+ 0�1362a4 [3s � -� 37sS��- i 1 '�'�1�23�;3 .u�E a
923�173031 �I p 135979�� ua - �siz �e!i �4
;��� , y' - j` � ( i�/}- J ��.. . ia �siz, �s612�113971 i � _ � , s..� G�< � asa c�i'
Zt6P. o �Ot � 361�;35i2 �6�3612_ 3iB8 �-� 3�6E� �� �21da �� F�S
; _ ' : ..� g i n f �- ; a5t2 � - ! � 4'_J _.., t 6239
tt?o28 : '� a ! '7 ��_ , asw s�v ]61'J611� 612 67 -_'---�-I� -- � C �136236 �F ��. .
�-� � � . { � I -' -�+ F9 \ � 13
�113'�29� -�4�6 ', ,�359�.p �. '_'-... 161.2 3612�3c12: ]5-12lrG1i: ��30� w 677�'J . _...'_ . . . ... _ ��-.. 1_�_:�24-�'302�$
PJ i4 � � �'
.., yg -t0� '� 1 `'��S��`� � �]G72 � 3612.�=-��C O�S1�.U��J�:-I3 � 0 '�10.1 ',p
; ,iz�sz �iat4A-��'146880 aa g�3ssa2� _as, j � 7672_ 3u1..;Q � iaszsz�a t� 3eoo . 145472 '� J aoea---
.� �-' _ ` _ :
IL-����,s��„�y;�._ Qz?p�-145863=��x r34E�5 -\�73'7&5 ;si2 ac '67= a-'17 14 ' --'� (J q ❑--_-. 'I n�'.�<�-�.: ,�°�z
aa�� ,� i-�a o.i� E•�_._. P - --�..newe� i s - �n4i� •
.�t O m " ' ' _- i 1 �,.t � Lc Q .5 K- �----e_11�- .__. � Rc, % ----� ,I
4 .
-�Y.�7��714,aiCa ., . - _-_- � C,ii:�_-. .- - --- �S, .n 147421 .r��c i� C --- - --1; -0 p ' i3°.it7 �` �
-.. .. c� .. -- .. :... ---- - -_ �_-�4. � _ ..�,. � �r,..r1.VS7?5_� 1��eE��.. i
UPSTREAM AREA - FLOW THROUGH VAULT
��?�;��r`���� ���:�-�� � xl
: �.�� _
Area ?J
Till Forest �•90 acres
Tili Pasture 0.00 acres
Till Grass 0.00 acres
Outwash Forest 0.00 acres
Ouiwash Pasture 0.00 acres'
Ouiwash Grass 0.00 acres
Wetland 0.00 acres
Impervious 0.00 acres
Total
0.90 acres
Scale Factor: 1.00 Hourly Reduced
Time Series: Upstream Basin - Forested »
Compute Time Series I
Modity User Input ,
__ _ ___ __ _ _ -- --- ____...— --------____
File for computed Time Series [TSFJ
� ��. -
� � � ���
�. ' t ,. _,,� .t�=.'�.< < . _ f
�
Flaw Frequency Analysis
i
' --------------------------------------------------------
Time Series File:upstream basin - forested. tsf
Praject I.ocation:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow Frequency Analysis---------
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - P.ank Return Prab
(CFS} (CFS} Period
0.057 2 2i09i01 18:00 0 .073 1 100.00 0.990
0.015 7 1i06i02 3 :00 0.057 2 25.00 0 .960
0. 042 4 2i28iO3 3:00 0.044 3 10.00 0.900
0.002 8 3i24iO4 21 :00 0.042 4 5.00 0.300
0. 025 6 1i05i05 5 :00 0 . 036 5 3.00 0 .667
0.044 3 1i18/06 21 :00 0 .025 6 2.00 0.500
0.036 5 11i24i06 4 :00 0 .015 7 1 .30 0.231
0.073 1 1i09i08 9 :f0 0 . 002 8 1 . 10 0 . 091 I
Computed Fe.�b;s D . 067 50.00 0. 9$0 � I
�� � !r: I,
; II
Section 4: Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design
Flow control/water quality preliminary calculations determined the projects will require a facility
sized for both detention and water quality. The projects (the combined three short plats) will have
a restrictive covenant limiting the impervious areas on the developed lots to 2,600 square feet with
"limited infiltration"dry wells for 1,300 sq. feet of the proposed impervious areas. The balance of
the property will then be collected and conveyed into the storm facility located on the west short
plat. The facility will be sized for all three short plats.
The detention/water quality facility is located on the westerly short plat in the southwest corner.
The calculations attached are used to size the facility. Additional upstream flows, from property to
the east, flow through the project and are accounted for within the vault as "pass through"flows.
A storm stub has been provided in the southeast corner of the easterly short plat to connect the
easterly upstream area when developed.
NE 7th West Short P/at
Area Breakdown
Impervious Pervious Forest
Area Breakdown Tota/Areas s , feet s , feet s , feet
Property
west/middle 57307 '
east 18653 '
frontage 4305
90265
Lots 12 15600 15600
2,600 sq. ft. impervious max. (SO%) I
(31,200 sq. ft. max.) "Limited In�/tration" �I
Landscaping 4050i '
Roads
20'roadsecrion (west/middle) 1i419 �,
(Fire Lane) 20' (east) 2840 '
Frontage 287 4305 Z296 2009
(sidewalk one side) 5'
(3' widening) 3' I
Tota/Area
Im pervious 32155
Pervious 58110
Forest O
Total Area 90265
Input Parameters
Tota/Area 2.07 acres
Impervious 0,74 acres
Pervious 1.33 acres
i
�
,�
I
i
i
�
�
,
I
.
�
Pedeveloped Conditions
� Land U_e�ummar,� i �=7 i j o { O ��,.�
Area- .__ - - ?;
Till For�st �.97 acres
Till Pas#ure O.aa acres
Tiil Grass 0.00 acres"
Ouiwash Forest Q.QO acres
Ouiwash Pasture �•0� acres
Ouiwash Grass O.UO acres'
Wetiand U.OU �cres ,
Impervious d.00 acres I
- - _
I
Total _ _ I
2.97 acres I��
_ ___---------- - I
Scale Factor: 1.00 Hnurly Reduced '
Time Series:�Predev.ts� }>� I
Compu#e Time Series �
. . Modif�User lnput
_- ___ _ _ __ _ - �
--__--_�.__-----__.._____.___ __------------- ------_ _.-,-__. . __ ___________
File for computed Time Sene$ [.TSFj
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:predev.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow Frequency Analysis-------
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) Period
0.188 2 2/09/O1 18:00 0.239 1 100.00 0.990
0.051 7 1/06/02 3:00 0.188 2 25.00 0.960
Q.139 4 2/28/03 3:00 0.144 3 10.00 0.900
C.005 8 3/24/04 20:00 0.139 9 5.00 0.800
C.082 6 1/OS/OS 8:00 0.121 5 3.00 0.667
0.144 3 1/18/06 21:00 0.082 6 2.00 0.500
0.121 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.051 7 1.30 0_231
s 0.239 1 1/09/08 9:00 0.005 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks 0.222 5�.00 0.980
Developed Conditions
`� Lan�Use Summary __=� � �_o i t� ��.5�
Area ?�
Till Forest 0.9U acres
Till Pasture 0.00 acres
Till Grass 1.33 acres
Qutwash Foresf 0.00 acres
Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres
Ouiwash Grass 0.00 acres
tNetland 0.00 acres
Impervious 0.74 acres
Total
2.97 acres
—__ _____ ._____
Scale Factor: 1.OU Hourly Reduced
Time Series: iDev.ts� »�
,
Compute Time Series '
Modiiy User Inpu# �
_ _ _ . _-- _ _ _ _ __ _. _--- -
File for computed Time Series [.TSF]
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:dev.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates-- ---Flow Frequency Analysis-------
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) Period
0.334 9 2/09/O1 2:00 0.695 1 100.00 0.990
0.233 7 1/O5/02 16:00 0.401 2 25.00 0.560
0.901 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.354 3 10.00 0.900
0.209 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.339 4 5.00 0.800
0.258 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.327 5 3.00 0.667
0.354 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.258 6 2.00 0.500
0.327 5 11/24/06 3:00 0.233 7 1.30 0.231
0.695 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.209 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks 0.597 50.00 0.980
Detention Faciliiv Desiqn
Retention/Detention Facility
Type of Facility: Detention Vault
Facility Length: 72.00 ft
Facility width: 24.00 ft
Facility Area: 1728. sq. ft
Effective Storage Depth: 10.50 ft
Stage 0 Elevation: 100.00 ft
Storage Volume: 18144. cu. ft
Riser Head: 10.50 ft
Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches
Number of orifices: 3
Full Head Pipe
Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter
(ft) (in) (CFS) (in)
1 0.00 0.75 0.049
2 6.00 1.25 0.087 4.0
3 7.20 0.75 0.027 4.0
Top Notch Weir: None
Outflow Rating Curve: None
Sta e Elevation Stora e Dischar e Percolation
q 4 9
(ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs)
o.ao ioo.00 o. o.000 o.oao o.00
o.oi ioo.oi v. o.000 o.oai o.00
0.02 100.02 35. 0.001 0.002 0.00
0.03 100.03 52. 0.001 0.003 0.00
0.09 100.04 69. 0.002 0.003 0.00
0.05 100.05 86. 0.002 0.004 0.00
0.06 100.06 104. 0.002 0.004 0.00
0.27 100.27 467. 0.011 0.006 0.00
0.47 100.47 812. 0.019 0.011 0.00
0.68 100.68 1175. 0.027 0.013 0.00
0.89 100.89 1538. 0.035 0.019 0.00
1.09 101.09 1884. 0.093 0.016 0.00
1.30 101.30 2246. 0.052 0.017 0.00
1.50 101.50 2592. 0.060 0.019 0.00
1.71 101.71 2955. 0.068 0.020 0.00
1.92 101.92 3318. 0.076 0.021 0.00
2.12 102.12 3663. 0.084 0.022 0.00
2.33 102.33 4026. 0.092 0.023 0.00
2.53 102.53 4372. 0.100 0.024 0.00
2.74 102.74 9735. 0.109 0.025 0.00
2.99 102.94 5080. 0.117 0.026 0.00
3.15 103.15 5443. 0.125 0.027 0.00
3.36 103.36 5806. 0.133 0.028 0.00
3.56 103.56 6152. 0.191 0.029 0.00
3.77 103.77 6515. 0.150 0.030 0.00
3.97 103.97 6860. 0.157 0.030 0.00
4.18 104.18 7223. 0.166 0.031 0.00
4.39 104.39 7586. 0.174 0.032 0.00
4.59 104.59 7932. 0.182 0.033 0.00
4.80 104.80 8299. 0.190 0.033 0.00
5.00 105.00 8690. 0.198 0.034 0.00
5.21 105.21 9003. 0.207 0.035 0.00
5.42 105.92 9366. 0.215 0.036 0.00 �
5.62 105.62 9711. 0.223 0.036 0.00
5.83 105.83 10074. 0.231 0.037 O.00
6.00 106.00 10368. 0.238 0.037 0.00
6.G1 106.01 10385. 0.238 0.038 0.00
6.03 106.03 10920. 0.239 0.039 0.00
6.04 106.04 10437. 0.240 0.040 0.00
6.05 106.05 10454. 0.240 0.043 0.00
6.07 106.07 10469. 0.241 0.046 0.00
6.06 106.06 10506. 0.241 0.049 0.00
6.09 106.09 10529. 0.292 0.050 0.00
6.10 106.10 10541. 0.292 0.051 0.00
6.31 106.31 10909. 0.250 0.062 0.00
i
� � �
6.52 106.52 11267_ 0.259 0.069 0.00
6.72 106.72 11612. 0.267 0.076 0.00
6.93 106.93 11975. 0.275 0.081 0.00 i
7.13 107.13 12321. 0.283 0.086 0.00 I
7.20 107.20 12492. 0.286 0.087 0.00
7.21 107.21 12459. 0.286 0.088 0.00 �
7.22 107.22 12476. 0.286 0.089 0.00 �
7.23 107.23 12493. 0.267 0.090 0.00 �
7.24 107.24 12511. 0.287 0.091 0.00
7.25 107.25 12528. 0.288 0.092 0.00
7.26 107.26 12595. 0.288 0.093 0.00
7.47 107.47 12908. 0.296 0.101 0.00 '
7.67 107.67 13254. 0.304 0.108 0.00 '
7_88 107_88 13617_ 0.313 0_114 0.00
8.09 108.09 13980. 0.321 0.119 0.00
8.29 108.29 14325. 0.329 0.124 0.00 �
8.50 108.50 14688. 0.337 0.129 0.00 i
8.70 108.70 15034. 0.345 0.133 0.00 '�
8.91 108.91 15396. 0.353 0.138 O.QO ',
9.12 109.12 15759. 0.362 0.192 0.00 '
9.32 109.32 16105. 0.370 0.146 0.00 '
9.53 109.53 16468. 0.378 0.150 0.00
9.73 109.73 16813. 0.386 0.154 0.00
9.94 109.99 17176. 0.394 0.157 0.00 �,
1Q.14 110.14 17522. 0.402 0.161 0.00 '
10.35 110.35 17885. 0.411 0.165 0.00 I
10.50 110.50 18144. 0.417 0.167 0.00
10.60 110.60 18317. 0.420 0.477 0.00
10.70 110.70 18490. 0.424 1.090 0.00 �
10.80 110.80 18662. 0.428 1.770 0.00 �
10.90 110.90 18835. 0.432 2.570 0.00
11.00 111.00 19008. 0.436 2.650 0.00 I
11.10 111.10 19181. 0.440 3.110 0.00 I
11.20 111.20 19354. 0.444 3.340 0.00
11.30 111.30 19526. 0.498 3.560 0.00
11.40 111.90 19699. 0.452 3.770 0.00
11.50 111.50 19872. 0.456 3.960 0.00
11.60 111.60 20045. 0.460 4.150 0.00
11.70 111.70 2C218. 0.464 4.330 0.00
11.80 111.80 20390. 0.468 4.500 0.00
11.90 111.90 20563. 0.472 4.660 0.00
12.00 112.00 20736. 0.476 4.820 0.00
12.10 112.10 20909. 0.480 4.980 0.00
12.20 112.20 21082. 0.484 5.120 0.00
12.30 112.30 21254. 0.488 5.270 0.00
12.40 112.40 21427. 0.492 5.410 0.00
�d Inflow Outflow Peak Storage
Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft)
0.70 0.29 0.59 10.62 110.62 18351. 0.921
2 0.33 ******* 0.20 10.51 110.51 18163. 0.417
3 0.33 ******* 0.12 8.30 108.30 14347. 0.329
9 0.35 ******* 0.11 7.64 107.64 13209. 0.303
5 0.40 ******* 0.12 8.30 108.30 14341. 0.329
6 0.21 ******* 0.06 6.33 106.33 10995. 0.251
7 0.23 ******* 0.04 5.29 105.29 9139. 0.210
8 0.21 ******* 0.02 2.29 102.29 3955. 0.a91
----------------------------------
Route Time Series through Facility
Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf
Outflow Time Series File:RDOut
Inflow/Outflow Analysis
Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.695 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Yea= 8
Peak Out£low Discharge: 0.590 CE'S at 9:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Reserooir Stage: 10.62 Ft
Peak Reservoir Elev: 110.62 Ft
Peak 2eservoir Storage: 18351. Cu-Ft
. 0.421 Ac-Ft
Duration Comparison Anaylsis
Base File: predev.tsf
New File: rdout.tsf
Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS
-----Fraction of Time----- ---------Check of Tolerance-------
Cutoff Base New %Change Probability Base New °sChange �
O.C41 � 0.95E-02 0.82E-02 -13.8 I 0.95E-02 0.041 0.037 -8.8
0.052 I 0.64E-02 0.70E-02 10.0 � 0.64E-02 0.052 0.055 4.8
0.063 I 0.49E-02 0.45E-02 -9.2 I 0.49E-02 0.063 0.061 -3.1
0.075 I 0.37E-02 0.36E-02 -9.0 � 0.37E-02 0.075 0.072 -3.3
0.086 I 0.29E-02 0.28E-02 -2.3 � 0.29E-�2 0.086 0.085 -1.1
0.097 I 0.22E-02 0.24E-02 7.4 � 0.22E-02 0.097 0.101 3.8 �
0.108 � 0.15E-02 0.18E-02 20.0 ( 0.15E-02 0.108 0.119 5.0 /��
0.120 I O.10E-02 O.10E-02 -1.6 � O.10E-02 0.120 0.119 -0.6
0.131 � 0.62E-03 0.64E-03 2.6 I 0.62E-03 Q_131 0.132 1.1
0.192 � 0.34E-03 O.S1E-03 47.6 I 0.34E-03 0.142 0.148 3.7
0.154 � 0.21E-03 0.28E-03 30.8 I 0.21E-03 0.154 0.158 3.0
0.165 I 0.16E-03 0.98E-04 -40.0 I 0.16E-03 0.165 0.162 -1.9
0.176 I 0.98E-04 0.16E-04 -83.3 I 0.98E-09 0.176 0.166 -6.0
0.187 � 0.16E-04 0.16E-04 0.0 � 0.16E-09 0.187 0.200 7.0
Maximum positive excursion = 0.015 cfs ( B.9�) �
occurring at 0.185 cfs on the Base Data:predev.tsf
and at 0.200 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf
Maximum negative excursion = 0.005 cfs (-10.9o} �
occurring at 0.042 cfs on the Base Data:predev.tsf
and at 0.037 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf
E.F�,:d-cs4,..,�er...w.n.crz . . ._ . � . - � . . .. . . . . � � ,.`-:- �,
I' o
I �Tu'gn.3vt ♦
• -,___'
i � .__. . .__ _.r-_.+.._ . ._._._ . ___... ...____ .._....-.
I�I ^ R ..._..-...-._ ,___ _____�'R
� o w, .
�' " • �`
U �
c
_ a '-.�
- p GOO ......... .. . .
( 4 •�
�
O
O
I •{-
*
I ��
I o
� c
I
I -
c
� �- , . . . . . � � , , . . . .. . . . . , � � . , � � �r�
50� �70, 10-� SO�� iG��� 10`.
I
P�eotskd.ry CYrcrceRcc
� �
Wetpool Sizing Calculations
Per 2009 King County Stormwater Management Manua{
Project Name: NE 7th Short Plats (all three projects)
Project Number:
Facility Description: Water Qualiry Sizina
Step 1: Identify required wetpool volume factor(f).
f= 3 Per KCSWDM 6.4.1.1
Step 2: Determine rainfall (R)for the mean annual storm.
R= Q.4�7 Per KCSWDM Fig. 6.4.1.A
Step 3: Calculate runoff from the mean annual storm (V,) for the developed site.
V�_ (0.9A; + 0.25,4t9+ 0.10A�+ 0.01Ao)x(R/ 12)
where: A; = Impenrious Surface Area = 32;155 s.f.
A�9 =Till Grass Area = 58,110 s.f.
A� =Till Forest Area = 0 s.f.
Ao = Outwash Area = 0 s.f.
V�= 1,702 C.f.
Step 4: Calculate required wetpool volume (Vb).
Vb= f xV�
Vb= 5,107 c.f.
, �
CONVEYENCE CALCULATIONS
STORMWATER CONVEYANCE BACKWATER CALC[/L4 TION SHEET _
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)
Barrel Entrance Entrance .
Pipe 100 year Pipe Outlet Inlet Barrel Barrel Velocity TW Friction HGL Head
Segment Q Length Pipe "n" Elev Elev Area Velocity Head Elev Loss Elev Loss
CB to CB cfs ft Size Value feet (feet s . feet f s feet feet feet) feet feet
#10 - #11 1.15 84 12" 0.012 402.66 403.50 0.79 1.46 0.02 404.00 0.0168 404.02 0.01
#11 - #7 1.15 169 12" 0.012 398.45 402.66 0.79 1.46 0.02 404.15 0.0338 404.18 0.01
#7 - #5 1.15 134 12" 0.012 399.00 398.45 0.79 1.46 0.02 403.31 0.0268 403.34 0.01
#5 - #3 1.15 82 12" 0.012 398.57 399.00 0.79 1.46 0.02 399.10 0.0164 399.12 0.01
#3 -vault 1.15 24 12" 0.012 388.20 398.57 0.79 1.46 0.02 399.65 0.0048 399.65 �.01
#13 - #12 1.15 20 12" 0.015 403.08 403.28 0.79 1.46 0.02 404.00 0.004 404.00 0.01
#12 - #8 1.15 104 12" 0.012 399.38 403.08 0.79 1.46 0.02 403.93 0.0208 403.95 0.01
#8 -vault 1.15 32 12" 0.012 388.20 399.38 0.79 1.46 0.02 403.73 0.0064 403.74 0.01
(14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)
Exit Outlet Inlet Approach Bend Junction
Head Control Control Velocity Head Head HW RIM ELEV
Loss Elev Elev Head Loss Loss Elev UPSTREAM
feet feet feet feet feet feet feet CB
0.02 404.05 404.15 0 0 0 404.15 408.00 OK.�
0.02 404.22 403.31 0 0 0 403.31 409.70 OK.�
0.02 403.37 399.10 0 0 0 399.10 402.85 OK.�
0.02 399.15 399.65 0 0 0 399.65 402.12 OK.�
0.02 399.69 399.22 0 0 0 399.22 401.27 OK.�
0.02 404.04 403.93 0 0 0 403.93 405.78 OK.�
0.02 403.98 403.73 0 0 0 403.73 405.78 OK.�
0.02 403.77 400.03 0 0 0 400.03 403.38 OK.�
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)
Barrel Entrance Entrance -
Pipe 100 year Pipe Outlet Inlet Barrel Barrel Velocity TW Friction HGL Head
Segment Q Length Pipe "n" Elev Elev Area Velocity Head Elev Loss Elev Loss
CB to CB cFs ft Size Value feet feet sq. feet f s) feet feet) (feet feet) feet
vault-#2 2.00 57 12" 0.012 386.93 398.00 0.79 2.53 0.04 398.50 0.0114 398.51 0.02
#2 - #1 2.00 58 12" 0.012 386.35 386.93 0.79 2.53 0.04 398.90 0.0116 398.91 0.02
#1 - #14 2.00 149 12" 0.012 380.20 386.35 0.79 2.53 0.04 387.83 0.0298 387.86 0.02
#14 - ex. 2.50 37 12" 0.012 379,46 380.20 0.79 1.46 0.02 387.25 0.0074 387.26 0.01
(14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)
Exit Outlet Inlet Approach Bend Junction
Head Control Control Velocity Head Head HW RIM ELEV
Loss Etev Elev Head Loss Loss Elev UPSTREAM
feet feet feet feet feet feet feet CB
0.04 398.57 398.90 0 0 0 398.90 401.00 OK.�
0.04 398.97 387.83 0 0 0 387.83 400.00 OK.�
0.04 387.92 387.25 0 0 0 387.25 397.00 OK.�
0.02 387.29 381.10 0 0 0 381.10 383.20 OK.�
CONVEYENCE CHECK
?�� .�. � ����-�'�- ��� ���
������t .�., .
Area _ . ?�
Till Foresi 0-00 acres
Tilt Pasture 1.33 acres
Ti11 Grass 0•00 acres
Outwash Forest 0.00 acres
Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres
OutvEash Grass 0.00 acres
Wetland 0.00 acres
lmpervious 0.74 acres
__ -----
Total _ __
2.07 acres
Scale Factor : 1.00 15-Min Reduced
Edit Fiow Paths �
Time Series: NE 7th Conveyence check �»�
Compute Time Series �
Modify User Input `
__ . _ _ --_-- ._ ___ . .___ . __ .. ________-___ _ _ ._._
Fite far computed Time Series [.TS�
��,��-���--��` '�.����_ . �.� � � - ._ __ ' -�o)�! ��
J '
� �
Flov Frequency �nalysis �� � ���
------------------------------------------ ------------ � �� `�!
Time Series File:ne 7th conveyence check.tsf �2r/- �'
Froject Location:5ea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow F equsncy Analgsis-------
Flo;a P.ate Rank Time of Peak - - Peak - - Rank REturn Frob
(CFS} Periorl
0.352 6 8�27/O1 18:OU 1.15 1 100.U0 0.990
0.251 8 1/05i02 15:00 83� 2 25.00 0.960
0.832 2 12i�8i02 17:15 0.483 3 10.40 �1.900
0.224 7 8i23iO4 14:30 0.422 4 5.00 0.800
0.401 5 10/28iO4 16:00 0.401 5 3.00 0.667
0.422 9 10i27i05 20:�5 0.352 6 2.d0 0.500
0.4d3 3 10i25/06 22:45 0.284 7 1.30 0.231
1.15 1 1i09/03 6:30 Q.261 3 1.10 0.091
C�_,rnp,:t�d Fea-}:= 1.04 50.00 0.9$0 �
� ►
. 43.1 CULVERTS—METHODS OF.4NALYSIS
FIGURE 4.3.1.B
HEADWATER DEPTH FOR SMOOTH INTERIOR PIPE CULVERTS WITH INLET CONTROL
1so 10,000
�ss $,000 EXAMPLE ��� �2� �3� ENTRANCE TYPE
s.
156 6,000 0=az incnes (a.o feM). 6,
t�=lzocfs SQUARE EDGEWtTH
�� 5,000 5' HEADWALL
6. 5.
4,000 H�nr Hw .�
132 0 (feet) 4. +
3,000 ��) z.s a.a 5' 4.
120 �z► z.� �.a � � �
2,000 �a� 2.x �.� 4. I I
108 3.
3.
'D i� feet
96 1,000 3' PLAN ���
GROOVE END WITH
800 __,y ___y HEADWALL
H4 Z' Z- �7a:
600 �
500 /� I '���
�2 400 � o Z� � i �
= 300 �,�,pj/ = 1 5 � 5 I
Zgp V 200 �/ W 1.5 '�r. PLAN �2�
— Z � W GROOVE END
0 54 � � Q PROJECTING
� ~ 100 �
�W Z
> 48 / � 80 '� '
_
U = 60 a 1.0 1.0 � ��
42 V w /
� 0 50 HW SCALE ENTRANCE � 1.0 �
� 40 D TYPE w .9
W 36 � '9 �3�
�.• 3� (1) Square edge with Q
W headwall � '9
Q33 20 (Z� Groove end with W
� 30 headwall 2 •$ ,$
(3) Groove end �$
27 projecting
10
.7 �_
24 8 .7
s To use scale (2) or(3) projeet
21 $ horizontally to scale (1J, then
4 use straight inclined line through I
D and Q scales, or reverse as ,6 �
3 illustreted. .6 - 's I
18 '
2 �
15 l� � I
1�`� � 5 5 5
1.0 ��r�„�
f
2
2009 Surface Water Design Manual li9l2009
4-45
SECTION,4.2 PIPES,OUI�FALLS,AND PLA�iPS
FIGIJRE 4.2.1.F NOMOGRAPH FOR SIZI'�i TG CIRCULAR DRAINS FLOWING FULL
{
1,000
900
800 .0001
700 2.0
600 .0002
500 Minimum
.0003
400 .0004 .0001 Allowable
.0005 Velocity
300 .0006 (Flowing 3.0
.0008 .0002 Full)
�20 n�i .001
108 � .0003
0
200 �� � .002 .0005 4.0
78 � .0006
72 O .003 .0008
66 .004 .001
a .005 5.0
100 60 O .006 ❑
90 54 cJn .008 .002 o O
80 48 -01 0 / W 6.0
70 w .003 � �
60 U 42 .004�� W 7.0
.02 .005 O
36 �
v 50 z 33 .03 •006 w �- g.0
.008 � w
z 40 w 30 .04 .�10 � �
w a. 27 :Q5 cn Z 9.0
( � 30 � 24 .08 .020 10.0
� = O 21 .10 �
� � .030 �
0 2p � 18 .040 W
� .050 �
Q 15 .060
p .080
12 .100
10 10
9 SAMPLE USE
8
7 $ 24"dia.CMP @ 2%slope yields 20.0
g 17cfs @ 5.4 fps velocity
5 6 (n=0.024)
4 Values per Manning's equation
Q=( 1.49 � ARZ/s g �/z
3 � � 30.0
This table can be converted
to other"n"values by applying
2 formula:
40.0
Q1 n2
Q2 n1
1
(
1
1;912009 2009 Surface�'ater Design I�4anual
4-22
�
s
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�e
�
C.2.2 FULL INFII.TRATIOl�
FIGURE C.2.2.A TYPICAL TRENCH INFILTRATION SI'STEM
,
�' ;
i
—roof �
f drain �
RLAN VIEW ,
N,i,$ —4"rigid or 6 flexble
� perforated pipe !
.�------------------�.�_..�_..�..._.____ �� i
�' ���.,�
,�_�j '
infiltration trench
`sump wlsolid lid
I '
-roof drain� '
RLAN VIEW � '
NTS I I
�
overf�ow -� ;
�4"rigid or 6�flexible gpl2�h bloCk��J �
� perforated pipe �
� f r���r f �` /`�ij. ���f�f
!i:�i,fr;<i�� � i`,�li�~i�r�����tii���r.i.���i��`i? ..-.,...:.
6� �
6n ' . . ',L�ry�.""'_'%I'_""'""""'y..""""'""""" �
��� �; wastaed rock -� �=� '-� "�� � �"�,'� 5.0'mi�
12" n�'r�',_ � 1 1/2"-314e '-- - r- - f
1 � 4 i'min
. _ -------- -------------------------=--�-----��= �
fine rr�esh _ CB sump v.�iaa�i�i i�i
crroon
� —4'd"��5 —�
A
-�ir::�=a����
�;* '` .if,'.:.
compacEec �ackflil
6" � ,, �;°
� ;r
4 _ _. 4.�dg��d or 6" flexib��
:: o '� �s�>L
�` perforated �.iF�e
24" `' '' " ��' �
c o�t.: �v� c
0
12" � .�� �;? G'✓V- --- Washed rr�r.:
\ %� c-6 �;�� r< _ : �
� � � w r. �
. �r o
. _. ��\i.`Li���ti.��r�-- - ..
��!i��;.'��uti�i.`
�—24' -a
SECTION A
NTS
2009 Surface V✓a[er Design Manual-Appendix C 1/9l2009
C-45
' � C.2.11 PERFORATED PIPE CONNECTIO�T
� ❑ TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS
Your property contains a stormwater management f!ow control BMP{best management practice} called a
"perforated pipe connection,"which was installed to reduce the stormwater runoff impacts of some or all of
the impervious surface on your property. A perforated pipe connection is a length of drainage conveyance
pioe with hales in the bottom, designed to"leak" runoff,conveyed bythe pipe, into a gravel filled trench
where it can be soaked into the surrounding soil. The connection is intended to provide opportunity for
infiltration of any runoff that is being conveyed from an impervious surface(usually a roof} to a local
drainage system such as a ditch or roadway pipe system.
The size and composition of the perforated pipe connection as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan
and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval either from the
King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King
County. The soil overtop of the perfcrated portion of the system must not be compacted or covered with
impervious materials.
FIGURE C.2.11.A PERFORATED PIl'E CO�INECTION FOR A SLYGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
random fill
/\/\j��j,\j\/��%
6" ���/���/���/��'/���/�%�� (ilter fabric
� ���/�����/i��i�/q �
p o �o „ � 6'perf pipe
18"min °,��°o � �'a o a�
� v � 1 Vz"-3/a'washed rock
a oa p4ea oa aa�
n o p o �-�,o 0 0 0
pG°oa o ° �-�4 p °oo 0
oo�Qo on4 aov
0 o C o p o � o n �
�24" min�
TRENCH X-SECTION
NTS
slope --►
to road
drainage system
2' X 10'
/level trench
w/perf pipe
PLAN VIEW 4F ROOF
NTS
2009 Surface Water Design i�fanual Appendix C 1P9/2009
C-81
PER�, PIPE C�NNECTI�N BMP DETAI�
-� C - MAINTENANCE
:�
r_�
�
, AYYE�iDIX A �1AINTE�IAi�CE REQUIRE�fEtiTS FOR FLOW'CON"IROL,CONVEY.4NCE,AND Vl-'Q FACILITIES
NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES
`:;':':�
Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is Performed
Structure Sediment Sediment exceeds 60%of the depth from the Sump of catch basin contains no
bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the sediment.
lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is
within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe
into or out of the catch basin.
Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than%z cubic foot which No Trash or debris blocking or
is located immediately in front of the catch basin potentially blocking entrance to
opening or is blocking capaaty of the catch basin catch basin.
by more ihan 10%.
Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds No trash or debris in the catch basin.
'/,the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the
lowest pipe into or out of the basin.
Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or�egetation
odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within catch basin.
gases(e.g.,methane).
Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which wouid
volume. attract or support the breeding of
insects or rodents.
Damage to frame Corner of frame extends more than'/.inch past Frame is even with curb.
and/or top slab curb face into the street(If applicabie).
Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of holes and cracks.
cxacks wider than%.inch.
Frame not sitting flush on top slab,i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top stab.
separation of more than'/.inch of the frame from
the top slab.
•;`=: Cracks in walls or Cracks wider than%z inch and longer than 3 feet, Catch basin is sealed and
':`� bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch structurally sound.
basin through cracks,or maintenance person
judges that catch basin is unsound.
Cracks wider than Y:inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than'l.inch wide at
at the joint of any inleUoutlet pipe or any evidence the joint of inleUoutlet pipe.
of soil partides entering catch basin through
cracks.
� SettlemenU Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has Basin replaced or repaired to design
misalignment rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. standards.
Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than%rinch at the joint of the No cracks more than Y.-inch wide at
inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of inleUoutlet pipes.
the catch basin at the joint of the inleUoutlet
' pipes.
Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of
II pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
' appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
In1eU0utlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20%or more of the pipe. InleUoutlet pipes clear of sediment.
accumulation
Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inleUoutlet No trash or debris in pipes.
ipipes(indudes floatables and non-floatables).
Damaged Cracks wider than Yrinch at the joint of the No cracks more than%-inch wide at
inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the inleUoutlet pipe.
at the joints of the inleUoutlet pipes.
�
_�
2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1/9/2009
A-9
APPEI��IX A titAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES
� NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES
Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Ezpected When
Component Maintenance is Performed
Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than'/B inch. Grate opening meets design
(Catch Basins) standards.
Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris.
of grate surface. footnote to guidelines for disposal
Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s)of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design
Any open structure requires urgent standards.
maintenance.
Manhole Cover/Lid Coverllid not in place Coverllid is missing or only partially in place. Cover/lid protects opening to
Any open structure requires urgent structure.
maintenance.
Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Not Working maintenance person with proper tools.Bolts
cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not
work.
Cover/lid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove CoverAid can be removed and
Remove cover/lid after applying 80 Ibs.of lift. reinstalled by one maintenance
person.
s�
i � � ��j ,�i����7.,ir����_ , ,� i�, . `,l���n°:_ 1��� ��. �
. APPENDIX A 1�tAINTENANCE REQL''IREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES
-� NO. 6-CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES
Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is Performed
Pipes Sediment 8 debris Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds Water flows freely through pipes.
accumulation 20%of the diameter of the pipe.
Vegetationlroots VegetatioNroots that reduce free movement of Water flows freely through pipes.
water through pipes.
Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materiais removed and disposed of
pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Damage to protective Protective coating is damaged;rust or corrosion Pipe repaired or replaced.
coating or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of
pipe.
Damaged Any dent that decreases the aoss section area of Pipe repaired or replaced.
pipe by more than 20°k or is determined to have
weakened structural integrity of the pipe.
Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris Geared from
square feet of ditch and slopes. ditches.
Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20%of the Ditch cleanedJflushed of all sediment
accumulation design depth. and debris so that it matches design.
Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation
constitute a hazard to County personnel or the removed according to applicable
public. regulations. No danger of noxious
vegetation where County personnel
or the public might normally be.
Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of
� pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations.
Source wntrol BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surFace oil film.
Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through ditches.
through ditches. I
Erosion damage to Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding.
slopes �,
Rock lining out of One layer or less of rock exists above native soil Replace rocks to design standards. '
place or missing(If area 5 square feet or more,any exposed native
Applicable) soil.
��
�
2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1/9i2009
�1-I I
��
-��'�_�rfl'(C��
RECORDiNG REQUESTED BY AND
WHF,N RECnRI�EI� MATL Tn:
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
CITY OF RENTON
1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY
RENTON, WA 98057
DECLARATION OF COVENANT
�' FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION OF FLOW CONTROL BMPS
Cirantor� !
Grantee: City of Renton
Legal Description:
Additional Legal(s)on:
Assessor's T�Parcel ID#:
IN CONSIDERATION of the approved City of Renton(check one of the following) ❑ residential
building permit, ❑ canmercial building pem�it, 0 ciearing and grading permit, ❑ subdivision permit, or
❑ short subdivision 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
'4
9
�
�
� covenants(covenant)with City or 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 S below with regard to the Property. Grantor(s)hereby grants(grant),
covenants(covenant), and agrees(agree)as follows:
l. Grantor(s)or his/her(their)successors in interest and assigns("Owners")shall retain,uphold,
and protect the stormwater management devices, features,pathways, limits, and restrictions, known as
flow control best management practices('BMPs"),shown on the approved Flow Control BMP Site Plan
for the Property attached hereto and incorporated herein as E�ibit A.
2. The Owners shall at their own cost,operate,maintain, and keep in good repair,the Property's
BMPs as described in the approved Design and Maintenance Details for each BMP attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit B.
3. City or Renton shall provide at least 30 days written notice to the Owners that entry on the
Property is planned for the inspection of the BMPs. After the 30 days, the Owners shall allow the City of
>;� Renton to enter for the sole purpose of inspecting the BMPs. In lieu of inspection by the City,the
Owners may elect to engage a licensed civil engineer registered in the state of Washington who has I',
expertise in drainage to inspect the BMPs and provide a written report describing their condition. If the i
engineer option is chosen,the Owners shall provide written notice to the City of Renton within fifteen
days of receiving the City`s notice of inspection. Within 30 days of giving this notice,the Owners, or the
engineer on behalf of the Owners, shall provide the engineer's report to the City of Renton. If the report
is not provided in a timely manner as specified above,the County may inspect the BMPs without further '
notice.
4. If the City determines from its inspection,or from an engineer's report provided in accordance I
with Paragraph 3,that maintenance, repair,restoration, and/or mitigation work is required for the BMPs, '�
The City shall notify the Owners of the specific maintenance, repair, restoration, and/or mitigation work j
(Work)required under RMC 4-6-030. The City shall also set a reasonable deadline for completing the I
;:{� Work or providing an engineer's report that verifies completion of the Work. After the deadline has
� passed,the Owners shall allow the City access to re-inspect the BMPs unless an engineer's report has
been provided verifying completion of the Work. If the work is not completed properly within the time
frame set by the City, the City may initiate an enforcement action. Failure to properly maintain the BMPs
is a violation of RMC 4-6-030 and may subject the Owners to enforcement under the RMC 1-3, including
fines and penalties.
5. Apart from performing routine landscape maintenance,the Owners aze hereby required to
obtain written approval from the City or Renton before performing any alterations or modifications to the
BMPs.
6. Any notice or approval required to be given by one party to the other under the provisions of
this Declaration of Covenant shall be ef�ective upon personal delivery to the other party, or after three(3)
days from the date that the notice or approval is mailed with delivery confirmation to the current address
on record with each Party. The parties shall notify each other of any change to their addresses.
7. This Declaration of Covenant is intended to promote the efficient and effective management of
� .
surface water drainage on the Property, and it 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.
8. This Declaration of Covenant may be terminated by execution of a written agreement by the ,
Owners and the City of Renton that is recorded by King County in its real property records.
�
� IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this Declaration of Covenant for the Maintenance and Inspection of
Flow Control BMPs is executed this day of , 20 .
GRANTOR, owner of the Property
GRANTOR, owner of the Property
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COLJNTY 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
`�
� '
Section 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design
This analysis and design will be provided as part of the Construction Plan submittal to the City of
Renton.
t �
Section 6: Special Reports and Studies
Geotechnical Study attached
��������������� �� � ����������� ��.����_�
� �
� �
����3�����-►nica►1 �r�gin�ering c�rnd Fs�rtf-� ,��i�r� ��.�
------- — -------- ;
� March 26, 2013 ;
; ,
�
; Mr. Kyle Miller , �
! KRRV Development, LLC
; P. O. Box 908 '
� Ravensdale, WA 98051 '
; i
I
�
� SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
� Proposed Residential Development
; 3517 & 3603 N E 7`h Street ,
Renton, Washington !,
; Project No. 13-103-01 � '
Dear Kyle, � li,
: This repo�t presents the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the site of your II
proposed new residential development on the subject properties. The purpose of our
work was to provide geotechni�al engineering evaluations of the site and geotechnical
recommendations for the residential development including design of foundations, site
grading, erosion control and site!drainage. Our work was performed in accordance with
� the scope and conditions of our proposal dated ,;anuary 26, 2013.
�
A site topographic map and 'preliminary development plans (see Figure 2) were
; provided to us and was used as'a reference for our evaluations. Based on our review of �
� the plans provided and discussions with you, we understand that the subject two
� properties will be divided into eight new lots and the development of the new lots will
j include new 2-story or 3-story wood-frame residences supported at grade (no
; basements) on each of the new lots. The structures will include ground level garages ;
� with slab-on-grade floors. The ground floors of the residence structures may be raised
; floors with crawl space or may be slab-on-grade.
�
;
� We assume that bearing wall loads will be in the range of about 2 to 3 klf and maximum
� column loads to be in the range of about 10 to 20 kips. !f actual structural loads exceed
+ the above values by more than 25%, this office should be notified.
;
� Review of the Renton online Sensitive Areas Maps indicates that the properry is not
�
� indicated to be within a Landslide Hazard, Erosion Hazard, Seismic Hazard or Coal
! Mine Hazard area.
�
;
�
!-----
P..�. �ox276, Issaquah, WA �8027-027� • Phone: (425)391-,4228 rax (�25} 39?�r;��
� KRR�/ Development, LLC March 26, 2013
SCOPE OF WORK
Our geotechnical evaluation included review of geologic mapping, site explorations,
engineering analyses and evaluations and the preparation of this report. The scope of
work included the following specific tasks: �
o Review of published geologic mapping of the site vicinity.
o Performed a reconnaissance of the site as well as observations of the
adjacent developed lots.
o Observed and logged nine test pit explorations within the two properties
(see Figure 2) to depths up to 4.5 feet below existing ground. Logs of the
test pits and results of field and laboratory testing are presented in the
Test Pit summaries of Appendix A.
o Performed geotechnical engineering evaluations of the proposed site
development and developed our geotechnical recommendations for
foundation design, site grading, drainage and observations during
construction.
o Prepared this geotechnical report summarizing our findings and
recommendations.
OBSERVED SITE CONDITIONS
The property is bordered on the west, south and east by developed residential lots (we
have recently performed a geotechnical eva!uation for new development of the
adjoining property to the west). At the time of our field exploration the properties were
developed with residences and out buildings as shown in Figure 2.
The topographic mapping included on the site plan of Figure 2 indicates that the subject �
properties generally slope very gently down to the west/southwest at gradients that
range from only about 2 to 7 percent in localized areas and the overall average gradient
across the site is only about 4 percent with an elevation difference across the site of
about 14 feet from northeast to southwest. We noted a small (less than 10 feet) but
steep slope adjacent to the south property line in the central area of the site (south of
TP-7 location) which appears to be a cut slope created for development of the adjoining
property to the south.
The site was well vegetated primarily with grasses but also included shrubs, fruit trees �
and evergreen trees up to about 3.5 feet in diameter.
We did not observe any seeps or springs or evidence of current or past erosion on the
site.
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 2
KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013
Subsoils
Our evaluation of the subsurface conditions was based on our observations of nine
exploratory test pits within the site plus review of published geologic mapping.
Approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 2. Logs of the test pits are
presented in Appendix A. Subsoils encountered in our test pits were found to include
some minor fill and natural glacially consolidated soils.
Fill soils were encountered in TP-1 located at the northwest corner of the site. Fill soils
were silty very fine sand with occasional gravel and were only about 1 foot thick at that
location. We also noted an oil tank fill cap near the northwest corner of the existing
house on the 3517 property which indicates another likely area of fill/backfill.
Natural soils encountered at the test pit locations were generally silty fine sand with
gravel. The upper soils were typically loose to medium dense soils to depths of about �
to 3.5 feet below the natural surface becoming very dense and hard and cemented ai
greater depths. Subsoils encountered in TP-7 adjacent to the sma(I but steep slope
adjacent to the south property line were also natural soils very similar to soils
encountered at the other ` ' � ' ` ' ` '` '
-�r.r�-�rr:r�i!�r ,--r�-��n�� h+i ^. '
Ground VVater
No ground water or seepage was observed in any of the test pits. Typicaliy the shallow
soils on the 3517 property were classified as moist to very moist and the shallow soils
on the 3603 property as well as the deeper cemented soils were cfassified as moist.
The measured moisture contents of the soils generally ranged from about 7+ to 16+
percent.
Subsurface Variations
Based on our experience, it is our opinion that some variation in the continuity and I!
depth of subsoil deposits and ground water levels should be anticipated due to natural '
deposition variations and previous onsite structures and grading. Due to seasonal
moisture changes, ground water conditions should be expected to change with time.
Care should be exercised when interpolating or extrapolating subsurface soils and
ground water conditions between or beyond our test pits.
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 3
,
KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013
SITE EVALUATIONS
General
The referenced geologic map of Figure 1 indicates the site vicinity to have surface
exposures of glacial till (Qgt) soils. The Qgt g�acial till soils are highly consolidated,
heterogeneous mixtures of sand, silt, clay and gravel soils deposited during the
advance of the Vashon glaciation, the last glacial advance into the Puget Sound area,
approximately 13,000 to 16,000 years ago.
Based on the soils observed on the site and review of the referenced map, it is our
opinion that the natural very dense/hard silty sand with gravel soils underlying the site
and are most likely glacially consolidated till deposits (Qgt).
Based on the results of our field investigations combined with our own experience and
judgment, it is our opinion that the geotechnical site conditions are suitable for the
proposed development provided our recommendations are followed.
Hazard Assessment
Landslide: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Landslide
Hazard area. In addition, the geologic map of Figure 1 indicates no mapped landslides
within the site vicinity and our site observations indicate the site is currently stable.
Considering the very gentle slope gradients and the observed glacial till soils, it is our
opinion that the potential for future instability on the site is very low to nil. The proposed
structure locations in the southern lots are 20+ feet from the observed small slope on
the adjacent property to the south in our opinion that slope should have no impact on
the proposed structures.
Erosion: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Erosion
Hazard area. We observed that the site is well vegetated we observed no indication of
any seepage or concentrated water flow or current or past erosion on the site. Based
on our site observations and explorations it is our opinion that there is no unusual ,
erosion risk at this site and any potential erosion potential resulting from development ',
will be mitigated by our recommended grading procedures and drainage/erosion control '
measures and by final re-vegetation/landscaping incorporated into the proposed '
development plans.
Coal Mine: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Coal Mine
Hazard area.
Seismic: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Seismic
Hazard area, however the Puget Sound region is a seismically active area. About 17+
moderate to large earthquakes (M5 to M7+) h,�ve occurred in the Puget Sound and
northwestern Cascades region since 1872 (141 years) including the 2/28/01 M6.8
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 4
KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013 I
• �
di iso r h s ds wi v li
Nisqually earthquake an t u opinion that t e propo e tructures II ery kely
experience significant ground shaking during their useful life. '
Based on a recently published study the site lies only about 2.5 miles south of the ,
southern mapped location of the Seattle fault and about 18 miles southwest of the
estimated trace of the South Whidbey-Lake Alice fault both of which have postulated �,
maximum credible magnitudes of 7.0 to 7.5. Another recent study of the Vashon- ',
Tacoma area presents evidence for the east-west trending Tacoma Fault which is �
indicated to pass through the south end of Vashon and the middle of Maury Island
about 10.5 miles southwest of the site. The study suggests that the Tacoma Fault and ,
the Seattle fault may be linked by a master thrust fault at depth.
The Seattle fault has been documented to have moved at its west end (Bainbridge
Island) about 1000 to 1100 years ago and evidence of movement at the east end has
also recently been documented. Some expe�ts feel that the recurrence interval
between large events on the Seattle Fault may be on the order of several thousands of
years but our calculations indicate it may be on the order of 1200 to 1400 years. The
activity of the documented Tacoma fault is considered to be on the same order as the
Seattle fault. The recurrence of a maximum credible event on the South Whidbey fault
is not known but some experts have assigned a recurrence of about 3000 years,
however smaller events will occu� more frequently as evidenced by the 5.3 event on
May 2, 1996 which was attributed to that fault.
In addition to Puget Sound seismic sources, a great ea�thquake event (M8 to M9+) has
been postulated for the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) along the northwest Pacific
coast of Oregon, Washington and Canada. The current risk of a future CSZ event is
not known at this time. Published reports have indicated recurrence intervals for a CSZ
event to range from as little as 100-200 years to as long as 1000+ years and the time of
the last event is reported to have been about 313 years ago.
The 2009 International Building Code (IBC) adopted by the City of Renton requires
consideration of a spectral acceleration level with probability of exceedance of 2
percent in 50 years for seismic structural design. This corresponds to about a 2475-
year recurrence interval earthquake ground motion. Based on the short period spectral
response accelerations presented in Figure 1613.5(1) of the 2009 IBC, adjusfed as per
equations 16-36, 16-38 and factored as per section 1803.5.12(2), we estimate the IBC
peak ground acceleration for soils and foundaticn design at this site to be about 0.38g.
Please note that the 0.38g peak ground acceleration includes the additional reduction
factor of section 1803.5.12(2) and is not intended for structural analyses. We
recommend the site be considered a Site Class D for structural design.
Secondary seismic hazards due to earthquake ground shaking include induced slope
failure, liquefaction, lateral spreading and ground settlement. Considering the very
dense/hard nature of the soils recommended for bearing at the site, it is our evaluation
that the potential for damage to the structures due to liquefaction, fateral spreading and
settlement is very low to nil. The potential for seismically induced shallow failures on
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 5
,KRRV,Development, LLC March 26, 2013
the site is also considered very low to nii and the potential for shaltow failures within the
smali adjacent cut slope to the south is also considered very low.
Structure Support Considerations
In our opinion the undisturbed very dense/hard natural glacial till soils encountered in
our explorations should provide good support for the proposed structure foundations.
Bearing soils are expected to be encountered at depths ranging from about 2 to 3.5 feet
below the natural ground surface at the site.
Foundations should penetrate through any existing fill, topsoil and loose/medium dense
soils to bear on undisturbed very dense/hard natural soils. Conventional spread
footings are considered appropriate for support of the proposed structures considering
that bearing soils are at shallow depths. However, if any deep fill areas are encountered
on the site (such as backfill of tank or structure removal excavations), lean concrete
footing extensions or pipe piles cou�d be used to transfer foundation loads to the deep
bearing soils in those areas. We have include�l recommendations for spread footings
and pipe piles in this report.
RECOMMENDATIONS ,
The following subsections present our recommendations for design of foundations, site
grading, drainage control and erosion control. Also included are recommendations for
plan review and observations and testing during construction.
�
Spread Footinq Foundations �
Conventional spread footings founded on undisturbed very dense/hard natural glacial till
soils should provide good support for the proposed structures. Bearing soils are
expected to be encountered at depths ranging from about 2 to 3.5 feet below the �
natural ground surface of the site.
Continuous wall footings should be at least 18 inches wide. Square footings for column ;
support should be at least 24 inches wide. Footings supported on undisturbed very
dense/hard natura! glacial till soils may be designed based on an allowable bearing
pressure of 2000 psf. '
All footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. I
Where the natural bearing soils slope, the footing excavation should be stepped to ,
maintain a horizontal bearing surface. '�
If deep fill or other unsuitable soils are encountered, foundation loads may be
transferred from the recommended minimum foundation depths to the recommended ;
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 6
KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013
very dense/hard bearing soils by a monolith of lean concrete having a minimum
compressive strength of 1000 psi. The width of an un-reinforced lean concrete
monolith should be at least as wide as the footing or at least one-third of the monolith
height, whichever is greater. Reinforced monoliths should be designed by a structural
engineer. A suitable width trench should be excavated with a smooth edged excavator
bucket (no teeth) to expose the dense/very dense bearing soils under observation by
our office and backfilled as soon as possible with the lean concrete to the footing
elevation.
The estimated settlement of a 18-inch wide continuous footing carrying a load of 3 kips
per foot is on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 inch. Our settfement estimates assume that
foundations are supported on undisturbed very dense/hard natural bearing soils and
that all fill and loose/disturbed material is removed from the bearing surface prior to
concrete pour. Maximum differential settlement within the proposed structures is
expected to be 112 inch or less. Settlements are expected to occur primarily during
construction.
Resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by friction acting at the base
� of foundatior.s and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be
assumed with the dead load forces in contact with on-site soils. An allowabte static
passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth may be used for the sides of
footings poured against undisturbed medium dense natural soils or properly compacted
structural fill. An allowable static passive earth pressure of 150 psf per foot of depth
may be used for the sides of footings or grade beams poured against existing loose
soils.
The ve�tical and lateral bearing values indicated above are for the total dead load plus
frequently applied live loads. For short duration dynamic loading caused by seismic or
wind forces, the vertical bearing values may be increased by 50 percent and allowable
lateral passive pressures may be increased by 33 percent.
Driven Pipe Pile Foundations
If deep fill or other unsuitable soils are encountered, foundation loads may also be
transferred from the recommended minimum foundation depths to the recommended
very dense/hard bearing soils by properly constructed pipe piles. This type of support is
constructed by driving 2-inch or 3-inch diameter steel pipe to refusal into the bearing
soils below existing unsuitable soils. Based on our experience, piles typically penetrate
about 5 to 15 feet into the bearing soils before encountering refusal.
Refusal penetration rates for pifes will depend on the hammer size and the load testing
results. Refusal penetration rate for a 3-inch pile driven with a tractor-mounted 6501b
hydraulic hammer typically should be in the range of about 15 to 20 seconds per inch.
Refusal penetration rate for a 2-inch pile driven with a tractor-mounted 6501b hydraulic
hammer typically should be in the ranQe of about 8 to 10 seconds per inch
KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013
Alternatively 2-inch piles may be driven using a 901b jack hammer plus the weight of the
operator or using a 140+Ib rinho-type pile-top pneumatic hammer to a refusal
penetration rate of 1 inch or less per minute. We recommend that all pile installation be
observed by our office to verify the allowable capacity and refusal criteria for the
production piles.
An allowable verticaf downward capacity of 6 kips (Factor of Safety = 2+) may be
assumed for 2-inch diameter piles and capacities of 10 kips (Factor of Safety = 2+) can
generally be assumed for 3-inch diameter piles installed as recommended above. No
uplift capacity or lateral support should be assumed for driven pipe piles. No lateral
support should be assumed for the pier shafts. Resistance to lateral loads can be
provided by battered piles (compression only) and by passive earth pressure against
the sides of grade beams. An allowable static passive earth pressure of 150 psf per
foot of depth may be used for the sides of grade beams poured against existing loose
soils.
Capacity may be limited by the structural capacity of the pipe and connections which
should be determined by the structural engineer. The pipe and couplers which form the
pile, must be of structural quality (schedule 40+) and must be provided with a corrosion
resistant coating (galvanized). The pipe pile suppo�ts should be capped with a grade
beam to transfer structural loads to the piles. The pile/grade beam system should be
designed by a qualified structural engineer.
Site Gradinq
Site grading is expected to consist primarily of excavation for proposed foundations and
subgrade preparation for slab and pavement areas and utility trenches. Onsite granular
soils cleaned of debris and organics are considered suitable for use in general
compacted fills but in our experience the onsite glacial til! soils will be moisture
sensitive with regard to grading and compaction characteristics. Grading should be
scheduled for the late summer months if possible. Wet weather grading may require
the use of imported clean granular fill soils which are more easily compacted at higher
moisture levels. Recommendations for site preparation, temporary excavations,
structural fill, subgrade preparation, site drainage and trench backfill are presented
below.
Site Preparation: Existing vegetation, debris, fill soils, and loose or organic natural soils
should be stripped from the areas that are to be graded. During rough grading, excess
soils may be stockpiled for later use. Stripping in subgrade areas is expected to
average about 1 foot. Soils containing more than 1% by weight of organics may be
used in planter areas, but should not be used for structural fill. Stumps, debris and
trash, plus rocks and rubb(e over 6 inches in size, should be removed from the site.
Subsoil conditions on the site may vary from those encountered in our test pits.
Therefore. our office shoufd observe the prepared areas prior to placement of any ne�v
t��;'�.
KRR�/ Development, LLC March 26, 2013
Temporary Excavations: Sloped temporary construction excavations may be used
where planned excavation limits will not undermine existing structures or interfere with
other construction. Where there is not enough room for sloped excavations, shoring
should be provided.
Based on the subsurface conditions encounter�d in the test pits, it is our opinian that
sloped temporary excavations may be made vertically to depths of 4 feet or less. '
Excavations up to 10 feet in depth should be sloped no steeper than 1:1 within
loose/medium dense soils and no steeper than %z:1 (horizontal:vertical) within the un-
weathered, hard cemented natural glacial till soils. It should be noted that the
contractor is responsible for safety and maintenance of construction slopes.
We recommend that cuts over 4 feet in depth be covered with visqueen tarp to help
control ravelling and sloughing. Surface drainage should be directed away from the top
edge of cut slopes. Surcharge loads should not be allowed within 5 feet of the top of the
slope or within a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane extending up from the toe of excavation,
whichever is �reater. �
Structural Fill: Provided that soil moisture can be reduced and maintained near
optimum, excavated onsite soils cleaned of organics and debris may be used for
general structural fill but the onsite soils are expected to be moisture sensitive and
during the rainy season the soils may become too wet for practical compaction.
Therefore impo�ted granular fill soils should be used if moisture conditions cannot be
adequately controlled.
Loose soils, formwork and debris should be removed prior to placing fill or backfill.
Structural fill should be pfaced in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose
thickness and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by the ASTM D1557 test method.
Imported granular fill should consist of clean, well-graded sand and gravel materials
free of organic debris and other deleterious material. Imported material for wet weather
grading should be a sand/gravel mixture with less than 5 percent fines based on the
sand fraction.
SIab/Pavement Support: Slabs-on-grade and pavement should be supported directly on
undisturbed dense natural soils or on properly compacted structural fill over medium
dense natural soils. Where unsuitable soils (existing fill, loose and organic soils) exist
at subgrade levef, subgrade preparation should include excavation of the unsuitable
soils as required to expose medium dense natural soils or to a maximum depth of 2 feet
(or deeper as required to remove all organic soils where organic soil depths exceed 2
feet beiow final subgrade) and placement of structural fill to final subgrade elevation.
Subgrade fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations for structural
fill except that the top 6 inches of the subgrade fill should be compacted to at least 95
percent of the ASTM D1557 maximum dry density in pavement and driveway areas.
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 9
. KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013
It should be noted that where the proposed slabs crass a fill/natural contact line, there
will be a high risk of cracking. Risk of cracking can be reduced by placing construction
joints at the contact and by proper steel reinforcement of the slab. Interior concrete
slabs should be underlain 6y a capillary break consisting of a polyethylene vapor barrier
of at least 6 mil thickness.
Utility Trenches: Buried utility conduits should be bedded and backfilled around the
conduit in accordance with the project specifications. Bedding material should extend
from six inches below the pipe to six inches above the pipe. Where conduit underlies
pavement or slabs-on-grade, the remaining backfill above the pipe should be placed
and compacted in accordance with the recommendations for structural fill. If imported
granular fill is used for trench backfill it should be capped with 12 inches of onsite silty
soils.
Draina�e Control
Surface drainage from the site and adjoining upslope areas should be controlled and !
dive�ted around the development area in a non-erosive manner. Adequate positive
drainage should be provided away from the structures and on the site in general to
prevent water from ponding and to reduce percolation of water into subsoils. Granular
backfill should be capped with paving or 6 inches of onsite silty soils. A desirable slope
for surface drainage is 2% in landscaped areas and 1% in paved areas.
Roof drains should be tightlined into the storm drain system (no discharge on the
ground surface). A permanent perimeter drain, independent of the roof drain system,
should be placed adjacent to the base of the continuous exterior foundations. The
drain should consist of a four-inch diameter perforated PVC drain pipe placed in at least
one cubic foot of washed drain gravel per lineal foot along the base of the foundations.
The drain gravel zone around the pipe should be encapsulated with a membrane of
Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent between the drainage zone and onsite silty soils.
Erosion Control
Although we observed no evidence of erosion, onsite soils are expected to be erodible
when distur�ed and exposed to concentrated water flows. Siltation fences or other
detention devices should be provided around the downslope side of the disturbed site
area and soil stockpile areas during construction to controi the transport of eroded
material. The lower edge of the silt fence fabric should have "J" shaped embedment in
a trench extending at least 12 inches below the ground surface.
Surface water flow should be collected in area drains and tightlined to the storm water
system, no water should be discharged on the site unless via a properly designed and
approved infiltration/dispersion system. ExposPd final graded soil areas should be
planted immediately with grass and deep rooted plants.
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 10
KRRV Development, LLC March 26, 2013
Plan Review
This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation of this site and to assist the
architect, structural and civil engineers in the design and construction of the project. It
is recommended that this office be provided the opportunity to review the final design
drawings and specifications to determine if the recommendations of this report have
been properly implemented and to make any suppfemental design recommendations
which may be required.
Observations and Testinq Durinq Construction
Recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumption that soil
conditions exposed during construction will be observed by our office so that any
necessary design changes or supplements may be made. Foundation excavations
should be observed to verify that they expose undisturbed very dense/hard bearing
soils and that excavations are free of loose and disturbed materials. '
All pile installation and testing should be observed by our office to confirm the allowable I'i
design capacities. Refusal criteria for all driven pipe piles should be confirmed by our
office. Surface and subsurface drainage provisions should be verified by our office. �I
All structural fill and slab/pavement subgrade areas should be observed by a
representative of this office after stripping and prior to placing fill. Drainage control
systems should be observed by our office to verify proper construction. Proper fill
placement and compaction shoutd be verified with field and laboratory density testing
by a qualified testing laboratory.
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 11
,KRR� Development, LLC March 26, 2013
CLOSURE j
This report was prepared for specific application to the subject site and for the exclusive �,
use of KRRV Development, LLC and their representatives. The findings and
conclusions of this report were prepared with the skill and care ordinarily exercised by ',
local members of the geotechnical profession practicing under similar conditions in the
same locality. We make no other warranty, either express or implied.
Variations may exist in site conditions between those described in this report and actual
conditions encountered during construction. Unanticipated subsurface conditions
commonfy occur and cannot be prevented by merely making explorations and
performing reconnaissance. Such unexpected conditions frequently require additional
expenditures to achieve a properly constructed project. If conditions encountered
during construction appear to be different from those indicated in this report, our office
shauld be notified.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. ,���
� � . ra �,��l�
� � h�� F';L'n.5',:' ; •
...�' � (:l• �f?
_ � �:'�, �`,
James A. Doolittl "' �`T �'�" r:�` -
Principal Engineer - '_ � 2;(k ,�
�f;`;�;
2�•;�3
' �Q �FGI�;�?t%�`� ,'
Encl: Figures 1 and 2 �s --- .�;N
`Sr�:j�,f,�'Y�l
Appendix A '��,,
�iPlRcS ?�t� �%
Dist: 2/Addressee
Project No. 13-103-01 Page 12
i •.�.�_I..F•'�•It�q�� %f� �1( �./E��l �7 �: i t� � . . \ ��_ �, � �� l� � ----
' �l 1 I�1�1� `�� `\ ;I';��ti,�r—JI��. I1 �! '! �r Ii . '
l -t R , ..4 � .,�! i ��i�F.. �- r „ �� g-�
,;:. .� � r. .• ,. ' ` i��o1� 1�� �ri . I ., i
..:..., • -!i; ;r�`� 1 `re ,.• t � � �+ i �' . � ' o /� � a
. s�l�Rii�• •I'� ,'`l� � �� ti /.+, ..'� .��. .� I�� �- � . . _ � . . �� . - ���. �, ..
.�,.. � . ,` ,,, , �,_�. 41� �;�: � 1 ,� f . �
�as s .:`J��'�a.I ■ � .fL., � -�j� � �.,al��� �\ ���. 14~�. � .l.. ' F�:. 't . r � .
�;'•�1's :✓ + �-�J ��� . � ' �
.ri I iV��r �.• `-`.tla �� .. ` `I-t �... ��( .• .� ' � � ' s .
•• � .��i•�s��.- �••er�—L�,.� ,�Sal I��.� �'� � ��_ i1r ��`�"\ ��.� . ��•,:i 1� - �� . � -
. �
---�! a. ��.. , �; �. ,
.:,� I,.' ! n , � � . �i �,f ��1�: \ -�� , �
;�1. ,�,:;;; 7�hl�:r���..� �.� �;:�t ,�; �rJJ , �� � ��� �--;. _�i � `_
?e!�I rf Y-ri� . -�\ � �dt- > : �f1i..������ )��: � �.�i . � - � . . . �1 -
d•�r. �,�. ,�,i � �.ch , � ��� � �'�P � , � �
a 1•� �► - ,,,. ,� YYu. �.y��.�.lj �� ��` 1 . I �� r-
+�ilr i.e �■I;� - i 1 im I :11Lf� _ � 1 .1��� . . . �-; , . : . . �: �.�.�.��`\ ��� .
� � }�' Qa'C � ♦ kI / `
����_J ��ei��J ..r i. it'1s+ 6��t����+ � ��'R aa_\ • �s�.e . 1� , - �5.�: ;..\\\ '- �::.
i
� r�bti�•� +���` � ���' '. ♦ �.� � i . . . — � - � !�.1 � \����- .
, ,, .� � � i ! i� „f ',,. � � � � , �:
�����•�.y:�i.es.+. ��-=��+• ,.,,�. �1��� 't I�i .:i � r� -. � � . . I � �Q-�tv�- �`t�� 't.^ i : }'..
���I�� •y • �•�l.�.-���r� J ♦. .. i� �� �,'. .. j .
�\; *,�. F ,�� �`- v,y � �{�'t� � �h � ' �i� : J `��
s\.Ti��e����1�+•��,s`��{ � �'i�f��,1��I� �I� �t 1 . // :_.� ��.. ' � ` II,} _�.1 .. . .. ..
� f •e��.���a ���►�r-�IG� f� .�!! .� f �:��t� I ;1..,. ��. � ���, � . � � if�•� .. �.• �.�_ .
% . �o�+�aa; � !'i �;• �n;� ���. .�i� • � li� !it `y �� S1TE ' ., r —` � .I�..-.. +
, , •, • . /• E r,,� . I �y. : , � S
`t f� . � � ��s li'- �� w+I' �I� � �` � ... • .. ,� , � '� *y .
r
e � r�1 •� //+� I., I�p�p 1.3 � � �� 1 1 /. y�.:-
t '� +' • �►•. �'S� ' I f �%"" � •iI'( �I I O i i � ' � i , _�_—/°
� �� ,l i r, �■. . •j t � . �r; •(1��J��-��t I __ _.,.`\_.... .1 . .
�`if� c� ro���\�*s-� r�ftis_'-`-j�-��! E��(. �s� sjll j i� �� ��/_'_' J ~� �� 1 - �� .
� �'��.—- • i i � "�
�.,�I� �` -z , ��at� � _ �;�1� �1�'.\]` \� �� � ,"� ' Jf _ �
.� pt I; ,� ( ��# �,o i�'�'i i�, � x , �t =� �' ; jf:; o �
. ,�■�.1� r �\ � ...��, +♦ //� tir�i � �-t� � ��. % = ■ ,
�s� -s• I� i� �� ��}'�--+����✓ p�'' �� �µ� -�.. . � r�� ": I � � + � � .
:
X �, ♦ 1, o
;;y'��.� � c� �� �r�` �� i� . t�j�� �l�, j1 �I:i,�. �� ;� ��:=� � � �� ��. :.
• �� �? �.�' - i�_♦.�e�i�i� � i} ��_�. --� . - ;( .i , � : . � . r :■
{ � �.�.- "' 1 ,./i90����j r4 !�`� 1 I r r� a].E r� r�-
/ � � ` r!i /o � �; � �ia 1 i.
''a��rt � / ...-� _�'' `v, '�.�...��r f'�Z ��� i t IJ • � ■ �� `� �..� .l
��==� ��— - `—°� �—
��j��"�, � . r` --�. - �--i r--, � . ' : iL .� ._ �i t --
, f
� 1�'`� 1_ ' ;/ __ _, ,. � , 1 ..l • E,:- t 1 .
( ���.� i �l . .,/; ���--,I r : .'E � � . � ���,t �
��.-� ^��:.l�-'Srv�r',, i �r.`-��-_�� . .� .;��� !�.� �L-- �--=— • i �� . j� � � ��
� � (^.. � ! �.�� � / !I � ---•--+�� ���1 i y: � •':I i. . 1
� ����,- -1 ��r-1 (I uree���0!'iC� l.;�t� ' 'i. ;f ' � .
�}� { ��� �-�OCj ,/ ,',� i; �. ! ( 1' � ,.
��J,�$ � �� �O� � ii ;'` 1( �� tl.".. 'c'
� � � � .n �i ' � li ,; '�
=;-.w - , i il :\ ;E � ;: � ft �
�� - � -; : _� ' `�
/-- �` , � I� \\ � il, '�,� �r� � � ali�:�:��. }
-t. ' � [�} a � � �� ,�__�-_-- �- _ �
\ , �C� i � .�1�.-.1r— - -- c�� � ��i �n��fj� �.
-. � ; ,- � , �� �� Ta�,K Te'at�ng V +sti ,
�;�, '�,� �:�- � �� X }; .: � A��� �, � � 4cE ,
_ „��E ; ^, '� 4� ;;�i3 li (A��nac�.neti) ii '� ,
- i '� ; '�� �; , ' ��=�-`_-__--=�`-�' �`�- : � ,�j _
r�,��;.����.. �,_ �: �f�,� C a , ,T;, ;
�j'� tl � � � ' �° �. , , - ';
! t \ v.' f . "i ! , .
�' r �,,� ' ,t ..
i /�i i �fVl. �".� i ��
i�C_,,,_i„s��7��� �._ 1`�+ . S'�i � .. � " ' �
`� �'Y t� � / �� J�__ J�. . . � . �
� t � r j: ,' � �✓'�<--�;�. �; r
�-� ':;,;� '� �• ` �1 �� �j � � �'--r"
� � � �y/ � / � }':J1 f;..� � ' ` � . .. .
�� � il
7 C�,t` i �l__ '\ �/ ���' � '`���� S//�� , I �`` . _ - t...��1 . .
`. %'" �-`�'� � / � � / � .\ ! .
���J�{ '���. � ;���/�.��,��.J `�! t����i{.�,�-�1 _��\� i . � � .
�.-1` � ` ____�-�i _ _ ..—� \� t '"'�� } � .. . .. . . �
� t�� i�� � . '
`tt�� '� �� ���� `��/'� } � �.. { .\
,4 ��.: ��-�� - af �_� , � . �, �-,'
a� �i . \� .1� � ..�. .y�.����r�t�� s aae����� � 'G' .� �i'�{ i,�� __ _
:I• ��i . �`�--_'_---_ _. /'-1��C—a.:.._��-� .•_ y�'�.:_+�v.�_ ..-:—i-1... . �..-�1:' . . /�9
ref: Geoloc�ic Map of the Renton Quadrangle
by D. R. Niullinea�ux, USGS Map GQ-405, 1965
_ SITE VICINITY GEOLOGIC MAP
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC.. 3517�&�3603s��e7�aStreetlopment
� ,��, > Renton, Washington
r>;: �
Gaotochn/co!Eng/noo�/ng ond Eorfh Scloncos
Proj. No. 13-10 Date 3/13 Figure 1
�
� � ,'
;`NE 7TN STREET' ' � ;
r � � �
� - ' I � �
�a-s i
— — — — '— Z— — —�—i t — —
--�-
� �
.. ,\ �
, � :
• '�__.�. ' ^�^^�'�.
.
i � �
� ..,.�.e......,...,...�..�M..,.� --' �.
_ ,�� —
� —__ ' .'.' ' .-__ ._.'--�-- . .
.. —'�-.-_.. ____ ,� _._.._....-..-_ '--°..� _,__.,� �.
1...�,.~ �\ Y , { ` �
� '.i 7 <F ' __"_ ��;_'_ J . .:l � � f'f � �
\._,� \ _ / � �� ��` -:..- _ .
�' � I \ •r F I � .
39 �;.- '` `,— __.__35 I � +�
�S �' �, — " �s . —-. � �� : ;e ,/t �
� � ', � `� :a: ��TP-5 �� �:� ; �,
� i '' t .\ �: � ri
- T1� l r'., - , .
� ^� 'f �� � `�\ � O.. - _ �
] +` '.' �'��i j � �,/ �' i �
:` �� / y,:.,i `��i?' � `,` � `,I � O
. J ..� Y`— ., �" '.`' � `
/� `. -1 � � '1 . . ' ? � Q
t � �F `t, �—+—.-+.� '. , � �
�� /// � L ' _ � " Zi� : I (�'� b �
�/��� i� , r. j ,";ti� O 4l .
%/ //i i� � � : ` �p �1 �
�' '%!' � , S;A % ri /i�r%i /i�j �f i i i M 'U Q
1 } i ..... . ' � '�'; � ���/'�J��'� t .�. df
� Y//iii ��i� �.:. i�; ` %!i//!/i, //� /, - ���/
��/�//1 '.J1�/�/; --• ' �..,- i , - -_� � F(�y
i:/ /r / y/' . l . - � � 7` r U {�/
���/ i Y/ � � _ -.�.-� :� �\ � G' W
t ///�_. ' . _. s� �\% '3 �:1'v/ %�/ ������/� ;�� � M N
° � 1 ' . � _ � N _ � i i�.__�'4'"iii.1�j l t '�y
� /`'7/� > �' 'i
\ �' `��" . __� _ � " I ��\ '`�.. r�'I li%{ ` ��
� � ��-- � ��//i�i,/.,:-.t � ,.�
\ � \�c.r^ �;.� _ 11`:.::y!!:cl1' �
: - ..'—��7 �_.�Y ! s � '�'1�n: �� C��,'�
� . ,.
,. , . _
. 1 .f :�`� �r l., •�
>�. ' - �I ��-- �w � o
,� �.. _ ....... _ -- - " - ' �` �� �
�,\���� _ �� -- - --- �. � > � �
., l __
`�=.�x��" TP—4 �;- .o` 5� . . ...�i � �i � �
.
�' �� , . ... .. . �.�i `� n
^ .!v�. _ �' �, b--- � �—
,
_ ;� �
_. ,, `
;.�. '.
`....... .,.... ..- ; - �
O
� ✓l�,��: 35 ! _f tl� � �
;�� %' _ � . f�� U ?�1-� td
,f�, `.' �, �;p-9 �� .n � �
,�„�j `.. =�; �� R.b � `�
�' �; - rd a� sz
�_= ;
" :;�'�� �� " � � , � o �i
, . �� t. i� `� _ � �� �
TP�2���..:'�%� : , `: �0 � c� �
: :i �� �
� . -
,
�. . --a.- �`
. _: . :� :;�
:i ���� �.. _. _ _ .. . . . ...
, ` w �,
_ __--,„� ��-... �:c � ; �
: . .
. �
,, �i �,� < , ,� `��-�'
,y ,., . Tp'-� N
� � b
' � �: � �
,, . �;.... . . ��.. _ � . ._.
. % �o' `ti�o�
,;'� ,�„ !
� . � ;�— �i �n: �o:
a - � '`�. � '�' �
` ^'Y, i_ ,�c\ y'` _., r�-�} i ;
}
, � � , �
+ ._ . ,
1. .\\�,�--=�� . . ...... _ .. . _ . . . _ . .TP-8�
� :'1^ i � �'4� '� \,
,'. C ��r__ 1 '.�� TP-7�
��3,�- �;Y��. } � ---,�`�_ '�
�: ;;;.� __�:, — � . - . — -
�..,,
�y� �
SITE DEVELOPMENT & EXPLORATION PLAN
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, /NC. �oposed Residential Development
3517 & 3603 NE 7th Street
;�;: Renton, Washington
Gaofochn/co/Englnoor/ng ond 6o��h �c,on�.�s
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure 2
f ,
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
Our field exploration included a site reconnaissance and test pit explorations. During
the site reconnaissance, the surface site conditions were noted, and the locations of the
test pits were approximately determined.
The test pits were approximately located using the existing structures as a guide. The
approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 2. Test Pit elevations were
estimated based on the topographic mapping shown on Figure 2.
Test pits were advanced using a trackhoe excavator. Soils were continuously logged
and classified in the field by visual examinaticn, in accordance with the ASTM Soil
Classification system.
Logs of the test pits are presented on the test pit summary sheets A-1 through A-5.
The test pit summaries include descriptions of the soils and pertinent field data. Soil
consistency and moisture conditions indicated on the logs are interpretations based on
the conditions observed in the field. Boundaries between soil strata indicated on the
logs are approximate and actual transitions between strata may be gradual.
, • TEST PIT NO. 1
Logged by JAD
Date: 1I31/13 Elevation: 406'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� SM Silty fine Sand w/occ grave! loose moist dk brn FILL
� � ---......
1 ..brown
--� - --�--- - � ................... ............. ....... .... .- .......... ........ . -
SM Siity fine Sand w/occ gravel medium brown
dense
to
2 .... .............. ....-- ---..
dense moist/ �ed- 16.5
ve rown i
m o�st
3 ...... - -- - -- - _ __ __ - - - I
very moist gray ,
w/some cementation da��se/ 9 6 �
4 '�
5
Maximum depth 4 feet. ,
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT NO. 2
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 403'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� SM Silty fine Sand w/arganics loose moist �ark
......... ......................................�-� --- �-- to rown
1 SM Silty fine.�Sand brown
wi h occ. gravel to 6" very
13.4
moist
2
...m:d�nse..
3 �cemented- . .. .- - - . . v: �errsel. .-m�isC��-�--
4
5
Maximum depth 3.5 ft.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. Proposed Residential Development
� �- _�` ; �` 3517 & 3603 NE 7th Street
,. �.�-. _
Geotechnrcal En ineerin and Earth Sciences Renton, WBShi� totl
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure A-1
� ' TEST PIT NO. 3
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 400'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(°/a) Comments
� SM Silty fine Sand w/occ gravel ioose moist dk brn
..... -
& abundant roots to 4" to brown
1
very
15.8
moist
2 .... - - --.. - ....._...
�ens�em ��o�n
3 . -� .............. ..�- - .. .... - ._........ .........._........ ................
very moist gray
w/some cementation da��se/ 9 6
4
5
Maximum depth 4 feet.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT NO. 4
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 405.5'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� Sod/or anics loose moist dark,brn
......... ..... .�--..9-...�..... �- �-- ....................
1 SM Silty fine Sand t� brown
with gravel to 3" very
moist
2 ................... ...............
�ens�em b�own 10.5
3
_cemented� .. . _ _.. V:�d��nsel.. . moist. . . g�ay . 8.4
4
5
Maximum depth 4 ft.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTAIVTS, 1NC. Proposed Residential Development
� .: i �; ' = 3517 & 3603 NE 7th Street
. _ ;.-._��
Geotechnical En ineerin and Earth Sciences Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure A-2
. � T�s-r Pir No. �
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 411'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� loose moist dk brn
Sod/organics
......... ....... . ............_....._............... ................
SM Silty fine Sand wlocc gravel to br�wn
� & abundant roots t� very dark
b ro�vn
2 r�ediem moist 12.1
3 ......._._... - - -..... ............. - - � ---
cemented hard moist ra 10.6
4
5
Maxirnum depth 3.5 feet.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT N�. 6
Logged by JAD
Date: 1l31/13 Elevation: 404'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� gM� Gravell Sil Sand loose moist dark
GM.. ............�vith�ravel__to 3" __brown
.......... to - ..
1 SM Silty fine.�Sand brown
wi h occ roots r�edium
. .............._..._ ._ ....ense-- ...
. ..._...... . . ................
2 r�edium �ra�- 10.3
ense ro n
3 cemented�-... ...............- ...hard� --.._. ..�r�y._... 9.8
4
5
Maximum depth 3.5 ft.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. Proposed Residential Development
_ ri,�x �£i s� -; 3517 & 36Q3 NE 7ih Street I
Geotechnicaf En ineerin and Earth Sciences Renton, Washin tOn ,
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure A-3 ,
. � TEST PIT NO. 7
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 403'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� Sod/or anics loose moist dk brn
..... . . ............9... - ........------....--��-- ........_ ...._...........
SM Silty fine Sand wlgravel ed-
1 �rown
& occ gravel to 6" 10.2
--� .........
li�ht
2 �- .... ..--�- b own
�edium
ense
3 ....................................... ......... .. ... ...............
cemented v.dense/ gray 7.4
hard
4
5
Maximum depth 4 feet.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT NO. 8
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 406'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%� Comments
� Sod/or anics loose moist �ark
. .. .... ............9........ -............ -� - ....
. . rown
1 SM Silty fine Sand w/gravel ���� � � row�
with occ. gravel to 6" �ens�em rown 10.8
2 ��-- - ---
�ra�-
ro n
3
.----- -� � ..................... .................. � � - - ...
4 cemented ha e�se/ gray 8 6
5
Maximum depth 4.5 ft.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. Proposed Residential Development
}�, ; � :�-1 '�<:_;:�, 3517 & 3603 NE 7th Street
Geotechnical En rneerir ard �.a��h ���ences Renton, WashingtOn
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure A-4
4 � TEST PIT NO. 9
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation 408'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(°/a) Comments
0 �
....... ..Sodforganics................................ loose moist ray
SM Silty fine and w/ r el �ark brn
, ........ ......... -- ..........
� occ: bo�u��e�to 12" dens�em brown �2 2
2 &abundant roots to 3"
� ... ..........
...._ ....1........................ �o�vn
................... ............ --
3 ha dnsel gray � �
4
Maximum depth 3.5 feet.
5 No ground water encountered.
6
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, IIVC. Proposed Residential Development
�i�g; 3517 & 3603 NE 7th Street
Geotechnica!Engineering and Earth Sciences Renton, WBshington
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3113 Figure A-5
�1"��,��, t ���.�".�,'�� ����'��� �����'�������.�����,� .�'�ti�� .� .��� .� ��
, .� ���
-- - ��
�: �
_:.��;,:�����a��c�l �E��gin ��rin� �x��d �.�r�f� �:si�r� �r�.w�
;
March 18, 2013
Mr. Kyle Miller
KRRV Development, LLC
' P. O. Box 908 �
� Ravensdale, WA 98051 I
;
! SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
� Proposed Residential Development
3513 NE 7th Street
Renton, Washington
Project No. 13-106-01
Dear Kyle, '
' This report presents the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the site of your
proposed new residential development on the subject property. The purpose of our �
work was to provide geotechnical engineering evaluations of the site and geotechnical '
recommendations for the residential development including design of foundations, site '
grading, site drainage and erosion control. Our work was performed in accordance with
the scope and conditions of our proposal dated February 11, 2013.
�
; A site topographic map and preliminary development plans (see Figure 2) were �
' provided to us and was used as a reference for our evaluations. Based on our review of �
' the plans provided and discussions with you, we understand that the property will be f
divided into 4 lots and the development will include a new 2-to 3-story wood-frame
residence on each of the new lots. The struct�ares will include ground level garages
; which will have slab-on-grade floors and the remainder of structures may have raised ;
i
floors with crawl space or slab-on-grade. !
�
� We assume that bearing wall loads will be in the range of about 2 to 3 klf and maximum '
; column loads to be in the range of about 10 to 20 kips. If actual structural loads exceed �
� the above values by more than 25%, this office should be notified. �
Review of the Renton online Sensitive Areas Maps indicates that the property is not
i indicated to be within a Landslide Hazard, Erosion Hazard, Seismic Hazard or Cval '
' Mine Hazard area. �
;
; ;
�
�
� �
� �
;
:`-'.�.�. �ox276, Issaquah, b1/�1 93027-027c5 • Phone: (425)391-�1228 Fax: �425) 397�=i2�&
,KRR`J Development, LLC March 18, 2013
SCOPE OF WORK
Our geotechnical evaluation included review of geologic mapping, site explorations,
engineering analyses and evaluations and the preparation of this report. The scope of
work included the following specific tasks:
o Review of published geologic mapping of the site vicinity and our recent
explorations on the adjacent property to the east.
o Performed a reconnaissance of the site as well as observations of the
adjacent developed lots to the east.
o Observed and logged three test pit explorations on the site (see Figure 2)
to depths up to 4 feet below existing ground. Logs of the test pits and
results of field and laboratory testing are presented in the Test Pit
summaries of Appendix A along with logs of adjacent explorations on the
adjoining property to the east.
o Performed geotechnical engineering evaluations of the proposed site
development and developed our geotachnical recommendations for
foundation design and site grading.
o Prepared this geotechnical report summarizing our findings and
recommendations.
OBSERVED SITE CONDITIONS I
The property is bordered on the west, south and east by developed residential Iots (we ,
are currently performing a geotechnical evaluation for new development of the next two
lots to the east. At the time of our field exploration the property was developed with a I
residence an� three out buildings as shown in Figure 2.
The topographic mapping included on the site plan of Figure 2 indicates that the
property generally slopes very gently down to the west/southwest at gradients that
range from only about 4 to 7 percent in localized areas and overall average gradients
across the property range from about 4 to 5 percent with a maximum elevation
difference across the property of about 8 feet from northeast to southwest.
The site was well vegetated primarily with gras�es but also included shrubs, fruit trees
and evergreen trees up to about 4 feet in diameter.
We did not observe any seeps or springs or evidence of current or past erosion on the �
site.
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 2
. KRR`ar Development, LLC March 18, 2013
Subsoils
Our evaluation of the subsurface conditions was based on our observations of three
exploratory test pits within the property plus review of our own three exploratory test pits
excavated within the adjoining property to the east (Project 13-103-01) as well as
review of published geologic mapping. Approximate locations of the onsite test pits
and the previous adjoining test pits are shown on Figure 2. Logs of the onsite test pits
and the previous adjoining test pits are presented in Appendix A. Subsoils encountered
in our test pits were found to include some minor fill and natural glacially consolidated
soils.
Fill soils were encountered in TP-1 (of Project 13-103-01) located at the northwest
corner of the adjoining property to the east. Fill soils were silty very fine sand with
occasional gravel and were only about 1 foot thick at that location.
Natural soils encountered at the test pit locations were generally silty fine sand with
gravel. The upper soils were typically loose to medium dense soils to depths of about 2
to 3.5 feet below the natural surface becoming �ery dense and hard and cemented at
greater depths.
Ground Water
� No ground water or seepage was observed in any of the test pits. Typically the shallow
soils were classified as moist to very moist and the deeper cemented soils were
classified as moist. The measured moisture contents of the soils generally ranged from
about 8 to 16 percent.
Subsurface Variations
Based on our experience, it is our opinion that some variation in the continuity and
depth of subsoil deposits and ground water levels should be anticipated due to natural
deposition variations and previous onsite structures and grading. Due to seasonal
moisture changes, ground water conditions should be expected to change with time.
Care should be exercised when interpolating or extrapolating subsurface soils and
ground water conditions between or beyond our test pits.
. .:;:,... , ,... .. , .,.. .. � �yy v ',
� .KRR�f Development, LLC March 18, 2013
SITE EVALUATIONS
General
The referenced geologic map of Figure 1 indicates the site vicinity to have surFace
exposures of glacial till (Qgt) soils. The Qgt glacial till soils are highly consolidated,
heterogeneous mixtures of sand, silt, clay and gravel soils deposited during the
advance of the Vashon glaciation, the last glacial advance into the Puget Sound area,
approximately 13,000 to 16,000 years ago.
Based on the soils observed on the site and review of the referenced map, it is our
opinion that the natural very dense/hard silty sand with gravel soils underlying the
property and are most likely glacially consolidated till deposits (Qgt).
I
Based on the results of our field investigations combined with our own experience and
judgment, it is our opinion that the geotechnical site conditions are suitable for the
proposed development provided our recommenc+ations are followed.
Hazard Assessment
Landslide: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Landslide
Hazard area. In addition, the geologic map of Figure 1 indicates no mapped landslides
within the site vicinity and our site observations indicate the site is currently stable.
Considering the very gentle slope gradients and the observed glacial till soils, it is our
opinion that the potential for future instability on the site is very low to nil.
Erosion: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Erosion
Hazard area. We observed that the site is well vegetated we observed no indication of
any seepage or concentrated water flow or current or past erosion on the site. Based
on our site observations and explorations it is our opinion that there is no unusual
erosion risk at this site and any potential erosion potential resulting from development
will be mitigated by our recommended grading procedures and drainage/erosion control
measures and by final re-vegetation/landscaping incorporated into the proposed
development plans.
Coai Mine: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Coal Mine
Hazard area. �
Seismic: The Renton Sensitive Areas Maps indicate the site is not within a Seismic �
Hazard area, however the Puget Sound region is a seismically active area. About 17+
moderate to large earthquakes (M5 to M7+) have occurred in the Puget Sound and �
northwestern Cascades region since 1872 (141 years) including the 2/28/01 M6.8
Nisqually earthquake and it is our opinion that the proposed structures will very likely
experience significant ground shaking during their useful iife.
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 4
,KRR�• Development, LLC March 18, 2013
i
I
Based on a recentiy published study the site lies only about 2.5 miles south of the
southern mapped location of the Seattle fault and about 18 miles southwest of the
estimated trace of the South Whidbey-Lake Alice fault both of which have postulated
maximum credible magnitudes of 7.0 to 7.5. Another recent study of the Vashon-
Tacoma area presents evidence for the east-west trending Tacoma Fault which is
indicated to pass through the south end of Vashon and the middle of Maury Island
about 10.5 miles southwest of the site. The study suggests that the Tacoma Fault and
the Seattle fault may be linked by a master thrust fault at depth.
i The Seattle fault has been documented to have moved at its west end (Bainbridge
Island) about 1000 to 1100 years ago and evidence of movement at the east end has
also recently been documented. Some experts feel that the recurrence interval
between large events on the Seattle Fauft may be on the order of several thousands of
years but our calculations indicate it may be on the order of 1200 to 1400 years. The
activity of the documented Tacoma fault is considered to be on the same order as the
Seattle fault. The recurrence of a maximum credible event on the South Whidbey fault
is not known but some experts have assigned a recurrence of about 3000 years,
however smaller events will occur rnore frequently as evidenced by the 5.3 event on
� May 2, 1996 which was attributed to that fault.
I
In addition to Puget Sound seismic sources, a great earthquake event (M8 to M9+) has
I been postulated for the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) along the northwest Pacific
� coast of Oregon, Washington and Canada. The current risk of a future CSZ event is
'I not known at this time. Published reports have indicated recurrence intervals for a CSZ
event to range from as little as 100-200 years to as long as 1000+ years and the time of
the last event is reported to have been about 313 years ago.
The 2009 )nternational Building Code (IBC) acopted by the City of Renton requires
consideration of a spectral acceleration level with probability of exceedance of 2
percent in 50 years for seismic structural design. This corresponds to about a 2475-
year recurrence interval earthquake ground motion. Based on the short period spectral
response accelerations presented in Figure 1613.5(1) of the 2009 IBC, adjusted as per
equations 16-36, 16-38 and factored as per section 1803.5.12(2), we estimate the IBC
peak ground acceleration far soils and foundation design at this site to be about 0.38g.
Please note that the 0.38g peak ground acceleration includes the additional reduction
factor of section 1803,5.12(2) and is not intended for structural analyses. NJ�
recommend the site be considered a Site Class D for structural design.
Secondary seismic hazards due to ea�thquake ground shaking incluc.:� ., �.,;:,�u ,,,���
failure, liquefaction, lateral spreading and ground settlement. Considering the very
dense/hard nature of the soils recommended for bearing at the site, it is our evaluation
that the potential for damage to the structures due to liquefaction, lateral spreading and
settlement is very low to nil. The potential for seismical(y induced shalfow failures is
also considered very low to nil.
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 5
� KRRV' Development, LLC March 18, 2013
Structure Support Considerations
in our opinion the undisturbed very dense/hard natural glacial tiil soils encountered in
our explorations should pravide good support for the proposed structure foundations.
Bearing soils are expected to be encountered at depths ranging from about 2 to 3.5 feet
below the natural ground surface at the site.
Foundations should penetrate through any existing fill, topsoil and loose/medium dense
soils to bear on undisturbed very dense/hard natural soils. Conventional spread
footings are considered appropriate for support of the proposed structures considering
that bearing soils are at shallow depths. However, if any deep fill areas are encountered
on the site, lean concrete footing extensions or pipe piles could be used to transfer
foundation loads to the deep bearing soils in those areas. We have included
recommendations for spread footings and pipe piles in this report.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following subsections present our recommendations for design of foundations, site
grading, drainage control and erosion control. Also included are recommendations for
plan review and observations and testing during construction.
Spread Footinq Foundations
Conventional spread footings founded on undisturbed very dense/hard natural glacial till
soils should provide good support for the proposed structures. Bearing soils are
expected to be encountered at depths ranging from about 2 to 3.5 feet below the
natural ground surface of the site.
Continuous wall footings should be at least 18 inches wide. Square footings for column
support should be at least 24 inches wide. Footings supported on undisturbed very
dense/hard natural glacial till soils may be designed based on an allowable bearing
pressure of 2000 psf. '
All footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade.
Where the natural bearing soils slope, the footing excavation should be stepped to
maintain a horizontal bearing surface.
If deep fill �r other unsuitable soils are encountered, foundation loads may be ,
transferred from the recommended minimum foundation depths to the recommended I
very dense/hard bearing soils by a monolith of lean concrete having a minimum
compressive strength of 1000 psi. The width of an un-reinforced lean concrete I
monolith should be at least as wide as the footing or at least one-third of the monolith
height, whichever is greater. Reinforced monoliths should be designed by a structural
engineer. A suitable width trench should be excavated with a smooth edged excavator '
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 6
,KRRV Development, LLC March 18, 2013
bucket (no teeth) to expose the dense/very dense bearing soils under observation by
our office and backfilled as soon as possible with the lean concrete to the footing
elevation. .
The estimated settlement of a 18-inch wide continuous footing carrying a load of 3 kips
per foot is on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 inch. Our settlement estimates assume that
foundations are supported on undisturbed very dense/hard natural bearing soils and
that all fill and loose/disturbed material is removed from the bearing surface prior to
concrete pour. Maximum differential settlement within the proposed structures is
expected to be 1/2 inch or less. Settlements are expected to occur primarily during
construction.
Resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by friction acting at the base
of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be
assumed with the dead load forces in contact with on-site soils. An allowable static
passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth may be used for the sides of
footings poured against undisturbed medium dense natural soils or properly compacted
structural fill. An allowable static passive earth pressure of 150 psf per foot of depth
may be used for the sides of footings or grade beams poured against existing loose
soils.
The vertical and lateral bearing values indicated above are for the total dead load plus
frequently applied live loads. For short duration dynamic loading caused by seismic or
wind forces, the ve�tical bearing values may be increased by 50 percent and allowable
lateral passive pressures may be increased by 33 percent.
Driven Pipe Pile Foundations
If deep fill or other unsuitable soils are encountered, foundation loads may also be
transferred from the recommended minimum foundation depths to the recommended
very dense/hard bearing soils by properly constructed pipe piles. This type of support is
constructed by driving 2-inch or 3-inch diameter steel pipe to refusal into the bearing
soils below existing unsuitable soils. Based on our experience, piles typically penetrate
about 5 to 15 feet into the bearing soils before encountering refusal.
Refusal penetration rates for piles will depend on the hammer size and the load testing
results. Refusal penetration rate for a 3-inch pile driven with a tractor-mounted 6501b
hydraulic hammer typically should be in the range of about 15 to 20 seconds per inch.
Refusal penetration rate for a 2-inch pile driven with a tractor-mounted 6501b hydraulic
hammer typicaliy should be in the range of about 8 to 10 seconds per inch.
Alternatively 2-inch piles may be driven using a 901b jack hammer plus the weight of the
operator or using a 140+fb rinho-type pile-top pneumatic hammer to a refusal
penetration rate of 1 inch or less per minute. We recommend that all pile instailation
and pile load tests be observed by our office to verify the allowable capacity and
refusal criteria for the production piles.
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 7
tKRRV Development, LLC March 18, 2013
An allowable vertical downward capacity of 6 kips (Factor of Safety = 2+) may be
assumed for 2-inch diameter piles and capacities of 10 kips (Factor of Safety = 2+) can
generally be assumed for 3-inch diameter piles installed as recommended above. No
uplift capacity or lateral support should be assumed for driven pipe piles. No lateral
support should be assumed for the pier shafts. Resistance to lateral loads can be
provided by battered piles (compression only) and by passive earth pressure against
the sides of grade beams. An allowable static passive earth pressure of 150 psf per
foot of depth may be used for the sides of grade beams poured against existing loose
soils.
Capacity may be limited by the structural capacity of the pipe and connections which
should be determined by the structural engineer. The pipe and couplers which form the
pile, must be of structural quality (schedule 40+) and must be provided with a corrosion
resistant coating (galvanized). The pipe pile supports should be capped with a grade
beam to transfer structural loads to the piles. The pile/grade beam system should be
designed by a qualified structural engineer.
Site Gradinq
Site grading is expected to consist primarily of excavation for proposed foundations and
subgrade preparation for slab and pavement areas and utility trenches. Onsite granular
soils cleaned of debris and organics are considered suitable for use in general
compacted fills but in our experience the onsite glacial till soils will be moisture
sensitive with regard to grading and compaction characteristics. Grading should be
scheduled for the late summer months if possible. Wet weather grading may require
the use of impo�ted clean granular fill soils which are more easily compacted at highe�
moisture levels. Recommendations for site preparation, temporary excavations
structural fill, subgrade preparation, site drainage and trench backfill are �
below.
Site Preparation: Existing vegetaticn, debris fiil �oils, and loose or organic natural soils
should be stripped from the areas that are to be graded. During rough grading, excess
soils may be stockpiled for later use. Stripping in subgrade areas is expected to
average about 1 foot. Soils containing more than 1% by weight of organics may be
used in planter areas, but should not be used for structural fill. Stumps, debris and
trash, plus rocks and rubble over 6 inches in size, should be removed from the site.
Subsoil conditions on the site may vary from those encountered in our test pits.
Therefore, our office should observe the prepared areas prior to placement of any new
fills.
Temporary Excavations: Sloped temporary construction excavations may be used
where planned excavation limits will not undermine existing structures or interfere with
other construction. Where there is not enough room for sloped excavations, shoring
should be provided.
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 8
, KRR`,✓ Development, LLC March 18, 2013
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits, it is our opinion that
sloped temporary excavations may be made vertically to depths of 4 feet or less.
Excavations up to 10 feet in depth should be sloped no steeper than 1:1 within
looselmedium dense sails and no steeper than '/2:1 (horizontal:vertical) within the un-
weathered, hard natural glacial till soils. It should be noted that the contractor is
responsible for safety and maintenance of constiuction slopes.
We recommend that cuts over 4 feet in depth be covered with visqueen tarp to help
control ravelling and sloughing. Surface drainage should be directed away from the top
edge of cut slopes. Surcharge loads should not be aliowed within 5 feet of the top of the
slope or within a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane extending up from the toe of excavation,
whichever is greater.
Structural Fill: Provided that soil moisture can be reduced and maintained near
optimum, excavated onsite soils cleaned of organics and debris may be used for
general structural fill but the onsite soils are expected to be moisture sensitive and
during the rainy season the soils may become too wet for practical compaction.
Therefore imported granular fill soils should be used if moisture conditions cannot be
adequately controlled.
Loose soils, formwork and debris should be removed prior to placing fill or backfill.
Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose
thickness and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by the ASTM D1557 test methad.
Imported granular fill should consist of clean, well-graded sand and grave! materials
free of organic debris and other deleterious material. Imported material for wet weather
grading should be a sand/gravel mixture with less than 5 percent fines based on the
��3t1C� if�CflOf�.
SlabiPa��t�7,�nt Supc;ort: �,a�s-��r-grade �n,� pa�rer���r�t snculd t�e ��:pport�d ,.:r�;�.ly ��n
undisturbed dense natural soils or on properly compacted structural fill over medium
dense natural soils. Where unsuitable soils (existing fill, loose and organic soils) exist
at subgrade level, subgrade preparation should include excavation of the unsuitabie
soils as required to expose medium dense natural soils or to a maximum depth of 2 feet
(or deeper as required to remove all organic soils where organic soil depths exceed 2
feet below final subgrade) and placement of structural fill to final subgrade elevation.
Subgrade fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations for structural
fill except that the top 6 inches of the subgrade fill should be compacted to at least 95
percent of the ASTM D1557 maximum dry density in pavement and driveway areas.
It should be noted that where the proposed slabs cross a fill/natural contact line, there
will be a high risk of cracking. Risk of cracking can be reduced by placing construction
joints at the contact and by proper steel reinforcement of the slab. Interior concrete
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 9
.KRR�;r Development, LLC March 18, 2013
slabs should be underlain by a capillary break consisting of a polyethylene vapor barrier
of at least 6 mil thickness.
Utility Trenches: Buried utility conduits should be bedded and backfilled around the
conduit in accordance with the project specifications. Bedding material should extend
from six inches below the pipe to six inches above the pipe. Where conduit underlies
pavement or slabs-on-grade, the remaining backfill above the pipe should be placed
and compacted in accordance with the recommendations for structural fill. If imported
granular fill is used for trench backfill it should be capped with 12 inches of onsite silty
soils.
Drainaqe Control
Surface drainage from the site and adjoining upslope areas should be controlled and
diverted around the development area in a non-erosive manner. Adequate positive
drainage ,should be provided away from the structures and on the site in general to
prevent water from ponding and to reduce percolation of water into subsoils. Granular
backfill should be capped with paving or 6 inche;� of onsite silty soils. A desirable slope
for su�fiace drainage is 2% in landscaped areas and 1% in paved areas.
Roof drains should be tightlined into the storm drain system (no discharge on the
ground surface). A permanent perimeter drain, independent of the roof drain system,
should be placed adjacent to the base of the continuous exterior foundations. The
drain should consist of a four-inch diameter perforated PVC drain pipe placed in at least
one cubic foot of washed drain gravel per lineal foot along the base of the foundations.
The drain gravel zone around the pipe should be encapsulated with a membrane of
Mirafi 140 filter fabric or equivalent between the drainage zone and onsite silty soils.
Erosion Control �
Although we observed no evidence of erosion, onsite soils are expected to be erodible �
when disturbed and exposed to concentrated water flows. Siltation fences or other
detention devices should be provided around the downslope side of the disturbed site ,
area and soil stockpile areas during construction to control the transport of eroded
material. The lower edge of the silt fence fabric should have "J" shaped embedment in I
a trench extending at least 12 inches below the nround surface. ,
I
Surface water flow should be collected in area drains and tightlined to the storm water
system, no water should be discharged on the site unless via a properly designed and
approved infiltration/dispersion system. Exposed final graded soil areas should be �
planted immediately with grass and deep rooted plants. �
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 10
.KRR� Development, LLC March 18, 2013
Plan Review
This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation of this site and to assist the
architect, structural and civil engineers in the design and construction of the project. It
is recommended that this office be provided the opportunity to review the final design
drawings and specifications to determine if the recommendations of this report have
been properly implemented and to make any supplemental design recommendations
which may be required.
Observations and Testinq Durinq Construction
Recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumption that soil
conditions exposed during construction will be observed by our office so that any
necessary design changes or supplements may be made. Foundation excavations
should be observed to verify that they expose undisturbed very dense/hard bearing
soils and that excavations are free of loose and disturbed materials.
All pile installation and testing should be observed by our office to confirm the allowable
design capacities. Refusal criteria for all driven pipe piles should be confirmed by our
office. Surface and subsurface drainage provisions should be verified by our office.
All structural fill and slab/pavement subgrade areas should be observed by a
representative of this office after stripping and prior to placing fill. Drainage control
systems should be observed by our office to verify proper construction. Proper fill
placement and compaction should be verified with field and laboratory density testing
by a qualified testing laboratory.
. I
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 11
�KRR� Development, LLC March 18, 2013
CLOSURE
This report was prepared for specific application to the subject site and for the exclusive
use of KRRV Development, LLC and their representatives. The findings and
conclusions of this report were prepared with the skill and care ordinarily exercised by
local members of the geotechnical profession practicing under similar conditions in the
same locality. We make no other warranty, either express or implied.
Variations may exist in site conditions between t►�ose described in this report and actual
conditions encountered during construction. Unanticipated subsurface conditions
commonly occur and cannot be prevented by merely making explorations and
performing reconnaissance. Such unexpected conditions frequently require additional
expenditures to achieve a properly constructed project. If conditions encountered
during construction appear to be different from those indicated in this report, our office
should be notified.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC.
4
� /
�•,\
L�� c S pt.. D Op1
� ti wast ;; .%�
James A. Doolittle "� �,5� �oF �i,
Principal Engineer -�Q'y� ��� := •�
.r � 1�" �3
...
:;�;,f���
r, yj.�.
Encl: Figures 1 and 2 �'����
Appendix A `�'�
�� �{�r�.:�� ,��
y
.y� i�y
^J'`'`�`i-;'J,!.,=' �
� +c: �I ../
Dist: 2/Addressee E��'a�' �'�' 20� �
Project No. 13-106-01 Page 12
� � i� � . . �... � � i� .� s� tir�r� ! '�l♦rJ�,!��; 1 1�'` �' � j�\ '' 1 . ..
�'�' � —�� ���,�v� .�i�`>�`�����'�- I - �. �� ' ..'1 (' .j � I�
� � I f��� .� �` . �`, � �.
J • �,_�_�' + ` c\*!�)1���. � � I� � ' ,
ri �•rt�s����•�� .��� •-.�• � . �' '- [ -F�� �t �_�.��`� �.lij . .. �� . � ��"�� ` -. R �'I ■ . . ..
'�+, � ���.u��r�` � . IjI. ��'' i i ��-�. i{ �.�.. t I,�j_1� ��i. F {-ii�'� � -���-� � �_ . I��� .
'�" :��i�� � � �I�:�I1�� '.�'y� �I � ti \��I . tt f.��!�[� 1 i� .� � ,.��- � �f-" . .'�..�.. - ,
�r��•��.��• s �� ■�I • ■ � ���.wU. �� '1�.1 wf y � ,� 1� tt �` . . �t �� { ` .. '.
�J�.. � G ,•' i^; 1 � .r h . � .
�.a,.��.ua ��, rLr t_JI G�. .,j, � .-.:� �_ �'
i%� �o�������I � •���'•+��i•�. �s�'l� �}:Y-���G �.� � �'l.-1 - �� � I
�1 / ��'�i�'. sl' r. . i.... � �� ��� . i� . n � �� I . •.
i
��� .....:�. ..� •�� 'o- '��L�!,�::i71� ;1 �: ti` ';
�„ -, : .�. ;;1.. . i�,hI�nc�, . .� ; e�e r l , i,= , �� ; � ;
J �
� y����'•.el►.-.��r \ 7 �� k�r. � � i.�; } ��J.:: ��. . '{ � � , I .
: ..;,�.�r. .�,;;;�I�'' Scn ,� [,.. .I� � �l� � � � �� i fJ .
. ; � [j��. `�.�, / � .�
"' ' �'� ;�( i r– d. � 3 r \
-�_''y��� . � ai1i�� ; ;��1��rt i ���`j, � � 4
•�'�iy • •�a'iY .. I� C . \ J � r.� r -r.�� ti� 1�.� I � . .. . . I .
• ,.'r ••••:�'••.li'� '� i. 1 1.�� F �1t��` � � - s a�� f. r e � �
. •a• a��Y ��i J' a � `,� I'/�:. �I � t � fi �. — ` (�� j�.q i�� . .�
� � ��f'7 ��� .�� s���f j :`, ,f .. �r{�.j..� �1 �� � •�' r LJ I.yl � �h �� � .
: 1 (t,�'�: r�_t '•�� _ � . �;! .. ��1 ��r�, ^ .. __� - �i . . �'� �1 -
. i� �_i •• '•s. al�i ir ` i:� �: �.}
�` ,�1.s`�� ��i� •��` �� �r 7- ���• r��_ kt�..� ��� . �J . .I �i ,�J � .
` ♦ •-.' � ? '� �f� /%I� • _ �^�� .�� -i.
�`{�\�l �.�r: ���,R �� �♦ ♦ �� �� ■� �' �) ��lr �' �� ��. �/ . . i i ,
� � i i _ �,
. � � `��* • . � •/ ��. .'a • ■1{. �I,, ' -�� . ..�� � 1— — : -
� . .�.� _ . . ,•J. � I. a ti � = .
�if��� �'.• '++��'� ',�� : i. �-: .''. •�i1 1�1� � `� � s�`�E - � I
.. � • ; .�� ,r I ��f1 ��� �If ( . � '.. f
����' �'� E .t - - i� i�\ �� i 4�w .{�i I� f� S ti . � - :1 . - 1
��`� t` : \ - � 1� li a �►a�.� � �• ;3'I�- 3 a r.�1�- i.� {��f �: ' �\� ( �.-t • .�� . -- --
� s iy�\� ��yl` �����yir�.�� ��—�-��.t��t�IJ � c� � ��' 11 J : t\, a. 1
♦ � 'w •\♦ ' �'-�-,���:.� 1������,yj.�'�i�.��� ' { :t �.
� — _- � I �
�r;� .l ��� -- —v-� { I 1 i( \ � • I �
� � � ,� � � � 1 �j�,�, \!I . . �t :,:� �, �
,y - ' ,r�.
.. � ` t ,,� X ��
% .;t j' _:; ,, •,•1 r,_~� , ,-,� e �� �;,� `.,� , � 342 t , c
, ����: �`i• . f.��v�,�,, }��.. ♦w r �f,'. � _� �
�� + J� � � : � .�• '� � . ,:. _./. � '
,✓'t',''�'''� � � � ��`�,('�_`� • '� ��� 1 � , � �` � �1: t`� �
��� �,;I,�v , . -, ♦ . 1��i ��i � f i . . �� , �i _
J�< \'', 1 •�:-�__ r\�"— � �`��f�j/i � ' l�_'--� � � � ` f �\
% • -;`v� �� �` � -i ♦ �; � � , + • i . � �
.• ; �, ,; ;.--�G �.> ,�,�,.L=�`I��� , ,, � ; , ; . •'��—�--;-�—L_--;��-
����._�--.� ,. c' ���r\ j ,. ,� � + rl �11 `
~' 1 -- � • ' ; ! i � i 4� i �
� �� �. j , � �I , � 4 . ,t �-;
i; • ^�,�--�' ' i`-��_�=�.=� -;'- �� �__ �__r-`;, , r i i_ ' 1 ' .
,,-- ��,: � ��
� \''; I - 1�.� ,�'�i �! r , • N, ,
;, ,,,i - ; ,�� ;� Greerv���oc�P.drt� � .:� _ �► ' \ ` .
+ J l� � ���D� � ,,� {I � � ��
�: ��
''(�� �S � _ _ ��QB x ./f� Ir I� ; . �, F 4 r 1�::... �� .
.' � r` I I ,�_ �.+: �
I�tir-�� �_ ` y i� {(:\� li � ( c. � ; � � � (t:r '�
— . :t-:_ t � 1� \� U . ---J--� ! 1 V�_ t ��f
- / ��r.:- �', �p\�� i�• if_�\.,�L___ __ —� _�--�. " � •
� . ,.. � . a \,. /. . �j_` lC':-^— ._�.,\c 1`•� . �i ,1` ��� � .
.\ �:��..�---� �.; �� . i� �: Ta�k T��S't��+�g r1��a '�
; •, �- ii�.. �
! fj'�1 ' �L � . � � f :� �� ,, n � 4C�b
� �'� _�,ve�` , �`..� ; _� , �c, ;�,-� t� (A6an� ���d� ,». � ,,
- f. c �� '�\. .�. �}-. . .J ����_.-.J L��_____.�L�—:��' � -� -� t r. ..
\ l • �
��r--; Cem i `�� � � ,; p,s,r — ---- — , , — � ���,
��� ��:, �=ti...� \ : ,�`' - ��� ,, �
�
;, ..;,� � -,, �� , � I.,
;'��" [�(�^ • �i i ::i_ ��.
'\` I ; ,
. \ . � I1 �.LiJ'�r / � . . .. 1t f �. �' .
;4 / L �t.
�''� c—� 321. t 51 ,
,� �:I `��.Q ; ,�, — :�.� �;. —
�., k�f ' �--' �:
� �. , � -_.,; \, �:
`�����/. _�` .. J� f ,` i , ��' C_-._�.'r � , i ��•., �s.. ;
� �-" --� i�y �� �` � r�-�
,��l ` �., ,,�' ,^� ;"� ` ��.�.4� � ��t 1• � ��..:. _
� --� L�,_�,_ ,,,� ,t L ,� `
�.� �� .\.� + � �i �,% �'.`-� ��-`:� ''�-�.�� `��t � �t� r ;
`-v�� �, ` 1 -�i�-''-=:��-G.U�-��/ .� `��-,��.�i� `` r-`.\� }. `.
��` ' �r-� �1 t.�� `' � � ..
_ `� � .-�:.' �—: -�.���'_� I `����i� ,� -,_ +1
1 � , .� � _ -�'� ���.�-� �.� ..� � +
� ��.�;-y�' a f � � � , , ; __� ,- � .� _
' . L_� `� �, \� �� . `
� y� � _� �., _ . �',- -- ������������• ■ ■�����' ( 4 ` ��' � ,' � ',i . .
� l: "l ���� � 1 •/�I���������� •�• �\' ` \��� '�'/� � i�� ' ���� f� ' .
•�f._ - I � . �'�� • e•������\ .` \- : �.�� /_1i -�/�;.',liA�t�
v:. _
ref: Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle
by D. R. �Iullineaux, USGS Map Gn-405, 1965
IIzlarged Scale� 1"=1000' SITE VICINITY GEOLOGIC MAP
Proposed Residential Development
GEOSPECTRUM CONSCILTANTS, INC.. 3513 NE 7th Street
�;�, ' �. � RPnton, Washington
Goofochn/co/E�g/noorl�g on�-J Lorfh �cloncoa
Proj. No.13-106 Date 3/13 Figure �
� �:- .'.. :� _ _ _ � _ �_
i�` � � i'4 � 7��$t.T�t '\
.atua�.:�_._d,.;_s_.:;� ..�"-- - - - . ` � -----
(j \______�—,____.�,. r��� r,....z �z -` ��;s . ` `
i. \ _��1 , �}�^:r Y �� i '.. �. .J.- _ � .�`��
---;.�-1.� . . :'ti.'x'+e'`�r ^!`arv�t!"` i �!7"�.�ah ,�5.. ,;. �!,',��. �...� --
_. ._ _ ` _ ' ; i �. _ �• -`�� - �'�-- -•--�-'� -
I t) � - r �
I 1 � ^ #
,� 35 `� � �s
� ���-- - �- , �.
,
� z t
� �� ;j 3 �'� e,,f, �, _ � y'`� � 1 �
r ,� �,� ,�;�. ,�-" }"a���-- :�. �
��. �. � pr. „G� ?.❑ �P 'f. . :.;4 ?�I`,
� � y �
��,�� � 15, i R ��.� � ( 1 3 1;,Q;3_=�01 )��
20' � >
i
jtJ-� jI I l �I i 4 '
-`'- F I 1 � ;nl � i �'� .
f �� I _!}.�.� 4 � ' � �
�'� � �..��'_.a.—F��'_-'f�---� J t ; J �� �� 1� I
�i �I 1,��� -'_`--} "--�-.. ( �. ! £ / f W
'i 4`• �� � p,�7���r :�.�, � �� \^''� �� ii� � ^' '�,,... O
i .:�, �""' i I I�,Y%9y,g$�' �_�, 1 � �`�/� //'�:.� r::,��f � � U
� , i j , ii/�/�l�/I:%���i, rr� o �
` i`,�f i , ,� 1 / . , � �
ti �,�o�?^ i�� ✓ � t1 ! / .:.- �
� �f"�,/�� .1 ��!j��,� '//1/�/..h'� � � ���% �/s�f,f�/Ji// � � �
� � 4 � / �,s / ��'�����
I �;I k!!! } il�i ' l E::.����. ' `,'�� � � Q
I I I 15' 1 ( � ��=1`��.;_ .-:': :•.'!
I I ��� �� � r i �- ,s/.p.
� fl �
I �I �� � � � � �� ;� � �,..� �
� �
jf � I i Q ' �' �• � � �
1 �I ! I n r` ��� M
. --r-�
. I
V
- �
II . ,
i� it f � � �j��� ` ��
i t� i ti�� � .t�'_35'-- � �
:,�, i h � ..-- —_ �• / �
i. L �� ``` — .. �`��r`' J„�^'---___'- R,
� 1 --- � \.: � Q+�
�� I �t� I � � ,7 �J
�c = � 5. �f .-�`^��! �'`` W z. �
!� - ; ..� �' !�I
� 'i � y / ,u {�,
'� i i '�� � o� �
�
i `� �
/
i � N -
i
� O
�:- �
.�
� ` r'/ri o
,` , �
_ 1 , �f �� � �
`� � TP-2,% — —35,- — �� /1 cd
� '.� `� 9,c� �j =
; !i + l ' � � (1�� � II
�' � � 1 / r ./ �
i: '� i( f �"'� �� ��� t'j � � �L'' �
III }�,,,� `� - �I'fi � : � C/� F-� �
end of hammer head i ,� � '�rn� r �� �� � ,-1
� i 'I ; o=' �,�.f% r, r •� A�� r
"i � /f �� U
-� `'� � C 5,� TP—2 \\/1 rd� �-�
r t �
� � � 95.97r----� � ,� : �1 3,-,; �'� �"'" �^'.�^ ;
t ,j` ' t W ✓ �
�! �----- ;----- �-� ��-__-., � �' �
s� � ,�l � a �' r:
i ! i `; �'j' `1
i � ,.
� ' �a
i ` i �
�`- �``� i i i \ 1 �
� � � � !�� ,�
� ` i � . r
i ` ,,, i -�"� L �:<:
\J -' ` �.�
t . �
1 � ��l � � � �
� � i F � °' �
�� � � i ;, � 3-1 �3 0-� �
i
— — -- -- -- — '�!�x�--- �_ , —� ;'c ���`� .��
t.: .
; �.
, �.l --� � � ""--�.< .�
� - ! � �;>
SITE DEVELOPMENT & EXPLORATION PLAN
GE4SPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC.. �'oposed Residential Development
3513 I� 7th Street
,u�:��;��'�" .; Renton, Washington
< ; : .
,. . . ,...:.....;>rc,:.,:., :.
Gootochnfco/Eng/noaring ond F_o�th Sc/oncos
Proj. No.13-106 Date 3/13 Figure 2
� '
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
Our field exploration included a site reconnaissance and test pit explorations. During
the site reconnaissance, the surface site conditions were noted, and the locations of the
test pits were approximately determined.
The test pits were approximately located using the existing structures as a guide. The
approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 2. Test Pit elevations were
estimated based on the topographic mapping shown on Figure 2.
Test pits were advanced using a trackhoe excavator. Soils were continuously logged
and classified in the field by visual examination, in accordance with the ASTM Soil
Classification system.
Logs of the on-site test pits are presented on the test pit summary sheets A-1 and A-2.
Logs of test pits from the adjacent property to the east (our Project No. 13-103-01) are
included on Figures A-3 and A-4. The test pit summaries include descriptions of the
soils and pertinent field data. Soil consistency and moisture conditions indicated on the
logs are interpretations based on the conditions observed in the field. Boundaries
between soil strata indicated on the logs are approximate and actual transitions
between strata may be gradual.
� ' TEST PIT N4. 1
Logged by JAD
Date: 2/13/13 Elevation: 400'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� loose moist �ark
........ ......�.................._....9--�- ��---..........
SM Sil fine Sand wlor anics& roots rown
� .......-� .........................�----....... - ............. ................
SM Silty fine Sand w/gravel light
brown 10.1
Z - � -- -� -...-
�ens�em ��o�vn 8.2
3 .._ ._...........
dense
c�emented. . _ - - --ha dnsei g�aY - - 7.9
4
5
Maximum depth 4 feet.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT NO. 2
Logged by JAD
Date: 2/13/13 Elevation: 399'
Depth Blows Class. Soi! Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� . ....... ..Sod.................................. . . - loose moist dark
� SM__. __Silty.fine Sand w/organics.&.roots
brown
SM Silty fine Sand w/gravel ��qht
& fine roots °W�
2 '
11.2
3 ........ . . .......................- - --�m:d�rsse�
. . .
..cemerite. .......................... ...v:-d��risel". ......_..- � 8.8
4
5
Maximum depth 4 ft.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. Proposed Residential Development
� �:: F � �:� �7�= 3513 N E 7th Street
Geotechnical En ineer,�r�a acd Ear;n �����enc�s Rentoll, WaShin tOtl
Froj. No. 13-106 Date 3/13 Figure A-1
� ` TE�T PIT NO. 3
Logged by JAD
Date: 2/13/13 Elevation 403'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
0
--...... ..Sodlorganics................................ loose moist ra
SM Silty fine Sand w/gravel to 3" �ar�C brn
� .brown
13.5
2 .----...... ..........
�ense Se� �o�rvn
..-�...................... .......... ....... ........... - -
3 v.dense/ gray
cemented hard 8.6
4
Maximum depth 3.5 feet.
5 No ground water encountered.
6
7
I
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, (NC. Proposed Residential Development
, :�;� F � 3513 N E 7th Street
Geotechnrcal Engrreen,nq ar,d Er����� ��`e���e� Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 13-106 Date 3/13 Figure A-2
� ' TEST PIT fVO. 1
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 406'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� SM Silty fine Sand w/occ gravel loose moist dk brn FILL
...............
1 brown
......... ...... ......................................... ............... ......._....... .. ...
SM Silty fine Sand w/occ gravel medium brown
dense
2 to
dense moist/ �ed- 16.5
ve rown
3 ..mo�st........ .. �- �
very moist gray
w/some cementation da� e/ 9
4
5
Maximum depth 4 feet.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT NO. 2
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 403'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� SM Silty fine Sand wlorganics loose moist �ark
rown
--...- ..... . ...............� -......................... to .............
1 SM Silty fine�and brown
wi h occ. gravel to 6" very
moist 13.4
2
...m:d�nse-.
3 �cemented-.. - . � -- . . v: de�rrsel m�tst-
4
5
Maximum depth 3.5 ft.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, 11VC. Proposed Residential Development
-- t�� �` � 3517 8� 3603 NE 7'h Street
� .,a.�,s':�:
Geofechnical En ineerin and Earth Sciences Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure A-3
� ' TEST PIT NO. 3
Logged by JAD
�
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 400'
Depth Blows Class. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� SM Silty fine Sand wlocc gravel loose moist dk brn
.........
& abundant roots to 4" to brown
1
very
moist 15�8
2 .......--��- --.... --- -�-----....
�ens�em �o�ivn
3 ......................� -......... ........----.._.... ..... - ........... .....-�-- -----
very moist gray
w/some cementation hanse/ 9 6
d
4
5
Maximum depth 4 feet.
6 No ground water encountered.
7
TEST PIT NO. 4
Logged by JAD
Date: 1/31/13 Elevation: 405.5'
Depth Blows Ctass. Soil Description Consistency Moisture Color W(%) Comments
� Sod/or anics loose moist _dark brn
- ..9........................................
1 SM Silty fine,�Sand t� brown
wi n gravel to 3" very
2 .................. moist ..............
�ens�em el�own 10.5 i�
3
cemented........ . . .. .. .. ...v:d��risel.. . moist... ... g�ay . 8.4
4
5 I
Maximum depth 4 ft.
6 No ground water encountered. �
7
GEOSPECTRUM CONSULTANTS, INC. Proposed Residential Development
' ` '�. � _' 3517 & 3603 NE 7�h Street
- �:: ,' �=�
Geotechnrcal En rneer�r,� , ; �=���n Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 13-103 Date 3/13 Figure A-4 �
�
. -.�r-"`.�;�' I
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY --^-�.�clry of- . �
. ���:
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT �� ��. �_ I '� �.� i � ���;y
�:; _ �. j
ADMINISTRATIVE SHORT PLAT REPORT & DECISION
A. SUMMARYAND PURPOSE OF REQUFST
� REPORT DATE: J u n e 4, 2013
I� Project Narne: NE 7th West Short Plat
I� Project Number: LUA13-000496;SHPL-A �
�'I.
, Project Manoger: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner
Owner: Arthur and Gertrude Stirn• 3513 NE 7th St- Renton WA 98
, , 056
Applicont: Kyle Miller; KRRV Dev, LLC.; P.O. Box 908; Ravensdale WA 98051
Contact:. Darrell OfFe; Offe Engineers; 13932 SE 159th PI; Renton 98058
Project Location: 3513 NE 7th St; Renton WA 98056
Project Summary: The applicant has proposed subdividing a 0.66 acre property, located at
3513 NE 7th St, in the Highlands neighborhood of Renton, into 4 lots
suitable for single-family residential development.The proposed action, a
short plat, is an administrative process. The property is designated
Residential Single Family in the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use
Plan and zoned Residential 8 (R-S). The proposed development density ':
7.7 dwelling units per net acre.
Exist. Bldg. Area SF: N/A Proposed IVew Bldg. Area N/A
(footprint):
Proposed IVew 8/dg.Area (gross): N/A
Site Area: 28,657 gsf(0.66 Total Building Area GSF: N/A
acre)
� i i i i. 1 4
— �:w � ' U,.. �I � _---,�� I�s �`��
' ✓�5;.0 3E�n - � ��
� t � ��� (e��.��
,.
; ' I �_�, _ ; -
� � �
-- — — — � � �� �E�2 � �'�' � �? �
_ - - _ _�--� .��� � �
. .. . . . _, . _ .. . .
�-i . � -j.-' �_ �a! '
�,— — — � c �
� + `u 17��,;
�� -- ? — F ry
�s_ ' S _ rt _--'.� _ `n _ .a ° �' � � _
. ,--i �°0 - _ ro '.,�,�: .� - _ _�_,� ��' `� so',
— i., i� -: ; � ���-31�,
i '�.. �- �� �. -�s �..-3X�� :�. Sr^ _ � . �
� :n,
�- � � �'�
�. i - `� ; I �.w ,�� SE ��n�-i
— `� ::.�.:� �" 3�. --.�"`� y,
_ �Fhii%. 1 .5 � � '.- . '
r�' �.. -b� � � _ i �----� 6� v
��! ' '= L _ — � II a='.3, _ ts .�p �
_ __ ,� ' — _— ' _ JI _� __ �� .p' q-�°1'—
� .. �. � J ` �5,p . . _`7 _ P ,�.r s �_I �,r`_����
L�,�dl, j 3�.. 2=1�� .ib��ld1Kl�,a { D�� •�� j�'S� � �� � L- I r I p-
, � ��s'��� �� '` �r�` .z�'1"=i _ I- �� titi' ��`` l�
=-�-T � �`� �,� � -- F -
� .�.�`,�.���.��"r `_ — '�� ��� `�`�! ` `� E6�� �" I �
�' �"�,- g, , �- �'�� - � ,�''�
_—z �,��� ' �` `� 'y�'�`.�� �+�- � —i
� x � c . '3� - -'� �'.,,. o _ S+ -
2
�..� 3.3 "t'-�� �E'" /� � �a' `, � .��f� , � u5n
� '��.�I���,E.�i��GfS: _'i . �.i ��"-.� '`.r�.����s��,�� rt� ..������ Ii�I�.���lE�i�
Project Location Map
Short Pfai Report 13-000496
Ciiy of Renton Department of Community& Economic Deve(opment Administrotive Short Plat Report& Decision
11:F 7TH tiVEST SHORT PLAT LUA23-000496;SHPL-A
Report of June 4, 2013 Page 14 of 17
4. The proposed NE7th West Short Plat complies with the street standards as established by City
Code, provided the project complies with all advisory notes and conditions of approval
contained herein.
K. DECISION:
The NE 7th West Short Plat, File No. LUA13-000496; SHPL-A, is approved, subject to the following
condition:
l. The private road {Olympic Court NE) shall be required to extend from the proposed
hammerhead eastward to the east property line, forming a looped private roadway with the
private road of the proposed neighboring short plat at 3517 NE 7th Street, LUA13-000514.
Maintenance of the private road and abutting landscaping shall be by the underlying property
owners of the easement area.
DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION:
SIGNATURE: ,
�
�, La�3
C.E. "Chip"Vincent, CED Administrator ate
TRANSMITTED this 4th day of lune, 2013 to tlte Contact/App(icant/Owner(s):
Contod: Applicant: Owner(sJ:
Darrell Offe Kyle Miller Arthur&Gertrude Stirn
Offe E'ngineers KRRV Dev., LLC 3513 NE 7th Street
13932 SE 159`h Place PO Box 908 Renton, WA 98056
I Renton, WA 98058 Ravensdole, WA 98051
TRANSMITTED this 4th day of lune, 2013 to the Party(iesJ of Record:
�
Mike Moran Bob Gevers
671 Pierce Court NE 900 Kirkland Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
TRANSMITTED this 4th day of lune, 2013 to the following:
Neil Watts, DevelopmentServicesDirector
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services
Jan Conklin, Development Services �
Carrie Olson, Development Services
lennifer Henning, Current Planning
Fire Marshal
Renton Reporter
Short Plat Report 13-000496 •
y_ r
Section 7: Other Permits
None applicable at this time
I
Section 8: CSWPPP Analysis and Design
The proposed development consists of 1.91 acres of developed area. A DOE NOI and SWPPP will
be required by the developer prior to start of clearing and grading. An Erosion Control Plan has
been included within the utility construction permit submittal. This plan will be approved and
included within the construction permit issued by the City of Renton.
� f
Section 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant
These documents will be prepared and provided at the time of Construction Plan submittal to the
City of Renton. At this time, the storm system and analysis provides for a conceptual system that
will be finalized during civil plan preparation.
.
Section 10: Operation and Maintenance Manual
The Operation and Maintenance Manuals will be prepared and provided at the time of Construction
Plan submittal to the City of Renton.