The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03738 - Technical Information Report � � m '�_{ � � � � Y�.: Technical Information Report _ � �:a,� �� f ��i;' � a`� ��.&;t' '',4 . :+ � '�- � � _ � .# � Canyon Terrace NWC 124t'' Ave SE and SE 192"d St Renton, WA 98058 � � , �S C Report prepared by � � , �q Mead � � - lunt � . � . _. „�„ � Offices Nationwide � www.meadhunt.com o��ssIONAL �� (�� 1 � March 10, 2015 3 ?38 �i ' �_ , �: �- Technical Information Report �-�� % +-�'�� _ � �. `�a, ^��= s,.�� , . �._. d• �a�'�� ,$ ,� -.� � �'��`� �� ,`- >s � ,, .`y �: = - � �" k: �A� �� - - , _°'� -: :, - � ��-. _ ' -�� .,�.� _�" Canyon Terrace NWC 124th Ave SE and SE 192"d St Renton, WA 98058 � Report prepared by ��1 � w r �q Mead r�1' ; - =_� Iunt � � z� � ,�„ � O�ces Nationwide ��'�ssjo � ��ti �� www.meadhunt.com NA ��0 March 10, 2015 Table of Contents Page 1.0 Project Overview...............................................................................................................................1 2.0 Conditions and Requirements Summary..........................................................................................3 2.1 Core Requirements .............................................................................................................3 3.0 Offsite Analysis.................................................................................................................................5 3.1 Upstream Basin Area ..........................................................................................................5 3.2 Downstream Areas-Immediate Proximity.........................................................................6 3.3 Downstream Drainage Course............................................................................................6 3.4 Site Discharge Locations.....................................................................................................6 3.5 SE 192nd Street Drainage System .....................................................................................7 3.6 Resource Review................................................................................................................7 4.0 Flow Control and Water Quality Analysis and Design......................................................................9 4.1 Existing Site Hydrolo9Y........................................................................................................9 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology.................................................................................................10 4.3 Water Quality Analysis and Design...................................................................................13 4.4 Flow Control Analysis and Design.....................................................................................14 4.5 Wetland Hydrology............................................................................................................14 5.0 Conveyance System Analysis and Design.....................................................................................16 5.1 Onsite Conveyance System..............................................................................................16 5.2 Bypass System..................................................................................................................16 5.3 SE 192nd Street Conveyance System..............................................................................16 6.0 Special Reports and Studies..................................•--�---.................................................................18 7.0 Other Permits...........................................................................................�--....................................19 8.0 CSWPPP Analysis and Design ......................................................................................................20 9.0 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries and Declaration of Covenant...............................................21 10.0 Operations and Maintenance Manual ............................................................................................22 List of Figures I 1.1 -Technical Information Worksheet I 1.2-Vicinity Map ' 1.3-Existing Conditions Basin Map 1.4-Developed Conditions Basin Map 1.5-NRCS Soils Map and Information 3.1 -Offsite Basin Map 3.2-Offsite Analysis Drainage System Table 3.3-FEMA Map 3.4-King County Wetland Inventory Map ' 3.4.1 -Renton Sensitive Areas-Slopes Map � 3.4.2- Parcel Report-Environmental Hazards(None) � 3.5-Offsite Basin Map Upstream of 192"� Street System � 4.2-Concentrated Flow Dispersion �� 4.2.1 -Typical Concentrated Flow Dispersion for Steep Driveways � Mead�-lunt Table of contents 4.3—Water Quality Basin Map 5.1 —Conveyance Map 5.3— 192nd Street SE (North Side) Basin Map 8.1 -Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Basin Map 9.1 —Facility Summary Forms Appendices Appendix A-WWHM Outputs-Pond Sizing Calculations, wetland hydrology calculations and overflow calculations Appendix B—StormFilter& Basic Wet Pond Wetpool Sizing Calculations and overflow calculations Appendix C—WWHM Outputs—Compensatory Areas and Flow Splitter Calculations Appendix D—WWHM Outputs—Upstream Drainage Basin Calculations IAppendix E—Onsite Conveyance System Calculations—WWHM Outputs, Preliminary Pipe Sizing Appendix F—Special Reports and Studies (Wetland and Geotechnical Reports) Appendix G— 192^� Street SE (North Side)Basin Hydrologic Calculations and Culvert Hydraulic Calculations Appendix H—Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control-WWHM Outputs,Trap/Pond Sizing and Orifice Sizing �I i ' �� Mead�-lunt � _ -� � 1.0 Pro'ect Overview J The proposed Canyon Terrace project is located immediately north of the border between Renton and Kent, northwest of the intersection of�24'h�vs��s�E and-SE.192nd Street.The project is bound to the north by the existing terminus of SE 188'"St and a single family residence,to the east by Boulevard Lane Park,to the south by two single family residences and SE 192nd Street, and to the west by single family residences. The area is zoned R-4 by the city of Renton; however, the project is vested under King County's R-6 zoning. The Canyon Terrace project is a consolidation of three approved preliminary plats,formerly known as Wehrman, Flueve des Voiles,and Cogger.The plats were consolidated under a minor modification, approved under project number LUA13-000804 on September 11, 2013. For project location, please refer to Figure 1.2, Vicinity Map, located in this section. The proposal includes development of 72 residential lots, construction of an internal road system, associated grading, utilities, landscaping, storm water management facilities including water quality and flow control,which are discussed in greater detail in section 4.0 of this report. Presently,the site is covered largely in forest. 124"'Avenue SE is the one significant portion of the site that has been disturbed.While unpaved, it has been used by a neighbor as a driveway and is currently covered in crushed rock. Existing site topography consists of steep slopes along much of the site, ranging from approximately 25%, up to 40%, generally from west to east toward Big Soos Creek. Storm water runoff currently sheet flows through the forested area on its way to the wetlands and ultimately to Big Soos Creek to the east. Please refer to the existing conditions basin map, Figure 1.3 of this section, for additional information. Soils in the area are listed by the USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. Upon review of the site's geotechnical information, dense Iodgement till was found to be present near the surface of most of the site. In general,stormwater runoff from upstream travels beneath an approximately 12"thick layer of forest duff as interflow along the top of the weathered lodgement till before reaching sands and gravels near the east side of the site near the valley floor. Cunently, additional infiltration testing is being performed and will be included as a part of this report prior to permit approval. Please refer to USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey maps and information in Figure 1.5 of this report, to the Geotechnical Report for the Flueve Des Voiles Plat by Gary Flowers and Associates, and to subsurface exploration data by Associated Earth Sciences in Section 6.0 of this report. In the proposed condition,the site will be approximatelv(53% mpervious. Building pads will be terraced or benched into the slope, with the intent to construct daylig asements for the future homes. Interior roads, which will connect to SE 188'h SVeet at the north end of the project and to 124th Avenue SE to the south, will provide access to the home sites. Interior road design contains a storm drain system that will collect and convey onsite storm water runoff to one of two water quality facilities and ultimately to a combined detention/infiltration pond along the eastern side of the project. In addition, storm water runoff 9 � Page 1 Mead�l-lunt from lots abutting the eastern property line will bypass the facilities,will surface discharge by way of lot dispersion, and will serve to maintain the hydrology of the wetla� nd.�ther lot areas underlain�y.Q�twash soils will utilize dry wells to infiltrate storm water runoff from roof top areas. Treated, detained storm wate� _._ __.---,._.._�.. runoff will be disc3laar.ged.uia.Je�c�l spreader to the vegetated,area abutting Big Soos Creek. --�__._.___.--_ 124'h Avenue SE, which cannot be collected by the proposed storm drainage system will bypass the proposed storm drainage facility.To compensate for the area not collected, an upstream area from draining a portion of SE 188'h Street and other upstream areas will be collected and conveyed to the proposed storm drainage facility. As the upstream area is greater than the area not collected, flows will be split in a structure located along SE 188t''Street. Please refer to Section 5.0 for flow splitter calculations and to Section 4.0 for further discussion of compensatory area hydrologic calculations. Upstream Basin Maps showing the areas mentioned are provided in Section 3.0. I Page 2 Mead�-lunt �� __ __`- • ��;. ,� _ .; KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OVIMER AND Part 2 PROJECT IOCATION AND PROJECT ENGINEER DESCRIPTION Project Owner � Project Name u �Trmc.� Phone 2.53 —�Sy —�-►S DDES Permit# Address 1�b00 �r i�;c�y�Ser� Q�. Location Township �� /� u�ew,� 1.,) Range S � Project Engineer �a ; Section 5�..1 33 Company c� v� Site Address �(11�G �`1�h�ve S�, Phone�''2�—�O-7— �� G S� ( 2h �� Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS � Landuse Services ❑ DFW HPA ❑ Shoreline Subdivison ! Sho�t Subd. / UPD Management ❑ COE 404 ❑ Building Services ❑ DOE Dam Safety � 5tructural M/F/Commerical I SFR RockeryNaulU,�,}gl,�S Clearing and Grading ❑ FEMA Floodplain � ESA Section 7 Right-of-Way Use ❑ COE Wetlands Other ❑ Other Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Site Improvement Plan (Engr.Plans) Type o#Drainage Review Fu11 / Targeted / Type(circle one): F�.u7b ! Modified ! (circle): Large Site Small Site Date(include revision Date(include revision � dates): dates): Date of Final: Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type{circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication / Experimental/ Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of A roval: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual I/9/2009 1 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMEIVTS Monftoring Required: Yes / No Describe: Start Date: Completion Date: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan: Special District Overlays: Drainage easin: �� SooS Cr.tn.� Stormwater Requirements: �S�L �.7 C�,� �.v�— Z -��.� ,� c��rb� Part 9 ONSITE ANQ ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS ❑ River/Stream � Steep Slope �7✓�S e _ ❑ Lake ❑ Erosion Hazard � Wetiands (.,,c��C.o..,v,�' ❑ Landslide Hazard ❑ Closed Depression ❑ Coal Mine Hazard ❑ Floodplain ❑ Seismic Hazard ❑ Other ❑ Habitat Protection ❑ Part 10 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential � ��cS�,rc..�u o c1� �� --� /,� S i� /.JI d�,>��i 1�,1�7 )�'-�o % sc�,.t.�-.�. ❑ High Groundwater Table(within 5 feet) ❑ Sofe Source Aquifer ❑ Other ❑ Seeps/Springs ❑ Additional Sheets Attached 2009 Surface Water Design Manual ]/9/2009 2 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL III TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET I'� Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS I REFERENCE LIMITATION 1 SITE CONSTRAINT 'I ❑ Core 2-Offsite Analvsis �31 Sensitive/Critical Areas laz�Ur�r� ��rCr�_.-� ❑ SEPA ❑ Other ❑ ❑ Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET rovide one TIR Summa Sheet er Threshold Dischar e Area Threshold Discharge Area: , name or descri tion �v y�u � �on sr�z �S�:-,� Core Requiremenks(a118 apply) Dischar e at Natural Location Number of Natural Dischar e Locations: Offsite Analysis Level: 1 2 / 3 dated: Flow Control Leve(: 1 3 or Exemption fVumber incl.facili summa sheet Small Site BMPs Conveyance System Spill containment located at: �.-, C s Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: —j� Contact Phone: After Hours Phone: Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: Private ublic If Private, Maintenance Lo Re uired: Yes /No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes / No Liabili Water Quality Type: asic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basicm ! Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption o. Landsca e Mana ement Plan: Yes / No S ecial Re uirements as a licable Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA!SDO/MDP!BP/LMP/Shared Fac.!None Re uirements Name: FloodplaiNFloodway Delineation Type: Major ! Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation(or range): �373'-3'S Datum: N,Q�� p��p�M �0 2c��O Flood Protection Facilities Qescribe: � Source Control Describe landuse: I�a��\e.,n-��) (comm.�ndustrial(anduse} Describe any structural controls: �P"T�,J3 �Sci, �,l 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9J2009 3 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High-use Site: Yes No Treafinent BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes No with whom? Other Draina e Structures Describe: G. .� G� �5 Sc+� '��a3}C..�2S CV�Vp S anv�y an� S��s-� �� .p¢.,� � �4 � sh�e� �o� d�s��si�h Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION 0 Clearing Limits � Stabilize Exposed Surfaces � Cover Measures Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities � Perimeter Protection Ciean and Remove All Silt and Debris, Ensure x�1 Traffic Area Stabilization Operation of Permanent Facilities � Sediment Retention ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas � Surface Water Collection ❑ Other ❑ Dewatering Control ❑ Dust Control � Flow Controi Part 14 STORMWATER FAClLITY DESCRIPTIONS Note: Include Facili Summa and Sketch Flow Control T e/Descri tion Water Qualit T e/Descri tion 1Ct Detention ❑ Siofiltration � fnfiltration �c1 Wetpool ❑ Regional Facility ❑ Media Filtration ❑ Shared Facility ❑ Oil Control ❑ Flow Control ❑ Spill Control BMPs -, ��y� ❑ Flow Control BMPs ,� other Q��__ __'"'` Sh�� .�}1'1 � � Other S �'`-� a`'� �p• �� P.G.Sc� .<, � 2009 Surface Water Design Manual I/9/2d09 4 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL I TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET I', Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS I Drainage Easement ❑ Cast in Place Vault III ❑ Covenant Retaining Wali ' � Native Growth Protection Covenant Rockery>4'High I �Tract ❑ Structural on Steep Slope , ❑ Other ❑ Other ' Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technicai Information Report. To the best of my knowledge e information provide here is ccurate. �� z/ 7 � Si ned/Date 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1J9/20(?9 5 _._ _ A "T—�'�F—'T "q'�^; ) ,_ ,q�„ _____ ' � � � � �.� ��. t�� •,� �� r �+� � � _ .__� k� i }I�� , q M � ^v n f�y ��.,� � �. � ��..+ �� ` `' r q��'d+a�� `^�, � � ��..1 _ � , , ,� � t •� "�t � '� � � � ..«a, +� `� y.�.� * ,� } 'idJ" .+-�,w T�C �r � � ��px`• r� � � � �� .. �,._ . rr � wN, � ,,� � �w t ;��*,,l'��.+, ��,�'w"� M .�,5 '�4 �''� �r �ti� s 1 w� �:4"` � V„� � � ... r'°f'��, w �� ,��'�� `r ��n�`",,�,.. �� ,'S� .�" 1� ,iW{ � � .... �,� �� r F. e �- tF�. ,� t � 1� � t, J f �'Kr�y 1 j'�, �' �, .�`.{ •t I..V � --� 7 � }j .,�,} �i'"�'.,✓� S`r,��, �j��• t ti�.� ��s�� ;�,.y Y��,,p�y�{. ":�}r q� ��W� �� F�� k��•[• IM��;�f'� fF,,�p ��y �,�� t��3�� I�►aW'4j�.�.`r`,�µ,k� k�V'" *H"v��'� � ,,,'s �'.�. �w"7�lwi.*uf �� 5iv,��'"k �:.�� I'� . �'M4 �� •�",k"••r �''A(� a�� i�j J `� ��"'�',Ay 'f. 'r �" 'gf �"' �1�p, rq:, �� ,�Wr :&il V °y',tYi r'' •�i� ''"'r��y , A � .{ .rw'� .+�t«�� ,�c'� .^* �t eq�� r�{'�y �wl"I � �� ',�S.�,� " p,. � � ., �'�'��' �4€�.., ' �� i_,^a,�a.wi.`.�� -��, � ��'k�`'; � �U��,��r.. �:S i ,y l ��y��te t��.,. #� ry �a� .�iC$ �-- � � ..r .tyu•��. .�#..� 4 � `...��'�...+.w:....r� Ti�Y� .11�. ��,;.1 �� .. . ,�� y r rq. . �'vXwS,r '�♦ • � �"� ,�Y l }w t � .+, ' ��'J,� .��,�� yk �, p_�� f��h � �� f�� , ..��, .. "r ,r �,��1' �� r� P. � s�� , ,�`�,y�tx''I �� `�i 6 ��,�p J t. � � x�i .=1 � /� � k �:� � �•�"`L�'.'.**":��'� � d 4 ,;f; w � .v�� ,y��," �' t S^ „� NN.:�� K � � �� .�„'��,�, . �� i�w'w �; ,aJ 7a4�a�/ ",,� v"«.rce ��'.�wrww' t+�M�y�<'a'��yw'«`�4*� � � Y �.�# y ',`� 7w ��n� . �� ` � �,� � �� P �° "' �y ' � ''""�«r. � " d"I' Ir y� �w �r s, 1 { ', �f .p: 'j . : � (� ' �,, � �, � � �: � �y�, �I �� : ��,W�``� ��+�� l �,-,��.� � �:'�+P� Y �f�1,�a yr+� '�fir ��. � �� j' � . �#"k"�/!1, �`�°".tk ,�1��4"'. ,�' ��n,r�lw�•, ��'�3p�i *„��` � I �' i `�� ,$.�� '�w�w�"" ,� a�;' +.J, �y,� ("' �1au r � i� �y � ' S , '�" � � ' , j��'7 , k k�:.��X , � �� Q� �� d {r jm..•}y � �h*� }'"�� Q I + '1 � Rb fi � . rW' � Y .l .o �tM f -. � ;�m�y,�:V�� .#�' ' �� ,��,�P �a� .� � �� ^,�,u � ��' N ��i ,� � � � j � t �i m"r �' �- �� .`^' a�)'�� " �.� ,,,�,�,��.i�,� �, � i4 �',��d `�,9 Y � � �� !�� r �� a � �� i�k �a � � ° w y , fr{ `. ,7" � � � �� .. y � ��pW �� F.� � P � ..�6 � � Z r _ i a � i �Y� � t w � '4' .�f. �'v�"�. ��,' � � k ��'�w �i«� .ya �� '".,� .i�'+ `MIiA��„�+� ae !i�"��..,,, � ��`� 1z�'f.l�'*A'�'t�E�.$E'�" L ��yL?i LL'w+""�A�," �'w �"�x:. � i':1'Y'�,y� � �„ �;� ,�n i�, � .._� ��t� �Y;,�+ x'1 _ . � ° uf �, A'�y� �C� 1 I � 1 ��I � 1�m� \, R �„'Ww"+�tl .t�i!w i�yp��"��, V ,: �� A "�qr"'.yS., w � �–°Wr. r� �+� ;:� �� . ��n�A�i n x�M ..,. r ^i Lr'E� . �`� A .➢ � .b �V. sr+' .'`1 ' � #.5'/�� .. 1 itr.y +W wk ,�s 5 ..1�'�y ..�..:� f � � �.n.� � �� I*W��'1 �(�� 4� �� ! ,InR' �o \ I .y• �tM.": ��rA'"� ��.'1� � .. ��i �'M..a�� 1+� � : �� '�•.M � a4w^aV! Y" ,P,. � �' �' 11;� �b f� tt� , "�P. JAMg ;!r* ,.�� ... , ��p � '' 1 I:�� fP "�t �F�� aC":,. '"� �'�� i � �, { ' E ' ' F.`"„" t � ` .; � pp�"" .� 5�;��, �.'� ".Kr��t f' �,1 - r�:; �5„ .,�'w� . � �T�t,' �^,g:��L.�l ' '.c'."�+�p � ` � "`"�`�,�� . ,�+ �y,p q'� � � i �' � �.° ,N.r"� i �w� � 5 +.A4�., ,JIY,b� Y '�y� ... �� Z 1J t = � o- A:� � �'�'�� V,n, 'a�� A��'i q� "" �v-.< �k�� ,6 �G'M' e � � �'. �i�r�,yi 1��Ih t � 4. t-7-W^ �•^� '! 4` .4�...l�'� '�N �4 '��t . .,. Y. Y.:. rA��' �'°�._4 � ! '!,",�..'""�'.41��: w '�"" �� +t. p� � p� t�y� r. a.d;T, r j a�. �� :wiM�w'G`e. (/� �PA. ,nrp�'''��,�, �,F 7 :.V� ,.�+ ,_ ` S ,�a � . � .: Q . .. { w I�� ' a�� ' ` �� I . � �„ i ,., �y �u., Z e ,. �� ` � � '`� 4�� -��w `T°��.°��x ��'��i . �� a Z w '�1 s�e„�, _ w�,:,K r ti� r c� '�' 7 "� � t �,� �'vw�v�' W , , r � �`''^� g '�� d��. "� � a a �•�r �.i�l,i V �� ,,� �� '� .4 "X �� ,i�d'�� `' .�� (. '�..�'�""�,�'' 4� � � � ^.�M1,�y�yyp � �� * �+�v �� a �Se��, u � Lll rr` .w""��°" �ti � Y � a"� � � � a��.'Y� "�.��.��"�`,j u�'-� 1 �+� a .��'.� '7 M,.r � ytlldn,'7" a�� ..-�' �� '�� v." �, �;�+q�y �'r ; �4k.�1J��; � Q w . � � �„ dr ..,�"'�y� �yar�� . '�uu �!r �� k 'w'��'��:°yst- �� I— Q � I ��.��t *,w�` A��'�r�.At.'4'�'9' t _ � . 4+'��paidN�`"�NL�+�.,� �: O (/� = a p I �Fr f � r, 4»� - �� A �.� r��; � N I ,q W ^ w , . , ., { � 2 F— 1"^�'` , , , ' � - ,, , '- .� �' � F� � �, �,�`+ �f;'� ;h� r � �.� � ,, �A �k ,.,.��Yii�w�� `c�i ��M1w ��-s t J'��'�dN:^r ��P! � � �INh+' � ,, � � ,ury�� Z � Z � � I .C '�.S:et.,"� Ce �,�� ..g 'i �� -� y A ^bX .-�. w. M � � � o'� �ixw,"`�t�r � -� ��, ;� � p�� ;1 �,��,' ��iK,,,��M � �r� � � � F— $o .�1.�. 1 � � �� `�� .��,y j�,i �;nJW� �.M��'°�k; �'� '�"iG., > Z �� s'' ��,"� �,��..r�f� y,��d.�,w,��'�� a4g n �y� o� '�.'�'� � "i" I p, � Q > W�y �N �., (r �VK ��( U� U Z LL. N N g^ t. � ��t N� x F�� ...L.�,. ".i�'�� 1 _ V� .,rr�.,... �.�.....:,� - � - - I (188TH � ' � � Mead � MATCHLIN�� I I � I } 1 VIEW ONLY) � � _ 1 U n L - 1 � � � —� � Mead 3 Hunt,Inc. � � �� ; � � : � � , �� ~ 6501 Watts Road I / Madison,WI 537'19 � � � I I � ' ��meadhn Lcom� � r I_ ,\ �i _ � � PSTREAM BASIN AREA I MATCHLINE-'' �, (SEE UPS7REA BASIN MAP�� --,� I � � I \ , , , � � - - � �` \ � ' j \l t ��w b-+ , , � _ �.�a -- � �.�.��. ��M��yd ' �� U STREAM BASIN AREA � � � � -__ (SEE PSTREAM BASIN MAP� i` cn ---<,5, m . —� \ 1 \ � `\ f � m � . \` ` � _ '�' \\ 'Y 1 � �� i � _- N< � � �-�\ �� - iZ �� _---�� ---- ------ ------� � _ Q^ � _-- ---' --- ---- H fA.-. � _. �---- - _ � -i � �1' ' I � �� ; ;��-��, TOTAL PROJECT AREA = 13.54 AC � � � , . ,,, L -- �_-,\ �� , �/��tV�: — 11 .3�-�`�� , ---�� PROPERTY,L'INE (�'aEP.) -_, � uwi � � � � �G�i�_-- ..� / � . / / �i �\ _—_ �_� � � . � � � � .i� � � � \ 1L WL � � �� . .. \�_�� / . � /� . —� r Z - � \� � . �`_4'a_ _ _ Z Q � � � i �� i _ _ � _- . - ', - ` � . , ._- , ,. � fA � ; � � `Sa�!----'�� Z W _, ___- Q _-- - " ' ' U � , � . �� —\ � Z � �� _--� - i . .. � � e25_-- � � � _�'� �__--_ _-- _ \ � � � � � `< � — �, -` � _—` ��—___ �� _'_'_____ _------ ' W ———' I�\ i . � __—__' � � � Q � �� — �—_ �� ` __ . �425' �' . —�—�— '425_ \�� _1�.�� /'//� � . � .. v .. �� -' .. . . . - . _. . � . / � � � � = N � � ' - - , _ _, -- - - i � � ;zs azsa2s' - �� ---, `--- --- __- _, ----- F- � , . � ' - I � __ _-- - -_ _ - — � -— , _- f � � � � ,__ ., � � _-- � � _-- � _____ _- � _ - - � � � � � �� -'� --- ----------------ac��--�� --�- — _ __ _ - --- -.,---�----� __----:, � /� ^(A Z ' ' --' � ` '`�- --,- �5��---- �` <: � _ - ✓ '- � WETLAND RECHARGE _-�- �__� , }�---_ ---�'_ ,; :., _ AREA= 1.38 AC ---- � : � � SLOPE EASEMENT � ,� AREA=0.44 AC ; � � � � ` - - � PROPERTY LINE(TYP.) � • � � � � �• � � ♦ • �� NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION � � � �...w I�C ' ' / a,� ,�_� � ��. � � � , ' __ _ EXISTING CONDITION FLOWS o ,00 zoo �,„ ,� �L � �.. � --- �� - � RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) °°"�'�"`"'"""" ��, � � EXISTING�CONDITION BASIN AREAS � 2-YR 0.35 �E�� 1 % EXISTING � � � � � 1 :� BASIN NAME AREA-FOREST AREA-TOTAL � 5-YR 0.55 LE G E N D CONDITIONS j `�-�124th AVENUE SE TOTAL AREA � 13.54 AC 13.54 AC 10-YR 0.66 BASIN MAP � � � � BASIN LINE �.�. WETLAND RECHARGE AREA 1.38 AC -1.38 AC 25-YR 0.79 0� SLOPE EASEMENT 0.44 AC -0.44 AC 50-YR 0.86 EX. CONTOUR F I G U R E � � AREA TO BE INFILTRATED 0.34 AC -0.34 AC 100-YR 0.92 � � EX-ON1 11.38 AC 11.38 AC 1 .3 : s LEG E N D � ��- - SLOPE EASEMENT � � NORTH UPSTREAM BASIN I � -~ MATCHLW�. � � � BASIN LINE � � � �AREA � � AREA NOT TRIBUTARY TO ---SE�� - �'- M�TCHLINE Mead _aa EX.CONTOUR � � POND(SEE FIG 3.1) �I U 1 1� � � LOTS 59-70 BYPASSED � � _ - - - (n SOUTH UPSTREAM BASIN ,00 PROP. CONTOUR �' , �, ' �` ,�(�yETLAND RECHARGE)� � p(�Eq NOT TRIBUTARY TO � - m Meaa a HuM,�nc. - - - - - - LOT LINE � � � � POND(SEE FIG 3.1) j � . o�o ��s� SETBACK UP-POND(SEE FIG 3.1 � ��r; ; BAs�N �� _ � FORCONTINUATION) `_ ` / 0.�� -_ _ UPSTR�AM TO P�ND - 6.8 AC � s �°�-�-Z'��° _ meadhuntcom "" '� ' NOT COLLECTED , UP POND(SEE FIGURE 3.1 FOR ,�o. r I � � , �� /� CONTINUATION) � `- � '� (UP-POND) - '� I �'-,1�.UPSTREAM BASIN AREA COLLECTED--� - - -- ' � BY UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ,-UNDERDRAIN SYStEM AT � -_- �TOPOTID_VIA SYS7EM ZI�1sE�88TFi� � � � � � 11 (S�E FIG 3.1 FOR CONTINUATION) t PROPERTY LINE(TYP.) -- SEE U EAM BASII�1�MAP I _ " � PSTR (F G 3.1)�flR , �� I � . CONTINUATION I �' " � � � � � ro ror�o y t _ ;, , � � � '�" � �, � � � � � � � i j � . � -- � � .. � _,�� (n � - . �� I s I_�! � � I I i , �;I I I _ .. � � �I; � ' '�, �' I UPSTREAM BASIN AREA COLLECTED- �°� � � � ,6 �; m ; � � 1 I -� � � �I � BY UNDERDRAW SYSTEM +�, ' •=��d�.,::, � � - ` I ao 0o i .,� �, .,\ � :�.:.::�.�.o._.p :� � � ��I I I � � � N �� ,�.d.,. N q � A � I-I'}tI-��-1-1� __ I;I � I (SE�FIG 3.1 FOR CONTINUATION) =� Z . . . 9j I . . . m�ra.�a�.n r.emr w.a:s �_� I ,� 1 � ��I'�. �I' -_ '\._y .�.-�� I j I ' . . �'�.. �. . '. .. .. wawrrw�...dr�mw.ra : i ' m...+.�o�.�...""`°.e..�.'.,�""er.. � , � I j � i � . � $ , . I ; � � � � J � _ - -I ,- ;UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM AT __ i � � � I_ � ,✓ - �-- - PROPERTY LINE(TYP.) 'y � - ' , � , __ -;- _ , - , � , _ / - 1 � ;- x -,�, -. , --�__ ,� _ --� -� __-- r� '�- �- �� zoo - , � `. ,. . - ., . �� ^ ; _ ;' _ m � , , ---- - - - ��-----" -- --- _ , � . , - -- _�- ` -- _ : , ; . . , �� , �'\.- �, � - _ _ _ �� - � / � �, _ - ! ; ` ' � _ ' I: a _ ., - .- i_ _ � . . __ ___ . ` ^�11� y � � � ' � � �� ' - � �� , �, , � �' � �� ,�" �', , , �; � - � j � v % , �\� �v 'V ' -�\� • i�� 1 �`''�° u~i � � , �;� � N� �M .� � , , __ ��+ ;� 1► �� ,� _ _ `6° _ �� , � _ � � , i �� , ,, � i �� ,. ,� ,,.� �� -- � � � ,�� - - - � - - ',� � , � , , , , �,�_ � , ; , ,� � �� , � , , � �� ;� , _ Ji� � , , , � �,, , , - -- �, r- 9 - --- , , - _ � , , , - � -�1� ' , , i �� , -- , � � - � , � ,_ -� _-_ - - � _ - :., _ . �. . - - _ - �� '1 � �i `, � �, , � JI � � � I;I �' ` ' L - i . Y . .,�\ � � _ � - � � `� -- - ----- �` � - _ „ , . ` �✓ �� -- \ \' �,�� f . �v �\- � ,%� � _ , _ '`-� �� /� W 0 � .. '• - . . .\� � �� .� -�_-� =�-_..� ��.�� - �_ , �, , �� ' �, �- _ __ -. _ � �,! i I{ �� ,, � � �;. > / ; ,� - ,, � - ,, , � . , ,� , . -- � - � i ,,/ , _ ; ., � �,.� �, ,� � /I i '�, ��- � } Q � � � , � , , � � �' I � T � a' z ; � �� , , \ � � ' � , , � �-- �, t � -J ;� `-�-/\ ''•, � \ - \ �/ �.:� ...... �_ �b/ '� ___�,. �__ _A2 I 425 � - H' v l_ -;�-✓ � � / ' . � • --__ ' ' � ��--�---� � , - i � ',,.. .,., � �� ' �.G - ., � _ v �-�. _��i �� _ , �� .�_ � � � �� . . . '�., r :�� ,, � i .� � � � _ _ _ - �I � i� � �� "' �_ .. � �'�� Z � � i i ,� . ; x�`j'--azs � J ".� � � � \ '� F, �,� _ - - -�"' �� I�� ,� C j 'i. � ��1 � �`� , ' W _ _ � � _ � ' � - - � � � - - L�� ,, �� a�V 4� >¢ � � i. \\,, �� ,, - � -- 1� ----�- - J - " � Q , � , � , _ � 4 , �{-,� " �I�, _ 7 � / , ' �AREA N7}T COLLECTED _3 j� �' - �%r�;:°p �' -- -- - ��\ � � � , , , � � .� -- `o . __ j: ,\'� ',,,� ,`� ____--- - � _ , � _ - _ ,__ EMERGENGY ACCESS /f - _ , , �� \ \ �` - ---._ - --- - - � ` � ,� ;�;; � � � � � � ,� (J.02 AC(0:64 AC TOTAL) l , '� :' ' �` �� `�� , � �., l c� � - _ a- � � ,- - - _ � � i � r- �, '� � � � , , ` � - -- - - �--- �i � " ' � '� �� __ - - - � ----- - - - _ -r�^°°-5,rt� �=,� , _ � � ) ; _ , � � -� � > .. _ -- - � � } �-r�- i i � � �'w� � U . , . .� , ,,_ - - i . I / � , .- - �� _ , �� ,�" I�� . � , . ,� �-� r � � ,�124th AVENUE�E;-- ,{- ,'O� „ � - - = ' -- - _ I - '� � - - _ �� 1 r � � - `---- /� cA Z ; - �` �t �� 1- -----� . ...s .��., A �,/ ;. � \ �"_ . - .a - _ V, _ - -- .. . �'� � F ..'. - -� -- � _ _ . -- , . „ , � � �� rl b, ,!`�,✓ 4,\ y f _, �� , i�l `, i � � � � \ � , t � I� �i � �-� �y �, � � �, �+ . '� �� , . , � �/ � � r �- := � _ _ � � � � � �I . � = +,+, + � � � v1 � � � , � �i � _�- � , - � �, t � I �� 1�� - - ' � � � N. ) �� W I� - - , , + � + ..� �, . _ , , .�� --� - - +_ _ L 4 i+ � � � , - ,, - # _-�-- . �. . � . K . :� � � f .�� i1 y /�' i1l ��y y I ll .'I - � 1 - - � � � . �. � _ � _ , } _ � �,,- � , � � i �, ` ,y , �� - - + + �: , � ; + + + + � t �i � � � � �I � J : � : � � , �++ - ++ _ ++++ '� , i � � � , , � � _ - � , , � . �� .. � � �� ;r � _ _ +�++_ ,- _ ; i � „ , L �r - , �.� �..,,�, �; i � � , �� , - - � � � _ _ � � � � � � � � . �� '. �, - ; ' . /% - � LOT MAINT SSEDND . - - - - E �i- NorFORcoNsrRucTiorv - . S 59 70 BYPA � -_ __, -� - AlN �I -I SLOPE EASEMENT TO B � --- REA NOT G�LLECT�D HYDROLOGY=1.38 AC ' REPLANTED WITH NATIVE � ��«_ -= --=� ;. - � - -� n.w _� - 24-�H AV�-0.6 AC ' VEGETATION '"""° ��€�'�� . - -- - -- - - - �� i -� �0.64 AC TOTALZ �JPSTREAM AREA °"�. ,� - -- - - :-- � � - � � � � DISCHARGE POINT TO �•• �ooc _ u; �� i MATCHED BY UPSTREAM FLOWS � �'� -` - ` - - � � GABION DISSIPATER �°°"„o,70O` �V DEVELOPED CONDITION BASIN AREAS "NOT COLLECTED" (124TH AVENUE) �� DEVELOPED CONDITION FLOWS FLOWS � BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV. AREA-LAWN a,REa-TOTA� DEVELOPED ! RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFSj DEV-ON-1 6.97 AC 6.57 AC 13.54 AC COMPENSATORY BASIN AREAS TO MATCH RATES CONDITIONS � 2-YR 0.20 2-YR 0.19 I I TO WETLAND _p,61 AC -0.77 AC ' -1.38 AC 5-YR 0.27 BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV. ' AREA-LAWN AREA-TOTAL �YR 0.24 BASIN MAP � RECHARGE _ NOT COLLECTED 0.49AC 0.15 AC 0.64 AC °�'"° of SLOPE EASEMENT -0.44 AC -0.44 AC 1QYR 0.33 I 10-YR 0.27 UPSTREAM TO ' � LOT AREAS TO -0.34 AC(10)1,500 SF 25-YR 0.41 pOND �•�0 AC(2596) 5.10 AC 6.80 AC` 25-YR 0.32 � � DRYWELLS ROOF ' -0.34 AC 5p-YR 0.48 „ 50-YR 0.35 FIGURE 1.4 RUNOFF FROM AREA NOT COLLECTED WILL BE MATCHED BY � � TOTAL 6.02 AC 5.36 AC 11.38 AC 100-YR �•� MATCHING FLOWS FROM UPSTREAM BASIN AREA. 100-YR 0.40 . a Z Z h P f � � a < 09L£SZS OOL£SZS OY9ESZ5 OBS£SZS OZSESZS 09b£SZS ODt•ESZS OYEESa 09ZESZ5 �� M.fiZ AT.ZLT � M.Q DI.ai N O p �"g� �r �.� ��€ N � � . : �i� o � �{ ».:1 '.�. ::f � ,�rJ cV a �� u� Y � , � � � ��y ��n�h\K � � ntl'v :y;M �.�i.�� r� 6� a��,�.x L 7 �� '� ��'+'"� ,-"L, � ;�J��:. �+" .a � p '�M� �� " ffy� +M1' Y � ± � ��t� t ��.F ��"�\ t I" � �'�F�� ._.� ._ ' � �.��. �.. �, b � T § k . �� k�h fh • a�'J. l'� ,� '� ' '" J i Y � � . ' �' �{ .i;,y1 � "f 1.,°i� p �� p �} ��e]�� .��^ � �'" � IA Z � � '�' - {�jkt^Y' �W JTL*y.��q y�l��,��t�� qy+ . .. � . ( ;� ' 3 � A ' +iW� �1,��' �r i � :b +�,F 1 .A* trt°cn=' � s H _. ��Y:x:Y'r I I�- a. u� !�' T � Y . 1 "'M1�alf . � y� '�� .. �t' � .�G - � +A �a t� ylfW ..i _ ]�1 /r+ ,�" Y .�. 4�� .,y "; �M`4��,vw��.� . � �n { �� `;f Y '.y, � .�.. �•�!S`. ..ri�� .i r b rYw r. ` D � .1 . S., {/ �4 �� u ��Y�L. �f+ a�k.) ui� ' � ,y lr y� �4.� ', � . � ��, �-0na�� h '�' „t,. . ' �y `'',. ti��;:, '+ � 'Y� • M�d��'k '� � � t Y-�rA �� -. � ti 1�� f� �,: Q j�� ,� R� �" y : .yk �� 'N' �' t '�yy,� .. _. . z, .,�W� F � l: } �fr q �i y+�0 � Y�:n .m 1 rr S� g(F �� , �� " �J' '+, r d.; ,d�, d� 1 rr l T hi O � � � �� y f�ry � � 2� �,k,�� 1�" Y 'S' �;� , �fi ,.�" ��,,. z � � ' + ^ WP � e ,�.� �I wf �� tl ,f yt�,,•y �8 _ � D �O� T� � � k�.� .�� d� Q � i+'l` } pv d � � • �. \ �[kY�tM .a',a',, � y N ` ' - ,�' # i4' ,� ♦ iM'S' .� e�'�v q .. ,;* � N > c C �R, � . �"�, y�„ti:, ti�r .�;1 � `"� `,+c �' t� �. �� i t�' ,��:...e �'� � �' ;� .o m V � � ��r''��.Y �,_, �Y��.a:, �^ s',: +� �,,�, '�„�,s+F� .� ��•• ' `�� *� , �' � � � � g C V jn; : ,3. �' ;y �.W,��' �.4, n @ M1 °��ti �� ~ �U � . - .t� ' � A�i��}S k' .4 � 4(.� fi � � � W �� n �A�� C � , � u' r a � ML .fh' :}4 N � ' `�9'i S r _X f0 C p Y' � w...w..�_�'� �.,�.a :�sn .'Y V '••�•� •t � ��4:�ri ,i'� M�,...-. R.�' ill Z � o�� '., .t .�� di� + � i .� +��._:.{�q��,,.�,f'_ ,i t� � � � �-z ;� � � a4".a , ,. � „ .,,rc�a "^rr r� µ�a Fi*p, � .Tw �i � �� M r ,. , i'. �u», �"�°L"it ep�t r ��%'. � i «�k � � � � �. , � �( . N� Mr T ..7,� '�! � � �' "� � ..� � � r, � • �; r •� r. �.,� .. ��. � �'��,. �y}�.. .»,ur,� Y, _ z";' r�,) � �Yµ�t,� � 'V:�' � �� .�' �� t�a, �� f l. r,�k �� ,ro �" �dJ�p'� � � U o `nd�� '� � ,,� � .r i� +-':.uti M � [:.�.-5 „ � �`i � �°.�a I ��a "�� + � ` t,' �- b�', � m O ' , � ' �° I'� — . � ;; � :: t a tt � �� k ��r� � �! (� �'' �� ry g ' c � � i�i,- ��h i4•...I N y� .t; i� `.. .I�`i��x� .i�n� �* �4�C j. M �'9�.�� F ;k�t ��" �; � _ '.; .:� �� Jf � O t�i . I I � � �„� � '� v , E�" �r ''.� '�� Q i« � ��•' � �' ,�� rf � fi „ 'k� 'd4 � � � F � � , , ,+ ^ � � ,� �`1' '�� t'x�`, o o � , . , �� r �� t..` .., t ,9M� ..-� � Y�_ .�.<r N �` ' �..ti t"�r ' �� t�� Y . �.. « ��m" � � C i9i � " "#C�' €' x'rr �. N� �. �r � � � i t�s��ptdr?`•^ ,I�I Z� 2 C� � �� . �m� JiF � ��y� :� � � , � �-� �- 'w � a�,r tf 4 t+a �„�, �` *;� y r�;,r_ + 4 ML!!I 2ii i�t��A x .��. .w�. i ,. �...... . .::.A �,lc�:�.. . .. :��.��".�a+,.�.. .I R. .�� . . . 7'. .2�: , . � M1►DS.2Zi Q I I I I I 0� 09LESZ5 OOLE4 OIHC�iS OFFESZS OLSESZS 096£SZS OObESZS Ot•£ESZS OBZ£QS -_�j�' Z z i e 16 N < e Soil Map—King County Area,Washington (Canyon Estates) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) � Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your A01 were mapped at 1:24,000. Area of Interest(AOI) ---- � � Stony Spot Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Soils Very Stony Spot ' � Soii Map Unit Poiygons � Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause — ;�� wet Spot misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line r,,r Soil Map unit Lines placement.The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting �, Other soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. � Soil Map Unit Points __ ____ . Special Line Features Speciai Point Features Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map �(e) Biowout water Features measurements. Streams and Canals � eorrow ait Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service 7ransportation Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov � Clay Spot �, Raiis Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) � Closed Depression ,,�,, Interstate Hi9hways Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator � Gravel Pit US Routes projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts ' distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the „ Gravelly Spot Major Roads Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more accurate � Landfill Local Roads calculations of distance or area are required. � �ava Flow eack round This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of 9 the version date(s)listed below. � Marsh or swamp � Aerial Photography Soil Survey Area: King County Area,Washington � Mine or Quarry Survey Area Data: Version 7,Jul 2,2012 � Miscellaneous Water Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 � Perennial Water or larger. ;�� Rock Outcrop Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jul 9,2010—Aug 20, � 2011 Saline Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were w rr sandy spoc compiled and digitized probably differs from the background .� Severely Eroded Spot imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. ,� Sinkhole �, Slide or Slip � Sodic Spot u� Naturel Resources Web Soil Survey 12/12/2013 I Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 , Soil Map—King County Area,Washington Canyon Estates Map Unit Legend King County Area,Washington(WA633) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Ag6 Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 7.9 I 54.O�o ' 0 to 6 percent slopes - - __ -- --- - - - __ ___ AgD Aldervvood graveily sandy loam, 6.7 46.0% 15 to 30 percent slopes ___ ! - --- _ Totals for Area of Interest 14.6' 100.0%�� t;SDa� Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/12/2013 � Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 detailed soil map u= The map units on the detailed soil maps at the back of this This survey includes misceUaneous areas. Such areas survey represent the soils in the survey area.The map unit have little or no soil material and support little or no descriptions in this section, along with the soil maps,can be vegetation.Pits is an example.Miscellaneous areas are shown i used to determine the suitability and potential of a soil for on the soil maps. Some that are too small to be shown are � specific uses. They also can be used to plan the identified by a special symbol on the soil maps. management needed for those uses. More information on Table 4 gives the acreage and proportionate extent of each map unit,or soil, is given under"Use and management each map unit. Other tables(see"Summary of tables")give I of the soils." properties of the soils and the limitations,capabilities,and Each map unit on the detailed soil maps represents an area on potentials for many uses.The Glossary defines many of the the landsqpe and consists of one or more soils for which the terms used in describing the soils. 'I unit is named. I A symbol identifying the soil precedes the map unit '� nameinthesoildescriptions.Eachdesaiptionincludesgeneral map unit descriptions I facts about the soil and gives the principal hazards and � limitations to be considered in planning for specific uses. 1-Alderwood gravelty sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes. ' Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil This mocierately well drairied soil is on till plains.It is moderately series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer or �p over a harcipan.The soil forrried in glacial till.Areas are of the underlying material,all the soils of a series have major ircegular in shape. They are about 100 aa�es in size.The native horizons that are similar in composition,thickness,and ��tion is mainly conifers and hardwoods.Elevation is 50 to 550 i arrangeme�t. feet The average annual precipitation is about 40 inches,the i Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F,and � layer or of the underlying material.They also can differ in �e average frost-free season is 170 to 190 days. I slope, stoniness,salinity,wetness, degree of erosion, and Typically,the surface layer is very dark grayish brown other characteristics that affect their use.On the basis of such gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The upper part of differences,a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the the subsoil is dark yellowish brown and dark brown very areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil gravelly sandy loam about 23 inches thick. The lower part is series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a olive brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches thick.A feature that affects use or management. For example, weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 35 inches. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes,is one of Depth to the hardpan ranges from 20 to 40 inches. several phases in the Alderwood series. Included in this unit are small areas of soils that have a Some map units are made up of two or more major stony or bouldery surface layer and areas of McKenna soils. These map units are called soil complexes. soils, Norma soils, and Terric Medisaprists in drainageways A soil complex consists of two or more soils in such an on plains. Also included are small areas of Everett, intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be Indianola,and Ragnar soils on terraces and outwash plains. shown separately on the soil maps. The pattem and Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total proportion of the soils are somewhat similar in all areas.Getchell- acreage. Oso complex, 15 to 30 peroent slopes, is an example. Permeability of this Alderwood soil is moderately rapid Most map units include small scattered areas of soils above the hardpan and very slow through it.Available water other than those for which the map unit is named. Some of �pacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. these included soils have properties that differ substantially Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. A from those of the major soil or soils.Such differences could seasonal perched water table is at a depth of 18 to 36 signi�cantly affect use and management of the soils in the inches f�om January to March. map unit.The included soils are identified in each map unit This unit is used mainly for urt�an development and as description. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils W�dland. It is also used for hay and pasture. are identified by a special symbol on the soil maps. Douglas-fir is the main woodland species on this unit. On the basis of a 100-year site curve,the mean site index is 142.On the basis of a 5a-year site curve,the mean site Typically,the surFace layer is very dark grayish brown index is 108.The mean annual increment at culmination (CMAI) gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The upper part of for pouglas-fir at age 65 is 148 cubic feet per acre.Among the subsoil is dark yellowish brown and dark brown very the trees of limited extent are western redcedar,western gravelly sandy bam about 23 inches thick.The lower part is olive hemlock,and red alder.Among the common forest brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches thick.A weakly understory plants are salal, evergreen huckleberry, Oregon- cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 35 inches. Depth to grape, brackenfern,and western swordfem. the hardpan ranges from 20 to 40 inches. This unit is well suited to year-round logging.Logging Induded in this unit are small areas of Everett,Indianola, and roads require suitable surFacing for year-round use. Rock for Kitsap soils on terraces and uplands. Also included are road construction is not readily available on this unit, but small areas of Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 2 to 8 gravel is available in areas of adjacent Everett soils. Brush percent slopes. Included areas make up about 15 percent of competition is the main limitation for the production of timber. the total acreage. Reforestation can be accomplished by planting Douglas- Permeability of this Alderwood soil is moderately rapid fir seedlings. If seed trees are present,natural reforestation of above the hardpan and�ery slow through it.Available water cutover areas by red alder occurs periodically.When capacity is bw.Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants, if is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight A seasonal not controlled,can prevent the establishment of seedlings. perched watertable is at a depth of 18 to 36 inches from Because the rooting depth is restricted by a cemented pan, January to March. trees are subject to windthrow. This unit is used mainly as woodland.It is also used for hay This unit is suited to hay and pasture.The main limitations and pasture and for urban development. are the low available water capacity and the weakly Douglas-fir is the main woodland speaes on fhis unit.On the cemented hardpan, which limits the use of the soil in this unit basis of a 100-year site curve,the mean site index is 142.On for deep-rooted plants.Grazing when the soil is wet results in the basis of a 50-year site curve,the mean site index is 108.The oompaction of the surface layer,poor tilth,and excessive mean annual increment at culmination (CMAI)for pouglas-fir at runoff. age 65 is 148 cubic feet per acre.Among the trees of limited Use of proper stocking rates, pasture rotation,and extent are weste�n redcedar,westem hemlock,and red alder. restricted grazing during wet periods helps to keep the Among the common forest understory plants are salal,evergreen pasture in good condition and to protect the soil from erosion. huckleberry, Oregon-grape,brackenfem, and westem Periodic mowing and spreading of the droppings help to swordfem. maintain uniform growth,discourage selective grazing,and This unit is well suited to year-round logging. Logging reduce clumpy growth. roads require suitable surfacing for year-round use. Rock for Proper grazing practices and weed control are needed for road construction is not readily available on this unit. Brush maxirrwm quality of forage.In some years,supplemental competition is the main limitation for the production of timber. irrigation is also needed. Fertilizer is needed for optimum Reforestation can be accomplished by planting Douglas- growth of grasses and legumes. fir seedlings. If seed trees are present, natural reforestation The main limitations for homesites and septic tank of cutover areas by red alder occurs periodically.When absorption fields are the depth to the weakly cemented openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants, if hardpan and wetr�ess.Drainage needs to be provided if buildings not controlled,can prevent the establishment of seedlings. with basements and crawl spaces are constructed. Onsite Because the rooting depth is restricted by a cemented pan, waste disposal systems often fail or do not function properly trees are subject to windthrow. during periods of high rainfall.The soil in this unit has an inherent This unit is suited to hay and pasture.The main limitations abiliry to support large loads.Topsal needs to be stoGcpiled during are slope and the weakly cemented hardpan,which limits the use site preparation and subsequently used to cover the of the soil in this unit for deep-rooted plants.Graang vvhen the exposed underlying material. soil is wet results in compaction of the surface layer, poor tilth, This map unit is in capability subclass IVe. and excessive runoff. Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of forage.Use 2-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes. of proper stocking rates,pasture rotation,and restricted graang This moderately well drained soil is on till plains.It is moderately during wet periods helps to keep U�e pasture in good condition and deep over a hardpan.The soil formed in glacial till.Areas are to protect the sal from erosion.Periodic mowing and dipping help to long and narrow.They are about 125 acres in size.The maintain uniform growth, discourage selective grazing, and native vegetation is mainly conifers and hardwoods.Elevation is reduce clumpy growth. 50 to 550 feet The average annual preapitation is about 40 inches, Proper grazing practices and weed control are needed for the average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F,and the maximum quality of forage. In some years, average frost-free season is 170 to 190 days. supplemental irrigation is also needed. Fertilizer is This unit is well suited to year-round logging. Logging needed for optimum growth of grasses and legumes. roads require suitable surfaang for year-round use.Rock for The main limitations for homesites and septic tank road construction is not readily available on this unit. absorption fields are the depth to the weakly cemented Reforestation can be accomplished by planting Douglas- hardpan and wetness because of the seasonal high water fir seedlings. If seed trees are present, natural reforestation table. EfFluent from absorption fields flows laterally above the of cutover areas by red alder occurs periodically.When hardpan and may seep at the bottom of slopes. Drainage is openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants, if needed if buildings with basements and crawl spaces are not controlled,can prevent the establishment of seedlings. constructed. During construction,disturbed areas need to be Because the rooting depth is restricted by a cemented pan, seeded and runoff controlled to protect the soil from erosion. trees are subject to windthrow. The main limitations for homesites and septic tank Temporary sediment basins can be used in construdion areas to absorption fields are the steepness of slope, depth to the reduce the amount of sediment in runoff water. �Wy��ted hardpan,and wetness because of the seasonal This map unit is in capability subclass IVe. perched water table. Effluent from absorption fields flows laterally above the pan and can seep at the bottom aF slopes. 3 Al�ood gravelly sandy loam,15 to 25 percent slopes. Drainage is needed if buildings with basements and crawl This moderately well drained soil is on till plains.It is spaces are constructed.During construction,disturbed areas moderately deep over a hardpan.The soil fonr�ed in glacial till. need to be seeded and runoff controlled to protect the sal from Areas are Iong and narrow,ar�e oriented in a northwest to erosion.Temporary sediment basins can be used to reduce the southeast direction,and are 20 to 100 acres in size.The amount of sediment in the runoff water. The topsoil needs to native vegetation is mainly oonifers and harciwoods.Elevation is be stockpiled during excavation and subsequenUy used to cover 50 to 550 feet.The average annual precipitation is about 40 the exposed material.A site preparation system that controls inches,the average annual air temperature is about 50 runoff and maintains the esthetic value of the site is needed. degrees F,and the average frost-free season is 170 to 190 This map unit is in capability subclass IVe. days. 4Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loams,25 to 70 Typically,the surface layer is very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick.The upper part of PerceM slopes.This map unit is on till plains,terraces, and the subsoil is dark yellowish brown and dark brown very outwash plains.Areas are 30 to 160 acres in size. The gravelly sandy loam about 23 inches thick.The lower part is native vegetation is mainly conifers and hardwoods. olive brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches thick.A Elevation is near sea level to 550 feet.The average annual precipitation is about 40 inches, the average annual air weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 35 inches. temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the average frost-free Depth to the hardpan ranges from 20 to 40 inches. season is 170 to 190 days. Induded in this unit are small areas of sois that are similar to This unit is about 60 percent Alderwood gravelly sandy this Alderwood soil but have cobbles or stones on the loam and about 25 percent Everett gravelly sandy loam.The surface.Also included are small areas of Everett, Indianola, components of this unit are so intricately intermingled that it and Ragnar soils on terraces and eskers. Included areas was not practical to map them separately at the scale used. make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. Included in this unit are small areas of Ragnar, Indianola, Permeability of this Alderwood soil is moderately rapid McKenna,and Norma soils and Terric Medisaprists in above the harcipan and very slow through it.Available water depressional aneas and drainageways on plains. Also included capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. are colluvial soils, slump areas, and escarpments. Included Runoff is medium,and the hazard of water erosion is areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. moderate.A seasonal perched water table is ffi a depth of 18 to The Alderwood soil is moderately deep over a harclpan and is 36 inches from January to March. moderately well drained.It fomied in glacial till.Typically, the This unit is used as woodland and for urban surface layer is very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam development. about 7 inches thick.The upper part of the subsoil is dark Douglas-fir is the main woodland species on this unit.On Yellowish brown and dark brown very gravelly sandy loam the basis of a 100-year site curve,the mean site index is 142. On about 23 inches thick.The lower part is olive brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches thick.A weakly the basis of a 50-year site curve,the mean site index is cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 35 inches. Depth 108.The mean annual increment at culmination(CMAI)for to the hardpan ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Douglas-fir at age 65 is 148 cubic feet per acre.Among the Permeability of the Alderwood soil is moderately rapid trees of limited extent are western redcedar,western above the hardpan and very slow through it.Available hemlock,and red alder.Among the common forest understory plants are salal, evergreen huckleberry, Oregon- grape, brackenfern,and westem swordfern. those on south- and southwest-facing slopes. When water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 openings are made in the canopy,invading brushy plants, if not inches. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion controlled,can delay the establishment of seedlings. is high.A seasonal perched water table is at a depth of 18 Because the rooting depth is restricted by a cemented pan in to 36 inches from January to March. Springs or seep areas the Alderwood soil,trees are subject to windthrow. are common. The main limitations of the Alderwood soil for septic tank The Everett soil is very deep and somewhat excessively absorption fields and homesites are steepness of slope and drained.It fomied in glacial oufinrash.Typically, the surface a seasonal perched water table. Effluent from absorption layer, where mixed to a depth of about 6 inches,is very darlc fields flows laterally above the pan and can seep at the grayish brown gravelly sandy loam.The subsoil is dark brown bottom of slopes. Drainage is needed if buildings with very gravelly sandy loam about 12 inches thick.The upper basements and crawl spaces are constructed. This soil part of the substratum is brown very gravelly loamy sand sloughs readily when saturated. about 5 inches thick. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches The main limitations of the Everett soil for septic tank or more is dark brown extremely gravelly sand. absorption fields are steepness of slope and seepage. If the Permeability of the Everett soil is rapid. Available density of housing is moderate to high,community sewage water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or systems are needed to prevent contamination of water more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is supplies as a result of seepage from onsite sewage disposal moderate. systems. Road cuts tend to slough readily. This unit is used mainly as woodland and for wildlife To protect the soils in this unit from erosion during habitat. It is also used for urban development. construction, disturbed areas need to be seeded and Doug�as-fir is the main woodland species on the runoff should be controlled. Alderwood soil. On the basis of a 100-year site curve, the This map unit is in capability subclass Vlle. mean site index is 142. On the basis of a 50-year site curve, the mean site index is 108.The mean annual inaementat 5-Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent culmination(CMAI)for pouglas firat age 65 is 146 cubic feet per slopes.This map unit is on till plains.Areas are irregular in acre. shape and are 100 to 1,000 acres in size. The native Douglas-fir is the main woodland species on the Everett vegetation is mainly conifers. Elevation is 50 to 550 feet.The soil. On the basis of a 100-year site curve,the mean site average annual precipitation is about 40 inches, the average index is 141. On the basis of a 50-year site curve,the mean annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the site index is 111. The mean annual inaement at culmination average frost-free season is 170 to 190 days. (CMAI)for pouglas-fir at age 65 is 146 cubic feet per acre. This unit is about 60 percent Alderwood gravelly sandy Among the trees of limited extent on this unit are loam and about 25 percent Urban land.The components of westem hemlock,westem redcedar, and red alder.Among this unit are so intricately intermingled that it was not the common forest understory plants are salal, evergreen practical to map them separately at the scale used. huckleberry, brackenfem, red huckleberry,common rose, Included in this unit are small areas of McKenna and and Oregon-grape. Norma soils and Terric Medisaprists in depressional areas The main limitation for the harvesting of timber is and drainageways on plains.Also included are small areas of steepness of slope. Slope restricts the use of wheeled and soils that are very shallow over a hardpan; small areas of tracked equipment in skidding operations; cable yarding Everett, Indianola, and Ragnar soils on terraces and systems generally are safer and disturb 1he soils less. outwash plains;and soils that have a stony and bouldery Harvesting systems that lift logs entirely off the ground surface layer. Included areas make up about 15 percent of reduce the disturbance of the protective layer of duff. the total acreage. Logging roads require suitable surfaang foryear{ound use. The Alderwood soil is moderately deep over a hardpan Rock for road construction is not readily available on this and is moderately well drained. It formed in glacial till. unit. Establishing plant cover on steep road cut and fill slopes Typically, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown reduces erosion.Steep yarding paths,skid trails, and firebreaks gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick.The upper part of are subject to rilling and gullying the subsoil is dark yellowish brown and dark brown unless adequate water bars are provided or they are very gravelly sandy loam about 23 inches thick.The lower protected by plant cover. part is olive brown very gravelly sandy loam about 5 inches Seedling mortality is the main limitation for the production thick.A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 35 of timber. Reforestation can be accomplished by planting inches. Depth to the hardpan ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Douglas-fir seedlings.If seed trees are present, natural Permeability of the Alderwood soil is moderately rapid reforestation of cutover areas by red alderooaars periodically. above the hardpan and very slow through it.Available water The high temperature and low moisture content of the Everett capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. soil during the growing season cause high mortality of Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion seedlings, especially I I 2.0 Conditions and Requirements Summary Storm water facilities are designed in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and to the 2010 city of Renton Surface Water Design Standards where required. Below is a list of the core requirements from Chapter 1, Section 1.2 of the manual along with a discussion of how each requirement is met. 2.1 Core Requirements #1 Dischar e at the Natural Location—The site currentl drains east down a slo e toward Bi Soos 9 Y P 9 � Creek,which is located in a wetland east of and below the site. In addition to onsite area, an upstream basin currently drains to and through the site on its way to Big Soos Creek. Please refer to Section 3.0 of this report for further discussion of upstream basin areas. In the developed condition, the site will continue to drain to Big Soos Creek to the east. Storm water facilities will discharge via dispersal trench to the existing vegetation on the eastern and downhill edge of the site. #2 Offsite Analysis—A Level 1 downstream analysis has been performed and is provided in Section 3.0 of this report. No downstream drainage system issues were noted, nor are any issues created by the I proposed improvements. #3 Flow Control—The site is subject to conservation flow control. Accordingly, Level 2 flow control is provided. Hydrologic modeling was performed using the WWHM (version 2012)in accordance with Section 3.2.3. Flow control system design was performed in accordance with Section 5.3.1 and was I sized using the WWHM (version 2012)at the 1-hour time step. It should be noted that the detention pond utilized partial infiltration into the underlying outwash soils. Regarding Subsection F of this requirement: • The flows from the upstream basin area remain tributary to the wetland located downstream. • Stormwater runoff from the upstream basin ident�ed in Section 4.0 of this report as"UP-POND" currently flows down the hill along the northem property line in a defined channel. The channel , down the slope does not provide significant measureable flow attenuation. The proposed design will route stormwater runoff from this same basin in a conveyance system to the bottom of the hill and will discharge high velocity flows to an energy dissipater. Stormwater runoff from basins UP-NORTH and UP-SOUTH discharge onto the subject site from the west along the western boundary. Currently,this discharge forms a series of channels across the site on its way to the valley floor. In the proposed condition stormwater runoff ftom these basins wi�l be collected in a network of interceptor"french"drains and diverted around the site in one of two conveyance systems on its way to the valley floor. As required by the city of Renton SWDM, Minimum Requirement#3: Flow Control -Subsection F, attenuation of these upstream flows in the proposed condition is achieved as discussed below. In the existing condition,the flow path and nature of flow was approximated as being in a 200- foot-wide flow path. This is a rough estimation of the four or five shallow defined paths flowing Page 3 Mead�t-lunt west to east along the face of the slope combined. The attenuation of these flows by the hiliside was modeled in WWHM and can be found in Appendix A. • Discharge to a gabion energy dissipation system is selected due to the system discharge velocity between 10-20 cfs. � • The basin UP-POND enters a conveyance system designed in accordance with the standards of � Core Requirement#4. Please refer to Section 5.0 of this report. #4 Conveyance System-The proposed system has been designed to convey the 100-year event. Any overflow from the 100-year event will discharge to the natural location. It should be noted that the proposed storm drainage system will discharge entirely to the natural location near the valley floor, which contains wetland areas and Big Soos Creek in a controlled manner. The proposed conveyance system discharge wi�l not create erosion or flooding problems. #5 Erosion Control-An approved temporary erosion and sediment control plan and SWPPP will be provided prior to construction. In addition,a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead will be onsite during construction and sampling will be performed in accordance with reporting requirements. The , erosion control system will be designed in accordance with DOE, King County, and city of Renton standards. Due to the site's terrain, soil types, proximity to wetland areas and Soos Creek, erosion control will be a priority. Major earthwork activities will be performed during the dry season. Should other earthwork activities occur between September and April,special care will be taken to prevent erosion and associated pollution, and to prevent destabilization of site slopes. #6 Operations and Maintenance. The storm drainage facility and conveyance system for the road will be maintained by the city of Renton as the pond is in a dedicated tract and the conveyance system in the city of Renton right of way. A bypass underdrain system installed along the westem property line to protect slopes and prevent upstream storm water runoff from reaching the site will be maintained by the homeowners'association. #7 Financial Guarantees and Liability-Summit Homes will post a construction bond prior to permit approval. A Bond Quantities Worksheet will be provided with the bond prior to permit approval. #8 Water Quality-Due to the amount of the projecYs disturbed area,to its location, and to land use, basic water quality is required.Water quality wilt be accomplished in a wet pond and a storm filter vautt prior to entering the flow control facility. The wet pond is sized in accordance with Section 6.4.1 of the KCSWDM using the VbNr method. The Stormfilter is sized using the GULD water quality approved flow rate per cartridge. The Stormfilter flow rate is calculated using the WWHM 15-minute time step. In addition, a StormCeptor is designed to precede the Stormfilter in series.While pretreatment is not required,the Stormceptor is specified to provide additional pollutant removal and to reduce the need for maintenance. Page4 Mead�-lunt 3.0 Offsite Analysis This chapter contains a discussion of the existing upstream basin areas, downstream drainage course, proposed site discharge locations, and impacts due to the proposed development. A Level 1 Downstream Analysis has been prepared as a part of this chapter. Basin boundaries and downstream conditions noted in this section were inspected on December 17, 2013 by Mead & Hunt staff. 3.1 Upstream Basin Area Generally,storm water runoff from areas west of 120"'Avenue SE, north of SE 188"'SVeet, and that which enters the system in SE 192"d Street do not flow into the site from upstream. The basin extents are explained in greater detail below. Currently, the highest point of the upstream basin is located in 120"�Avenue SE, near SE 191�'Street. The centerline of 120'"Avenue SE serves as a dividing line where storrn water runoff to the west enters a system of ditches and culverts and flows either south toward SE 192nd Street or north toward 188'"Street SE,where it continues north in a culvert under the uphill site of the intersection. Storm water runoff originating east of 120'h Avenue SE enters a ditch system and flows north toward SE 188'h Street where it continues east in a ditch from the intersection,to where it enters the subject site and flows in a channel down the site's slopes. On the downhill side(east)of the ditch in 120"'Avenue SE, storm water runoff sheet flows across a row of homes toward the top of the hill that forms the western boundary of the site. Between SE 191"Street and SE 192"d Street,there are new developments on either side of 120�Avenue SE, which discharge to the system in SE 192^d Street. The Basin boundary turns east at the intersection , of 120�'Avenue SE and SE 191g�Street,where, upon reaching the north end of SE 121°� Place, it is again ' formed immediately downhill (east)of the SE 121 g�Place system,which again flows to SE 192nd Street. The 188th Street centerline forms the northern boundary of the basin, identified as UP-POND. North of the centerline, storm water runoff flows toward a row of homes and continues north toward Big Soos Creek. South of the SE 188�"Street centerline, storm water flows into a series of ditches and culverts toward the current terminus of SE 188�h Street,where it enters a vegetated channel and flows over the hill at the northem portion of the site toward Big Soos Creek. , Approximately 9.43 acres of upstream area(basins UP-SOUTH and UP-NORTH)discharge onto the 'i subject site from the west along the western boundary. Currently,this discharge forms a series of ��I channels across the site on its way to the valley floor. In the proposed condition, storm water n�noff from these basins will be collected in a network of interceptor french drains and diverted around the site in one of two conveyance systems on its way to the valley floor. As required by the RSWDM, Minimum Requirement#3: Flow Control -Subsection F, attenuation of these upstream flows in the proposed condition is achieved as discussed below. Page 5 Mead�Flunt In the existing condition,the flow path and nature of flow was approximated as being in a 200-foot-wide flow path. This is a rough estimation of the four or five shallow defined paths flowing west to east along the face of the slope combined. The attenuation of these flows by the hillside was modeled in WWHM and can be found in Appendix A. Please�efer to Figure 3.1, Offsite Basin Map in this section. 3.2 Downstream Areas — Immediate Proximity The site discharges to a wetland area,which contains Big Soos Creek.The site lies outside the 100-year FEMA floodplain.While in close proximity, it is significantly above the floodplain to where flooding events will not create challenges with tailwater conditions at the pond discharge locations. Per the city of Renton Revised FEMA DFIRM Map, updated November 2010,flood elevations in Big Soos Creek range from 375 at the north end of the site to 373 at SE 192nd Street. Site grades are aIl above elevation 380. A small portion of the site, spec�cally 124th Avenue SE, will drain to SE 192"d Street. No drainage complaints have been logged downstream of the site along SE 192"�Street, between 124t"Avenue SE and Big Soos Creek. One complaint from 1996, at the property located directly upstream, appears to have been mitigated by the addition of a catch basin near SE 192"� Street.The system on the north side of SE 192^�consists of ditches and culverts owned by the city of Kent. 3.3 Downstream Drainage Course Upon entering Big Soos Creek north of SE 192^� Street, storm water runoff flows south for approximately 8 miles before reaching the confluence with Covington Creek. It continues flowing west for approximately 3 miles before entering the Green River in Auburn and flowing north to Puget Sound. Big Soos Creek is located in WRIA#9 and, more specifically, in the Soos Creek Drainage Basin. Big Soos Creek is not on the 303d list for pollutants near the site; however, Covington Creek,just east of the confluence with Big Soos Creek, is listed for pH and phosphorus. 3.4 Site Discharge Locations The project site will discharge generally in two locations,as shown on the Offsite Basin Map in Figure 3.1 of this report; however, it shou�d be noted that all parts of the site discharge to a natural location in a wetland buffer to the east of the site.Accordingly,the offsite analysis drainage basin table does not show a"drainage system"typically found in more developed areas. The table combines site discharge locations into one table as the downstream path is common. The first discharge location is to the buffer at the eastern edge of the site.The pond discharge and lots 59 through 70 will both generally discharge in this location.While in relative close proximity to Big Soos Creek,flooding events in the creek will not create challenges due to tailwater elevations at the proposed Page6 Mead�lunt discharges. Upon review of FEMA floodplain maps,existing topography and field inspection, sign�cant fall exists between the floodplain and the dispersal trench. The second discharge location will be to an outfall in 124t"Avenue SE. Due to elevations constraints, 124th Avenue SE at the southeastem portion of the site cannot be feasibly collected by the storm drain system tributary to the proposed pond. Downstream of the culvert in 124'h Avenue SE, stormwater runoff will flow east across a wetland and into Big Soos Creek. Please refer to Figure 3.2, Offsite Analysis Drainage System Table for 124�"Avenue SE(drainage basin - NOT COLLECTED). 3.5 SE 192nd Street Drainage System A system of culverts and ditches in SE 192"�Street of the site receives storm water runoff from a drainage basin upstream of the site.This system is located in the city of Kent. Currently, a 24-inch concrete pipe under 124'"Avenue SE and immediately adjacent to the north side of SE 192"� Street conveys runoff east for approximately 100 feet, before discharging to the wetland area to the east,which contains Big Soos Creek. The culvert will be replaced by a new 24-inch concrete culvert,which will include a slope, increased to 1%to ensure proper drainage. In review of the system in SE 192^�Street, I no known drainage complaints have been logged downstream of the site between 124'h Avenue SE and Big Soos Creek. One complaint from 1996, at the parcel located directly upstream of 124�"Avenue SE, appears to have been mitigated by the addition of a catch basin near the property frontage. I To assess capacity in the system along the north side of SE 192"�Street,the upstream area was analyzed using WWHM 2012 and modeled as 25% impervious. Using a 15-minute time step, runoff rates were calculated. Manning's equation was used to determine capacity of the existing corrugated metal pipe. Please refer to the Basin Map-Figure 3.5 in this section and to Appendix G for VWVHM output and Flowmaster(Manning's equation)calculations. 3.6 Resource Review • WRIA 9 Habitat-Limiting Factors and Reconnaissance Report—Soos Creek Subbasin was reviewed. The report did not identify problems or recommend mitigation beyond what is required in the SWDM. • FEMA Floodplain Map ID#53033C0991 F is shown as Figure 3.3 of this report. The site is not located within the 100-year floodplain. , • Offsite analysis reports in this area are not required to assess impacts to downstream properties. ' The site is located immediately adjacent to the discharge area,which contains Big Soos Creek. I • The site is not identified by King County as having sensitive areas within the area of disturbance. The site is, however, located immediately adjacent to a wetland containing Soos Creek. This wetland is identified in the Wetland Evaluation by H&S Consulting as Wetland A and has a 100- , foot buffer. It should be noted that"Wetland B,"as noted in the report by H&S Consulting, is not ' Page 7 Mead�lunt considered a wetland as confirmed by the Plat Modification Reconsideration Response letter from the city of Renton,dated September 24, 2013. • Drainage Complaints-One complaint from 1996, at the parcel located directly upstream of 124tn Avenue SE, appears to have been mitigated by the addition of a catch basin near the property frontage. Secondarily, culvert analysis in this section demonstrates adequate capacity of the culvert at the location of the complaint. • Road Drainage Problems—The city of Kent does not identify drainage problems in SE 192nd Street. • Soil Survey—Please refer to Section 1.0 of this report for soils information. • No wetlands are identified onsite. Please refer to Figure 3.4. • Migrating Channel Studies are not applicable to this report. • Section 303d list of polluted waters—Big Soos Creek is not on the 303d list until below its confluence with Covington Creek. Covington Creek is listed for pH and phosphorus. • The site is not listed as being in a designated water quality problem area.The site is subject to basic water quality requirements. Please refer to the Offsite Analysis Drainage System Table in this section, included as Figure 3.2. ;I Page 8 Mead�lunt Mead LEGEND � lunt � � � BASIN LINE I � = EX. CONTOUR Mead&Hunt,Inc. I � i 6501 Watts Roacf m .00 PROP. CONTOUR Madison,wi ss��s ' �D - - LOT LINE Pho�:sos-z�3-ssao � — — — — SETBACK meadhunt.00m — � � � � I!, UP-NORTH � � � --- r , � � � ' i , UP-SOUTH � ;. � ; � � 1 - . ,'; � _ _ � UP-POND n�`�'� �' � � � - "w'��.��Yd ; � � _ � ��`��,� . , ' i UP-POND l� �_ ��>�� / i r � 6•8 C I � ; OFFSITE BASIN AREAS � � i�/ TO FLOW SP IT � � BASI ME AREA-IMPERV. ', AREA-LAWN AREA-TOTAL � '- EXISTING IDITCH � � UP-SOUTH i 1.72 AC(25%) 5.16 AC 6.88 AC EXISTING SYSTEM IN 192N �' FLOW PATTERN � / SE 188 H) I PORTION OF S , RM w2L BE �', UP-NORTH 0.64 AC(25%) 1.91 AC 2.55 AC I - ___ 121 ST PL S � / ROUTED To POND-MATCHES 1' UP-POND 1.70 AC(25%) 5.10 AC 6.80 AC ~ ONS/TE AREA N T COLLECTED � � o • �( _ �S / Z TO SE 192ND STREET V A � � � �, ' I ' U � PROPOSED D IN,�T � --��O TH 6.88 C J�yS I i Q PROPERTY LIN�TYF? _- - �` 'm- TOF�ow UP-SOUTH FLOWS ' � uwj /~� I �"�E� ,� RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) W o ' � � nnr�n ; - �-- - � , ._ ..._. _ � . � Z � I a ,f�;, �� I , L` °m,. `� 2-YR � 1.20 Z Q � I ; �I e I�I o li � � j v �. UPSTREAM BA51N ARE \A�UP ORTH ', �i �I��ir i��' - - L,-�II ` COLLECTED B BYPASS,_\ �,� 2:55 AC ; /r 5-YR 1 J3 ; � � . � m - ,�i -' 10-YR € 2.12 Z w , �m \ � � --� - SY�T_EN( ----- a � '' n � ----' - -- � 25-YR 2.66 � V Z i � , �� I ��4�� -�',:y-- \ ��`��,n�l� IIn!�r �,- -� ,__ , 50-YR 3.11 w Q EXISTING DRAINAGE COURS ; ��,� ` ��I J'�� ` j ��'. =1� � ��'�� ,' 100-YR 3.59 g NORTH SIDE OF 192ND �� :' � � % , ��' � �� " �- � _ �� ` �`�"r� r� z � �• � �` �---- � �,- , , y �� _ % � c� �- -- - \ �A�� 't�� 1� � �,�I�I I�i til�;�—I�!��1-�� ,� �-_`� ; __� ;�, ., UP NORTH FLOWS � •- ! . ` �,_,,„-" , �' - ��. � ��'�'�-� i ' �� \,�';� `�_ : RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) � V ' �\ • � 'i` i�i �I �� '� �� U�L��-�1� /�'' � �i � � � -� "�� _ �� i ti % � � ��,J-��J��iL_ � ;i"� �� 2-YR 0.45 c� Z _ � � - %'�/ � ` � ;�`� \\J� -- '� �''1 �--•_j�� YR 0.64 �� -- � ;ti ' � � ��.,�,� , �, � � / � \�\� _'r�- � - I�---';r--�' �� 1�'' p1 �;� �� 10-YR 0.79 _,_/-- � , � J s ' � ,�.-- � . � /�.�r/� , = �i '�'� `II� �,I ��'�� 'i ('I ��'� 25-YR 0.99 ---- � �� J��_ � _ U U�JIU 'J�' � � 50-YR 1.15 / •, ,� � I _< _i� - . . � 100-YR 1.33 24 AVE SE � � � / / / � � .� � � , \ _ , � , ---- ~ - .� — �'.. _ . . — . -� ..; �-�: � � UP POND FLOWS J ---- — —_` � -�----� i- .�- -- n_ i `` � N o � � % - i� ---��--'�,s ; - _r '`E-=�-i-�`-�-- . - . . RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ` \ y �'� . l� � � � . � N� i �'p� _ �� Y� - - . . _ 2-YR 1.19 ,�„�_ � � � / ` �� g�� )�� `�__ � � 5-YR 1.71 �_.�. - ,� � � --i �ti � ; � / -''� .� �,,;� _ - �' - — 10-YR 2.09 �" � � " UPSTREAM BYPASS ! 25-YR 2.63 ��•� � CULVERT „'�,, - . � � � � ��.,U.Ea.�.� __-I�fDER 124TH ` , P� - ASS) 50-YR 3.07 � . AVE SE DISPERSAL TRENCH ENERGY DISSIPATER I 100-YR 3.55 OFFSITE BASIN � � � (TYP.) MAP � — � � , ' ; �� NOTE: REFER TO SECTION 5.0 OF THE REPORT �� of ' - �� / � AND FIGURE 1.4 FOR"AREA NOT COLLECTEI�" 7 I � � , � CONCEPTUAL LOCATION OF BIG BASIN INFORMATION AND FLOWS =- Z=°=°° FIGURE 3.1 SOOS CREEK OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DKAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE SURF'ACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL, CORE REQUIREMENT#2 Basin: ��,�,.,;s� Subbasin Name: �,�;� ��zY-� Cre4� Subbasin Number: Symbol Drainage Drainage Slope Distance Existing Potential Observations of field Component Type, Component from site Problems Problems inspector, resource Name and Size Descri tion dischar e reviewer or resident see map Type:sheet flow,swale, drainage basin,vegetation, % Y.ml=1,320 ft. constridions,under capacity,ponding, tributary area,Iikelihood of problem, stream,channel,pipe, cover,depth,rype of sensitive overtopping,flooding,habitat or organism overflow pathways,potential impads pond;Size:diameter, area,volume destruction,scouring,bank sloughing, surface area sedimentation,incisfon,other erosfon '� C�v'c.,r��r�Q a '� a�l s°��' 'LSo'-�.�cra� N��e �wn h6�'��'-bs�r o��^ � �w " sy 1�u� G�v� � �- ��s Ci'1�� S-j'r r ho6c�t o A � cc+,N, G I-3�i��/_ g,M',los ►�10� ew�, 5��„r� -l-iar� � � i�noo9 i I i ! - ; �� .–=–_ `ti —� � � �� 1 _ ---i S ITE ,� y ti, -_}_ F .�.- . � _ _ � � ; � . . ` : ' -�� ; ��, � .�"___ { .��c�,� ��1 j/ , � F . tON[71 f � � ... � �� - ;� _ �� .�� 1 __._. , � ,. , J �>"" � . , !`� -N,i -� .. L 8� /� �";-: .. �--•--}-�— '_"" _._ '.__ f --..-'-E��'J� 3 • !. � � I -- S 188TH ST �� '��; 1\ � _ �� ' $� p f �.�..�� !: L�'s..' Fe.. � ,.._� -- �� ¢`' t l�«„ °'' x t; I :y .- �,� � � - �,-� - ," . , - �s �' i � � � ��._ -,�._ �� 1 : y � . . . : y . � .. ._. . , r. . _�. �.��____ , . _ _ � _ , , `� N N----w': � - - �_'. "� = �a � � � ' ' -- '� � �� € 2 � , ;, ! I � F 3 f �_ x G : �� ;tat�: �:uLs��"Y � ; m ' unu`«�krux.�y�u a�u:.�s � 'i j (n j �,; 53i)G?I }�% ,r' � m �� , �F t � _ : � �. : _ �� . . � -:,�.- �-�-�,- � � � _� _ ,_.. ., ��:� - � . *; � , ,�,, ,� _.. t , _. ,- -. � = �� `` ' zo� a� ��. �,,, .. I� r � _ ��. : . � 6 �, - _ - Y 4` TI q..: �:��': 4 . �4 � � �� .��e.._ .. .. . S _ .....� '- - _ , iG `t w"�+. S �5r �: - ��- �t ��'*_ .,3.} "'e.�e.,... FIGURE 3.3 FEMA MAP NTS SUMMIT HOMES CANYON ESTATES Mead NWC 124TH AVE SE AND SE 192ND ST RENTON, WA I IUnt 4270600-132332.01 12/2312013 i MAP � 75TN 5� .�175T►19T �`. " -_ ��NLN `� SEp�1 � _�:� r'� • kU�rT.g,Cy RO: � St f'€�fti)VIiS!CY fi�_ _ m��t.�,..,,..s� �� „"'� t� � - `' '� � SE 176TM GT � k"=34 � � � E � � ' •, � �'� l� �l�1 . � ; '� - � � � � � ��N� �, � - ^ o �,�.� , � �,�,� � �,�,� �. �` �,�a < ; - � � �� _ � - SE 18tST ST � � SE 1ffiNOST SE t8?MOST'I � :��`-:a�€�4 !}J � � £= --� -` � 3� � �� --4�-��-�= �-`� � < Renton �� y=-�� S�18lTN ST {� � ' �� 13��AVE`.� � I t SE 18TTH PL S ��F� S�19[TH R � � �= � 184TN R Sf 188TN ST { �'�� ;}� �t�Tk S1 = SE 186TM ST : :s-�--�..`d' � � _' =a;� �l� ��T1ygt � B � _ Tya� �ru � S � �'�� e �` � � �r SE�8BTt1 ST �-r ^ �fffiTM p� � ! SE 1�TH P1 `4 %.4 2 � � � � � 118TH AVE SE fN � i� � �`y � sE tesr+t a d � � � � �� t � _ � .� � sE�e�sT sr � � s z � � � �- •• �t .: . __ . .sE`�yzi�u st � �S � sE,s�o r� � � - � < }� � � � � �Y - � Q � Q � N i ` � � � SE t90TH� �� I ,� � �196TF1 Pl � �� ( �,�„� Kent � � _ � � _ �-_.-_..� s�,�n+sr � � r` " "� � �� _ � ,,,� _ � :n = � � � � 1� " � � x o y _ � �� ,,Q� SE 199TM Pl y.- �� t_--� .� ��fk&T � SE 199Ti/CT N ."�` ,� � �t � SE 2J0TM ST __ � ,a r --. .. - �} �•, '1kpJ Y � S.r�` �g#. � � P,*niher Lake� � �t �,p.`' � � y ��¢� � � . `� �a �� .-- - . -_ �� {C I 2008 K ng Coumy ��fl ST 0 1090}t COMMENTS:King County Wetlands!Channel Migration Map The inlortnation included on this map has been compiled by Kng County slaft from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice.IGng Counry makes no representalions a warranties,ezpress or inpBed,as to accuracy,compleleness,Gmelness,or rights to the use ot wch infamation. This documenl is not iMerWed for use as a survey product.IGng Counry shaA not be Fable br any general,special.ndirect,incidenlal,a consequential s � damages including,but nol limiled lo,bst revenues or bsl profits resuhing hom the use a misuse of Me inlorma�ion contained on this map.My sale of K�ng County this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permissbn ot King County. Date:12/262013 Source:King Counly iMAP-Hydrographic In(ormation(http7lwww.metrokc.gowGI�MAP) . _ ; __.__ � . _______, � _ , _� i N ' � �". ._ . �` y� �` � '' 4 Cit of Renton r.�,� , � , �. ,. , �� Y �--T-�,;.h- �' i'�,�- �:�- � , � ._ t � `1 � {.' �� _ �� -��`v``'r�� " � Y' - ' F :` Sensitive Areas � � � � t� :-�' �i ��.� x T-� 3 i f l-1 f r �� X � � L �•� � �v1�r _ y`�ir�".. � �� I 1 � � �: �� r~� _�,�. I�} -� ��Yr�. � . �� `t� "' �'�f f � �;='a. r '- -,,... y�-..._- I�_ � +i�,^ g yI ,' � �l��.� V tr�; �� f"�1+- �_'n< �. I. a. t-� !-'-+�'� �'V` '�Lf W-.\ 'a..: ' 1 ,'-�'� � -`'- J .{�. -,Tr.i � -� � 1 _"�?`4�-�`�`'� E�� :. . ~ i � ''"` v i �'_ ,� `—. � � j � �`y ��-{ � { �� ^-� � _ �_ � i � �� - , j } ��. r �— � �� ,.._...�� , , - ��,�� ., (•j ,c �;�} `,�{t � ' t t Y 1��1 '_.,'.) '� � i �� M � �� — �� t .:.�T '' { � _T� s, _ --��' '� �a _ _'1 �� ,�� i {�6 �� L.kZ Ii��1 � _. ' ,� � \ T. J i� �.:��`_. �, {�� t��?,�� "��. _� �� j;I� t� :'� _ �� 5 � �+--...,� -_ .�,,. l_'i.>yt_�� t-1 '� y.. �i ' . �� r�� .3 � ' � . - +T _rt _ _ _ _ , ' ''r�'. I� �'�.�� .�'�'aS' } Y,a .�1 ' i�r�.. �S � t�-�- t . _ -� 4• /. ��h�i , - i t _ _,_ 4 x 6 � - , �_ �,�- �-,-. — . ( � �, - - - _ � � __ � , .. • , , � _ � , — - '° � �—' i I .: --'' : — . � . - Fl`t � :;+r_'`€ f '^r, . .. � y T-t. ' -f t�. .^,y. T,..�� ' t�( ` �'ti �� 4 l 1 i 1 1 ��._t .1 .,{ � � ' . � �`t�� _ y i � 1 � '� • x , ��'..�`�i , � .�-�,r � i = � 1 — ' �� .r � . "`� �1 =#rT r -c� j�� - ! 1 I ..'- � ri �� "_ ,i �� . _ y�ti � ,� i � 1: I }r j`��'�-,-3 '�` "'1''1 t t�;�`'_`.�j-1 �i<``� �', �� ` '' ' --� �}��--R - . �-� � �j I ;; �M J' �� _ � " �:�-.,� �.� � �`� �, _ � ' '`w` �' —_..�� -;`. ,�`1 �~`�'••d+r.��-,� - �+x ! ! �f:.yf.. i:i r'E.:� - r-� �' f ,q�}� Y�{��.'.."�' �� { _.J 'Q�� l+ -re __' -�i� �,- t � r, I _ ;��..�w:.� -�;- _a � , ;� '� � �_- 1 `�� '�..��• ,..j � �,i ._.1 a . .: 4 .�,� -., -_f� ' c - <= Y .-�.,� . �, -, "�-�� .:.. ( i . ,�-, _ - i•-.. � _ s':v —- �� - j 1 i` . �. �,-r� �-• -v " ��L �` ` �. i i�} � �.��:.�� _� �- �.- - + ��'F'y r y?, s �� - ' ��..�i - ` � ��- • � f� � c � v .' �. �� ; �� ;� { t,�,--�=— _ �.�: � �` � ; �� '::._ � i +x�'+.. 7 �,,,1 �'� - t ..y �y [c�%] � :�.r�'�,(,/ '' ' �`�l�..� �. � ,. -i� . / � .�',-+ ..- . ,t 1�� . �� _�'�.� . . r y 1.. \_`'_ . ` �z,- ;\� � T�� _ ''. _ � r � �ti ', S•��,�2t , �t ��t �! �4� . .x.y � �4 r�r�� _ �. �_1 -- _ ��.a��f�, ,�� ^ � . � � �`'~=��„�;_.. � t ,�,.�.: �, � —Y.� ,:� .__ , ,�. ,��z�� ;_.,. , , � . � ``�' � : , ;� ; _ �",�' s . , � . _ : { � _ _ � _� -•- -..� . . - , ,, j � . � a ; � . � � a 3 0� , ,�.`t � t -�� t _ �r;.�� . _ ' Y.._ , ..,. ' . ... ' Ji: ; , -__.___. �._ ; . -_ - : +� +x.• � ! =� L.-. �' � _ ,-.. ., �—° ri �.. ; _J , r' -�`.�-�,:y; _ I�'�''. �.� t�" _ i I ; = � �'"�r `; -�.' y € 1 -- _ �_ , � 'r � � `�r 1dt�`�`�� -� ��l. , � ! �`, �-� �r ; _ : f }� - �, I�'�" � ��"}-{ ' ��'r-i �� ': = i + ; � «- !.� ' � i�; � � -� 3'- �} , _ I `�� r��I 4 > � ► 1 , I _,_;�.,'"( -'^ 1 t� --i . � . �`'� �.:�'��=: i. �' �7 !��-'' G ,''x� �-U€- � r�. � �(-_._ v;i��i�� t: - �_ � _- ' S� ,`��f,T �. . :, s ' ' � _ ,�..p .e' � _ h��S � 1 �r'*- �' � �t-� . ' ,1-. � �.7Y• " ..�_. � -� ' ; -/ . 1'�x��'� �' {��(�.1 r` , -�- I ` `ii*�-:' i'� , _ ` � � `_`_! � {�� - � r ,�f .r._, j i i`,,�1. , � -,`�� ,_ ,�r: _ �. � �� -- � � , .�, :r� +-i' � + � � F s , i _�•�j. t—�T, � �t_J�'� ' 1 r-- j `'- � �- -- -� � +-�. - : , . , —,1 • . ' 1 � � �l'_. r � � F �i � � � :��" .� i r .��" + -- t ! j - � �� `��• ( .-�� r' i��1� I �� . � _�_ � �, ; � , ��; � �' � � � � � ! f t : ,.�., � r � � i �.�'�F�r. '� j..; S � _ r. f � T � �i i. - i.7 }� �— ��-`,{, r- , �j � - � j -: �� '� t,,�, 0 0.25 0.5 1 _._ �i— - i*+� � ' - . Miles Iniormatbn Techndopy-GIS {r� Steep Slopes mapsupport�rontonwa.pov .s f Renton City Limits �;�cea o�:osr��rzo�z j Education Percent Range Data So�xoes:City of Renton,Kirp Counry � F're Stations >15%8<=25% This document is a praphic representation,not yuaranteed � ��e DePartment >25%3<=40°�6 b wrvey aocuncy,and is based on tlie best infamation Q ya�ley Medical Center >40%d<=90% available as of the date shown. This map is intended for City display purposes ony. � >�% coww�.e.srrl.m N�o�sas rr.nrav x,r.�.w.��n�a�Fws�eor r..r I'�'"�-� `. Proj�cUai.LsmMrt ConlormN Caric � o( ;•' . DaNm:NorMAmsrican 198JMARN �--.-�_��_ a,r I r J t i ��:� _ _- v King County Department of Assessments:eReal Property Page 1 of 3 \ew Scarch Propem Ts�Blf Al�p This ProMrty Gbaary of 1 e�ms Arri Rep�ut Prinl Proprn.Detaii � Reference Ltn PARCEL DATA ._ __ _ _.--__ _ K_jpq Countv Ta Parcel .. . .. .�6199fi6-0240 � jJurisdktion I,RENTON ; Links `_... ._..._ -__..______ ,�_. . .. . .. � Name SUM1iMII'T FRENCHIES levp Code 2t28 ! ro�� ;LLC -- - I _.___ P Taa ___._ _.__ _�_ _ _ ___.___._ Property Typa _ , R ' Qvhor Slte Address j Plat Hlock f Bulldng Numher � -- - �Rasfdential Aroa ��(SW Appratsal �p�at iot/Unit Number �� 14-13 � . �� ._�_._�_�_ .__.�.. . � - -- -1--"- �- " _ quarter•Saedon-Trnmahi hopetty Name i P I SW-J3•2J•5 Revenue(Exten � _ -- -- _ -- _ ;Range l _ �) _._ _ .. . Lpal MserlpUon ___.-_ _ _----- - _.__-_____��---__�.__._�_____ __.._.--__..__ WashinatonS4 NORTHYIESTERN GAROEN TRS DIV XS L�T X OF KING COiJNTY 8LA 10EL0093 REC X200704t9900019 SD goard of Tax (8lA LOCAIEO IN LOTS 17-13 OF SD PLAT i PLat Block: ' Aooeals(Extem 'Plat Lot 11-13 �^k� Board of IAND DATA a� �� Click the pmera to see mae pidures pistricts Reoon _ 7 � � x t`#�, ' �� . � � ' "��,�� Reeorders offi� t a.� ,. rt,� � �` �" ��. '� £ �dx��. Scannedfmaae �.' s:^.> � �'..o 'i SUNBVS Afld 014 �� .� �� f> � � `A mao documenU �+-„� ��m�4.�'�`rd�p� � `. � 'i y� • � � � �� Scannedlmaae �.�� . � �.� v'.�=. plats ��g � a � Notice meiling dat ,+``',rtf�� ; � �; �'� 06t1211014 � �, : � ��; � sxh ��, �'�� " - k �J � � z a r . �y y :'� rt,r, -<'��: '_'�s�.�r'� _ ..:`.s,. . � H,ghest 8 gest Usa ks If Percentage U�usable '0 Vacant �tv-..E Fa ..��v .. ; UnOuildable �NO Hl�ast b Best Use As pRESENT USE � RestricUve Size Shape NO Imptoved —� � ---- - ._.�_____. --- . _.r.___ , � Prnent Usa Vecant(Snglriemity) � ?oning R�l _- _ ___._. _'- ----' iWater WATER DISTRICT �B:ae Land Va1ue SqPt �0 � 1 ..._..__ _....___._.__.. . .__ _ _.. . ._�.___.. , -- -.___.._._.. Base Land Vs1ue 2 7.000 �SewertSept�c �none) ------ - -` -r-----.. _ ... _ ___. ..__�_ �RoadAttess ?PUBIIC S 8ase Land Value Impacted �� --� - . --�� jBaselandValue6Date � �yt&201q ~ � '�Parking ;ADEOUATE -_._._ .---__-- -- .�� .._�.._; Sheet Surfacs FAVE� �Basa land Value Taa Ysar ,2015 .._.F-- - _ _ . ,_�__. _ ! ;Land Sqft !751.935 ;__.___ _ .___,____ ____�. iAcres !3.44 i_. . . . s._.._. ..... .._---,�_.� Vlwra Waterfront ----- T Rainier � �Waterfront LocaUon � -__. : _ . . ...._..�.. Territorie! ; � WatMront FooRaga -- : �_�_.�__�_ __ i0iympics Lot D�pth Fador . _...----- O -- � --�. __ .�_� ._. ._.._ ._. ascadea WatMront Bank .. ._._. .... . ..--- -.. .__�_.._�. _.. _._� _. ;Seattle Skyline ;TidelShore -____-- __ ,_._._._.._..�.----- ------ �.. i Puget Sound i Waterfront Restrided Acceas __ _ __._ _�_._� ____..__.___ Lnke Washington Watertront Access Ri�fs �NO --- --- ___._ .__... _....--._. . _.__._ ._._._.... laMa Sammamiah �Poor Qualify _ ___. _.__. _..---._._. .---,---, .. �Leke/RlvertCreek ,Proximity IMue�ce j NO , _._._ ._._... , ..._ .._ _. . . ... Other View ': , _._____.. .__.. c_.-- ---. . _ _ .:.. _._._.._....__— D�sipoatlons Nutsanc�s -- __._-._--_____-�. --- _ _ _ �Hiatoric Sita T�ography YES � __._ __ ___�___ 'sCurrent Use � � Traffic Ndse MODERATE j :.._..�.__________- _ ._.._._._..�...__�_.. _._�. _.. : j N6r Bldg Sites Ntport Nois� i __ _____ __�___ _ _..____ __ _ _,_ i Adjacant to Gotf Fairway NO Powx Urws NO E- __ ____ __ __.�_�_� � _ ___ jAdjacent to Greerffitlt k0 �Oth:r Nuisances � NO , , �----------.____. . -----i �.. .. . . . . . . . - - _. .�---. ._-- !OthsrDesiy�na8on �NO � Prohlams , _..__.,,_ _ ._ . _..__ ... . . _._ , _ . _._.. tTeed Restrictions NO j Water Problems �NO _ . _ __.__ �___________. ._ ,�avelopment Righb Tnnsportation Concurrency !NO Purchaaed N� �._.J.__._._____. __ __.._. 3-__ ._.._._..___.. . . . . _ ..�. _._... �Otber Problems j NO Easements NO _______. _. vlmnm�ntal _ _ :Native Growlh Protoction NO � � ��Eesement �Environmental � � ;N9 � ' __ _ ___.__.___ httn�//infn kinacrnmtv o�v/ASaPscnr;eRealPr�nertv/l�etail asnx?ParcelNhr=fi199��240 9!1 fi/2(114 King County Department of Assessments: eRea1 Property Page 2 of 3 �DNR Lease �NO BUILDING � TAX ROLL HISTORY ,�--. � . . .. . .. .�. .... . .. . _.. .. . . . - �Taxable Taxable Ta�cable�� . ';Valued�Taz Omit-Levy.�Pnhed�Appralsed Appralsed� New ��nd . Imps Total '� Tax : ��. Account Land � Imps Total Dollara Yalua ; ' Year Year�Year Code Vatue VaWs Value � �Vslue(i),V�lue(S? vatue(S1 fSI ts1 �s) (S� :Reason ,__ _ _- - ----_ __ ,- - ��619900624p08 2074 2015 ; 2126 277,000 i0 �'�.277.000 -i0 i277,000 .0 277,000 ._ _...__ .. . ___....i---_ i_. _ ..._ __._.. .s- __._ .. .; .; . 619900624008 2013 2014.� 2128 '261,OOQ '0 261,000 ;0 261.000 0 281 000 ��; : __ . _-�.--�_L___ . _._ ,___ ._ _.__ �__ __. __.; 619900Q24008 Zb72 �'.2013 j �2128_�261.000 0 i261,000 i0 261.000 <0 261,000 ; _ - _-_.--t� �---- �---._.-- - _ � ..__ �----_. ,_...__._.;_... _. ---....._.- 674900024008 2071 2012! 2128 261000 0 i261,000 0 2&1.000 t0 261 000 . - - _. _ _ - = 67 9900024008 2010 2011 ' 2128 285 000 0 285 000 0 285 000 0 2&5 000 � -- � -- � - -- � -- --- ` 6t990002400H 2O09 2050, �2728 285000 0 285000 0 285000 0 285.000 _.__ - �- -�----�- -_- ._..._ _. . _. ,._.__._._ . .__ 5�9900024008 20(32 2009 ! !2128 ;285.0�0 �0 T2B5.000 0 i285,000 .Q 285,000 _i --- -- -- _...- -- _ ____ _ _ _ _ o't 9900024008 2007 2008 � i425Q �509 000 �0 509 000 �D 509 000 .0 509,000 � ....�.�.. _.-- --- _.____ .�� - -- --- - . . '019500024008 2(K'6 2007 � ;4250 3o8.iD0 SD.000 418,tOC ;0 368.:00 50.�00 418,100 LL __ __; __ _-- _.. _ �___ _ 5?99�G024Q08 2005 2006 ; 4250 382 300 37.000 419,300 0 382,300 37 000 419 300 , ___ .._.�. ..___.. ._ ._._ __.._._. _.. _.- -- 579400024008 2004 2005 I 4250 131.U00 86000 219.OQQ 0 131,00p �86000 219000 ; - _; __ _ _� ---._. . 5t9900024008 2003 .20(W ��, '4250 131,000 '88.000 '.219,OOQ �-0 � �131,000�88:000 ;219.000 .:' ..�. _ _ _._. _... ..__ . _ _ r. ._ < ----- --- ��-- --- ' ---- ---- 5'9900024008 2002 2003 'i ;4250 �126 000 81.000 207.00R ��.0 126.000 �81.000 2Q7.006 �. --T :.---'�-----. •---. _.._ .._-- -_._. : ____. ._._.__.t .__. 5t490D024008 2007 �'2002 ! �4250 �120.000 �74,000 194.000 �0 ��'12G.000 ;?4,OD0 i194.006 I - . -' ._---. . __. _._ �__ . .__ .___ - ` - 679900024008 2(}00 2001 i :425D �1151300. ...j58 000 173,000 �0 115.0�0 58.000 1J3,�00 � ... _._ . ._._. _.._ !_ .._. _._ _... _ E19'',,000240U8 1999 2000'- �4250�88 D00 58,000 146.000 0 �88 000 r58 000 148 D00 , .. .._._- -- v.�. .._ .... .._. � __.. ._.._. 579900024008 7?58 1499 1250 83 000 43,000 126.000 �0 B3 OOQ E43 D00 126 006 _. __ � __ �_.. . _ 679900024006 1997 1998 4250 �0 �.0 .. . 0 � ;0 �76,000 i4p,ppp 1 6,000 � ._,-_ __. . .._ . _. .;__ . _.--._- � ----_ .----- ` 5t9900024008 1996 1397 4250 �0 '0 0 �0 i76,000 f37,900 I713,900 ( ' �_-- �---- ---� -�-_. i . _._ .--�----_. 5t5900024008 199a '1995 �4250 �0 �0 ��0 . .._�0... . '76,OOD ,37.900 1t3,900_. ..._: �_.._. ._ .. ... __L ....__.... �. . : , 5199QOG24006.1952 1993 � 4250 �0 0 6 '0 70,700 .t3.200 �173,90D '. _-�- -�•--- _-__ . . .F--.._..----- -_-. __ _._..__._._ .. _ 619900024008 t991 t492 : d250 ;0 0 '0 0. 41.100 43200 84,300 i ..__ 3-._.. . ._..: .. :--..__._.. _.. ..._.. � _'. .._" _« . _. 519900024008 1990 799t 4250 0 0 0 0 41,100 43,200 84.306 ; -� -- - �- � ----�- -- - �-- - 5199D0024008�;1988 1989 a250 0 0 0 0 24.300 3t.700 67,000 __ ___ _ . -- ---- — - -_ _- - _— 6'9900024008 1986 1987 '�. 4250�Q 0 0 0 2T,900 0 .. . .27 900 : . ..-- - .- _. _._ .._ _.._._ _ . ___. _._._ ._.r_.>__.__� c?4900024008 f5&: t925 4250 '0 '0 ,0 '0 �24,000 iC 24,�00 � �. _ _-_ - _. _. ; : ,.�y_,�27^C�a tgo�2 �S<�3 �=a. .. C . �.0. _. ..._.- 0 �,24,OG0 s� 24,000 SALES HISTORY Exclse Recording Document Bayer Saie , Numbsr; Number �� Date , Sate Price �- Seller Namr Name ��,�°g�meat.Rsason ��. 26�2919 401J092T007458 924ROt3 �51200 pp�OSCREEKREAL 'FRE CHIES WxrsrVy Nane � _� _ ESTATE LlC LlC Ueed ' ; _ SOOS _ � €THOMPSON JAMES ��.CREEK i Sta!utory � 2159628120051009002728�.9R9t2005 i.5285.�:•-::� - sLEE+JUDITH REAL IVYarr�ry iNone I i '�,CAMPERSON �.�ESTATE �DCed I iLLC , LEW ROY Wartanly tu02940:188805310993 t5l31/1988 1535000:-. ROBERT+GERTRUDE JAMES � iNma � I S L�JUDRH : REYIEW HISTORY Tsx Review Revlew Appeated : Mea�ing , SettlemaM I Dacfsio�' SbWs Year Num6er 7ypa - Valua Date �� Yalae I -.. _ ._____._ .. .: .. . . :. __-- - -._._ ... . . . . . . . t . . ._ . � 2009 jOB02818 LocalAppeal :5800.000 1n1i900 SO �Completed I . __ .�_...__._. :Review• _ . . .. . . .._ :. . .. .. ;_ .___ . 2LY18 f 070066 .:�s� :-SO �1Jt11900 s 50 ;Cotnp101ed ' ' � ' ' '�-- -- . ... _ _.._ _ _.__-__.` _ -5?+. �OL'998? Locz!A.p,ea: 5'�'rJ l'v�' 5�211991 584,300 REVISE CamPe!ed PERMIT HtSTORY FermlE VermEt Iss�e Pe�mk . Issuing RevFewed Number Description jYP� Date Yalue Jurisdiction 6ate ... .. . _ . _..... --.__<'t �DemolishSFR Demahtion /O1172pp5 5-_ K�";�COU":7Y ... ��_,}_.? httn�//infn.kin�c�untv.env/Assess�r/eRealPr�nertv/netail.asnx?ParcelNbr=6199000240 9/16/2014 King County Department of Assessments: eReal Property Page 3 of 3 .. HOME IMPROVEMENT EXEMPTION \cx Scarch Pro�erh�Tac BAI i�lop This Prapert+ Glussarc o(�em�s 4rea Report Print PmpeAy Drtai� � httn�/1inf�.kin�c�untv.g�v/Assess�r/eRealPronertv/Detail.asox?ParcelNbr=6199000240 9/l6/2014 King County Department of Assessments: eReal Property Page 1 of 2 \ew 5<arcb Propan�70�Bill Nap lhrs Propeny � Glouaq uf Term� Arrs Neport Print Proprn��Iktnil � Reference Lin PARCEL DATA �n Countv Ta _ .. _ 1 ( -_:_ - _ _ _. �Parcel ;6t8900-0101 � ;lurisd�ction RENTON �- Unks ._.._ _._._' ------ -- ----__. . Name �SUMMIT FRENCHIES LLC �Levy Code 2728 _____� ____ 1-------- _, _ ___ ____ �------ Property Tax Site Addreu �Property TYpe R �� Advisor _.�_�_..�_.._---- . ----- -.�.__.�________.__ ... -- . _._ -.- Res{de�tlal Area ;�'��(SW Appreisai P Plal Block J Bullding Number ! ' ,Distecl) `-"'""" '-" ... Washlnaton 51t . ._.__ ._. .__._ . _.;..__ . .__.._ __._.__._. Plat Lot!Unit Nvmber �5 � PropertyName ' �_--�-"'---- - i Qvwnmentof _ . __. _ � . _ . ----- iQuarter-Sactian-TownsMp- f$W-33-2�-i ' Revenue(Exlert _ �. �Range...__.. .. .. __ ... . .€ ��. link) Lspal Dexription __._ ._____.__ _.__ __._.___.. . .____._ _____. NORTH1h£S7ERN GARDEN TRS�N 8 5 LESS Vd 150 P"f MEAS ALG 5 LN TGW POR NLY 30 F7 BEG A NE Washinaton S4 COR OF TR 4 OF SO PLAT TH S 1-08-14 E 120 Ff TH S 6534-39 E 150 FT TH N Ot-0B-�O E TO N LN OF TR 5 Board ot Tax TH N 89-34-39 W t D3 38 PT TH S 0-25-21 W 30 FT TH N 84 34-39 W 45 89 P"f SD POR PER DEED � ��«� 82008Q521QQQ774 8 LETTER FR CITY OF RENTON DATED OS-O6-08 ' 6nk) �PLat Block: '�,. 1 Plat Lot:5 ' Boatd ot ______ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ : AoaaalstEaualL LAND DATA ��R$DO� '�Click ihe cemera lo see more pichres. �Mgu _. ._._._.___ _ _ _____ _ . _ }O�� 'K RecordersOffi� ;C(i�1�i ScsnneC hnaae survevs and o� mao document• ° Scannedimaua � �lats � Nodca mallMy dat OBt1 T12014 i r '-� I ' � �� e�� *�-�-�� ,� -�� t. - „ 3 ��, _ iM �'.a_ � _ --_ _ _, _ _ , ;Higbes3 S Best Use As IT ,� ' Percentaqe UnusaWe 0 ` `Vacant ...INGLE FAMILV . __ �_ �__.________� � . . . . ; UnbuildaWe NO�� Water9.... _._ .. WATER��... _- -- i tU�est d 8at Usa As `-�� tmprovM {u�crownj � i Restrictiva Size Shape NO � � _.._ .... _.�_- ---_. �in R-4 '� Preaent Use Vacart(Sngle temiy) _._.__-__ __ ..___ .. tSTRfCT Base Land Value SqFt �0 -- ----_.- -.. Base Land Yatue 'Zgp,qpp � � Sewerl5eptic (none� -- " �- �Road Aacess LEGAWNDEVEIOPEDj N.Base�Lantl Value Impac[ed BO -�- . � . .� _ -- . .._ . .-.��... . - . � - Parking ADE�UATE � . �Base Land Yalued Date 2NBf2010 _.._ -.- -_.-- _.-` ------ � " Street Surface PAVED � i �Base Land Valus Tax Year 2015 '. . _ _. __. ___ .Land S tPq i 231,795 �i ;_._____.. . . ;-----.__ ._..__. `Acres i 3 32 ' �-._ _- - Visws Wateriiont �i Trtitorial � - --_ WateAront Pootage � .--.__ Ralniar Wateriront lxation I F —__ _ _. _ __ __ ----._.______ _ _ _ _.___._-_-- Olympics �Lot Oepth Factor -- ^ �_y___ �_ .`_.� ____._�_.___. Cauadea WatsAront Bank _ ._ ____ « _.__ .�_ Seattle Skytlna TidetShora — --._ _ r._ . �_.__---- � -� _ I Puget Sound Waterfront Reatricted Access F — --.._..� �Lake Waahington Waterfront Access Rtghts NO I _ _. _._- _� i Lake Sammamish Pow Quafiy j i,l ..--- ..._ .___. ._--'---- �__.� -_ , _ . ._.�____ lakelRiverlCresk lPraximlty Influence NO ---- _ _._ __ _ _T_ ;OtherYww i i ;_ . _ _ _ DaslynaNa�s � Nulseneas Histo�ic Site � ETopography �YES ��Y � .... ....___ i ____._ ._._. �-� _. . . ,_.._.. ' ..�_.,'.�._ i Current Use � Trafic Ndsa Nbr BI S�tes N ort Nolse �Adjacertt to GoltFairway DH)_----� fPower Lines YES . �______ __---.. �_..___ __.__._. � _..._ , Adjxent to Groanbelt NO ,Othar Nuisances NO i _._� ----- — ._— � ;Qther Oesignatlon NO � ProbNms ;.,_..�... .�__.__-._ ._ . � _ _ .,..___ . ._ __. ---.. �Deed RestricUons NO Water Problems NO ! ,__ .__�_ _� -- -- Deve7opmentRiphta NO �TnnsporfatlonConcartenry �"NO � i �Purchased --- "` � .._.� _.____�.,__._ .�_.._._. ._.._�..1 Olher Problems :NO � EasemeMs NO S Environm�ntal . `N�. _ . .. . . , . httn:l/info.kingcountv.¢ov/Assessor/eRealProvertv/Detai 1.aspx?ParcelNb�6199000101 9,J 16/2014 King County Department of Assessments: eReal Property Page 2 of 2 +Nadve Growtb ProtecGon ! nvlronmentai NO ■� 'Easement ` _-_.___. . . ��.DNR leasa �NO j BUILDING TAl(ROLL HtSTORY i � � �T�xableiTaxabie�Taxable� � �Appnlsed�:Apprala�d�,Appnfsed; New � � i � Tax � Valwd Tax Omtt�Levy ; { ' Land p Imps Total Aecount a Laea ; Imps ; Total jDo�lars' ; t Value �� ; Year jYear Year�Code � Value ; Value � Value � Vslue(i);Value�i)�Valns(S) (S) I €fieason. ' __J_ ?_ �.-- --- (S) � (S1 � IS) - -- _..__ _ _. _ - - 6.4900010t06�20t4�.. 2075 .. . 2128 280.000 10 280,G00 0 260.O�D ;0 280Q00 '� i ..-------.. ._ .. ._...�. _____ �.. �- - r � 0��900010106�2013 2014 2128 607.00p iD �607.000 0 607.D00 j0 �607,OOQ ; _.-----'- --_ .._. _- - � - - --_ . - � --.�� ._ _ -- F;99Q"lOtOt06 2(112 2t113 ... 21Z8 607,W0 0 fi67.00D 0 607.000 0 fi07.006 -- � - -- ---- ---- -�-- - £�9400010106 2011 2012 2128 607.00G 0 607.000 0 60T,000 0 667.000 __ - - - - ---- `_ _ _. 6�95000SOt06 2i110 2011 2128 663 000 0 663.000 0 663,000 0 663,000 _ --- V _ . _ _ _ __ ,._� ___ 6t49p0p10106 2009 2010 2128 663.000 0 663.000 0 663,000 6 663,000 _._ _ _. _ __,.__ ___ _ ____ 6;89000�Ot06 2006 2009 2128 663:000 0 663.�OD 0 663.000 0 663.000 _._._._. _� --- ---- __ -� __ __ _-- _ _._ �679''.v00010706 2007 20D8 4250 803000 0 803.00G Q 803,000 0 803.000 - �- - � .._ ... _.. _._...__ _. _ .._ __-_ �E+.99000t0106 2006� 2007 4250 726:000 D � 726,000 0 ... T26,000 0 726 000 ,._ - - --- � ------ . ..._ . .._.. __.--- 519900010106 2005 TOOG 4256 699 000 0 694.600 0 699.000 U 699.000 6t990001Q106 2064 Z005 4250 205,000 0 _ 2Q5,000� 0 205.000-0-- 205000 _ .__ _ - - . - --_ __ ...- --- - - _ 5?.9500070106 2003 2004 4�50 205000 0 205.000 0.. . . 2050� 0 205.D00 . _..._.r._._ __.__... _ . --- ..__ _ _ - -- -. .. _-.. __. . . .._.. _... 6i99000�0106 2602 2003 4250 198000 0 198.000 D 796,000 0 198.000 ----- --- -_ --_ `__ _�_ _--_ _ --- 5i9?00010106 2001 2002 4250 189 000 0 789.000 D 189.000 0 789,OOD �____ _. __- -- ---- --- - -___ _ _-. -- �.5t9900010106 2D�0 2001 4250 7�,000 0 180.000 Q 180,000 0 �� 180.000 ---- -...- �-- -_.. ._ _. ._... . .. _ ��5�9900070106 1999 2C00 425Q 134.000 Q 134.000 0 134 000 0 134,000 ._. _ .. ._--. .. .__ --�. . ... ----_. 5 t 9900pt 0196;7998 1499 4250 126,�00 6 1 Z6 000 0 126 000 0. 126 000 - -- � � -- -- - - .- a;990D010tOfiT1997 1998 4250 0 0 0 0 115 000 0 115,000 I _----i-_- -- .�_ __ - --- --- T -- .�75900010106!1996 7997 ;4250 0 ... ..0. . 0 . 0. . t15.000 0 1�5,000 ; r._..___t- - -- r--- _ _ _ _ . _- __ --- - ---T � S'�.9900010106'1994 1995 4250 0 0 0 0 � 115,OD6 0 115,000 i ...`. . ---,_. _ .._ _ ___.._ .._..__ .�_ .. . _._ ..._. 5?9900010i06�1992 1993 �4250 0 0 0 0 119 900 0 119,900 �. (-_... ---- __._. _._ _�... _..---. � .�_. _. _.._--_�_ ---_. 5?9900070706 1990 5997 425� 0 0 0 0 69 700 0 69 i00 _ �.. _. .__. . __ - - - ---- 5'9900010106�7986� 59H9 4230 0 D D 0 55 400 0 55.I00 - - --- - - -. . . -- fi+99000tOlOfi 1986..� t9B7 4230 0 0 0 0 54.000 0 Sa.000 . ..,_.. ._._.. _ . _... -- ...- --_. . ___. - -- -- � . _-._ 6!990D010106 7484 �1985 4230 0 _.._-- �. i 0 0 30 000_.�0.. 30 000 E'9900010106 1982 1983 4230 0 0 0 0 _ 30.000 i0 �30.D00 . _- SALES HISTORY Exetse Rscording :Document'; � SNtsr ' Buyer � Sale >Sale Pr]ce � i Instrument Number Numbar Date � � Name j Name Reason _ -- _ _ ___ s _ _ __. t � SUMMIT Sta!W 26J2800 20130927001472�'�,9�'26+2D73 }5800000DO��RVI�N FRENCHIES 1Narreny �ttl1emeM , � LLC Deed , . ___--- -- ----__ _ ___ .1431641 't4950607�000 :'19�5 �514�.�'?C..��O .�HRMAN VWSEMAN Olher-See aher �:ARVIN HERBERTM AtF�davll REVIEW HISTORY Tax Review . Review '� Appealed Nearing Settbmeat � ; � i Dee�sloo Status � Yesr � Number Typ� � Yalue Date Value - -- -- -_ _._ ____ _._ _. _. �t19 090'+585 lccal A:pea 51 659 5h"' 3 h4�2004 �5663,OCJ0 REVISE �Completed t� 1393 0 - _� ;Lc:a'��,A:F�a S'��.•c �:_ i3�7993 ES119.900 SUSTAIN�Completedi PERMIT HISTORY HOME�MPROVEMENT EXEIdPT16N \n:Snarc6 Propenp Tat HVII \tap l his Propcn. GWssan of Tcrms �1rtn Rcpon Prim PropeNy Delail ��„ � http://info.kinecounri.Sov/Assessor/eRealPropertv/Detail.asnx?ParcelNbr=61990001 Q 1 9/16/2014 Mead ,._ �-� . �- e..�� _ :� - i � - - �� -�� - � _ � _ � � �� _ �. � �� t-lunt � � - �':�- '� ��; �-- �=. , � � �`- � �Y= �& '`� . - y T ,, , : � s ;: '- ' � -_ ��- �. � - � �:. �- _ = F : -.�� _ � ��.. _ ��. �eaa a H�„c i�. . . . ._ - �'� rf:: c ., f �.� �E ' �' � - P. ` ' �_ > - .�, -� � 6501 Watts Road .; _. > � ' ' ` _ .s= , �. � - m � , ._: ��_ _ - !:�` " '� = Madison,W153719 �a � . �:. �'�_.§ �:�-.�� _�,:"�� 1�� . �„ .. �_ - -- - � ��,�,� - _„ u �4_ . � ;, ,� � _;. ' .<;, - - �� pbone:608-273�380 � �'..„ � _ ��. �,' � �� =-�-�� - �. �; �- �=l� . . ` - -- ' meadhuntcom _ _ - � �'� - � =- — __ - �; >: ��'� , ��, � � .� y r._ � �- � - � - , � `� � � �.° r+� � ° _ ,; :- , . ; :�� ,��. �=_"�. �: , {- —� �� . � � �, �; '�� ,. � � . .�i �.��- �� _ � . , � # _ - A�g . . '� �� '�.% � ' _ _ �- _ _ „ �, _� - ; -- s �-, �,- -qa. � �, ;x��- � �- . n � � �� - .� � - - � - � -_- .¢ � � F _ � _ �� _ - — — a. - � � � -. ��:i .r .�. , . ,� � : , � • -�� ' _ = . . - �e..� �. �-;- �� r _� v.,- _ � ,.�,, �_� �:. ,, � � � � �� <�� ,_ ;: �,�=.� _ ��, ,� � .�..� F ., e. - � �- �� '�`r �� ..� :�; � _ �:, � , .;.. �_-,. . � =: , . , -, - .�� ,..�`-�,e- � � _:, � ��- - : � {' h.:. k #_-.L:. ... �.3. � ... .y�:�-� -.v. - �' . .. .,.. � :.'� .. ;.,. '��" �,.3.� 3�� . �� '� �'� - _�� '� = ' � �-� , . £„ _, �„�t, ��°: � � �� . � �,..`r ��„ � _ � � � . :_ � ..�,_ r_ , � .. � � ,,_r _ _ : _ � �_ .: ��. _ .�.�, ; _ � . ,, � �` � .�� ;� - _ 4. �*� _ - =�, �-�.. _ � - - ' �.t = ' : �'' , ' - .._ .... � �` ` ,��.- -�= �' --� � _ _ �. �� r i� .�,, � �•# s�� . >.,, �,:- - =g �_ � _ '_ �- � : . _ ,�a�`. s _ �, , -: �_ �- i�. _ �� - - �: :F. ��, _ � �__� _ _ �r� � =: � �.�. ,: ��.�.,L �_ . _ _ � �.. : � _: �� `� � � ;�, _ , . �t �`�� ;.t _ ; ,, �� _ � � '�` .� - - . _ - - �� - < -- � - ;: � . . .�. --�:- �. � �� _ �� i � �� w : �� ' I: 3� � • -=_ �` � . - �, � �� :g � ; ,� -. , _ . . _ : � _ . , _ r _._ ,� � , : . . - - : ' � e _ �� z�_ - I .� - �' " � � � y ,' ; , c � - i �- .>-`�;.,. �. , �; ,.. :: -- . _ , �:�. =',"� �r�-�� v_: ��` �Sy ,� ..:.� ,_ - < .. _ �, . �... ... . .�� . , „4,� . .�- # +r� -"+`w` � °'+��,, ��"� i�x :�� z.�"" �� .m.�..r,.e.�.r+..�, ry; , �1 � '� : ' .<�,� . �. �.= .... : ' � � _:,> a' _ ,.„ -.a ]]�� _ � _ €. � : '._ ' , `y_� � ,.�� .�:. ;_�. .. .. . ;.;.,.��; _ . -�� .,� . . •`.�.�- �- 'y'y�� 'fi.= - rt-.�"'s`!'� _ " ��rd�r..°' ., � � :..- <R, <'_.. .;.:,."<. � �e� � �� ._. � ... � '� .'z . "� �� .� �.v"k _ �=\F � � "�__> .-.`ay" � ��i}.�' rr�i.WY�.�.�ew�� ` :' .. , f�.', . _� s"�. .Y. " .� �" �c. � ....-��.� . '.: . ..6 � �.� .. �� #s �+a.�'R'��a �F�� lOul'VY�'MtiruvwY.�YrYWM j i, �. .� �::R'6 <f i � a. .. ,_ �. .3, ` � . - `E #n. � ' w .Y� � �: " '__.{ " � �� ,. � ... � ._y.� � . . . °�tyr. i: � .yy6a,:s_ �. .=.� �°�y^ "P e'b�u�MV�eA�ram�✓�r �� , _, : _r � �-�� ' � � �j �� s� _ .� . : - �� , , _ _ � `��.� : � �= � � �� ' _ _ � �. � : " � . .: �i gMe-e � �.� ".�� _ �s;� �;M''. z�P .4'.� .E<, . } Y � .. � `� � �':. '� : _: � ..., -�Jy: ,�,*` �� .�� .:. �. �.. � r.�.. � {." :�'`. �:� �'.. �r__�� '� u�.�. ` ..�� . �..,_ -. .:._ ' .a:��. ��.5�. �--x '� . s?,. . �e �"� ��4 t - - �� s �.� , � . �.�-F % .'.� �".:�. � �-� .�. . . ,, �d'._ . .., ..,- ��:�: .....4 ��. � �. z. .- ��-Y .� �� . �� f�� .9, ��8 . _ ��yi'o- Ms�.+�eh oa�d : �: a. m--� a'.� - . - ' � ." . � . . 4 , � � _._ _: � -� : ... . ; , i� �+` �€,�� w� �� $ �: �'-_ � � , a� _. : i � . � .., :�y� _ �,.r � � �. - �:� �` '4��' � �' a � �� - — L � :` .� � - _ :. - � - _ K �. _ ��' - �- � � � = � � % P � � . _ . _ . � . � A_ � _ _ �,� � � �� - : � .a -, � ��. -�; � a�� : .,�,.�..-_... `� _ _ _ �� . : � _ _ � �._ � ��, ��i � � � �� _ . .��- . � �� _ _ -_' __ } - � � _=� , � g _.. , r � � � , - .��-—. .�� r � . � , , _ ` .�� - ` �,k � � � - ` < � _ �� . :� a� , � _ � �� . x � _ _ �x�� `�"�� ,� � x �. r �� , ,,, � � �'� _ � r�� , �� _ - _ . . � -1 �� g-� � �� = ��. a�� a , _ . - �. � � - ��°� � � �� Y 3 � ,�� _g > . , ' � .. r _ �.� ,. - r_ �� ' �� r . . � < < - - � . _ �� - % . � -��,, - - _�_ - _� a- � x � �- �� - �� - �� j � � ' � iY � � ��~ � P�T�LAM � � � � . �� 1-. � ;� � .. �. _ , � � j . � � � k - g c~n . '.�� —�;: v . �� _�� r; _ _� _ � �� . � � : eT0 �TE � =� ` � �� .Y , ., . —� � �' �`1�' -_ , �� - � ° ��s� ,��.� _ � > � f �,�, : - - -�- Z � � � � •, �� F_:. � � ;� �� `� � -°� � �� ,� s� � - � � �a�-: > w N = - - : • v„ '' � ' � ' y<. . S �. : . -._ � `. � . ;F ' .� � �� "��: . , '-, '�� '�." �` € ' . .. � y_. ��:� � � � � ,�� `+�� . .. � : p _ � �. 7� ' • w� e '. 's .' �� ' � . '"� r ,... .: - .. . �" �� - � _ �_� , . : �; s 9 �' es '��` � �,�s.�# ' w' — =�3 L�� •" ��" W _ � � ,� _ � .: � _� y� ti .. G�4y�_ M . � , � �' ,.. - : .� ��. .. i ,, �."�.�'4�� g' , �.-r _ � �'^_` � i � � _ � _ ...� .. . .. � __:: .. .*'� �-. �� . _ . d:� �:'" �' ; _ . . ��„ � 1 _ � v . � ;-- �� • � � � ��:.:�4� � � L 3 t. r_ � , � � r , � T- U��T�EA �� f = �� W o ;� .e � � � � � � �� b�� r� �- � w � �� _ �� p 3 � _ �:� �� .� �_ . .� - . � � � -�� =�� ._; �� -- _ .�� _ � _ _ �� . � _� � � � "�� --�� = -� � � � _ �. � � � - � = # : � . � ��`�� _ z A �a-� ,_ �`�a,: � -w� , � � ` . �; "-- - �� ° O � � _ s � _ Z } � � , Q . ,;�- � � `� UF��TR�AM ��.� � - � � � � T SITE_ , � � . - �-, r � . _,- . . . . �� - � SITE � � . s p � _ x. :. = , �,� - � _ a �� - � � _,�� _ � � _ �� . - � t- �� -F ;� � - �� _ -� � . � x � � ��, � � �� - . z .�,.Y�� y.a:#�r ' �:; , '� � ._� €` ,- �� - ` _ . . _ . '�:a /Q� W ... �. .� .> �s� �.S � .. `t�. ' � '� ` =r „Y'�'_�.: �F7�'` �� _ ��... V : h, k < < ' _ � _ �� , �t,:� ., "�� , `�'. � -� �`.� i�"'. _' . =c'3"'. ��;-,� � . . , � �� , Z �`t� 'I92 D � � _ � � v� ,� � -- �_� � . _ � 40 AC - ; � � � ; �, ;-��; �� ' , �� ; _ '�_ a�� ---- �- --�� `�-� � � �� = � �� ;�., ,� � �.:.� � _ " , �.�.� <_��' a ` �E `_,� �� •z ��,� t� - �� - _ � � � � - � �� Q y ; # _- � -- , a c� , -, _ # :� - � - ! �. ��z�;� ; : _t�� .v � `� - � +�:� ,� �� _ r �_a � �� ` _ r ' :. , � � �;. � � � : � : = =" -r� _ _� -,� . � ��- �� ` . � �. � :� a,� � � �� _ � � O _ . M ° � _ �' ; , . � r - ��. - .t � -. C' ��`� f- : ._ _ . _ r : �� '� � ` 3��y"',,�� r'�`� � � � � �,� � �� _ � �+q� �� +�� - - Z N . ' �� - � �� _�, _,� � r._,,_ '�< a r �" ,� `�� _ _ � <. .� i � , � . � F" �.-_.� � -�;��:�' ' �-�':��' �.-��# � �� . . ..„�. �' j � - . � � r _ � > � � -�.s , " `` '`� E -=x'' � � ,. �A::� • � _ ._.. i _ • `� .:��} _ .� � - �� .caae.��- '�^,� `�_ � ` � _ .,_ ,. F =� .� . � _ � �' � �-�'� ➢! - : .� €: �.°' ,�::... 5, �_ ' � ' ��. . �� ; 3 �*� .. �> �� . V � � � i ' .. .�.. ,.. �;'�.= �. . � ..� x- � - �� - s�- � - � �-�. '4� ,�.. _�_ -. .. -�. �� i .:-�. -- a - � ' � ::; °g . .., s . �.�_.,, �. t� �:�. �". " � � r � '�.T1�' - � - - - �-. �-'� s ; - � _ �.- - _ � i _�`-�' �.-.� � ' . i �- � � , f� �, : . . �r ��. ; t . s . � . - ` �- - � ��. �" � . .,: -.�; � :�"- r�- 'a`-.-'' � .�€ -a '�_ ' _,. �. �: �` �'�_.-.<-. °,:r,�..: �.:. ..:_ �' £.. _ '� � � s . � � � � � ` � x. ' . .: .. . . , �: ,< ... .,, .�,, a- ..z : ,., av. , ... ,.. . _.. � ... _. � "^- � .��.�... �;;:.---_—�� ' #�_ct ...�:.• � „�_> ., ... [_�� .. . �..... .-.. '�", �. .. ' . ... . -�'�s� a. -. �� .._ .r:, _ , , _ ��5:..,. ;... .. � - ...�-�,� - .:r.. - . ,.. � , ,� � � " � � � � � �J - y � � � � y � � � �. � 7� ._-� _ � '' " .t_ _. �... . `4 ka � ..... " `�� = -'- : " - i� : r�. - �� -�:.q s s�� .,� .,�' . . . . .: . �-� .�' 3.:- _ . ;: ., `..~` `F� �x.�� ' � - �.. - - ,:. � g..-�--' ` - - _-'� - �' �}' '' ` <a . - =� _ _ �. � ��7; •-� � �,_ . . _ - -ra�.. - �. .;.- ., _- . _ - � i �_ .: ." . :. . � ��-,' :�:� � _ ' �� . . �. _ +�� (E �.-� �" _ � : , �.: � �� 3 �' _ f" �' � �: < < � - �� ' , �� . �. � t ' v . � _ y� � � g._. #�i � � : �^ _:. , a �_� # .. . - -�� a�a � - - - � ,. t�-�..,Y _ - _ . -.. ,_. ,:c � �� _ � - , .� . . ... - n.� . _ _ � . ` . .-` -.)- ,-� 3._ _ : ; . '� �Ca� „ c: _ i,_�'- " " ' `-s �: - �� :�y �,r � . �. , . ..i , . �, . .-�. .. < # .f� � �_� _ _ " ' ,.:. . .. _ ��' a;�� `'= -..�¢ 4 .:,,. ,N _ �,> r �.�:,- __ _.�_ '" - _ __ � _ _ _._: �� _ _� , =c� ,_ _ , °'� � - __ a - Y � :,,:� ,?_ � _ �r.� �-x �. s.: € : - ;E< �_� _. ,�� -� � � � � - f. - � r�-< � = . , a� t '-_ _ i: � �-..� g : � �� ..: � _ � - � - _; ,_ � € ;,.� . _.. �- � _ �',�� - . �. _� ,� .� � � �- . e � . - - ° � � - _ `: .._ _ >_�� _ �, .'� � _� - .�� : _. -. r _ _ � „ _ � _ �- �r_ � � � - � � - . _ , - - . . -� . � � �S � ,� � . �_: �-� �� ;; - -" �' �, � �- � - _� � � e < . - -�; 1 _ -� �`+�,�� _� - , : , , �_,,.� �;� . 4 : t _ - s � 4� � ^ � r� � „ _ , - _ _ � - a .' � -: � , � .� � � � � _ >= _ _ _ _ _ � ,_ ��:, _, ,� ,, s. �� , � � " � ,��;��, � _ - �„ f; j �-�__� ;� _ h< � - - ��, � . -�. - � ��_ -� - - ��► �-s _ �`� � �, tv�<�;� � ._ �� - �'� � �� '��, ' � ' ' �'_ _ ' a_ _ , � ' - , : : _ a,' � � : E� = ,'�`. _ �,.- � � � � � '�i�- .v a .__ . . � ��' -- � ' �,� � _ _ �� _ �7_a_ �,. �e ,� __ _ - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION � .. .__, ... ,.a._ �.� .. ._ . .. .._...�. ,�— . - � .wxa � . . _ _. ..__. �ra: -- 0 192ND BASIN FLOWS' �n � � BASIN AREA TRIBUTARY TO NORTH SIDE OF SE 192ND ST s 5 ac REPRESENrs z5ro OF THE BASIN THAT IS NOT RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) �^ � BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV. AREA-LAWN AREA-PASTURE AREA-FOREST AREA-TOTAL MODELED AS FOREST. �o� �o« a SE 192ND ST o . +. "THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES OF 2-YR 3.63 \ °°"°"V"°""""`° � (CURRENT) 6.5 AC(25/o� 10 AC 9.5 AC 14 AC 40 AC DEVELOPMENTS WITH EXISTING FLOW CONTROL 10-YR F>.26 � 192ND ST FACILITIES. THOSE DEVELOPMENTS ARE MODELED AS OFFSITE BASIN L 'TILL FOREST'TO REPRESENT APPROXIMATE OUTFLOW 25-YR 7.81 MAP � CONDITIONS. 50-YR 9.08 .�.,,, FLOWS ARE BASED ON A 15-MINUTE TIME STEP. 100-YR 10.43 D � 800 of � � FIGURE 3.5 � � � � — __ � _ —� 4.0 Flow Control and Water Quality Analysis and Design 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology The site consists o�p,.acres of forested land located on the hillside,just west of Big Soos Creek and north of SE 192"� Street. Topography slopes down significantly to the east from the top of a hill,toward Big Soos Creek, with up to 40%slopes near the center of the property.According to the NRCS Soil Survey, the predominant soil type in the area is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam.A geotechnical report done in 2005 by Gary Flowers and Associates and subsequent explorations by Associated Earth Sciences revealed slightly different conditions.Areas of the site closer to the valley floor contained sand, gravelly sand, or sandy gravel with trace silt, while dense lodgement till was found from the middle of the slope upward.The geotechnical report states that storm water runoff flows through the forest duff found at the surface and travels along the top of the weathered zone of the lodgement till on its way toward the valley floor before reaching the more porous soils where further infiltration occurs. The project is irregular in shape but is generally bound to the north by SE 188�''Street and a single-family residence,to the east by a wetland containing Big Soos Creek,to the west by single-family residences atop the hill, and to the south by single-family residences and by SE 192"�Street at the Kent-Renton border. The project includes improvements to both SE 188"'Street at the northwest end of the site and to SE 124'"Street at its southeast. Please refer to Figures 1.3 and 1.4 for existing and developed conditions basin maps. Storm water runoff from the site as well as upstream areas currently flows down the hill to the east, on its way to Big Soos Creek. Upstream areas, as discussed in Section 3.0 of this report, include those that convey storm water runoff from roads by way of a ditch system in SE 188"�Street over the slope near the north end of the site. Storm water runoff from upstream also reaches the site after draining at or near the surface, east from single-family residences toward the site at the top of the hillside. Please refer to the upstream basin map for an illustration of the upstream basin areas. Approximately 9.43 acres of upstream area (basins UP-SOUTH and UP-NORTH)discharge onto the subject site from the west along the western boundary. The flow path and nature of flow was approximated as being in a 200-foot-wide flow path.This is a rough estimation of the four or five shallow defined paths flowing west to east along the face of the slope combined. The attenuation of these flows by the hillside was modeled in WWHM and can be found in the appendix. The total project site area is 13.54 acres. For the purpose of sizing flow control facilities and to meet standards for adequate wetland recharge,the tributary basin must be considered differently. There are two distinct areas that are removed from the pond analysis but are addressed by separate BMPs. These areas are as follows: • Lots 59-70. This area must be discharged to match durations and to maintain the hydrology of �� t e�Fir weTand to the east. Page9 Mead�-lunt • Roof areas from Lots 1-6 and 35-38. These areas will be infiltrated via drywell systems on the individual lots. EXISTING CONDITION BASIN AREAS AREA- AREA- BASIN NAME FOREST TOTAL EX-ON-1 13.54 AC 13.54 AC Wetland Recharge (lots 59-70) 1.38 AC 1.38 AC Slope Easement 0.44 AC 0.44 AC Drywell Infiltration(roofs from lots 1-6, 35-38) 0.34 AC 0.34 AC Total 11.38 AC 11.38 AC The information on this table is shown on Figure 1.3. EXISTING CONDITION FLOWS RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) 2-YR 0.38 5-YR 0.60 10-YR 0.72 25-YR 0.85 50-YR 0.93 100-YR 1.00 t-'" 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology The site, in its developed condition,will provide basic water quality treatment and flow control for onsite storm water runoff. The site's proposed conveyance system will collect and convey storm water runoff to the pond prior to discharge to the ground through infiltratable soils and to vegetated areas along the wetland buffer adjacent to Soos Creek via dispersal trenches.As previously mentioned,two blocks of areas-nns�ite are not included in the pond analysis. Lots 59-70 will be discharged to the wetland via �.-�,...�_..... ... . is ersio to maintain wetland hydrology(please refer to Section 4.5 for further discussion). Roof areas and footing drains from lots 1-6 and 35-38 will be infiltrated through drywells. Driveways will be collected by the system in the street. Runoff control for lots designated for 59-70,which are designated for wetland recharge,will be accomplished by sheet flow dispersion in accordance with .11of Volume V of the 2005 SWMMWW. In addition, Post Construction Soil Depth -BMP T5.13,will be implemented to provide additional water quality and flow control characteristics for these lot areas. Page 10 Mead�l-lunt Drywells are uti�ized to infiltrate non-pollution generating roof runoff from lots 1-6 and 35-38. These 10 lots are underlain by recessional and advance outwash soils. The remaining lots will be routed to the infiltration pond. The impervious area of the remaining lots is, in all cases, 10% below the maximum allowable impervious area. Per King County code for R6 (as specified in the city of Renton plat amendment), the maximum allowable impervious area for R6 is 65%. The smallest of the lots, Lot 48, contains 3,819 square feet of area, but only 1,860 SF of impervious area is proposed (1,500 SF at 30' x 50')of home and 360 SF of driveway(20'x18'). This represents 48% impervious area in the smallest lot. Below are tables summarizing the site's ground cover in the developed condition and associated mitigated runoff rates. DEVELOPED CONDITION BASIN AREAS BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV AREA-LAWN AREA-TOTAL DEV-ON-1 6.97 AC 6.57 AC 13.54 AC Wetland Recharge (lots 59-70) - 0.61 AC -0.77 AC - 1.38 AC SLOPE EASEMENT -0.44 AC -0.44 AC Drywell Infiltration (roofs from lots 1-6, 35-38) -0.34 AC - 0.34 AC Total 6.02 AC 5.36 AC 11.38 AC The information on this table is shown on Figure 1.4. MITIGATED DEVELOPED CONDITION FLOWS -(DEV- ON-1) RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) 2-YR 020 5-YR 0.27 10-YR 0.33 25-YR 0.41 50-YR 0.48 100-YR 0.56 Due to site grades, an area of the site cannot be collected by the conveyance system tributary to the , proposed pond. This basin is referred to as"NOT COLLECTED°and includes 124ih Avenue SE and a ' small portion of emergency access along SE 192�d Street. Following are tables summarizing the NOT ' COLLECTED basin area and its associated runoff rates. �� . ._ . Page 11 Mead�lunt "NOT COLLECTED"BASIN AREAS AREA- AREA- AREA- BASIN NAME IMPERV LAWN TOTAL NOT COLLECTED 0.49 AC 0.15 AC 0.64 AC NOT COLLECTED RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS) 2-YR 0.19 5-YR 0.24 10-YR 0.27 25-YR 0.32 50-YR 0.35 100-YR 0.40 This basin is identified on the developed condition map(Figure 1.4). To compensate, a portion of the upstream basin identified as UP-POND will be captured by the proposed conveyance system and directed to the proposed water quality and flow control facilities. Storm water runoff from this upstream basin area,as identified in Figures 1.4 and 3.1, is routed through a flow splitter directing a portion of the flow to the conveyance system tributary to the pond. The flow splitter will allow peak flows equivalent to that of a 100-year event from the basin identified as NOT COLLECTED to be routed to the pond. Flows above the NOT COLLECTED 100-year will overflow into a bypass system, which discharges directly to a gabion energy dissipater located north of the lower pond. ' Please refer to Section 5.0 for design of the flow splitter. I� "UP-POND" BASIN AREAS �I BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV AREA-LAWN AREA-TOTAL � UP-POND 1.70 AC(25%) 5.10 AC 6.80 AC UP-POND RETURN PERIOD FLOW(CFS)* , 2-YR 1.19 i i5-YR 1.71 10-YR 2.09 25-YR 2.63 50-YR 3.07 100-YR 3.55 Page 12 Mead�lunt i The net result is that during the 100-year event, 0.40 cfs from basin"UP-POND" (corresponding to the � 100-year event from NOT COLLECTED)will be directed to the pond, while the remaining 3.15 cfs will be routed to the bypass system,which discharges to the gabion energy dissipater located north of the pond discharge. � The upstream basins UP-SOUTH and UP-NORTH are collected in a gravel trench that runs along the i westem project boundary and eventually discharges to either the wetland buffer to the east or the system ', in 192"� Street. In the existing condition,this flow is attenuated by the hillside. In this devel�ped condition, I the trench itself provides attenuation that matches that of the hillside. Please refer to the appendix for these calculations. 4.3 Water Quality Analysis and Design Water quality is provided for onsite storm water runoff.As with the flow control facility, a portion of the upstream basin area will be conveyed to onsite water quality facilities to compensate for the portion of 124�''Avenue that cannot be collected. To accomplish water quality onsite, one wetpond, one stormfilter vault, and three separate catch basin Stormfilter units are proposed. There is a very small area within the city of Kent,which will be treated by a combination of sheet flow dispersion and by post construction soil quality and depth. The Stormfilter vault is located east of the alley connecting Road A and Road B and will treat storm water runoff essentially from the top half of the site.The pond is situated adjacent to the flow control facility and will provide treatment to the lower half of the site. The three catch basin Storrnfilter units are located in SE 124th Avenue.The small area within the city of Kent is represented on the water quality map as the 0.02 acre , area of emergency access located south of the end of Road C. Please refer to Figure 4.3 for a basin map showing areas tributary to each facility. East(lower)wetpool volume required: - 11,708 CF East(lower)wetpool volume provided: - 12,582 CF The wetpond was chosen to treat the eastern portion of the site as it was the most cost-effective and desirable basic water treatment facility for the space available. The storm water facility tract allowed for just enough room to accommodate a wetpond adjacent to the infiltration pond. Construction and maintenance costs associated with a wetpond were lower than for a Stormfilter system or wetvault, while space was not available for other basic treatment BMPs in this area. Stormfilters were chosen to serve other areas of the site where only the smallest footprint could be accommodated. Please refer to Appendix B for water quality facility sizing for the wetpond, filtration units, and sheet flow dispersion area. Page 13 Mead�lunt i 4.4 Flow Control Analysis and Design The facility utilizes infiltration as well as surface discharge to meet Level 2 flow control requirements. An infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour was used for design. Subsequent to the 2005 report by Gary Flowers and Associates,Associated Earth Sciences(AES)performed additional subsurface exploration. Based on observations of the underlying soils and the results of a PIT test, AES recommends a long-term infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour. Please refer to the WWHM analysis in Appendix A of this report. Detention Volume Provided: 1.395 acre-feet. (Note that the facility was modeled as a stage/storage/ discharge table. The facility demonstrates the ability to meet flow control requirements with the volume provided but does not give a specific output for volume required.) Please refer to Appendix A for overflow and emergency overflow sizing. 4.5 Wetland Hydrology To maintain the hydrologic period of the wetland to the east of the site, a combination of the discharge from the flow control pond and surface discharge from lots 59-70 is directed to the wetlands. In order to analyze the developed hydro-period for the wetlands,we are using DOE guide sheet 2B, bullet point 1 alternative modeling method. In short,water level fluctuation data is not available for pre-developed condition so a continuous series model, WWHM,was utilized to prepare a durations analysis as described below. The WWHM model is not calibrated for the existing site conditions,as this was outside the scope of the project. In addition,the flow control facility also utilizes infiltration. As the forested land use in VWVHM is not exactly matched to the second-growth nature of the existing project surface condition, a mixture of pasture and forest was used to better model the existing site conditions. In addition, as the downstream area of lots 59-70 is atop outwash soils, a 0.15 inch/hour infiltration rate was applied to the downstream buffer area.The buffer area where the pond outlets was modeled as a lateral basin. Considering the geotechnical and monitoring data that we have in place now,this is an appropriate method to analyze the ' hydro-period. The durations analysis showed that for lower flows,the durations were near to or below the pre- developed rate while the higher flows the developed project exceeded. Considering that we have lot areas and a pond contributing to the wetlands, it is preferable that we are close in the low flow range and higher in the upper range of flows. This is interpreted basically to be that the pre-developed flows are exceeded in the less common storms,or heavier storms where runoff passes through the wetland to i Soos Creek. In addition to the durations analysis, a daily peak analysis was perforrned for the months of May through September. This analysis showed that peaks were exceeded for these months on a daily , basis which tel�s us that the wetland is getting enough runoff during these months. , Page 14 Mead�lunt j To better disperse flows, BMP T5.13, post construction soil quality and depth is specified to be used on lots 59-70.According to the 2005 DOE SWMMWW, BMP T5.13 will provide additional flow attenuation. Considering the available data and the inexact nature of hydrology,the analysis shows that the hydroperiod for the wetland below is being maintained by the upstream surface water management system. Once the project is installed, it is recommended that two piezometers be installed in the wetland to monitor the level fluctuations. This data ptus monitoring will allow for adjustments to be made upstream of the wetlands to provide a more appropriate hydroperiod. , Mead lunt Page 5 � � f • � I � � ��./� ��. � BMP T5.11 Concentrated Flow Dispersion Purpose and Definition Dispersion of concentrated flows from driveways or other pavement through a vegetated pervious area attenuates peak flows by slowing entry of the runoff into the conveyance system, allows for some infiltration, and provides some water quality benefits. See Figure 5.4. Applications and Limitations • Any situation where concentrated flow can be dispersed through vegetation. • Dispersion for driveways will generally only be effective for single- family residences on large lots and in rural short plats. Lots proposed by short plats in urban areas will generally be too small to provide effective dispersion of driveway runoff. • Figure 5.4 shows two possible ways of spreading flows from steep driveways. Design Guidelines • A vegetated flowpath of at least 50 feet should be maintained between the discharge point and any property line, structure, steep slope, stream, lake,wetland, lake, or�ther impervious surface. . A maximum of 700 square feet of impervious area may drain to each dispersion BMP. • A pad of crushed rock(2 feet wide by 3 feet long by 6 inches deep) shall be placed at each discharge point. • No erosion or flooding of downstream properties may result. • Runoff discharged towards landslide hazard areas must be evaluated by a geotechnical engineer or qualified geologist. The discharge point shall not be placed on or above slopes greater than 20%or above erosion hazard areas without evaluation by a geotechnical engineer or qualified geologist and approval by the Local Plan Approval Authority. • For sites with septic systems,the discharge point should be downgradient of the drainfield primary and reserve areas. This requirement may be waived by the Local Plan Approval Authority if site topography clearly prohibits flows from intersecting the drainfield. Flow Credits • Where BMP T5.11 is used to disperse runoff into an undisturbed native landscape area or an area that meets BMP T5.13, and the ��egetated flow path is at least 50 feet, the impervious area may be February 2005 Volume V—Runoff Treafinenf BMPs 5-9 � f ��f�� f. 2 • i modeled as landscaped area. This is done in the WWHM by entering the impervious area into the" landscaped area"field. rW �i h�.�' �f '�tl Q ; '7 ti � 1 I � '::::;�'_ : � � � J I�LL �t ! � � � I�F r J � r I = �� : f � � + I 1 Lacata dram � �� r 25 frosn FCOVS+iF 1� 700 sq.ft max.beAvean berms d riueway sloQes i� � � toward street� J � � �'?'�-� £�sh�a.��;.>;,, � ,, �� "� 2-4' w � . ; ' , ' ::. _.... .. _.... . ._......... .:...... :: - . � ' r ' t � G'm ici I .,� i � .�.i y � i Diagonal ber m BERM DETAIL ; ' i wfthdipersim �, r �'�.� � trench ---�+ �� + �.a`�, ` ;2.�veyetated� �, �e�� fb�� I ♦ r �� r 1 J � � r / l r r I PLAN Steep Driveway with Diagonal Berms � t�,� , � - �r �r �� I��>r , , �.. ..: � ;:�::::: f r Locate drai� �Q i ::::�:::: I I 25'trom ROW if'~. i '' ''�::!:: �::::: r � driuewaY SbAes = r :;:::;�;:;;: � f� t�ward street � � : . � , � 7'04 sq.tt.maX.betwean drains � � � I � .:: 1 L?�nf9+�t�i� .. ': ' =� :.. :. .., � ,.,. ,: ,;��: x; , __ _._ _ _. .. , . � ! � j`::;::::::[::_:::::[: � .' ' r ---4• I � Diagonal ber m� "`''I � ,�� witFt dipersim i � � ,�� • trench y •--�a � � r Qs,d� r t 29 v�agetated ti � �`�e�� I I fb�pa}h � � � � i � � . � a i ► � � � � 1 1 , PLAN Steep Driveway with_Slotted Drains Figure 5.4—Typical Concentrated Flow Dispersion for Steep Driveways 5-10 Volume V—Runoff Treatmenf BMPs February 2005 J I ! ` � _ MATCHLIN Mea� � � ; ; �% \ � + .}. , '1�8�ht�1tE�E _ �I u n l ..r i -_ ._ � � I i ' - , � � � - ; � . -- - �_� �- � � Meaa a Hu�t,�nc. _ � � �I� � � 1- � -1 f�I �- -� i , : . _ - � ' _ sso�wa�R�a � � � �I � � � �'� � � � �1! ; � ! �,�a��,sos-i�i3s3eo � � :{ � j� � v ' I I i;I 1 � r„�arn,�e.� "' �, �� - �� I�� j �� j� I�� I�I � ��l � �� I 1 � � � � � � �, ; � i f ,� 1� � �� I lii � � `° � I � I�i .� � j� �� `'' �; , =_ � � ,�;- -�� I t �►� --� � ,;_ l�- T � , � -� m : , � � � � : � m � m m �� . � _ , � � : -__ � � �- - , o � ,� ; a - � �� _�z � r � � ;� � - r- �, --� r �- � \ / - � ' ., 1 � � \ � �' 1 J, ! �„�,��.ti" �I I '� w `� / � � �,� �' I �I� � ��.,.��,�.�.';°� � � �,� �,� ��{ - - � `� a, �I� � �I� o l �� I 1 �, 1�}'� %� ��`,;� � 1'til oN, �f I. �.I I I � I I � I � � .� �'� _,i-=� i ��..��`°..., � I � � , .�-.��__..�...,�., i ; ,_ �L i,� ;� _ ��i ` �� a �,'\ 1�1 I'I J�I i�l I � II �; .� � _ _� -� - �� --- � - - �- � � �� LJ LJ � J LJ � ��:� �`� � I�� i ' �� . I� �., � � ��. - -�-�.�= w I =?� � � � V � � � I � �' �� .C� � ,��`'� � �/� �\ W i � ` \ w\ � \�� %� . � � i _��;T��, �'� ^1\� t�a `\\�� ';i �� . . � . .- A �- . . .. . . � W � � - i -�" 1�� '� � 1� � �> `� � � ' � ��'`� rt�T�� -�� `''' '',1 � �,\ , � -T- -� -� i � i ti � � � �" � � � ,' r- ,A�� - � �� '�i��-j��,� r � �� i � � �� i� �',�, �, 1�� ,1 �Y /''`� � v� � , a I � o � {� , � � � � , �� \�� ,�� l � � �, '�' �� i � � '�' , , r � � �\ �. Y �1 1 +a I � � I t, I t. .� I o� / / w N � � � �� :o� � '�� :,%�, � '�� 1�1 �, � .�-_I_�I- N I �,,, I� � � �„ � °j � '� I, I�I �i�,� '�� , � ; _ �� I �� \ � � � �"` ','1 � �.1 � I,I I�I I� `' j �-� '' o� , C ;, � ,�, �� ,,�, � �,� ,n� �� -TO DISPERSION - � '' ��.� � � �� ,�� w ,�, 1�, � _ _ � � � � ai �-- {CITY OF KENT) � !/�� w ��,� '�' _ - � - � � ,,�- ��,,�� , w o �� ; %,y �� ,�.�� ` _-- � ,' �.. , � � ��Yi= 4� z ¢ � �'„� �, . ;� � ��;. � � �:,` _ ' �Ir �-.;�� ,.,1� \ � � ,. . / , , , ,:; � // �� \ � -I-- � ,,1- -�-� � � �,� �, N 1� \ �� `�'° � �- / �; 12 h AVENUE SE r � � � �� j� �j� �1�� g� w �,1 �`�,� \ �. � � Q � ;,, L � � �,/ � �r��; \ , o,�, � ,I, �,�, �� , �,�� , , ��,,� � _, � W . �, �r �� w � � � � I i;i i�i ��i i � � ;� ,�, � l- „ � > �� ,_ �, a� , r ( < N - � .a� �� , i�, ili �ili �i�� i '� � , �� _�E , � Q I: ' ��L -� �r ��' `� - - �'�l- J�� I'�� , -� � EAS T=0.44AC � v � N c I I \ � � ,, - -��-,� J I I� � / � � ', i�FILTER 51 j �� ,�--�" �� / / / �/ - - - - � � U I /X , i"%� - ' �FILTER 52 ,'� L� ' 'r% `'�� ' - - , "�` °��,,,, ,r" �' c=n z . . � �i � � � ` �,� � � - � � - - � � � - SSED � 1 `r - - / �`,, - ' - ' �As'�VN�TPON4 TO MAINTAIN WETLAND ��= ' - ..� - � - � `� - - - - - 'HYDROLOGY= 1.38 Pc� ; , a �. � , , � � - ' c[I! 1 fi1 ' � , --\ --- � -- --; - - � ,. �.. ,�' _ , - ,a - - - - - , � � -- -- -- �-- � -� � ��- i � � � = i � `� � `� � �_ i�FILTER 50 � ,� � �,,} --- -- �-- -_ i � ''� � ''-FILTER 100K(KEN7�_ - ' 1 , � � �/ � r \ '� -\ � � � � � � WEST(UPPER)WATER QUALITY AREAS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV. AREA-LAWN AREA-TOTAL AREA-TOTAL L E G E N D WEST 123,657 SF 155,521 SF 279,178 SF 6.41 EAST(LOWER)WETPOND AREAS �� BASIN LINE ROOF TOP j BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV. AREA-LAWN ARE4-PASTURE AREA-TOTAL AREA-TOTAL �h - - LOT LINE BYPASS(34) I '51,000 SF I - -51,000 SF EAST 168,436 SF 123,122 SF 19,322 SF 310,870 SF 7.13 AC ��'Y � - SETBACK ' TOTAL ' 72,657 SF 155,521 SF 228,178 SF WETLAND RECHARGE _26,400 SF -33,780 -60,180 SF =� �m � ��.�� ^ � � � (12 LOTS) � � � EAST(LOWER) WATER QUALITY AREAS(100K,KENT DISPERSION,49,50,51) SLOPE EASEMENT -19,322 SF -19,322 SF WATER QUALIN � � ' � BR51N NAME AREA-IMPERV. AREA-LAWN AREA-TOTAL AREA-TOTAL ROOF TOP BYPASS(16 � � � � FILTER 100K 1,825 SF 1,712 SF ' 6,629 SF 0.15 AC LOTS) -24,000 SF - -24,000 SF BASIN MAP _ WEST(UPPER� DISPERSION 875 SF - �� 875 5F 0.02 AC ROOF TOP � � � � FILTER 52 6,660 SF - 5,501 SF 0.13 AC INFILTRATION(8} -�5,000 SF I - -15,000 SF ��« a BASINS IN 124TH,KENT EMERGENCY FILTER 51 5,442 SF - 5,442 SF 0.12 AC � POND SURFACE AREA -17,131SF -17,131 SF � A ACCESS,LOTS 59-70 AND SLOPE FILTER 50 6,855 SF - 6,855 SF o.�s aC FIGURE 4.3 � � EASEMENT ARE SHOWN DELINEATED, TOTAL 23,592 SF 1,712 SF 25,302 SF 0.58 AC TOTAL 85,905 SF 89,332 SF 0 SF 175,237 SF I � BUT NOT HATCHED � x : 5.0 Conveyance System Analysis and Design Analysis of onsite and offsite conveyance systems demonstrates their ability to convey the 100-year storm without overtopping or creating flooding issues. Conveyance systems associated with this site are largely separate from one another, and are discussed and analyzed separately. The systems are as follows: The onsite conveyance system tributary to the ponds(includes pond outfall calculations), bypass system, and SE 192nd Street system. For the flow splitter used to direct flows from the upstream compensatory area, calculations are also included in this section. Please also refer to figure the conveyance map, included as Figure 5.1 in this section. 5.1 Onsite Conveyance System This system is conveys storm water runoff to the onsite treatment and flow control facilities. Hydrologic modeling was performed using the Rational Method in accordance with the 2009 SWDM. Catchment areas were analyzed separately. Conveyance system sizing was performed using the Civil 3d Hydroflow Software, which uses the direct step method to generate a hydraulic gradeline. The system as designed is able to convey the 100-year event without overtopping. Please refer to Appendix E. 5.2 Bypass System This system which collects storm water runoff from upstream areas, conveys it through the site and discharges downstream,was also able to convey the 100-year event without overtopping.This system also discharges to a gabion energy dissipation system at the northeast end of the site. This system was sized using the same methods discussed in section 5.1 above. 5.3 SE 192nd Street Conveyance System The existing culvert located along SE 192"� Street was analyzed downstream of the site. Proposed development has only negligible impact to this system; however, analysis was performed to identify any potential capacity issues and to ensure that the improvements do not exacerbate any existing issues. This basin was analyzed using the WWHM at a 15-minute timestep. The 100-year event was routed through a section of the culvert under 124�Ave SE and analyzed using Manning's Equation. Minor impacts to this area include the addition of a cutoff ditch beginning at the back of lot 17 and draining toward SE 192^d Street as well as the improvement of SE 124'h Avenue. Currently, upstream drainage from west of 121 St Place SE flows overland toward the back of lots 8-17 and ultimately to SE 192"d Street. The addition of this system will connect the cutoff drain to a catch basin at the southwest corner of lot 8, in SE 192^� Street,which is slightly upstream of where it currently reaches the system. Page16 Mead�lunt Improvements to 124'h Avenue SE will include the replacement of an existing culvert near the intersection of SE 192"d Street. For upstream a map of the upstream basin tributary to the culvert on the north side of SE 192^� Street, please refer to figure 3.5 under Offsite Analysis. Please also refer to Appendix G for hydrologic and hydraulic calculations. Page17 Mead�l-lunt ,F� � a�E� ��A Mead i a:,sin ' aasw E�sira � I��t (:.0 4ES) (.�C EES) ;A�F.ES! ..�' � ::P7 .`.C8 ^E'= i.�3.^ , - ` :^ ,^- Mead&Hunt,Inc. 6501 Watts Road C_- `..77 i:-' , �_-i`. '� Madison,W153719 �e a,t = _ - . `--� phone:60&273-6380 0.�� j _ s ;�� meadhunt.com :G :JS ,-G�� `_OS --_ - !'_' :.1 r, - ':i�:, - -:9 C?`. i.'�.I :�.r;'. -�._r,,, -- =E' -.I� :I�>; �5 ,:r. �d- - - i>,i :E7- cga' N.'p,z� _�.B�:J CE_'.=�"�1 . - �.1=, P��''�- -i.,' �� . . :H;. _Jy - CC1iEGI - =.a7��t " -- C 8 i . :07 =8�- - - n...�.�r� :,G , - -. = C:` ��I w,.:,r eL n"e.�.we n ��w.r„a�. �E-. .J f9 F.'i1 _ -5'' : ■■ �o��ydn.�s�,.�...n�.wd :i �'_ asnqs.�.ein ie+�a2 ao.sn r^ -u- . �,s c . (.�� - ��°S.�� F., - i � i � �l ,I � IM � , I � � � i -- � � � � � � � � � _ _ � �� • ' — �. � v �� v �g25� �B °° SEE FIGURk 3.1 FOR OFFSIT ' � ti � Z r� q� � .: o �, _ N � �� I '� �, � ! ' CONTRIBUT NG AREAS - � °' _ _ � � - � w m _ � �� ; ; � ; � � `., _ – ' 26 – BYPASS SYSTE AT � z � �' _ _ � � PROPERTY LIN , (TYP.) ; p w e 2a " , �_� ' >- cn � � z �� - c ��'� � � B 001 �r B ��\ �' � ( I� _ CB 35-- -C � I U W - 1 �' �/ � �n �Bo <so \ i ��. - ti I ��'� I� � � - - C�, ,,�� _ W � I � i � � � }�� G�i -ef'\ , �� rn - � . - � Q � ; � �% \. - cn B 33 rn - - �/ O !�- , � - - , � - - � CB �2 ,i — � � ' � A - - , ----- � \.`� � �" H � _ .__�__CB 30 �� ' �- �`.� ►•' �\ v- - - ' ' ` g � � � � ,�=' - -- � ,. � � � � �� g U w �. � � � � `" �� CB 6 C � C $ fn Z � � _ � 'C'e �� 1 I � � � B 40 � ,. .. 79 •\ �� I'A A s2s � � , '---- ,:,�. � � � , . ' , � ; /� � � ' - '� A �+ , � � + �� r� � w — ----- --- -- -------- ---- . � i ' ' , � � � I �` -- � v �� B 1401�1 � �— } � , , , ; � � ' -— � o � \ � , • __�. — � ' \ : ' y-�_- � ; . _ ,..�-i.�- , — � .�-f— ; - , . � C , . , '-�-r� CB 4 , . , - __ � , � , -_ \� , � - • e � .?� � w �, i ----- ----- -- � 1 .., , . ��. �� s -- 1 , . � ,� � �� _ � -�� _ , , � � �� w`� �' � � --. . ' r� � p� � NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION A e�� % _� � � � � v � � � .,,� � � ��5`y � i, , � �� - j, ` i ��1 I �I� I � o.re N i oE�E�.+ p� �'e4 �,�i �' � �.�.s. � 9 � �.�.. �ocx 7% � . � �. I - � . _ _ . — _ .��.�.�.s��,y.� � � -- ` .� � J — ��' CONVEYANCE � I , �J �� ` � � � MAP � . i � ��1�, a , ; _ . — — _ . � � a _ . / - � � ' — � . . — � — � � . _ . _ _ , � . _ . s.�r�o. of �.... � --�-.__�-- �_ _�. F \ , � / � g � --. ` � . � �1 .'�. � � I �� — — -- — —__ �/ � � j_^_ ,L.1 , � o so too FIGURE 5.1 , � R a' — 6.0 Special Reports and Studies Please refer to appendix F for the following reports: Wetland Evaluation and Delineation by H&S Consulting,dated May 26, 2004. Geotechnical Report by Gary Flowers, PLLC, dated February 14, 2005. Subsurface Geotechnical investigation by Associated Earth Sciences, dated April 24, 2014. Page 18 IYII.��'�1 I l I, 7.0 Other Permits The project will require the following permits from the agencies listed below: City of Renton Grade and Fill Permit � Construction Permit II Building Permits for walls City of Kent Civil Construction Permit Soos Creek Water and Sewer District Developer Extension Agreement Washington State Department of Ecology NPDES Construction General Stormwater Permit Washington Department of Natural Resources Forest Practices Application Page 19 Mead�t-lunt 8.0 CSWPPP Analysis and Design A construction SWPPP will be provided prior to permit. Page 20 Mead�lu nt 9.0 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries and Declaration of Covenant Facility Summaries for the wet pond and detention pond are provided in the following pages. Bond quantities have been submitted separately and declaration of covenant will be provided following approval and prior to final plat. Page 21 Mead�f-lunt 10.0 Operations and Maintenance Manual , Please refer to the foliowing pages for operations and maintenance information. Page 22 Mead�t-lunt APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIRE:�4ENTS FLOW COVTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND W`Q FACILITIES I NO. 1 -DETENTION PONDS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Resulks Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Site Trash and debris Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot Trash and debris cleared from site. per 1,000 square feet(this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fiH up one ` standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation constitute a hazard to Counry personnel or the removed according to applicable public, regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where Caunty perso�nei or the public might normaliy be. Contaminants and Any evidence of conkaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oi1,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if I appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Grasslgroundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in Grass or groundcover mowed to a height. height no greater than 6 inches. Top or Side Slopes Rodent holes My evidence of rodent holes if Eaci�ity is acking Rodents removed or destroyed and of Dam,Berm or as a dam or berm,or any evidence of water dam or 6erm repaired. Embankment piping through dam or berm via rodent holes. Tree growth Tree growth threatens integrity of slopes,does Trees do not hinder facility not allow maintenance access,or interFeres with performance or maintenance maintenance activity. If trees are not a threat or activities. not interfering with access or maintenance,ihey do not need to be remaved. Erosion Eroded damage over 2 inches deep where cause Slopes stabilized using appropr'�ate of damage is stitl present or where there is erosion control measures. If erosion potential for continued erosion. Any erosion is occurring on compacted slope,a observed on a compacted slope. licensed civil engineer should be consufted to resolve source of erosion. Settlement Any part of a dam,berm or embankment that has Top or side slope restored to design setded 4 inches lower than the design elevation. dimensions. If sedlement is significant,a licensed civil engineer should be consulted to determine the cause of the settlement Storage Area Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 10%of the Sediment cleaned out to designed accumulation designed pond depth. pa�d shape and depth;pond reseeded if necessary to control erosion. Liner damaged Liner is visible or pond does not hold water as Liner repaired or replaced. (If Applicable} designed. InteUOutlet Pipe. Sediment Sediment filling 20°/a or more of the p�e. InleVoutlet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inleVoutlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes(indudes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than'/rinch at the joint of the No cracks more than'/.-inch wide at inleUoutlet pipes or any evide�ce of soil entering the joint of the inleUoutlet pipe. at the joints of the inleUoutlet pipes. Emergency Tree growttti Tree growth impedes flow or threatens stabiliry of Trees removed. OverflowJSpiilway spillway. Rock missing Only one layer af rock exists above native soil in Spil{way restored to design area five square feet or larger or any exposure of standards. native soil on the spillway. I/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A A-2 APPENDIX A MAIti'TENAh'CE REQUIREMENTS FOR FL01'�'CON1'ROi.,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACIU7'IES NO.2-iNFiLTRATION FACIlITIES Maintenanee Detect or Problem CondiUons When AAaintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Malntanance Is Performed 5ite Trash and debris Any Uash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot Trash and debris cleared from site. per 1,000 square feet(this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take lo fill up one standard size office garbage can). I�general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Noxious weeds Any naxious or nuisance vegetalion which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation constitute a hazard to County personnel or the removed according to applicabte public. regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the pubiic might normally be. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oif,gasoline,canaete slurries or pai�t. according to appiicabie regulations. Source contral BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contami�ants present other than a surface oil fiim. Grasslgroundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in Gress or groundcover mowed to a height. height no grealer than 6 inches. InflltraGon Pond,Top Rodent holes Any evidence of rodent holes H faality is acting Rodents removed or destroyed and or Side Slopes of as a dam or bertn,or any evidence of water dam or berm repaired. Oam,Berm or piping ihrough dam or bertn via rodent holes. Embankment Tree growth Tree growth threatens integriry of dams,berms or Trees do not hinder tacility siopes,does not allow maintenance access,or performance or maintenance interferes with maintenance activity. If trees are activities. not a threat to dam,berm,or embankment integrity o�noi interfering with access or maintenance,they do not need to be remaved. Erosion Eroded damage over 2 inches deep where cause Slopes stabllized using appropriate of damage is still present or where there is erosion conVot measures. If erosion polentiai ior coniinued erosion. Any erosion is occurring on compacted slope,a observed on a compacted slope. licensed civii engineer shou�d be consulted to resolve source of erosion. Setllement Any paA af a dam,berm or embankment that has Top or side slope restored to design settled 4 inches lower than lhe design elevation. dimensions. If settlement is significant,a licensed avil engineer should be consutted to detertnine the cause of the sett(ement. Infiltra6on Pond, Sediment If lwo inches or mora sediment is present or a Facility infiltrates as designed. Tank,Vault,Trench, accumulation percolation test indicates facility is working at or or Small Basin iess than 90%of design. Storape Area Infiltration Tank Plugged air vent Any blockage of the venl Tank or vauit freely venls. Structure Tank bent aut oi Any part ot tank/pipe is bent oul of shape more Tank repaired or replaced to design. shape than 10%of its design shape. Gaps between A gap wider than'/rinch at the joint of any lank No water or soii entering tank sections,damaged sections or any evidence of soil partiGes entering through joints or walis. joints or cracks or the tank at a Joint�r through a wall. tears in wall Infrltration Vault Damage to wail, Cracks wider than Yrinch,any evidence of soii Vauit is sealed and structureliy Structure frame,bottom,andlor entering the structure through aacks or qualified sound. top slab inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structuralty sound. 2�09 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1/9/2009 A-3 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYAI�'CE,AND WQ FAClL[TIES NO.2-INFILTRATION FACILITIES Maintenance Defect or Problem Condttions When Maintenance Is Needed Resuits Expected When Component Maintenanee Is PeHormed InieUOutlet Pipes Sediment Sediment filiing 20°�or more of the pipe. Infettoutlet pipes clear of sedimeni. accumula6on Trash and debris 7rash and debris accumuiated in inieUoutlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes(indudes floatables and non-flaatables). Damaged Cradcs wider than'/rinch at lhe joint of ihe No cracks more than'/.anch wide at inleVoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the inteUoutlet pipe. at ihe joints of the inleUoutlet pipes. Access Manhofe Covedlid not in place Coverflid is missing or only paAially in place. Manhole access covered. My open manhole requires immediate mainte�ance. locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mecha�ism opens with proper toois. not working maintenance person with proper tools.Botts cannot be seated. Se1f-lodcing coverAid does not work. CoverAid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove CoverAiti can be removed and remove coverAid after appiying 80 Ibs af lift. reinstalled hy ane maintenance person. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs,misatignment,rust,or cracks. Ladder meets design siandards. Allows maintenance persan safe access. large access Damaged or difficutt Large access doors or plates cannot be Replace or repair access door so it doors/piate to open openedlremoved using n�rmal equipment. can opened as designed. Gaps,doesn't cover l.arge access doors not flat and/or access Doors ciose flat and covers access compietely opening not completely covered. opening compietely. Lifting Rings missing, Lifling rings not capable o(lifting weight ot door Lifting dngs sufficient to tift or rusted or plate. remove door or plate. infiltration Pond, Plugged Filier bag more ihan'/,fuil. Replace fifter bag or redesign Tank,Vaull,Trench, system. or Smatl Basin Filter Bags InfilVaGon Pond, Sediment 6"or more of setiiment has accumuiated. Pre-seriling occurs as designed Tank,Vault,Trench, accumufation or Sma11 Basin Pre- settling Ponds and Vaults tnfillra6on Pond, Piugged Fiigh waier level on upstream side of fifter Radc filter replaced evaluate need Rodc Fiiter remains for extended period of 6me or little or na for filter and remove if not water flows through filter during heavy rain necessary. storms. InfiltraGon Pond Rodc missing Only a�e layer of rock exists above native soii in Spillway restored to design Emergency Overtiow area five square feet or larger,or any exposure of standards. Spiliway native soll at the top of out flow path of spillway. Rip-rap an inside slopes need not be repiaced. Tree growth Tree growth impedes flow or threatens stability of Trees�emoved. spiltway. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A A-4 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FAC[LITIES NO. 4-CONTROL STRUCTURElFLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect or Probiem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Structure Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than'/�cubic foat which No Trash or debris blodcing or is located immediately in ftont of the structure potentially blocking entrance to opening or is blocking capacity of the structure by structure. more than 10%. Trash or debris in the structure that exceeds'/, No trash or debris in the structure. the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. '� Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in Mo condition present which would � volume. attract or suppoct the breeding of insects or rodents. Sediment Sediment exceeds 60%af the depth from the Sump of structure contains no bottom of the structute to the invert of ihe lowest sediment. pipe into or out of the structure or the bottom of the FROP-T section or is wilhin 6 inches of the invert of the bwest pipe into or out of the strudure or the bottom of the FROP-T section. Damage to frame Corner of frame extends more than'/.inch past Frame is even with curb. andlor tap slab curb face into the street{If applicable). Tap slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or 7op slab is free of holes and crecks. cracks wider than Y.inch. Frame not sitting flush on top slab,i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of more than'/.inch of the frame ftom the top slab. Cracks in walls or Cracks wider than'h inch and longer than 3 feet, Structure is sealed and structurally bottom any evidence of soil particles entering structure sound. through cracks,or maintenance person judges that sUucture is unsound. Cracks wider than Y:inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than'/.inch wide at at the joint of any inleVoudet pipe or any evidence the joint of inleUoutlet pipe. of soil particles entering structure through cracks. SettlemenV 5trudure has settled more than t inch or has Basin replaced or repaired to design misalignment rotated more than 2 inches ouk of alignment. standards. Damaged pipe joints Cradcs wider than'/rinch at the joint of the No cracks more than'/.-inch wide at inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of inleVoutlet pipes. the strudure at the joint of the inleUoutlet pipes. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gaso�ine,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No cantaminants present other than a surface oil film. Ladder rungs missing Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, Ladder meets design standards and or unsafe misalignment,rust,aacks,or sharp edges. allows maintenance person safe access. FROP-T Section Damage T section is not securefy attached to structure T section sewrety attached to wall walt and ouUet pipe structure should support at and outlet pipe. least 1,D00 Ibs of up or down pressure. Structure is not in upright posiGon(allow up to Structure in corcect position. 10°�from p[umb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight or Connedions to outlet pipe are water show signs of deteriorated grout. tight;structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Any holes--other than designed holes—in the StruGure has no holes other than structure. designed holes. Cleanout Gate Damaged or missing Cleanout gate is missing. Replace cleanout gate. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual–Appendix A ]`9 20�9 A-7 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQU[REMENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE;AND«'Q FACILITIES NO.4-CONTROL STRUCTUREtFLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Perfortned Cleanout gate is not waiertight. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one Gate moves up and down easity and maintenance person. is watertight Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or damaged. Chain is in place and works as designed. Orfice Plate Damaged or missing ConUoi device is not working properly due to Plate is in place and works as missing,out of place,or bent orifice plate. designed. ObsUuctians Any trash,debris,sediment,or vegetation Plate is free of a!I obstructions and blodcing the plate. works as designed. Overtlow Pipe Obstructions Any trash or debris blocking{or having lhe Pipe is free of all obstructions and potential ot biocking)the overflow pipe. works as designed. Deformed or damaged Lip of overflow pipe is bent or deformed. OverFlow pipe does not a{low lip ove�flow at an elevation lower than design InIeVOutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20°/a or more of the pipe. InleUouUet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inleUoutlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes(inGudes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than'/rinch at the joint of the No uadcs more than%.-inch wide at inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the inleUoutlet pipe. at the joints of ihe inleUoutlet pipes. Meta1 Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than'!,inch. Grate opening meets desgn (If Applicable) standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 24% 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 grete. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Manhole CoverlLid CoverAid not in place CoverAid is missing or only partially in place. Coverllid protecis opening to Any open structure requires urgent structure. matntenance. Lodcing mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechan'ism opens with proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with praper tools.Bolts cannot be seated. Self-lodcing coverAid does not work. Covedlid difficuft to One maintenance person cannot remove CoverAid can be removed and Remove cover!{id after applying 80 Ibs.of lift. reinstalled by ane maintenance person. 1 9 2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual-Appendix A A-8 APPENDIX A MAINTENAhCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLO�V CONTROL,CONVEYANCE.AND W'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°k af the depth from the Sump of catch basin contains no boriom of the catch basin to the inveR 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'/:cubic foat which No Trash or debris blocking or is located immediately in front of the catch basin potentiafly blocking entrance to opening or is blodcing capacity of the catch basin catch basin. by more than 10%. Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds No trash or debris in the catch basin. '/,the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the trasin. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or vegetation odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within catch basin. gases(e.g.,methane). Deposits of ga►bage exceeding 1 cubic foot in tJo condRion present which would 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 applicable). Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of holes and cracks. cradcs 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. Cradcs in walls or Cracks wider than'/:inch and ionger than 3 feet, Catch basin is sealed and bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch sUudutaNy sound. basin through cracks,or maintenance person judges that catch basin is unsound. Cracks wider than'/:inch and longer than 1 foot No cradcs more than'/�inch wide at at the joint of any inleUoutlet pipe or any evidence the joint of inleUoutlet pipe. of soil paRicles 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 Cradcs wider than'/rinch at the joint o(the No cracks more than'h-inch wide at inleUoudet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of inletloutlet pipes. the catch basin at the joint of the inleUoutlet pipes. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminaMs present other than a surface oil film. InleUOuUet Pipe 5ediment Sediment filling 20%or more of the pipe. InleVoutlet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inteUoutlet No trash or debr�in pipes. pipes(includes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than'/rinch at the joint of the No cxacks 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 2004 A-9 APPENDIX A MATNTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLQW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Oefect or Problem Condition When Mafntenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than'/,inch. Grate ope�ing meets design (Catch Basins) standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash a�d debris. of grate surface. footnote to guidelines for disposal Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s)of the grate. Grate is in piace and meets design Any open structure requlres urgent standards. matntenance. Manhole Cover/Lid Coverilid not in place Caverllid is missing or only partially in piace. CoverAid protects opening to Any open structure requires urgent structure. maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens wtth proper tools. Nnt Working maintenance person with proper toofs.Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking coverAid does not work. Covedlid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover(lid can be removed and Remove coverAid after apptying 80 Ibs.of lift. reinstalled by one maintenance person. I�9:2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Apgendix A A-!0 APPENDIX A MAINTENATVCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 6-CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Defect o�Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Resuits Expected When Component Mafntenance is Performed Pipes Sediment&debris Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds Water flows freely through pipes. accumulation 20%of the diameter of the pipe. VegetatioNroots Vegetationlroots that reduce free movement of Water flows freely through pipes. water through pipes. Contaminants and Any evidenoe of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gasoline,conuate slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. 5ource conhol BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Damage to protective Protective coating is damaged;rust or wrrosion Pipe repaired or replaced. coating or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of pipe. Damaged Any dent that decreases the cross section area of Pipe repaired or replaced. pipe by more than 20%or is determined to have weakened structural integrity of the pipe. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from square feet of ditcti and slopes. ditches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20%of the Ditch cleanedlflushed 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 rnight normally be. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollu6on such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. accarding to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriale. No contaminants present other than a surFace oil film. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows heely through ditches. through ditches. Erosion damage to Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding. slopes Rodc 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?92009 A-1 I APPENDIX A R9AlNTENANCE RF,QUIREIvfENTS FLO«'CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND�4`Q FACILITIES NO. 7-DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G.,TRASH RACKS) Maintenance Defect or Probiem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expacted When Component Malntenance is Perfortned. Site Trash and debris Trash or debris plugging more than 20�0 of the Barrier clear to receive capacity flow. area of the barrier. Sediment Sediment accumulation of greater than 20%of Barrier Gear to receive capacity flow. accumulation the area of the barrier Structure Cracked broken or Strudure which bars attached to is damaged- Structure barrier attached to is loose pipe is loose or cracked or concrete structure is sound. cxacked,broken of bose. Bars Bar spacing Bar spacing exceeds 6 inches. Bars have at most 6 inche spacing. Damaged or missing Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches. Bars in piace with no bends more bars than'/.inch. Bars are missing or entire barrier missing. Bars in place according to design. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50°� Repair or replace barrier to design deteriaration to any part of barrier. standards. l 9 2009 2009 Surface Water Design R4anual Appendix A A-12 APPENDIX A MA[NTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOV4'CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILi7'IES NO. 8-ENERGY DISSIPATERS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditlons When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Perfortned. Sfte Trash and debris Trash and/or debris accumulation. Dissipater Gear of trash and/or debris. Contaminanls and Any evidence of contaminants or poilution such Materials removed and disposed of poilution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surtace oil film. Rock Pad Missing or moved Oniy one layer of rock exists above native soil in Rodc pad prevents erosion. Rock area five square feet or larger or any exposure of native soii. Dispersion Trench Pipe plugged with Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20°k of the Pipe cleaned/flushed so that it sediment design depth. matches design. Not discharging water vsual evidence of water discharging at Water discharges from feature by properly concentrated points along trench(normal sheet flow. condition is a"sheet flow"of water along trench). Perforations plugged. Over 1/4 of perforations in pipe are ptugged wilh PerForations freely discharge flow. debr�s or sediment. Water flows out top of Water flows out of distributor catch basin during No flow discharges from distributor "disUibuto�'ptch any storm less lhan the design stortn. catch basin. basin. Receiving area over- Water in receiving area is causing or has No danger of landslides. saturated potenGat of qusing landsfide problems. Gabions Damaged mesh Mesh of gabion broken,twisted or deformed so Mesh is intact,no rock missing. structure is weakened or rock may tall out. Corrosion Gabion mesh shows corrosion through more than All gabion mesh capable of Y.of its gage. containing rock and retaining designed fortn. Coliapsed or Gabion basket shape defortned due to any All gabion baskets intact,structure deformed baskets cause. stands as designed. Missing rock Any rock missing that could cause gabion to No rock missing. loose structural integrity. Manhole/Chamber Wom or damaged SUucture dissipating flow deteriorates to'fi or Structure is in no danger of failing. post,baffles or side of original size or any concentrated worn spot chamber exceeding one square foot which would make strudure unsound. Damage to wall, Cracks wider than'h-inch or any evidence of soil Manhole/chamber is sealed and entering the structure through cracks,or frame,bottom,and/or structurally sound. top slab maintenance inspection personnel determines that the strudure is not sUucturally sound. Damaged pipe joints Cradcs wider than'/rinch at the joint of the No soil or water enters and no water inletloutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering discharges at the joint of inleUoutlet the structure at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes. pipes. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Appendix A 1`9.'2009 A-13 APPENDIX A MATNTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 9-FENCING Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expecfed When Component Maintenance is Performed Site Erosion or holes Erosion or holes more than 4 inches high and 12- No access under the fence. under fence 18 inches wide permitting access through an opening under a fence. Wood Posfs,Boards Missing or damaged Missing or broken boards,post out of plumb by No gaps on fence due to missing or and Cross Members parts more than 6 inches or cross members broken broken boards,post plumb to within 1'/z inches,cross members sound. Weakened by rotting Any part showing structural deterioration due to All parts of fence are structurally or insects rotting or insect damage sound. Oamaged or failed Concrete or metal attachments deteriorated or Post foundation capable of post foundation unable to support posts. supporting posts even in strong wind. Metal Posts,Rails Damaged parts Post aut of pfumb more than 6 inches. Post plumb to within 1'F�inches. and Fabric Top rai(s bent more than 6 inches. Top rail ftee of bends greater than 1 inch. Any part of fence(including post,top rails,and Fence is aligned and meets design fabric)more than 1 foot out of design alignment. standards. Missing or loose tension wire. Tension wire in place a�d holding fabric. Deteriorated paint or Part or parts that have a rusGng or scaling Strudural(y adequate posts or parts protective coating condition that has affected structural adequacy. with a uniform protective caating. Openings in fabric Openings in fabric are such that an 8-inch Fabric mesh openings within 50°�of diameter ba11 could fit through. grid size. I I II I I I �I 1 9 2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Appendix A A-14 APPENDIX A MAINTEIv�ANCE REQU[REMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES N0. 10-GATESBOLLARDSIACCESS BARRIERS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Resuits 6cpected Nlhen Component Maintenance is Performed Chain Link Fencing Damaged or missing Missing gate. Gates in place. Gate members Broken or missing hinges such that gate cannot Hinges intact and lubed.Gate is be easily opened and closed by a maintenance working freely. person. Gate is out of plumb more than 6 inches and Gate is aligned and vertical. more than 1 foot out of design alignment. Missing stretcher bar,stretcher bands,and ties. Stretcher bar,bands,and ties in place. Lodcing mechanism Locking device missing,no-functioning or does Lodcing mechanism prevents does not lock gate not link to all parts. opening of gate. Openings in fabric Openings in fabric are such that an 8-inch Fabric mesh openings within 50%of diameter ball could fit through. grid size. Bar Gate Damaged or missing Cross bar dces not swing open or cfosed,is Cross bar swings fully open and cross bar missing or is bent to where it dces not prevent closed and prevents vehicle access. vehicle access. Locking mechanism Locking device missing,no-functioning or does Locking mechanism prevents does not lodc gate not link to all parts. opening of gate. Suppo�t post Support post dces not hold cross bar up. Cross bar held up preventing vehicle damaged access into facility. Bollards Damaged or missing Bollard broken,missing,does not fit into support No access for motorized vehides to hole or hinge broken or missing. get into facility. Does not lock Lodcing assembly or lock missing or cannot be No access for motorized vehicles to attached to lock bollard in place. get into facility. Boulders Dislodged Boulders not located to prevent motorized vehicle Na access for motorized vehicles to I access. get into facility. ' Circumvented Motorized vehiGes going around or between No access for motorized vehicles to boulders. get into faci(ity. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1 9 2009 A-15 � APPENDIX A MAtNTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES N0. 11 -GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Maintenance Defect or Problem Cond3Nons When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Mafntenance fs Performed Site Trdsh or litter Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot Trash and debris deared from site. per 1,000 square teet(this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. 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 normaty be. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gasoline,conaete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs imp�emented if appropriate. No wntaminants present other than a surface oil film. Grass/groundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in Grass or groundcover mowed to a height. height no greater than 6 inches. Trees and Shrubs Hazard Any tree or limb of a tree identified as having a No hazard trees in tacility. potential to fall and cause property damage or threaten human Irfe. A hazard tree IdenHfied by a qualified arborist must be removed as soon as possible. Damaged Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are splft or Trees and shrubs with less than 5°h broken which affect more than 25%of the total of total foGage with split or broken foliage of the tree or shrub. limbs. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or No blown down vegetation or knocked over. knocked over vegetation. Trees or shrubs free of i�jury. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately Tree or shrub in place and supported or are leaning over,causing exposure adequately supported;dead or of the roots. diseased trees removed. 1 9 2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual- Appendix A A-16 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FL01V CO:VTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND 1�1'Q FACILITlES NO. 12-ACCESS ROADS Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Site Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Roadway drivable by maintenance ' square feet(i.e.,trash and debris would fill up vehides. ' one standards size garbage can). Debris which could damage vehicle tires or Raadway drivable by maintenance prohibit use of road. vehides. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Blocked roadway Any abstruction which reduces clearance above Roadway overhead clear to 14 feet road surface to less than 14 feet. high. Any obstruction restricting the access to a 10.to At feast 12-foot of width on acoess 12 foot width for a distance of more than 12 feet road. or any point restricting access to less than a 10 foot width. Road Surface Erosion,settiement, Any surFace defed which hinders or prevents Road drivable by maintenance potholes,soR spots, maintenance access. vehicies. ruts Vegetation on road Trees or other vegetation prevent access to Maintenance vehicies can access surface facility by maintenance vehides. facility. Shoulders and Erosion Erosion within 1 foot of the roadway more than 8 Shoulder free of erosion and Ditches inches wide and 6 inches deep. matching the surrounding road. Weeds and brush Weeds and brush exceed 18 inches in height or Weeds and brush cut to 2 inches in hinder maintenance access. height or cleared in such a way as to allow maintenance access. Modular Grid Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of Pavement pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. � Source control BMPs implemented if ' appropriate. No contaminants present othe►than a surface oil film. Damaged or missing Access surface compacted because of broken on Access road surface restored so missing modular block. road infiltrates. 2009 Surface R�ater Design Manual—Appendix A I 9 2009 A-17 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILIT[ES NO. 16-WETPOND ' Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Ezpected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Site Trash and debris Any trash and debris accumulated on the Wetpond site tree of any trash or wetpond site. debris. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation consGtute a hazard to County personnei or the removed according to appiicable public. regulations. No danger of nozious vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or poilution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surFace ail film. Grasslgroundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in Grass or groundcover mowed to a height. height no greater than 6 inches. � Side Slopes of Dam, Rodent holes Any evidence of rodent holes ff facility is ading Rodents removed or destroyed and Berm,intemal berm as a dam or berm,or any evidence of water dam or berm repaired. or Embankment piping lhrough dam or berm via rodeni holes. Tree grawth Tree growth threatens integrity of dams,berms or Trees do not hinder facility slopes,does not aliow maintenance access,or performance or maintenance interferes with mai�tenance activfty. If trees are activities. nat a threat to dam,berm or embankment integrity,are not interfering with access or mainte�ance or leaves do not cause a plugging problem they do not need to be removed. Erosion Eroded damage over 2 inches deep where cause Slopes stabilized using appropriate of damage is still present or where there is erosion control measures. If erosion potential for continued erosion. Any erosion is occurring on compacted slope,a observed on a compacted slope. licensed civil engineer should be consulted to resolve source of erosion. Top or Side Slopes Settlement Any part of a dam,berm or embankment that has Top or side slope restored to design oE Dam,Berm, settled 4 inches lower than the design elevation. dimensions. If settlement is internal bertn or significant,a ticensed civil engineer Embankment should be consuNed to determine the cause of the settlement. Irregular surface on Top of berm nat uniform and level. Top of berm graded to design iniernal berm eleva6on. Pond Areas Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 10°!0 of the Sediment cleaned out to designed accumulation(except designed pond depth. pond shape and depth. first wetpool cetl) Sediment Sediment accumulations in pond bottom that Sediment storage contains no accumufation(first exceeds the depth of sediment storage(1 foot) sediment. wetpool cell) pfus 6 inches. Liner damaged(If Liner is visible or pond does not hold water as Linsr repaired or replaced. Applicable} designed. Water level{first First celt empty,doesn't hold water. Water reta+ned in first cell for most of wetpool cell) the year. Algae mats(first Algae mats develop over more than 10%of the Algae mats removed(usually in the wetpool cell} water surface shauld be remo�ed. {ate summer before Fall rains, especially in Sensitive Lake Protection Areas.} Grav'ity Drain Inoperable valve VaNe will not open and close. Va1ve opens and closes normaly. Valve won't seal Valve does not seal completely. Valve compietely seals c{osed. Emergency Overtlow Tree growth Tree growth impedes flow or threatens stability of Trees removed. SpiiN+ray spilNvay. � 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1/9 2009 A-21 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREn1ENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FAC[LITIES N0. 16-WETPOND Mainte�ance Defect or Probiem Conditlon When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Perfortned Rock missing Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in Spiliway restored to design area five square feet or larger,or any exposure of standards. native soil at the top of out flow path of spillway. Rip-rap on inside sfopes need not be replaced. InIeUOutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20%or more of the pipe. InleUoutlet pipes clear of sediment. acxumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inleUoutlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes(includes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than Yrinch at the joint of the No uacks more than%.-inch wide at inleUoutfet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. at the joints of the inleUoutlet pipes. I 92009 2009 Surface 4Vater Design Manual—Appendix A A-22 Appendix A - WWHM Outputs W�VHM2012 PROJECT REPORT General Model Information Project Name: Pond-infil-final-2014-09 I Site Name: Summit Plat 'I Site Address: I City: Renton Report Date: 2/9/2015 Gage: Seatac Data Start: 1948/10/01 Data End: 2009/09/30 Timestep: Hourly Precip Scale: 1.00 Version: 2014/06/24 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1: 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1: 50 Year Low Flow Threshold for POC2: 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC2: 50 Year Low Flow Threshold for POC3: 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC3: 50 Year Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2!9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 2 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use Pre-Dev Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Forest, Steep 4.17 C, Forest, Steep 9.37 Pervious Total 13.54 Impervious Land Use Acres Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 13.54 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2l912015 9:14:21 AM Page 3 Offsite Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Flat 5.1 Pervious Total 5.1 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 1.7 Impervious Total 1.7 Basin Total 6.8 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2l9/2015 9:1421 AM Page 4 124th Bypass ' Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres � A B, Lawn, Mod 0.15 Pervious Total 0.15 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 0.49 Impervious Total 0.49 Basin Total 0.64 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 5 Mitigated Land Use I Developed I, Bypass: No I GroundWater: No I Pervious Land Use Acres ' C, Lawn, Steep 2.18 C, Lawn, Mod 2.18 A B, Lawn, Mod 0.85 ' Pervious Total 5.21 Impervious Land Use Acres ' ROADS FLAT 2.51 ROADS STEEP 0.46 ROOF TOPS FLAT 2.06 POND 0.5 Impervious Total 5.53 Basin Total 10.74 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Infil-pond Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 6 ' Offsite Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Flat 5.1 Pervious Total 5.1 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 1.7 Impervious Total 1.7 Basin Total 6.8 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Flow Splitter Flow Splitter Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 7 Basin 3 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Lawn, Mod 0.15 Pervious Total 0.15 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 0.49 Impervious Total 0.49 Basin Total 0.64 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2J9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 8 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2l9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 9 Mifigated Routing Infil-pond Depth: 8 ft. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 SSD Table Hydraulic Table Stage Area Volume Infilt (ft) (ac) (ac-ft) Manual (cfs) NotUsed NotUsed NotUsed 0.000 0.159 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.183 0.171 0.108 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.000 0.208 0.367 0.153 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.000 0.232 0.587 0.188 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.000 0.257 0.832 0.450 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.000 0.281 1.101 0.740 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.000 0.306 1.395 0.954 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.000 0.431 1.764 9.908 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 8.000 0.448 2.020 13.69 0.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 Pond-infii-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 10 Flow Splitter Depth: 2.4 ft. Element Flows To: Outiet 1 Outlet 2 Infil-pond SSD Table Hydraulic Table Stage Area Volume (ft) (ac) (ac-ft) Manual Manual NotUsed NotUsed NotUsed 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.096 0.695 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.200 0.000 0.000 0.135 0.983 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.300 0.000 0.000 0.166 1.204 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.400 0.000 0.000 0.191 1.390 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.214 1.554 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.600 0.000 0.000 0.234 1.703 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.700 0.000 0.000 0.253 1.839 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.800 0.000 0.000 0.271 1.966 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.900 0.000 0.000 0.287 2.085 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.303 2.198 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.100 0.000 0.000 0.318 2.305 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.200 0.000 0.000 0.332 2.408 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.300 0.000 0.000 0.345 2.506 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.400 0.000 0.001 0.358 2.601 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.500 0.000 0.001 0.371 2.692 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.600 0.000 0.001 0.383 2.780 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.700 0.000 0.001 0.395 2.866 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.800 0.000 0.001 0.406 2.949 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.900 0.000 0.001 0.417 3.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.000 0.000 0.001 0.428 3.109 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.100 0.000 0.001 0.439 3.526 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.200 0.000 0.001 0.449 4.222 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.300 0.000 0.001 0.459 5.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9l2015 9:14:21 AM Page 11 Analysis Results POC 9 �::� �,,��a�,�, � ��,,,,w.,... ., � . . „ LL , . . _ .. _...r..�_ �. �.i / 2 5 I: 2: U R T; �; 5( � p6 H P.5 1 �� ' I� + Predeveloped x r��itiq�ted I Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 �I!, Total Pervious Area: 13.54 j Total Impervious Area: 0 ' Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area: 10.31 Total Impervious Area: 7.23 Flow Frequency Method: Log Pearson Type III 17B Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.381523 5 year 0.598714 10 year 0.721733 25 year 0.85202 50 year 0.932624 100 year 1.001171 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC#1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.19648 5 year 0.338836 10 year 0.469728 25 year 0.68772 50 year 0.896196 100 year 1.151674 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.428 0.170 1950 0.690 0.172 1951 0.798 0.460 1952 0.293 0.133 1953 0.209 0.142 1954 0.297 0.135 1955 0.572 0.313 1956 0.455 0.170 1957 0.407 0.182 1958 0.377 0.166 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 219/2015 9:14:21 AM Page 12 1959 0.308 0.148 1960 0.544 0.423 1961 0.302 0.151 1962 0.207 0.118 1963 0.264 0.128 ' 1964 0.288 0.138 1965 0.245 0.160 1966 0.248 0.133 1967 0.554 0.209 1968 0.322 0.145 1969 0.342 0.161 1970 0.292 0.153 1971 0.241 0.141 1972 0.618 0.277 1973 0.307 0.147 1974 0.284 0.127 1975 0.494 0.257 1976 0.302 0.144 1977 0.041 0.130 1978 0.297 0.170 1979 0.144 0.131 1980 0.423 0.220 1981 0.227 0.155 1982 0.527 0.567 1983 0.380 0.166 1984 0.278 0.141 1985 0.151 0.162 1986 0.702 0.466 1987 0.593 0.452 1988 0.240 0.129 1989 0.138 0.113 1990 0.920 0.695 1991 0.742 0.575 1992 0.296 0.156 1993 0.309 0.139 1994 0.080 0.110 1995 0.379 0.157 1996 0.756 0.407 1997 0.767 0.590 1998 0.175 0.146 1999 0.498 0.323 2000 0.330 0.165 2001 0.054 0.131 2002 0.396 0.450 2003 0.259 0.134 2004 0.669 1.448 2005 0.430 0.207 2006 0.476 0.165 2007 1.098 0.704 2008 1.091 0.939 2009 0.572 0.248 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 1.0980 1.4485 2 1.0906 0.9393 3 0.9203 0.7039 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2l9i2015 9:14:27 AM Page 13 4 0.7982 0.6951 5 0.7666 0.5901 6 0.7558 0.5750 7 0.7417 0.5665 8 0.7019 0.4660 9 0.6902 0.4603 10 0.6694 0.4516 11 0.6177 0.4504 12 0.5932 0.4227 13 0.5724 0.4073 14 0.5722 0.3231 15 0.5536 0.3126 16 0.5440 0.2766 17 0.5266 0.2572 18 0.4984 0.2484 19 0.4941 0.2200 20 0.4764 0.2089 21 0.4550 0.2074 22 0.4304 0.1824 23 0.4282 0.1720 24 0.4228 0.1704 25 0.4071 0.1701 26 0.3963 0.1695 27 0.3798 0.1661 28 0.3794 0.1656 29 0.3773 0.1654 30 0.3416 0.1648 31 0.3295 0.1616 32 0.3219 0.1608 33 0.3088 0.1598 34 0.3076 0.1572 35 0.3068 0.1558 36 0.3025 0.1555 37 0.3019 0.1533 38 0.2974 0.1508 39 0.2966 0.1483 40 0.2963 0.1471 41 0.2930 0.1465 42 0.2915 0.1453 43 0.2882 0.1442 44 0.2835 0.1418 45 0.2779 0.1408 46 0.2642 0.1406 47 0.2592 0.1389 48 0.2476 0.1384 49 0.2445 0.1355 50 0.2410 0.1340 51 0.2403 0.1334 52 0.2275 0.1327 53 0.2086 0.1307 54 0.2067 0.1305 55 0.1753 0.1300 56 0.1510 0.1291 57 0.1442 0.1280 58 0.1380 0.1266 59 0.0802 0.1180 60 0.0545 0.1127 61 0.0414 0.1105 ' Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:27 AM Page 14 � _ � Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:1427 AM Page 15 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Fiow(cfs) Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.1908 2858 349 12 Pass 0.1983 2641 331 12 Pass 0.2057 2444 315 12 Pass 0.2132 2271 303 13 Pass ', 0.2207 2122 291 13 Pass ' 0.2282 1980 274 13 Pass 0.2357 1861 268 14 Pass 0.2432 1736 263 15 Pass 0.2507 1623 252 15 Pass 0.2582 1501 242 16 Pass 0.2657 1412 235 16 Pass 0.2732 1314 228 17 Pass 0.2807 1242 219 17 Pass 0.2882 1156 210 18 Pass 0.2957 1102 203 18 Pass 0.3032 1033 197 19 Pass 0.3107 972 189 19 Pass 0.3182 918 176 19 Pass 0.3256 878 169 19 Pass 0.3331 830 160 19 Pass 0.3406 786 156 19 Pass 0.3481 742 149 20 Pass 0.3556 707 144 20 Pass 0.3631 666 134 20 Pass 0.3706 636 129 20 Pass 0.3781 594 121 20 Pass 0.3856 562 117 20 Pass 0.3931 528 109 20 Pass 0.4006 498 103 20 Pass 0.4081 463 99 21 Pass 0.4156 436 97 22 Pass 0.4231 409 88 21 Pass 0.4306 386 87 22 Pass 0.4380 364 81 22 Pass 0.4455 349 76 21 Pass 0.4530 337 71 21 Pass 0.4605 309 68 22 Pass 0.4680 292 63 21 Pass 0.4755 281 61 21 Pass 0.4830 267 60 22 Pass 0.4905 253 56 22 Pass 0.4980 242 54 22 Pass 0.5055 226 54 23 Pass 0.5130 216 53 24 Pass 0.5205 214 50 23 Pass 0.5280 204 47 23 Pass 0.5355 198 46 23 Pass 0.5430 189 43 22 Pass 0.5505 , 182 42 23 Pass 0.5579 170 42 24 Pass 0.5654 164 42 25 Pass 0.5729 156 38 24 Pass 0.5804 148 35 23 Pass Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2!9/2015 9:14:27 AM Page 16 0.5879 138 34 24 Pass 0.5954 134 32 23 Pass 0.6029 126 32 25 Pass 0.6104 122 31 25 Pass 0.6179 112 29 25 Pass 0.6254 106 28 26 Pass 0.6329 102 27 26 Pass 0.6404 93 26 27 Pass 0.6479 88 26 29 Pass 0.6554 82 26 31 Pass 0.6629 76 25 32 Pass 0.6703 69 24 34 Pass 0.6778 62 23 37 Pass 0.6853 57 23 40 Pass 0.6928 53 21 39 Pass 0.7003 48 20 41 Pass 0.7078 42 19 45 Pass 0.7153 40 19 47 Pass 0.7228 38 19 50 Pass ' 0.7303 35 18 51 Pass ' 0.7378 31 17 54 Pass 0.7453 28 17 60 Pass 0.7528 28 17 60 Pass 0.7603 22 16 72 Pass 0.7678 20 15 75 Pass 0.7753 19 15 78 Pass 0.7828 18 15 83 Pass 0.7902 15 14 93 Pass 0.7977 15 14 93 Pass 0.8052 13 13 100 Pass 0.8127 13 13 100 Pass 0.8202 13 13 100 Pass 0.8277 13 12 92 Pass 0.8352 12 11 91 Pass 0.8427 11 11 100 Pass 0.8502 11 11 100 Pass 0.8577 11 10 90 Pass 0.8652 11 10 90 Pass 0.8727 10 8 80 Pass 0.8802 10 7 70 Pass 0.8877 8 7 87 Pass 0.8952 8 7 87 Pass 0.9026 8 7 87 Pass 0.9101 8 7 87 Pass 0.9176 7 4 57 Pass 0.9251 5 4 80 Pass 0.9326 5 4 80 Pass Pond-infl-final-2014-09 219l2015 9:14:27 AM Page 17 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #1 On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2Q15 9:14:27 AM Page 18 LI D Report 11DTechnique Usedfor TotalVolume Volume InfilVation Cumulatide Percent WaterQuality Percent Comment Treatment? FJeeds Through Volume Volume Volume WaterQualiY� Treatment Faality (ao-ft? Inflltration Infiltrated Treated (ac-ftj (ao-ft) Crecit Infil-Ro�d POC ❑ 898.87 ❑ 74.92 Fiow Sp�itter ❑ 587.90 ❑ 86.60 Total Volume Infittrated 1486.77 0.00 0.00 79.53 0.00 0% �'�o Treat. CredR Duration Compliance with LID AnalySis Standard 8%of 2-yrto 50-yr Resuit= Passed Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2!9l2015 9:14:27 AM Page 19 POC 2 �' I ,.�o _--- ------ ,>t ��, M. �-�e---- : ,� — ----- --—--- o . � � . . . ,� _ _ --__ _.__.________ _..._.___ .___ _ .••• 0 � ,o .....-��. ,o J LL � Q� .•.... o.a -- --- 10E�1 lUE3 10E-2 1�4 1 10 � 100 oi oi P�.-o�n�r�..,��c•�d�.,o es i s s w p w so n r, w �s r vs�s.s + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC#2 Total Pervious Area: 5.1 Total Impervious Area: 1.7 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #2 Total Pervious Area: 5.1 Total Impervious Area: 1.7 Flow Frequency Method: Log Pearson Type III 176 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #2 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.69487 5 year 0.969407 10 year 1.174967 25 year 1.463119 50 year 1.699318 100 year 1.954762 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC#2 Return Period Flow(cfs� 2 year 0.694411 5 year 0.96836 10 year 1.173413 25 year 1.46078 50 year 1.696282 100 year 1.950925 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #2 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.751 0.751 1950 1.454 1.448 1951 0.845 0.844 '� 1952 0.512 0.512 ', 1953 0.477 0.476 1954 0.644 0.644 1955 0.717 0.717 1956 0.700 0.699 ' 1957 0.827 0.826 1958 0.654 0.653 1959 0.491 0.491 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/912015 9:14:42 AM Page 20 1960 0.711 0.712 1961 0.575 0.574 1962 0.498 0.498 1963 0.576 0.575 1964 0.670 0.670 1965 0.548 0.547 1966 0.581 0.580 1967 0.857 0.857 1968 0.909 0.908 1969 0.553 0.552 1970 0.585 0.585 1971 0.588 0.588 1972 1.026 1.024 1973 0.523 0.523 1974 0.618 0.617 1975 0.920 0.918 1976 0.578 0.577 1977 0.526 0.526 1978 0.805 0.805 1979 0.632 0.631 1980 0.795 0.795 1981 0.798 0.798 1982 1.242 1.239 1983 0.658 0.657 � 1984 0.609 0.609 1985 0.473 0.473 1986 0.887 0.886 1987 0.828 0.828 1988 0.395 0.394 1989 0.417 0.417 1990 1.571 1.568 1991 1.373 1.371 1992 0.593 0.594 1993 0.386 0.386 1994 0.361 0.361 1995 0.553 0.553 1996 0.999 0.998 1997 0.836 0.836 1998 0.750 0.749 1999 1.523 1.520 2000 0.765 0.765 2001 0.442 0.442 2002 0.834 0.834 2003 0.731 0.730 2004 1.610 1.610 2005 0.599 0.598 2006 0.619 0.619 2007 1.912 1.903 2008 1.363 1.363 2009 0.819 0.819 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #2 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 1.9116 1.9027 2 1.6100 1.6103 3 1.5705 1.5678 4 1.5228 1.5198 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 219/2015 9:14:57 AM Page 21 5 1.4540 1.4482 6 1.3733 1.3713 7 1.3626 1.3626 8 1.2415 1.2395 9 1.0263 1.0242 10 0.9989 0.9980 11 0.9201 0.9184 12 0.9091 0.9080 13 0.8869 0.8862 14 0.8573 0.8569 15 0.8446 0.8442 16 0.8361 0.8363 17 0.8340 0.8342 18 0.8278 0.8284 19 0.8271 0.8261 20 0.8190 0.8186 21 0.8048 0.8053 22 0.7983 0.7979 23 0.7953 0.7946 24 0.7651 0.7648 25 0.7514 0.7508 26 0.7502 0.7487 27 0.7308 0.7297 28 0.7172 0.7174 29 0.7114 0.7115 30 0.7002 0.6994 31 0.6700 0.6701 32 0.6577 0.6574 33 0.6537 0.6535 34 0.6443 0.6442 35 0.6324 0.6313 36 0.6191 0.6191 37 0.6182 0.6172 38 0.6093 0.6087 39 0.5987 0.5984 40 0.5934 0.5937 41 0.5882 0.5883 42 0.5850 0.5854 43 0.5807 0.5803 44 0.5776 0.5774 45 0.5759 0.5754 46 0.5747 0.5745 47 0.5534 0.5532 48 0.5526 0.5523 49 0.5476 0.5474 50 0.5259 0.5260 51 0.5228 0.5227 52 0.5122 0.5120 53 0.4979 0.4976 54 0.4910 0.4909 55 0.4767 0.4765 56 0.4731 0.4725 57 0.4419 0.4418 58 0.4174 0.4172 59 0.3947 0.3944 60 0.3856 0.3855 61 0.3607 0.3605 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:57 AM Page 22 Pond-infil-flnal-2014-09 2�9/2015 9:14:57 AM Page 23 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs) Predev Mit Percentage PasslFail 0.3474 1115 1116 100 Pass 0.3611 985 987 100 Pass 0.3747 893 893 100 Pass 0.3884 800 801 100 Pass 0.4021 695 696 100 Pass 0.4157 626 626 100 Pass 0.4294 569 569 100 Pass 0.4430 521 520 99 Pass 0.4567 480 479 99 Pass 0.4703 441 441 100 Pass 0.4840 404 403 99 Pass 0.4976 381 380 99 Pass 0.5113 344 344 100 Pass 0.5250 320 321 100 Pass 0.5386 292 293 100 Pass 0.5523 273 272 99 Pass 0.5659 251 250 99 Pass 0.5796 231 230 99 Pass 0.5932 206 205 99 Pass 0.6069 193 192 99 Pass 0.6205 175 176 100 Pass 0.6342 161 161 100 Pass 0.6479 151 151 100 Pass 0.6615 138 138 100 Pass 0.6752 126 126 100 Pass 0.6888 118 118 100 Pass 0.7025 112 112 100 Pass 0.7161 109 109 100 Pass 0.7298 101 101 100 Pass 0.7434 92 92 100 Pass 0.7571 85 85 100 Pass 0.7708 77 77 100 Pass 0.7844 71 71 100 Pass 0.7981 67 66 98 Pass 0.8117 64 64 100 Pass 0.8254 62 62 100 Pass 0.8390 56 56 100 Pass 0.8527 54 54 100 Pass 0.8663 51 51 100 Pass 0.8800 50 50 100 Pass 0.8937 47 47 100 Pass 0.9073 47 47 100 Pass 0.9210 43 42 97 Pass 0.9346 39 39 100 Pass 0.9483 38 38 100 Pass 0.9619 37 37 100 Pass 0.9756 36 36 100 Pass 0.9892 33 33 100 Pass 1.0029 32 32 100 Pass 1.0165 32 32 100 Pass 1.0302 29 29 100 Pass 1.0439 29 29 100 Pass 1.0575 29 29 100 Pass Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9l2Q15 9:14:57 AM Page 24 1.0712 27 27 100 Pass 1.0848 27 27 100 Pass 1.0985 25 25 100 Pass 1.1121 25 25 100 Pass 1.1258 25 25 100 Pass 1.1394 23 23 100 Pass 1.1531 21 21 100 Pass , 1.1668 21 21 100 Pass 1.1804 21 20 95 Pass I, 1.1941 20 20 100 Pass 1.2077 18 18 100 Pass 1.2214 17 17 100 Pass 1.2350 14 14 100 Pass 1.2487 12 12 100 Pass 1.2623 11 11 100 Pass 1.2760 11 11 100 Pass 1.2897 11 11 100 Pass 1.3033 11 11 100 Pass 1.3170 11 11 100 Pass 1.3306 11 11 100 Pass 1.3443 11 11 100 Pass 1.3579 11 11 100 Pass 1.3716 10 9 90 Pass 1.3852 8 8 100 Pass 1.3989 8 8 100 Pass 1.4126 8 8 100 Pass 1.4262 8 8 100 Pass 1.4399 7 7 100 Pass 1.4535 7 6 85 Pass 1.4672 6 6 100 Pass 1.4808 6 6 100 Pass 1.4945 6 6 100 Pass 1.5081 5 5 100 Pass 1.5218 5 4 80 Pass 1.5355 4 4 100 Pass 1.5491 4 4 100 Pass 1.5628 3 3 100 Pass 1.5764 2 2 100 Pass 1.5901 2 2 100 Pass 1.6037 2 2 100 Pass 1.6174 1 1 100 Pass 1.6310 1 1 100 Pass 1.6447 1 1 100 Pass 1.6584 1 1 100 Pass 1.6720 1 1 100 Pass 1.6857 1 1 100 Pass 1.6993 1 1 100 Pass Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:57 AM Page 25 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #2 On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:14:57 AM Page 26 LID Report LID Technique Used for Total Volume Votume Infittration Cumulative Percent Water Quality Percent Camment Treatment? Needs Through Volume Volume Volume NJaterQuality Treatment Faalitp (ac-ft) Int�ttration infiltrated Treated (ac-ft) (ao-ft) Credit Flaw Splitter POC ❑ 587.90 ❑ 86.60 Total Volume Infiltrated 587.90 0.00 0.00 85.6D 0.00 pyb No Treat. Credit Duration Compliance with lID Analysis Standard 8%of 2-yr to 50-yr Result= Passed Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9l2015 9:14:57 AM Page 27 POC 3 0 26 y :;urra:h6:e PotaW R� . At � or -- -- , . U • � ........• ais __ _ ____. _.__ __ � O � C1 • • • •��♦ . i J � otz —___ __-- ---- — _ __ —�—----- — ------ J � �.�1�J 10E3 10E�2 lOEd 1 10 100 I oo� aoi �� P�ro��t Tim��d�..o ,s � z s +e m x ec ,o a, x �s ce �se.s + � + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #3 �', Total Pervious Area: 0.15 ', Total Impervious Area: 0.49 '� Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #3 I Total Pervious Area: 0.15 �, Total Impervious Area: 0.49 I Flow Frequency Method: Log Pearson Type III 17B �'� Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #3 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.13685 5 year 0.172491 10 year 0.19766 25 year 0.231303 50 year 0.257743 100 year 0.285396 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #3 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.13685 5 year 0.172491 10 year 0.19766 25 year 0.231303 50 year 0.257743 100 year 0.285396 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #3 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.133 0.133 1950 0.217 0.217 1951 0.131 0.131 1952 0.113 0.113 1953 0.108 0.108 1954 0.126 0.126 1955 0.127 0.127 1956 0.130 0.130 1957 0.143 0.143 1958 0.134 0.134 1959 0.105 0.105 Pond-infil-final-2Q14-09 2/9/2015 9:14:57 AM Page 28 1960 0.122 0.122 1961 0.118 0.118 1962 0.120 0.120 1963 0.118 0.118 1964 0.125 0.125 1965 0.116 0.116 1966 0.113 0.113 1967 0.175 0.175 1968 0.202 0.202 1969 0.101 0.101 1970 0.115 0.115 1971 0.114 0.114 1972 0.164 0.164 1973 0.099 0.099 1974 0.133 0.133 1975 0.157 0.157 1976 0.103 0.103 1977 0.132 0.132 1978 0.193 0.193 1979 0.195 0.195 1980 0.148 0.148 1981 0.153 0.153 1982 0.204 0.204 1983 0.159 0.159 1984 0.126 0.126 1985 0.110 0.110 1986 0.133 0.133 1987 0.207 0.207 1988 0.106 0.106 1989 0.149 0.149 1990 0.210 0.210 1991 0.195 0.195 1992 0.121 0.121 1993 0.096 0.096 1994 0.101 0.101 1995 0.123 0.123 1996 0.142 0.142 1997 0.140 0.140 1998 0.166 0.166 1999 0.283 0.283 2000 0.144 0.144 2001 0.129 0.129 2002 0.138 0.138 2003 0.142 0.142 2004 0.244 0.244 2005 0.114 0.114 2006 0.103 0.103 2007 0.268 0.268 2008 0.187 0.187 2009 0.143 0.143 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #3 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.2826 0.2826 2 0.2683 0.2683 3 0.2441 0.2441 4 0.2173 0.2173 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 29 5 0.2099 0.2099 6 0.2069 0.2069 7 0.2043 0.2043 8 0.2020 0.2020 9 0.1952 0.1952 10 0.1948 0.1948 11 0.1931 0.1931 12 0.1866 0.1866 13 0.1746 0.1746 14 0.1657 0.1657 15 0.1642 0.1642 ', 16 0.1586 0.1586 ' 17 0.1568 0.1568 18 0.1534 0.1534 19 0.1489 0.1489 20 0.1484 0.1484 21 0.1444 0.1444 22 0.1432 0.1432 23 0.1429 0.1429 24 0.1422 0.1422 25 0.1421 0.1421 26 0.1402 0.1402 27 0.1380 0.1380 ' 28 0.1341 0.1341 29 0.1335 0.1335 ' 30 0.1330 0.1330 I 31 0.1327 0.1327 ' 32 0.1322 0.1322 ' 33 0.1312 0.1312 34 0.1301 0.1301 35 0.1294 0.1294 36 0.1268 0.1268 37 0.1261 0.1261 38 0.1260 0.1260 39 0.1249 0.1249 40 0.1229 0.1229 41 0.1224 0.1224 , 42 0.1211 0.1211 43 0.1198 0.1198 44 0.1183 0.1183 ', 45 0.1181 0.1181 ' 46 0.1161 0.1161 I 47 0.1151 0.1151 ��, 48 0.1142 0.1142 I 49 0.1141 0.1141 50 0.1132 0.1132 51 0.1131 0.1131 52 0.1097 0.1097 53 0.1079 0.1079 54 0.1056 0.1056 55 0.1054 0.1054 56 0.1032 0.1032 57 0.1029 0.1029 58 0.1011 0.1011 59 0.1011 0.1011 60 0.0987 0.0987 61 0.0961 0.0961 Pond-infil-fnal-2014-09 2/9l2015 9:15:12 AM Page 30 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 31 Duration Flows �I The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs� Predev Mit Percentage PasslFail 0.0684 1215 1215 100 Pass 0.0703 1118 1118 100 Pass '� 0.0722 1020 1020 100 Pass I 0.0742 932 932 100 Pass I 0.0761 848 848 100 Pass 0.0780 777 777 100 Pass OA799 718 718 100 Pass 0.0818 656 656 100 Pass 0.0837 602 602 100 Pass 0.0856 563 563 100 Pass 0.0875 506 506 100 Pass 0.0895 464 464 100 Pass ' 0.0914 424 424 100 Pass I 0.0933 400 400 100 Pass 0.0952 366 366 100 Pass 0.0971 342 342 100 Pass 0.0990 308 308 100 Pass �, 0.1009 291 291 100 Pass � 0.1028 274 274 100 Pass 0.1048 255 255 100 Pass ' 0.1067 241 241 100 Pass 0.1086 222 222 100 Pass ' 0.1105 209 209 100 Pass 0.1124 198 198 100 Pass 0.1143 181 181 100 Pass 0.1162 171 171 100 Pass 0.1181 162 162 100 Pass 0.1201 149 149 100 Pass 0.1220 145 145 100 Pass 0.1239 131 131 100 Pass 0.1258 123 123 100 Pass 0.1277 110 110 100 Pass 0.1296 103 103 100 Pass 0.1315 97 97 100 Pass 0.1334 91 91 100 Pass 0.1354 86 86 100 Pass 0.1373 83 83 100 Pass 0.1392 77 77 100 Pass 0.1411 76 76 100 Pass 0.1430 70 70 100 Pass 0.1449 67 67 100 Pass 0.1468 64 64 100 Pass ' 0.1487 62 62 100 Pass 0.1507 59 59 100 Pass 0.1526 56 56 100 Pass 0.1545 52 52 100 Pass 0.1564 50 50 100 Pass 0.1583 46 46 100 Pass ' 0.1602 44 44 100 Pass 0.1621 40 40 100 Pass 0.1640 38 38 100 Pass 0.1660 33 33 100 Pass 0.1679 30 30 100 Pass Pond-infil-finai-2014-09 2/912015 9:15:12 AM Page 32 0.1698 30 30 100 Pass 0.1717 29 29 100 Pass 0.1736 29 29 100 Pass 0.1755 27 27 100 Pass 0.1774 25 25 100 Pass 0.1793 24 24 100 Pass 0.1813 23 23 100 Pass 0.1832 21 21 100 Pass , 0.1851 19 19 100 Pass ' 0.1870 18 18 100 Pass 0.1889 18 18 100 Pass 0.1908 17 17 100 Pass 0.1927 16 16 100 Pass 0.1946 15 15 100 Pass ' 0.1965 12 12 100 Pass , 0.1985 12 12 100 Pass I 0.2004 12 12 100 Pass 0.2023 11 11 100 Pass 0.2042 10 10 100 Pass 0.2061 9 9 100 Pass 0.2080 8 8 100 Pass 0.2099 7 7 100 Pass 0.2118 6 6 100 Pass 0.2138 6 6 100 Pass 0.2157 6 6 100 Pass 0.2176 5 5 100 Pass 0.2195 5 5 100 Pass 0.2214 4 4 100 Pass 0.2233 4 4 100 Pass 0.2252 4 4 100 Pass 0.2271 4 4 100 Pass 0.2291 4 4 100 Pass 0.2310 4 4 100 Pass 0.2329 3 3 100 Pass 0.2348 3 3 100 Pass 0.2367 3 3 100 Pass 0.2386 3 3 100 Pass 0.2405 3 3 100 Pass 0.2424 3 3 100 Pass 0.2444 2 2 100 Pass 0.2463 2 2 100 Pass 0.2482 2 2 100 Pass 0.2501 2 2 100 Pass 0.2520 2 2 100 Pass 0.2539 2 2 100 Pass 0.2558 2 2 100 Pass 0.2577 2 2 100 Pass Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9�2015 9:15:12 AM Page 33 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #3 On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 34 LID Report LID Technique Used for Total Vofume Volume InfilVation Cumulative Percent Water Quality Percent Camment Treatment 7 PJeeds Through Volume Volume Volume Water Quality Treatment Facilitw (ac-ft� Infiltration Inflitrated Treated (ac-R} (ac-fti Credit Totai Volume Infiltrated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% No Treat Credil Duration Compiiance with LID Anal�sis Standerd 894 of 2-yr to 50-yr Result=. Passed ��-_ i� i Pond-infil-final-2014-�9 2/9i2015 9:15:12 AM Page 35 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2,�9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 36 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic re-Q � ffs� 24th ' 3.�4 c ; � .80ad ' YPe Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2!9l2015 9:15:12 AM Page 37 Mitigated Schemafic ' i � ', ' ffs�e` asin .S4ac� _ � .�4a� ; __._ _ _. _�_ ; I ! eveb —�= lo�v i�ter ; ; �� , . : ��. 14.74s �, ., . � � —�- �fi�p� � ' 1 i Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2!9l2015 9:15:12 AM Page 38 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 O1 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 Pond-infil-final-2014-09.wdm MESSU 25 PrePond-infil-final-2014-09.MES 27 PrePond-infil-final-2014-09.L61 28 PrePond-infil-final-2014-09.L62 30 POCPond-infil-final-2014-091.dat 31 POCPond-infil-final-2o14-092.dat 32 POCPond-infil-final-2014-093.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:60 PERLND 3 PERLND 12 PERLND 16 IMPLND 1 PERLND 8 IMPLND 2 COPY 501 COPY 502 COPY 503 DISPLY 1 DISPLY 2 DISPLY 3 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Pre-Dev MAX 1 2 30 9 2 Offsite MAX 1 2 31 9 3 124th Bypass MAX 1 2 32 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NNIN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 502 1 1 503 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K **" END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 3 A/B, Forest, Steep 1 1 1 1 27 0 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2!9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 39 , 12 C, Forest, Steep 1 1 1 1 27 0 16 C, Lawn, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 8 A/B, Lawn, Mod 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active SECtlORS ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PZVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 3 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 12 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS WZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 ' PWAT-PARM2 , <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** 'I # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 3 0 5 2 400 0.15 0.3 0.996 '' 12 0 4.5 0.08 400 0.15 0.5 0.996 I 16 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 B 0 5 0.8 400 0.1 0.3 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 3 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 12 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 16 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 3 0.2 0.5 0.35 0 0.7 0.7 12 0.2 0.3 0.35 6 0.3 0.7 16 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 8 0.1 0.5 0.25 0 0.7 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 8 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 END PWAT-STATEI END PERLND Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 40 i IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 1 ROADS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 2 ROADS/MOD 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active SeCt1011S ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *�* 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS � ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP �IRS VNN RTLI *** 1 D 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 1 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 2 400 0.05 0.1 0.08 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 1 0 0 2 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 1 0 0 2 0 0 END IWAT-STATEI END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Pre-Dev*** PERLND 3 4.17 COPY 501 12 PERLND 3 4.17 COPY 501 13 PERLND 12 9.37 COPY 501 12 PERLND 12 9.37 COPY 501 13 Offsite�** PERLND 16 5.1 COPY 502 12 PERLND 16 5.1 COPY 502 13 IMPLND 1 1.7 COPY 502 15 124th Bypass*** PERLND 8 0.15 COPY 503 12 PERI,ND 8 0.15 COPY 503 13 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 41 IMPLND 2 0.49 COPY 503 15 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK � <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** , COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 ' COPY 502 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 2 INPUT TIMSER 1 , COPY 503 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 3 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK ' RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES**� ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active S2Ct10RS ***************************** I # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Pr'int-fldgs ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * ,r * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> ,r** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS , END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 SUM PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 SUM IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 42 EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 502 OLTTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 502 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 503 OLTTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 503 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> �Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 END MASS-LINK END RUN Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 43 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 O1 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 Pond-infil-final-2014-09.wdm MESSU 25 MitPond-infil-final-2014-09.MES 27 MitPond-infil-final-2014-09.L61 28 MitPond-infil-final-2014-09.L62 30 POCPond-infil-final-2014-091.dat 31 POCPond-infil-final-2014-092.dat 32 POCPond-infil-final-2014-093.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:60 PERLND 18 PERLND 17 PERLND 8 IMPLND 1 IMPLND 3 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 14 PERLND 16 IMPLND 2 RCHRES 1 RCHRES 2 COPY 503 COPY 2 COPY 502 COPY 1 COPY 501 DISPLY 3 DISPLY 2 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 3 Basin 3 MAX 1 2 32 9 2 Flow Splitter MAX 1 2 31 9 1 Infil-pond MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 503 1 1 2 1 1 502 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 44 END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 18 C, Lawn, Steep 1 1 1 1 27 0 17 C, Lawn, Mod 1 1 1 1 27 0 B A/B, Lawn, Mod 1 1 1 1 27 0 16 C, Lawn, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* ACtive SeCtions ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 18 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***********************�***** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 18 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 17 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO I, PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VLTZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** ia o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 18 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.15 0.5 0.996 ' 17 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.1 0.5 0.996 6 0 5 0.8 400 0.1 0.3 0.996 16 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 I END PWAT-PARM2 I PWAT-PARM3 I <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 **t # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 18 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 i 17 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 I 8 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 I 16 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 18 0.1 0.15 0.25 6 0.3 0.25 17 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 8 0.1 0.5 0.25 0 0.7 0.25 16 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ' ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 45 # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 18 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 17 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 ' 8 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATEI I END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 1 ROADS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 , 3 ROADS/STEEP 1 1 1 27 0 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 14 POND 1 1 1 27 0 2 ROADS/MOD 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active SeCt10riS ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 14 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* , 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 ! 3 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 � 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 14 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 ' 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 1 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 3 400 0.1 0.1 0.05 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 14 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 2 400 0.05 0.1 0.08 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 1 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 14 0 0 2 0 0 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2;912015 9:15:12 AM Page 46 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 1 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 14 0 0 2 0 0 END IWAT-STATEI END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Developed*** PERLND 18 2.18 RCHRES 2 2 PERLND 17 2.18 RCHRES 2 2 PERLND 8 0.85 RCHRES 2 2 IMPLND 1 2.51 RCHRES 2 5 IMPLND 3 0.46 RCHRES 2 5 IMPLND 4 2.06 RCHRES 2 5 IMPLND 14 0.5 RCHRES 2 5 Offsite*** PERLND 16 5.1 RCHRES 1 2 � PERLND 16 5.1 RCHRES 1 3 IMPLND 1 1.7 RCHRES 1 5 Basin 3*** PERLND 8 0.15 COPY 503 12 PERLND B 0.15 COPY 503 13 IMPLND 2 0.49 COPY 503 15 ******Routing****** � PERLND 18 2_16 COPY 1 12 PERLND 17 2.18 COPY 1 12 PERLND 8 0.85 COPY 1 12 IMPLND 1 2.51 COPY 1 15 IMPLND 3 0.46 COPY 1 15 IMPLND 4 2.06 COPY 1 15 IMPLND 14 0.5 COPY 1 15 PERLND 16 5.1 COPY 2 12 IMPLND 1 1.7 COPY 2 15 PERLND 16 5.1 COPY 2 13 RCHRES 1 1 COPY 1 17 RCHRES 1 RCHRES 2 7 RCHRES 2 1 COPY 501 17 RCHRES 1 1 COPY 502 16 END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 503 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 3 INPLTT TIMSER 1 COPY 502 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 2 INPUT TIMSER 1 COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** 1 Flow Splitter 2 1 1 1 28 0 1 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 47 2 Infil-pond 2 1 1 1 28 0 1 END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active SECClOriS ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * f * * * * * * * *** 1 0 1 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** 1 1 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 2 2 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> #** <---><---><--><---><---> 1 0 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES � SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES FTABLE 2 9 5 Depth Area Volume Outflowl Outflow2 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes) *** 0.000000 0.159458 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 I 1.000000 0.183402 0.171442 0.108493 0.342407 I 2.000000 0.207645 0.366965 0.153432 0.342407 ' 3.000000 0.232436 0.587006 0.187915 0.342407 �i 4.000000 0.257346 0.831887 0.449916 0.342407 5.000000 0.281359 1.101240 0.739613 0.342407 6.000000 0.306244 1.395041 0.953879 0.342407 7.000000 0.431405 1.763866 9.908469 0.342407 8.000000 0.447658 2.020202 13.69142 0.342407 END FTABLE 2 FTABLE 1 25 5 Depth Area Volume Outflowl Outflow2 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes) *** 0.000000 0.000360 0.000000 0.000000 0_000000 0.100000 0.000360 0.000036 0.095731 0.695099 I 0.200000 0.000360 0.000072 0.135384 0.983019 I 0.300000 0.000360 0.000108 0.165811 1.203947 ' 0.400000 0.00036a 0.000144 0.191463 1.390199 0.500000 0.000360 0.000180 0.214062 1.554289 Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 48 0.600000 0.000360 0.000216 0.234493 1.702639 0.700000 0.000360 0.000252 0.253281 1.839060 0.800000 0.000360 0.000288 0.270769 1.966038 0.900000 0.000360 0.000324 0.287194 2.085298 1.000000 0.000360 0.000360 0.302729 2.196097 1.100000 0.000360 0.000396 0.317505 2.305384 1.200000 0.000360 0.000432 0.331623 2.407895 1.300000 0.000360 0.000468 0.345164 2.506217 1.400000 0.000360 0.000504 0.358194 2.600824 1.500000 0.000360 0.000540 0.370766 2.692109 1.600000 0.400360 0.000576 0.382926 2.780398 1.700000 0.00�360 0.000612 0.394711 2.865969 1.800000 0.000360 0.000648 0.406154 2.949057 1.900000 0.000360 0.000684 0.417264 3.029868 2.000000 0.000360 0.000720 0.426124 3.108579 2.100000 0.000360 0.000756 0.438696 3.525734 2.200000 0.000360 0.000792 0.449020 4.222441 2.300000 0.000360 0.000828 0.459112 5.099854 2.400000 0.000360 0.000864 0.468986 6.122459 END FTABLE 1 END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgapc--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 SUM PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 SUM IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 SUM RCHRES 2 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 RCHRES 2 EXTNL POTEV END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** RCHRES 2 HYDR RO 1 1 1 WDM 1008 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 2 HYDR O 1 1 1 WDM 1009 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 2 HYDR O 2 1 1 WDM 1010 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 2 HYDR STAGE 1 1 1 WDM 1011 STAG ENGL REPL COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR RO 1 1 1 WDM 1012 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR O 1 1 1 WDM 1013 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR O 2 1 1 WDM 1014 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR STAGE 1 1 1 WDM 1015 STAG ENGL REPL COPY 2 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 702 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 502 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 802 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 3 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 703 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 503 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 803 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 2 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES ZNFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 2 MASS-LINK 3 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 3 MASS-LINK 5 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 5 MASS-LINK 7 RCHRES OFLOW OVOL 1 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 49 END MASS-LINK 7 MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN I END MASS-LINK 12 � MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 I IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN ' END MASS-LINK 15 MASS-LZNK 16 RCHRES ROFLOW COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 16 MASS-LINK 17 RCHRES OFLOW OVOL 1 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 17 END MASS-LINK END RUN I Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 50 Predeveloped HSPF Message File Pond-infil-fnal-2014-09 2;g/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 51 Mitigated HSPF Message File �' Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 52 Disclaimer Lega! Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. Ti entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, ' business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even � if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright O by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2013; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. I 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F I Olympia, WA. 98501 ' Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com Pond-infil-final-2014-09 2/9/2015 9:15:12 AM Page 53 ��, S�,�t�� ssv T�. 100 year flows: RIM = 459.74 4.74 Q NOT COLLECTED= 0.4 cfs Uncollected Basin IE to Overflow= 455 0 Q TO POND= 3.55 cfs 6.8 AC Basin IE to Pond= 455 Weir Elev= 457 Setup for Calc Glbypass= 3.15 cfs Max WS= 457 stage area storage outlet 1 outlet 2 455 0.00036 0 0 Orifice 1 (to Pondl 455.1 0.00036 3.6E-05 0.095732 0.6951 Radius, in= 1.67 <----- 455.2 0.00036 7.2E-05 0.135385 0.983019 IE= 455 <----- 455.3 0.00036 0.000108 0.165812 1.203948 Radius,ft= 0.139167 455.4 0.00036 0.000144 0.191463 1.390199 Head,ft= 2 Q= 0.427907 455.5 0.00036 0.00018 0.214062 1.55429 Orifice coeff= 0.62 455.6 0.00036 0.000216 0.234493 1.702639 455.7 0.00036 0.000252 0.253282 1.839061 Orifice Area,sf= 0.060844 REQUIRED 455.8 0.00036 0.000288 0.27077 1.966039 Qpond= 0.428124 Qpond= 0.4 cfs 455.9 0.00036 0.000324 0.287195 2.085299 456 0.00036 0.00036 0.30273 2.198098 456.1 0.00036 0.000396 0.317506 2.305385 Outlet 2(Sharp Crested Weir 456.2 0.00036 0.000432 0.331624 2.407896 Q=C(L-02H)H^(3/2) 456.3 0.00036 0.000468 0.345165 2.506217 Weir Elev 457 456.4 0.00036 0.000504 0.358195 2.600825 IE to Overflow 455 456.5 0.00036 0.00054 0.370767 2.692109 456.6 0.00036 0.000576 0.382926 2.780398 P= 2 456.7 0.00036 0.000612 0.394711 2.865969 C=3.27+.4(H/P)= 3.27 456.8 0.00036 0.000648 0.406154 2.949058 D= 1 456.9 0.00036 0.000684 0.417284 3.029869 L=(1/2 Circ of 12") 3.14 457 0.00036 0.00072 0.428124 3.10858 PASSES REQUIRED 3.15(Qbypass-Qpond) 457.1 0.00036 0.000756 0.438697 3.525734 �bypass= 0 -0.43 457.2 0.00036 0.000792 0.449021 4.222441 457.3 0.00036 0.000828 0.459112 5.099854 457.4 0.00036 0.000864 0.468987 6.122459 Orifice 2(Bvpass) Radius, in= 4.5 <----- Q= 3.107004 I E= 455 <----- Radius,ft= 0.375 Head,ft= 2.99 (assume 1'-9"freeboard) Orifice coeff= 0.62 Orifice Area, sf= 0.441786 RECIUIRED (�bypass= 3.800867 Gtbypass= 3.15 cfs ' - Canyon Terrace Pond Stage Storage Discharge 2/9/2015 Cd 0.62 Orifice# Elevation Size (in) Area Stage Area Storage Discharge Infiitration 1 386 2 0.021806 0 0.159458 0 0 0 2 389.65 3.81 0.079133 1 0.183402 0.171442 0.108493 0.342407 3 390.72 1.66 0.015022 2 0.207645 0.366965 0.153432 0.342407 3 0.232438 0.587006 0.187915 0.342407 4 0.257346 0.831887 0.449916 0.342407 5 0.281359 1.10124 0.739613 0.342407 6 0.306244 1.395041 0.953879 0.342407 7 0.431405 1.763866 9.908469 0.342407 8 0.447658 2.020202 13.69142 0.342407 Riser Raw Data Circumfer Size (in) Top Area ence Live Storage 18 392 1.76625 4.71 386 stage Area Infilt Area Infiltration Storage Live V Ori 1 Q Ori 2 Q Ori 3 Q Riser 380 0 0 0 0 381 0 0 0 0 Infil Design 2 in/hr 382 0 0 0 0 4.63E-05 fUsec 383 0 0 0 0 384 Live Store 0 0 0 0 0 385 0 0 0 0 0 386 6,946.00 7,396.00 0.342407 0 0 0 0 0 0 387 7,989.00 7,396.00 0.342407 7468 7468 0.108493 0 0 0 388 9,045.00 7,396.00 0.342407 15985 15985 0.153432 0 0 0 389 10,125.00 7,396.00 0.342407 25570 25570 0.187915 0 0 0 390 11,210.00 7,396.00 0.342407 36237 36237 0.216986 0.23293 0 0 391 12,256.00 7,396.00 0.342407 47970 47970 0.242598 0.457466 0.039549134 0 392 13,340.00 7,396.00 0.342407 60768 60768 0.265753 0.603567 0.084559606 0 393 18,792.00 7,396.00 0.342407 76834 76834 0.287046 0.720633 0.112856191 8.787934232 394 19,500.00 7,396.00 0.342407 88000 88000 0.306865 0.821176 0.135361415 12.42801578 394.5 0 0.316309 0.867087 0.145312798 48.40656528 395 0 0.325479 0.910686 0.154625048 15.22114858 ��Ol..) ��1 ��1�-I 1� �IDD� �� G�S �j' �'� �.� / 5.3.4 CONTROL STRUCTU RES—hIETHODS OF A,'4'.9L}'SIS Riser Overflow The nomograph in Figure 53.4.H may be used to determine the head(in feet)above a riser of given diameter and for a given flow(usually the 100-year peak flow for developed conditions). FIGURE 5.3.4.H RISER INFLOW CURVES 100 --- ----- ----- 72 54 48 / } i . i - . ____ . __ : � . . _ . : ' 42 � + , _ ___.___--- ----r - . - " I . . . . , 36 - - -- — - --�---=—=-_ - + - 33 - - - - - ' I i ; 30 j . i 27 24 N i � ( t __ _ -- - - - -tt_ _ . . 21 � �Q � i6 �8 � � � j � �� _ _ _ _ 15 � � � ,� - vf - - + - tt _ . � ' Cp.� �G�S �� . , � 12 � �Q,��r►r�� ,�.�� ; j ; �o ' I _ - - . . _ . _ _._ _ _ _ . < _ : _ . . _ � . . . _ . . " __ _ 1 . =o_Z i_ �� HEAD IN FEET(measured from crest of riser) �� Q,,,�,=9.739 DHut Gl„�,.=3.782 D=H„= Q in cis,D and H in feet S1ope change occurs at weir-orifice transitlon 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9/2009 5-47 (i(/,C. TGi9n/n h d�sj.�'�6G �ONT.�1 /rlc��c/Th't y ,O,E�i+fS s OA% y �vE,c�+�,�' BJ192009 0.00 O O.00Ea� 0 0 8179/20090�.00 D O.00Et00 0 0 BI20/2009 0.00 0 O.00Er00 0 0 Bl2t/20090.00 0 O.00E+00 0 0 8�22/20090.00 0 O.00E+00 0 0 8/23�2009 0.00 0 O.00Et00 0 0 8�24M2009 0:00 0 O.00E�00 0 0 Bi25r20090'00 0 O.00E+00 0 0 826�2009000 0 O.00E�00 0 0 &'2720090'00 0 O.00E+00 0 0 fl�28/20Q9 0:00 0 O.00E+00 0 0 8!'19l20Q9 Q.00 725006E-07 7.54033E-OS 725E-07 1.54E-05 8��I2009 0:00 0 9.30781 E-OB 0 9.31 E-09 B/31/2009 0.00 0 0 0 0 9/1/2009 0 00 0 0 0 0 8�"7J2009 0.00 0 0 0 0 9�3J2009 0.00 0 1.78956E-06 0 1.77E� 9l4.�20090.00 0 8.23514E-W 0 8.24E-09 9�5120090:00 228669E-07 1.84176E-OS 224E-07 1.84E05 fll6�20090:00 0.000473744 O.OB4126756 D.000674 O.OB4127 9RP20090:00 694946E-05 2.64824E05 6.95E-OS 2.65E•OS 9lfl�20p90.00 2.084&lE-05 3.27251E•07 ZOBE•OS 3.27E-07 9,g,2pp9 p.pp 0 2.3244E•07 0 2.32E-07 9110/2009 0:00 0 1.651�4E•07 0 1.65E-07 9/11/2009 0�,00 0 1 J OS6E-07 0 1.1/E-07 9l12f2009 0:00 0 7.73922E-OB 0 7.74E-08 9/73/20090.00 0 5.66445E-OB 0 S.66E08 9f14f20090:00 0 �.60043E-OB 0 4.6E-OB 9/7 5J2009 0 00 0 0 0 0 9116�2009 0.00 0 0 0 0 s�,�nooe o.00 o a o 0 9118I2009 0.00 0 0 0 0 9l1972(109 D:00 6.0142E•06 0.00010494 6-OtE-O6 0.000105 920I2009 D.00 0 6.6791 E-07 0 6.58E-07 9121f20090:00 0 723a43E-09 0 7.23E-09 BY1?/2009 Q00 0 723443E-Q9 0 7.23E-09 9/232009 0.00 0 7.23443E-09 0 723E-04 9124/2009 0.00 0 7.23443E-09 0 713E-09 9l2S2009 0.00 0 7.23443E-09 0 7.23E-09 � 8�262009 0.00 0 7.23443E-04 0 T.23E-09 i 9�27l2009 0.00 0 723443E-09 0 723E-09 li 8.�28/2009 0 DO 0 723443E-09 0 723E-09 �i 9�29l2009 0 00 D 7.23443E-09 0 7.23E-09 �. 9�30/2009000 0 7.23443E-09 0 723E-09 Average 0.001504 0.002698 0 000731 0.002498 3 71 E-05 0.000773 2 36E-QS 0.001385 5 25E-05 0.002/89 I Ddlerence(CFS) 0.001/94 O.00t7W 0.000676 0.001362 0.002736 Pre Htit Pre Mt Pre Mt P�e M.t Pre Mit �v!A S' 3v�v,� �"vc y q v(� S�PT WWHM4 PROJECT REPORT ?roject Name: wetland hydrology Site Name . Summit Plat Site Address: City . Renton Report Date : 4/30/2014 Gage . Seatac Data Start . 1948/10/O1 Data 8nd . 2009/04/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version . 2012/04/04 Low Flow Threahold for POC 1 . 90 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 year Low Flow Threahold for POC 2 . 100 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 2 : 50 year PREDEVELOP�D LAND DSE Name . Pre-Dev Bypasa: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Uae Acres A B, Forest, Steep 4.17 C, Forest, Steep 8.68 Pervioue Total 12.85 Impervious Land Use Acrea Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 12.85 Flement Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Name . eq-pre Bypasa: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Us• Acres A B, Paeture, Steep .5 C, For�et, Staep 7.68 C, Pasture, Steap 1 A B, Foreet, Steap 3.67 Pervioue Total 12.85 Impervious Land Use Acres Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 12.85 Element Flowe To: I Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATBD LAND USE Name . Developed Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervioue Land IIse Acrea C, Lawn, Steep 2.08 C, Lawn, Mod 2.08 A H, Lawn, Mod 1 Pervious Total 5.16 Impervious Land Use Acrea ROADS MOD 3 ROADS STBBP 0.4 ROOF TOPS FLAT 2.06 POND 0.5 Impervious Total 5.96 Basin Total 11.12 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater SSD Table 1 Name . Equivelant Basin Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervioue Land Use Acres A B, Paeture, Steep 1 Pervioue Total 1 Impervious Land Use Acres ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.25 Impervious Total 0.25 Basin TotaZ 1.25 F.1 omrant F1 nwa Tn� Surface Interflow Groundwater SSD Table 2 SSD Table 2 Name . SSD Table 1 Depth: 8 ft. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Lateral Basin 1 Lateral Basin 1 SSD Table Hydraulic Table Stage Area Volume Infilt (ft) (ac) {ac-ft) Manual (cfs) NotUsed NotUaed NotUsed 0.004 0.165 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.190 0.178 0.146 0.540 0.000 0.000 0.000 2 .000 0.216 0.381 0.206 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 3 .000 0.242 0.510 0.253 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.000 0.267 O.B65 0.292 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.000 0.293 1.144 0.562 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.000 0.317 1.449 0.743 0.5d0 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.000 0.371 1.972 9.665 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 Naate . Lateral Basin 1 Bypaes: No GroundWater: No Pervioue Land Use Acres A B, Pasture, Flat .1 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Name . SSD Table 2 Depth: 1.2 ft. E3lement Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Lateral Basin 1 Lateral Basin 1 SSD Table Hydraulic Table Stage Area Volume (ft} (ac) (ac-ft) Manual Manual NotUsed NotUsed NotUsed 0.000 0.574 O.OUO 0.000 0.087 0.�00 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.574 0.057 5.330 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.200 0.574 0.115 16.93 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.300 0.574 0.172 25.00 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.400 0.574 0.230 50.00 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.574 0.287 100.0 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 Q.600 0.574 0.344 150.0 0.087 0.000 O.00D 0.000 0.700 0.574 0.402 200.0 �.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.800 0.574 0.459 250.0 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.900 0.574 0.517 300.0 0.087 D.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.574 0.574 356.0 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.100 0.574 0.631 400.0 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.000 ANALYSIS RESULTS Predeveloped Landuae Totals for POC #1 Total Pervioua Area : 12.85 Total Impervious Area : 0 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area : 0 Total Impervious Area : 0 Flow Frequency Return Perioda for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.353468 5 year 0.554717 10 year 0.66871 25 yeaz 0.78944 50 year 0.864132 100 year 0.927653 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfe) 2 year 0.349408 5 year 0.454959 10 year 0.532948 25 year 0.641036 50 year 0.728756 100 year 0.822895 Annual Peaka for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.397 0.379 1950 0.640 0.375 1951 0.740 0.438 1952 0.271 0.282 1953 0.193 0.289 1954 0.275 0.298 1955 0.530 0.431 1956 0.421 0.339 1957 0.377 0.397 1958 0.350 0.339 1959 0.285 0.295 1960 0.504 0.422 1961 0.280 0.286 1962 0.191 0.263 1963 0.245 0.265 1964 0.267 0.303 1965 0.227 0.286 1966 0.229 0.291 1967 0.513 0.391 1968 0.298 0.327 1969 0.316 6.333 1970 0.270 0.320 1971 0.223 0.304 1972 0.572 0.430 1973 0.284 0.306 1974 0.263 0.274 1975 0.458 0.410 1976 0.280 0.298 1977 �.03& 0.278 1978 0.275 0.370 1979 0.134 0.278 1960 0.392 0.381 1981 0.211 0.339 1982 0.488 0.513 1983 0.352 0.373 1984 0.257 0.282 1985 0.140 0.338 1986 0.650 0.498 1987 0.549 0.444 1988 0.223 0 .271 1989 0.128 0.241 1990 0 .853 0.665 1991 0.687 0.580 1992 0.275 0.338 1993 0.286 0.265 1994 0 .074 0.234 1995 6.352 0.325 1996 Q.700 0.466 1997 0.710 0.538 1998 O.Z62 0.305 1999 0.462 0.417 2000 0.305 0.367 2001 0.050 0.287 2002 0.367 0.457 2003 0.240 0.289 2004 0.620 1.020 2005 0.399 0.405 2006 0.441 0.316 2U07 1.019 0.637 2008 1.010 0.816 2009 0.530 0.415 Ranked Annual Pesks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 1.0192 1.0197 2 1.0103 0.8162 3 0.8526 0.6654 4 0.7395 0.6366 5 0.7102 0.5802 6 U.7003 0.5384 7 0.6872 0.5131 8 0.6502 0.4983 9 0.6397 0.4604 10 0.6202 0.4566 11 0.5723 0.4443 12 0.5495 0.4379 13 0.5302 0.4311 14 0.5301 0.4302 15 0.5128 0.4216 16 0.5040 0.4169 17 0.4878 0.4146 18 0.4617 0.4104 19 0.4577 0.4050 20 0.4413 0.3969 21 0.4215 0.3912 22 0.3987 0.3813 23 0.3967 Q.3794 24 U.3917 0.3747 25 0.3772 0.3729 26 0.3671 0.3698 27 0.3519 0.3670 26 0.3515 0.3393 29 0.3496 0.3392 30 0.3165 0.3388 31 0.3053 0.3379 32 0.2983 0.3375 33 0.2861 0.3331 34 0.2849 0.3268 35 0.2843 0.3253 36 0.2802 0.3199 37 0.2797 0.3161 38 0.2755 0.3063 39 0.2748 0.3054 40 0.2745 0.3039 41 0.2714 0.3034 43 0.2670 0.2975 44 0.2626 0.2953 45 0.2574 0.2915 46 0.2448 0.2893 4? 0.2401 0.2890 48 0.2294 0.2874 49 0.2265 0.2865 50 0.2232 Q.2860 51 0.2226 0.2824 52 0.2107 0.2824 53 0.1933 0.2784 54 0.1915 0.2783 55 0.1624 0.2744 56 0.1399 0.2709 57 0.1335 0.2655 58 0.1278 0.2652 59 0.0743 0.2630 60 0.0505 0.2412 61 0.0383 0.2336 POC #1 The Facility PASSfiD The Facility PASS$D. Flowicfs) Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.3181 771 640 83 Pass 0.3236 740 602 81 Pass 0.3292 707 552 78 Pass 0.3347 676 524 7� Pdss 6.3402 647 485 74 Pass 0.3457 616 467 75 Pass 0.3512 587 436 74 Pass 0.3567 562 412 73 Pass 0.3622 538 386 71 Pass 0.3678 516 364 70 Pass 0.3733 487 328 67 Pass 0.3788 463 297 64 Pass 0.3843 439 272 61 Pass 0.3898 418 254 60 Pass 0.3953 396 233 58 Pass 0.4009 380 226 56 Pass 0.4064 364 187 51 Pass 0.4119 354 172 48 Pass 0.4174 344 154 44 Pass 0.4229 328 144 43 Pass 0.4284 303 132 43 Pass 0.4339 292 121 41 Pass 0.4395 283 110 38 Pass 0.4450 272 106 38 Pass �.4505 264 102 38 Pass 0.4560 249 93 37 Pass 0.4615 242 87 35 Pass 0.4670 229 82 35 Pass 0.4725 222 81 36 Pass 0.4781 214 77 35 Pass 0.4836 212 73 34 Pdss 0.4891 203 70 34 Pass 0.4946 198 65 32 Pass 0.5001 191 62 32 Pass 0.5056 186 62 33 Pass 0.5112 181 61 33 Pass 0.5167 170 58 34 Pass 0.5222 165 57 34 Pass 0.527? 158 53 33 Pass 0.5332 151 52 34 Pass 0.5387 147 50 34 Pass 0.5442 Z38 47 34 Pass 0.5499 136 47 34 Pass 0.5553 129 47 36 Pass 0.5663 120 40 33 Pass 0.5718 114 38 33 Pass 0.5773 109 38 34 Pass �.5629 105 36 34 Pass i.5884 98 36 36 Pass 0.5939 93 35 37 Pass 0.5994 88 33 37 Pass 0.6049 83 32 38 Pass 0.61D4 79 32 40 Pass 0.6159 74 32 43 Pass 0.6215 69 30 43 Pass 0.6270 66 28 42 Pass 0.6325 58 26 44 Pass 0.6380 55 24 43 Pass 0.6435 51 23 45 Pass 0.6490 47 22 46 Pass 0.6546 42 22 52 Pass 0.6601 40 22 55 Pass 0.6656 39 21 53 Pass 0.6711 37 20 54 Pass 0.6766 35 19 54 Pass 0.5821 32 18 56 Pass 0.6876 29 18 62 Pass 0.6932 28 18 64 Pass 0.6987 27 16 66 Pass 0.7042 22 16 72 Pass 0.7097 21 16 76 Pass 0.7152 19 15 78 Pass 0.7207 19 15 78 Pass 0.7263 16 14 87 Pass 0.7318 15 14 93 Pass 0.7373 15 14 93 Pass 0.7428 13 13 100 Pass ).7483 13 12 92 Pass 7.7538 13 12 92 Pass 0.7593 13 11 84 Pass , 0.7649 13 11 84 Pass ' 0.7704 13 11 84 Pass 0.7759 12 9 75 Pass 0.7814 11 8 72 Pass �.7869 11 B 72 Pass 0.7924 11 8 72 Pass 0.7979 11 8 72 Pass 0.8035 11 5 45 Pass 0.8090 10 5 50 Pass 0.8145 10 5 50 Pass 0.8200 8 4 50 Pass 0.8255 8 3 37 Pass 0.8310 8 2 25 Pass 0.8366 8 2 25 Pass 0.8421 8 2 25 Pass 0.8476 8 2 25 Pass 0.8531 6 2 33 Pass 0.8586 5 2 40 Pass 0.8641 5 2 40 Pass water Quality 8[�IP Flow and Volnme for FOC �1 On-line fncility volume: 0 acre-feet Oa-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjueted for 15 min: 0 cfe. Off-line Eacility target flow: 0 cfa. Adjueted foz IS min: 0 cfe. Predevelopad Landuse Totals for POC #2 Total Parvioue Area : 12.85 Total imparvious Area : 0 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #2 Total Pervioua Area : 0.1 Total Impervious Ares : 0 Flow Frequency Return Perioda for Predeveloped. POC #2 Return Period Flow(cfa) 2 year 0.358673 5 year 0.566896 10 year 0.689488 ' 25 year 0.823732 50 year 0.91078b 100 year 0.986723 Flow Frequency Return Periods foz Mitigated. POC #2 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.199302 5 year 0.305124 10 year 0.392031 25 year 0.523511 50 year 0.638874 100 year 0.770654 Annual Peaka for Predeveloped and Mitigsted. POC #2 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.403 0.256 1950 0.675 0.242 1951 0.747 0.249 1952 0.276 0.143 1953 0.197 0.134 1954 0.278 0.148 1955 0.536 0.233 1956 0.432 0.231 1957 0.386 0.267 1958 0.355 0.174 1959 0.289 0.148 1960 0.519 0.235 1961 0.284 0.141 1962 0.196 �.117 1963 0.252 0.129 1964 0.271 0.153 1965 0.234 0.142 1966 0.237 d.143 1967 0.524 0.207 1968 0.302 0.200 1969 0.322 0.170 1970 0.278 0.162 1971 0.233 0.150 1972 0.583 0.307 1973 0.288 0.158 1974 0.267 0.133 1975 0.473 0.246 1976 0.287 0.150 1977 0.041 0.142 1978 0.282 0.353 1979 0.138 0.160 1980 0.401 0.267 1981 0.216 0.171 1982 0.519 0.383 1983 0.360 0.276 1984 0.262 0.145 1985 0.143 0.222 1986 0.658 0.319 1987 0.563 0.345 1988 0.228 0.132 1989 0.131 0.105 1990 0.866 0.541 1991 0.696 0.468 1993 0 .291 0 .132 1994 0.076 0.090 1995 0.357 0.171 .996 0.716 0.260 _997 0.720 0.346 1998 0.173 0.155 1999 0.470 0.420 2000 0.309 0.192 2001 0.055 0.125 2002 0.377 0.268 2003 0.252 0.171 2004 0.641 0.867 2005 0.408 0.216 2006 0.450 0.170 I 2007 1.080 0.477 2008 1.028 0.827 2009 0.537 0.238 Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #2 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 1.0799 0.8670 2 1.0280 0 .8268 3 0.8661 0.5409 4 0.7471 0.4774 5 0.7198 0.4674 6 0.7157 �.4197 7 0.6956 0.3834 8 0.6753 0.3531 9 0.6582 0.3458 10 0.6410 0.3448 11 0.5827 0.3189 12 0.5628 0.3069 13 0.5373 0.2761 14 0.5365 0.2683 15 0.5238 0.2674 16 0.5192 0.2672 17 0.5185 0.2596 18 0.4734 0.2562 19 0 .4697 0.2493 20 0.4503 0.2459 21 0.4323 0.2416 22 0.4079 0.2382 23 0.4035 0.2352 24 0.4009 0.2332 25 0.3863 0.2305 26 0.3765 0.2218 27 0.3597 0.2159 28 0.3567 0.2072 29 0.3546 0.2004 30 0.3216 0.1917 31 0.3086 0.1745 32 0.3023 0.1717 33 0.2913 0.1714 34 0.2888 0.1708 35 0.2885 0.1706 36 0.2868 0.1697 37 0.2841 0.1696 38 0.2824 0.1619 39 0.2808 0.1600 40 0.2781 0.1579 41 0.2780 0.1550 42 0.2756 0.1534 43 0.2714 0.1504 44 0.2673 0.1501 45 0.2616 0.1479 46 0.2519 0.1476 47 0.2516 0.1452 48 0.2372 0.1430 49 0_2343 0.1429 50 0.2334 0.1421 52 0.2158 0.1413 53 0.1974 0.1342 54 0.1957 0.1329 55 0.1725 0.1325 56 0.1427 0.1320 57 0.1376 0.1289 58 0.1315 0.1251 59 0.0776 0.1167 60 0.0546 0.1048 61 0.0407 0.0896 POC #2 The FaCility PASSED The Facility PASSSD. Flow(cfs} Predev Mit Percentage Pase/Fail 0.3587 581 50 8 Pass 0.3642 563 49 8 Pass 0.3698 529 49 9 Pass 0.3754 502 48 9 Pass 0.3810 48Q 48 10 Pass 0.3866 450 47 10 Pass 0.3921 427 46 10 Pass 0.3977 409 41 10 Pass 0.4033 391 39 9 Pass 0.4089 375 39 10 Pass � 0.4144 361 37 10 Pass � 0.4200 351 35 9 Pass 0.4256 339 35 10 Pass ' 0.4312 319 33 10 Pass 0.4367 305 32 10 Pass 0.4423 292 32 10 Pass � 0.4479 279 31 11 Pass 0.4535 267 31 11 Pass 0.4591 251 31 12 Pass 0.4646 248 29 11 Pass 0.4702 238 27 11 Pass 0.4758 228 27 11 Pass 0.4814 219 26 11 Pass 0.4869 215 25 11 Pass 0.4925 209 25 11 Pass 0.4981 201 25 12 Pass 0.5037 198 23 11 Pass 0.5092 191 22 11 Pass 0.5148 188 22 11 Pass 0.5204 176 22 12 Pass 0.5260 170 21 12 Pass 0.5316 166 21 12 Pass 0.5371 157 21 13 Pass 0.5427 151 19 12 Pass 0.5483 143 19 13 Pass 0.5539 141 19 13 Pass 0.5594 133 19 14 Pass 0.5650 128 17 13 Pass 0.5706 124 17 13 Pass 0.5762 115 16 13 Pass � 0.5817 112 16 14 Pass 0.5873 107 16 14 Pass 0.5929 100 16 16 Pass 0.5985 97 16 16 Pass 0.6041 91 16 17 Pass 0.6096 87 14 16 Pass 0.6152 81 13 16 Pass 0.6208 76 12 15 Pass 0.6264 71 12 16 Pass 0.6319 69 12 17 Pass 0.6375 61 12 19 Pass 0.6431 57 12 21 Pass 0.6487 55 10 18 Pass 0.6598 46 10 21 Pass 0.6654 41 10 24 Pass 0.6710 40 1Q 25 Pass 1.6766 37 9 24 Pass ).6821 37 8 21 Pass 0.6877 34 8 23 Pass 0.6933 32 S 25 Pass I 0.6989 30 8 26 Pass i 0.7044 26 8 30 Pass II 0.7100 25 8 32 Pass �, 0.7156 22 8 36 Pass I 0.7212 19 8 42 Pass I 0.7267 19 8 42 Pass i 0.7323 17 8 47 Pass ' 0.7379 16 8 50 Pass 0.7435 15 6 53 Pass 0.7491 13 8 61 Pass 0.7546 13 5 38 Pass � 0.7602 13 5 38 Pass 0.7658 13 5 38 Pass 0.7714 13 5 38 Pass 0.7769 13 5 38 Pass 0.7825 13 4 30 Pass 0.7881 12 4 33 Pass 0.7937 11 4 36 Pass 0.7992 11 4 36 Pass 0.8048 11 4 36 Pass 0.8104 11 4 36 Pass 0.8160 11 4 36 Pass 0.8216 11 4 36 Pass 0.8271 9 3 33 Pass 0.8327 9 3 33 Pass 0.8383 8 3 37 Pass 0.8439 8 3 37 Pass 0.8494 8 2 25 Pass 0.8550 8 2 25 Pass 0.8606 8 1 12 Pass 0.8662 6 1 16 Pass 0.8717 5 0 0 Pass 0.8773 5 0 0 Pass 0.8829 5 0 0 Pass 0.8885 5 0 0 Pass 0.8941 5 0 0 Pass 0.8996 4 0 0 Pass 0.9052 4 0 0 Pass 0.9106 4 0 0 Pass Water Quality SI� Flap and Volume for POC #2 Oa-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility targat flow: 0 cfa. Adjueted for 15 min: 0 cfe. Off-line facility target flow: 0 cfe. Adjueted for 15 min: 0 cfe. Perind and Impind Chsnges No changes have been made. This program and accompanying documentation is provided �as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by the user. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. disclaims all warranties, either expreased or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or ir.ability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. has been advised of the possibility of such damages. Outlet 1 orifice Orifice 100 coefficient 0.62 Assume 2 x 3 trench L= 1283 Porosity 0.3 Orifice Dia 8 stage area storage outlet 1 100 0.176722 0 0 100.1 0.176722 0.005302 0.019505 100.2 0.176722 0.010603 0.081821 100.3 0.176722 0.015905 0.199139 100.4 0.176722 0.021207 0.352364 100.5 0.176722 0.026508 0.52416 100.6 0.176722 0.03181 0.712072 100.7 0.176722 0.037112 0.866888 100.8 0.176722 0.042413 1.552626 100.9 0.176722 0.047715 1.646808 101 0.176722 0.053017 1.735888 101.1 0.176722 0.058318 1.820615 101.2 0.176722 0.06362 1.90157 101.3 0.176722 0.068921 1.979217 101.4 0.176722 0.074223 2.053931 101.5 0.176722 0.079525 2.12602 101.6 0.176722 0.084826 2.195744 101.7 0.176722 0.090128 2.263321 101.8 0.176722 0.09543 2.328938 101.9 0.176722 0.100731 2.392757 102 0.176722 0.106033 2.454917 102.1 0.176722 0.111335 2.515541 102.2 0.176722 0.116636 2.574738 102.3 0.176722 0.121938 2.632605 102.4 0.176722 0.12724 2.689227 102.5 0.176722 0.132541 2.74468 , 102.6 0.176722 0.137843 2.799036 102.7 0.176722 0.143145 2.852355 102.8 0.176722 0.148446 2.904697 102.9 0.176722 0.153748 2.956111 103 0.176722 0.15905 3.006647 , __------------ - � WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: Upstream-atten Site Name: Canyon Terrace Site Address: City . Report Date: 11/6/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 00:00 Data End : 2009/09/30 00:00 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year Hiqh Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Up north-south Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 7.07 Pervious Total 7.07 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 2.36 Impervious Total 2.36 Basin Total 9.43 Element Flows To: Surface Interflovr Groundwater Site Site Name : Site Bottom Length: 560.00 ft. Bottom Width: 200.00 ft. Manninq's n: 0.05 Channel bottom slope 1: 0.33 To 1 Channel Left side slope 0: 20 To 1 Channel right side slope 2: 20 To 1 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 0 ft. Riser Diameter: 0 in. Element Flor►s To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Channel Hydraulic Table Stage(ft) Area(ac) Volume(ac-ft) Discharqe(cfs) Infilt(cfa) i 0.0000 2.571 0.000 0.000 0.000 I 0.0044 2.573 0.011 0.411 0.000 0.0089 2.575 0.022 1.306 0.000 0.0133 2.576 0.034 2.568 0.000 I 0.0178 2.580 0.045 4.148 0.000 � 0.0222 2.582 0.057 6.018 0.000 0.0267 2.585 0.068 8.156 0.000 0.0311 2.587 0.080 10.54 0.000 0.0356 2.589 0.091 13.17 0.000 0.0400 2.591 0.103 16.03 0.000 0.0444 2.594 0.114 19.12 0.000 0.0489 2.596 0.126 22.41 0.000 0.0533 2.598 0.137 25.91 0.000 0.0578 2.601 0.149 29.62 0.000 0.0622 2.603 0.161 33.52 0.000 0.0667 2.605 0.172 37.61 0.000 0.0711 2.608 0.184 41.88 0.000 0.0756 2.610 0.195 46.35 0.000 0.0800 2.612 0.207 50.99 0.000 0.0844 2.614 0.219 55.80 0.000 0.0889 2.617 0.230 60.79 0.000 0.0933 2.619 0.242 65.95 0.000 0.0978 2.621 0.253 71.28 0.000 0.1022 2.624 0.265 76.77 0.000 0.1067 2.626 0.277 82.43 0.000 0.1111 2.628 0.288 88.25 0.000 0.1156 2.630 0.300 94.22 0.000 0.1200 2.633 0.312 100.3 0.000 0.1244 2.635 0.324 106.6 0.000 0.1289 2.637 0.335 113.0 0.000 0.1333 2.640 0.347 119.6 0.000 0.1378 2.642 0.359 126.4 0.000 0.1422 2.644 0.370 133.3 0.000 0.1467 2.647 0.382 140.3 0.000 0.1511 2.649 0.394 147.5 0.000 0.1556 2.651 0.406 154.6 0.000 0.1600 2.653 0.418 162.3 0.000 0.1644 2.656 0.429 169.9 0.000 0.1689 2.658 0.441 177.6 0.000 0.1733 2.660 0.453 185.5 0.000 0.1778 2.663 0.465 193.6 0.000 0.1822 2.665 0.477 201.7 0.000 0.1867 2.667 0.489 210.0 0.000 0.1911 2.670 0.500 218.5 0.000 0.1956 2.672 0.512 227.0 0.000 0.2000 2.674 0.524 235.7 0.000 0.2044 2.676 0.536 244.6 0.000 0.2089 2.679 0.548 253.5 0.000 0.2133 2.681 0.560 262.6 0.000 0.2178 2.683 0.572 271.9 0.000 0.2222 2.686 0.584 281.2 0.000 0.2267 2.688 0.596 290.7 0.000 0.2311 2.690 0.608 300.3 0.000 0.2356 2.693 0.620 310.1 0.000 0.2400 2.695 0.632 319.9 0.000 0.2444 2.697 0.644 329.9 0.000 0.2489 2.699 0.656 340.0 0.000 0.2533 2.702 0.668 350.3 0.000 0.2578 2.704 0.680 360.6 0.000 0.2622 2.706 0.692 371.1 0.000 0.2667 2.709 0.704 381.7 0.000 0.2711 2.711 0.716 392.4 0.000 0.2756 2.713 0.728 403.3 0.000 0.2800 2.716 0.740 414.2 0.000 0.2844 2.718 0.752 425.3 0.000 0.2889 2.720 0.764 436.5 0.000 0.2933 2.722 0.776 447.8 0.000 D .2978 2.725 0.788 459.3 0.000 0.3022 2.727 0.800 470.8 0.000 0.3067 2.729 0.812 482.5 0.000 0.3111 2.732 0.825 494.3 0.000 0.3156 2.734 0.837 506.2 0.000 0.3200 2.736 0.849 518.2 0.000 0.3244 2.739 0.861 530.4 0.000 0.3289 2.741 0.873 542.6 0.000 0.3333 2.743 0.885 555.0 0.000 0.3378 2.746 0.898 567.5 0.000 0.3422 2.748 0.910 580.1 0.000 0.3467 2.750 0.922 592.8 0.000 0.3511 2.752 0.934 605.6 0.000 0.3556 2.755 0.946 618.5 0.000 0.3600 2.757 0.959 631.6 0.000 0.3644 2.759 0.971 644.7 0.000 0.3689 2.762 0.983 658.0 0.000 0.3733 2.764 0.996 671.4 0.000 0.3778 2.766 1.008 684.8 0.000 0.3822 2.769 1.020 698.4 0.000 0.3867 2.771 1.032 712.1 0.000 0.3911 2.773 1.045 726.0 0.000 0.3956 2.775 1.057 739.9 0.000 0.4000 2.778 1.069 753.9 0.000 0.4044 2.780 1.082 768.1 0.000 MITIGATED LAND USE Name : up north-south Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 7.07 Pervious Total 7.07 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 2.36 Impervious Total 2.36 Basin Total 9.43 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater SSD Table 1 SSD Table 1 Name : SSD Table 1 Depth: 3. 1 ft. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 SSD Table Hydraulic Table Stage Area Volume (ft) (ac} (ac-ft) Manual NotUsed NotUsed NotUsed NotUsed 0.000 0.177 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.177 0.005 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.200 0.177 0.011 0.082 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.300 0.177 0.016 0.199 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.400 0.177 0.021 0.352 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.177 0.027 0.524 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.600 0.177 0.032 0.712 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.700 0.177 0.037 0.867 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.800 0.177 0.042 1.553 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.900 0.177 0.048 1.647 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.177 0.053 1.736 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.100 0.177 0.058 1.821 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.200 0.177 0.064 1.902 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.300 0.177 0.069 1.979 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.400 0.177 0.074 2.054 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.500 0.177 O.OBO 2.126 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.600 0.177 0.085 2.196 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.700 0.177 0.090 2.263 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.800 0.177 0.095 2.329 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.900 0.177 0.101 2.393 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.000 0.177 0.106 2.455 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.100 0.177 0.111 2.516 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.200 0.177 0.117 2.575 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.300 0.177 0.122 2.633 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.400 0.177 0.127 2.689 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 � 2.500 0.177 0.133 2.745 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 , 2.600 0.177 0.138 2.799 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.700 0.177 0.143 2.852 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.800 0.177 0.148 2.905 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.900 0.177 0.154 2.956 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.000 0.177 0. 159 3.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ' 3.100 0.177 0. 164 20.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:7.07 ', Total Impervious Area:2.36 I Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 ' Total Pervious Area:7.07 Total Impervious Area:2.36 li Flovr Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.95999 5 year 1 .333362 10 year 1.60622 25 year 1.98107 50 year 2.282771 100 year 2.60424 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitiqated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.963181 5 year 1.322311 10 year 1.582433 25 year 1.937278 50 year 2.221126 100 year 2.522112 i � m x � _ a� a a a � Wetpond Sizing Worksheet (EasULower Wetpond) Canyon Terrace Subdivision ' Step 1 f= 3 for basic wetpond Step 2- Determine Rainfall R= 0.47 feet From figure 6.4.1.A ' Step 3-Calculate runoff from mean annual storm I Vr=(0.9Ai+0.25Atg+0.10Atf+0.01 Aog)'R ' Ai = 85905 sf ' Atg= 89332 sf Vr= 3902.86 Step 4-Calculate Wetpool Volume Vb=f'Vr AU Vb= 11708.58 (required) Wetpond Volume Provided= 12,582 cf wwHr�2 o i2 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: WetpondEastLower Site Name: Wetpond East - Lower Site Address: I� City : Report Date: 5/2/2014 I�� Gage : Seatac � Data Start : 1948/10/O1 I Data End : 2009/09/30 I Precip Scale: 1.00 ', Version : 2013/10/17 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year ' PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Forest, Steep 4.02 Pervious Total 4.02 Impervious Land Use Acres Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 4.02 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE I� Name : Basin 1 �' Sypass: No I GroundWater: No � Pervious Land Use Acres � C, Lawn, Mod 2.05 Pervious Total 2.05 I Impervious Land Use Acres �I ROADS MOD 1.97 Impervious Total 1.97 Basin Total 4.02 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:4.02 Total Impervious Area:O Mitigated Landuse Totals £or POC #1 Total Pervious Area:2.05 Total Impervious Area:1.97 FloW Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flovr(cfs) 2 year 0.17989 5 year 0.266594 10 year 0.355795 25 year 0.439546 50 year 0.498692 100 year 0.554938 Flox Frequency Return Periods for Mitiqated. POC #1 Return Period Florr(cfs) 2 year 1.033737 5 year 1.370663 10 year 1.613227 25 year 1 .942688 50 year 2.205326 100 year 2.483157 (For Riser Overflow) Nc further aralysis g=nerated. Wetpond sizing is calculated using C�R. sizi�g :nethcdcicgy. F1cx ccr.t_o1 ar.alysis is csovid�d ir. Appendix r as part of the o.,erali basi� ar.alysis. StormFiiter Sizing Sheet Use 8'x11'vauit w/18" Cartridges(w/access hatch) 18"Cartridge treats 7.5 gpm per cart. (manuf. recommendation w/GULD approval) Water Quality Flow Rate(WWHM- 15min timestep) 1 gpm = 0.00223 cfs 0.017 cfs/cartridge Qwq(online) 0.28 cfs Use 17 cartridges @ 18" wwxi�2 o ia PROJECT REPORT Project Name: StormfilterWestUpper Site Name: Stormfilter West - Upper Site Address: City . Report Date: 9/16/2014 Gaqe : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Dats End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Lo�v Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE II Name : Basin 1 I Bypass: No i GroundWater: No I'I Pervious Land Use Acres C, Forest, Steep 6.4 Pervious Total 6.4 Impervious Land Use Acres Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 6.4 Element Flor+s To: Surface Interflov� Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 3.58 Pervious Total 3.58 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 2.82 Impervious Total 2.82 Basin Total 6.4 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped I.anduse Totals for POC �1 Total Pervious Area:6.4 Total Impervious Area:O Mitiqated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:3.58 Total Impervious Area:2.82 Flox Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flor+(cfs) 2 year 0.286392 5 year 0.45619 10 year 0.56644 25 year 0.699774 50 year 0.793938 100 year 0.883483 Flov� Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flox(cfs) 2 year 1.536064 5 year 2.058889 10 year 2.438452 25 year 2.957465 50 year 3.373675 100 year 3.816038 wwxrs2oia PROJECT REPORT Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC#1 On-line facility volume: 0.0184 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0.0243 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0243 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0.0137 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0137 cfs. Project Name: CB50 WQ Cartridge Filter Sizing Site Name: CANYON TERRACE Site Address: City . RENTON Report Date: 8/12/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2014/06/24 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flovr Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : BASIN 51 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.15 Zmpervious Total 0.15 Basin Total 0.15 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundr+ater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres Mead September 17,2014 1 I(u11t Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.15 Impervious Total 0.15 Basin Total 0.15 Element Flows To: Suface Interflow 6roundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total impervious Area:0.15 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.15 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.05719 5 year 0.072237 10 year 0.082461 25 year 0.095723 50 year 0.105873 100 year 0.11627 Flox Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.057494 5 year 0.072665 10 year 0.083335 25 year 0.096945 50 year 0.10738 100 year 0.1180B3 Mcad September 17,2014 2 I Iw�t wwxr�2oi2 PROJECT REPORT Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC#1 On-line tacility volume: 0.0159 acre-feet On-Iine facility target flow: 0.0211 cfs. AdJusted for 15 min: 0.0211 cfs. Off-Iine facility target flow: 0.0119 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0119 cis. Project Name: CB51 WQ Cartridge Filter Sizing Site Name: Site Address: City . Report Date: 8/11/2014 Gaqe : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 �� Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2014/06/24 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.13 Impervious Total 0.13 Basin Total 0.13 Element Flops To: Surface Znterflor� Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No September 17,2014 1 Me�a�d Pervious Land Use Acres Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.13 Impervious Total 0.13 Basin Total 0.13 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.13 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.13 Florv Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.049564 5 year 0.062606 10 year 0.071466 25 year 0.06296 50 year 0.091756 100 year 0.100767 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. P�C #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.049564 5 year 0.062606 10 year 0.071466 25 year 0.08296 50 year 0.091756 100 yesr 0.100767 September 17,2014 2 i�iu WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT Water�uality BMP Flow and Volume for POC#1 On-line facility volume: 0.0159 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0.0211 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0211 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0.0119 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0119 cfs. Project Name: C652 W�Cartridge Filter Sizing Site Name: CANYON TERRACE Site Address: City : RENTON Report Date: 8/15/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2014/06/24 I,ow Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land IIse Acres Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FI.AT 0.13 Impervious Total 0.13 Basin Total 0.13 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater , MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres Wednesday,September t7,2014 1 Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.153 Zmpervious Total 0.153 Basin Total 0.153 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.13 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.153 Flow Frequency Return Periods £or Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.058333 5 year 0.073682 10 year 0.08411 25 year 0.097637 50 year 0.10799 100 year 0.118595 Flovr Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC �1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.058333 5 year 0.073682 10 yesr 0.08411 25 year 0.097637 50 year 0.10799 100 yesr 0.118595 Wednesday,September t7,2014 2 ww�2oi2 Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC#1 On-line facility volume: 0.0051 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0.0068 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0068 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0.0038 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0.0038 cfs. PROJECT REPORT Project Name: CB100K WQ Cartridge Filter Sizing Site Name: CANYON TERRACE Site Address: City . KENT , Report Date: 8/15/2014 I Gage : Seatac ' Data Start : 1948/10/Ol Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2014/06/24 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : CB 100K Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.0419 Impervious Total 0.0419 Basin Total 0.0419 Element Flows To: Surface InterfloW Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : CB100K Bypass: No September 17,2014 1 GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres Pervious Total 0 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.0419 Impervious Total 0.0419 Basin Total 0.0419 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.0419 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:O Total Impervious Area:0.0419 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.015975 5 year 0.020178 10 year 0.023034 25 year 0.026739 50 year 0.029574 100 year 0.032478 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.015975 5 year 0.020178 10 year 0.023034 25 year 0.026739 50 year 0.029574 100 year 0.032478 September 17,2014 2 Appendix B-Basic Dispersion Canyon Terrace Subdivision City of Kent Emergency Access Area-0.02 acres of new PGIS Basic Water Quality is accomplished by Basic Dispersion (2009 KCSWDM BMP C2.4) Otherwise known as BMP T5.12-2012 SWMMWW This BMP is complemented by BMP T5.13 Post Construction Soil Quality and Depth and is planted with bioswale seed mix to enhance pollutant removal. � From KCSWDM C.2.4.5-Design Specifications for impervious surface sheet flow 1.The strip of impervious surFace may be either roof or pavement. The edge of the target impervious strip and the ground adjacent to or immediately below the edge must be either level or sloped such that the direction of sheet flow is perpendicular to the edge or no more than 45 degrees from perpendicular. The direction of sheet flow is almost perpendicular. 2.A 2 ft wide,4 to 6 inch deep,strip of crushed rockor the extended base course of the road or driveway must be provided at bor below the edge of the impervious strip to facilitate dispersal of runoff. This requirement may be waived for use of reverse slope sidewalks and other impervious strips that are 10-feet wide or less. The edge of pavement contains a 2'wide st�ip of crused surfacing base course 3.A"vegetated flowpath segment"of at least 10 feet in length must be available along the flowpath that runoff would follow upon discharge from the strip of crushed rock. The vegetated flowpath is approximately 60 feet 4. No more than a 20-foot wide strip of impervious surface may be sheet flowed in this manner unless the length of vegetated flow path segment is increased 10 feet for each additional 20 feet of impervious surface width or fraction thereof. At its greatest dimension(between the two returns),the new asphalt surface width is 70 feet wide. To Accommodate,the vegetated flow path is greated than the required 40 feet 5. For purposes of maintaining adequate separation of flows discharged from adjacent dispersion devices,the outer edge of the vegetated flowpath segment for the strip of impervious surface not overlap with other flowpath segments,except those associated with sheet flow from non-native pervious surfaces. There are no adjacent dispersion devices. There is a very small area of adjacent asphalt that will drain to the dispersion area; however,the dispersion area is larger than necessary and has a vegetated flowpath long enough to accommodate 120' PGIS per note 3 above. V X 'Q C d a a a wwsrs2oia PROJECT REPORT Project Name: 124TH NOT COLLECTED ' Site Name: 124TH NOT COLLECTED � Site Address: , City . Report Date: 5/2/2014 ' Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 ' Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 ' Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year Hiqh Florr Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Forest, Flat .64 Pervious Total 0.64 Impervious Land Use Acres Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 0.64 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE ' Name : Basin 1 II Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Lawn, Mod .15 Pervious Total 0.15 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 0.49 Impervious Total 0.49 Basin Total 0.64 Element Flows To: Surface Interflo� Groundwater ANALYSIS RESUI,TS ', Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 I Total Pervious Area:0.64 Total Impervious Area:O ' Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.15 I Total Impervious Area:0.49 � Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 II' Return Period Flow(cfs) ! 2 year 0.000543 I 5 year 0.000822 10 year 0.001049 ' 25 year 0.00139 50 yesr 0.001687 ' 100 year 0.002024 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC �1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.187318 5 year 0.238205 10 year 0.273674 25 year 0.320616 50 year 0.357189 100 year 0.395181 WWF�II�2012 PRQJECT REPORT Project Name: UP POND Site Name: UP POND Site Address: City . Report Date: 12/26/G013 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED I�AND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: I�o Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 5.1 Pervious Total 5.1 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 1.7 Impervious Total 1.7 Basin Total 6.8 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 5.1 Pervious Total 5.1 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 1.7 Impervious Total 1.7 Basin Total 5.8 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:5.1 Total Impervious Area:1.7 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:5.1 Total Impervious Area:1.7 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #2 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.19Q773 5 year 1.705552 10 year 2.090692 25 year 2.62973 50 year 3.07069 100 year 3.546583 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.190773 5 year 1.705552 10 year 2.090692 25 year 2.62973 50 year 3.07069 10o yesr 3.546583 "ro .�� 5��1,1'e�' _ ---- _ 0.9 c�s �� po�d 3,1 S c-�'s �7��SStS Si� �w 5�.��.r- S�D T� 100 year flows: RIM= 459.74 4.74 Q NOT COLLECTED= 0.4 cfs Uncollected Basin IE to Overfiow= 455 0 Q TO POND= 3.55 cfs 6.8 AC Basin IE to Pond= 455 Weir Elev= 457 Setup for Calc Qbypass= 3.15 cfs Max WS= 457 stage area storage outlet 1 outlet 2 455 0.04036 0 0 Orifice 1 (to Pond) 455.1 0.00036 3.6E-05 0.095732 0.6951 Radius, in= 1.67 <----- 455.2 0.00036 7.2E-05 0.135385 0.983019 I E= 455 <----- 455.3 0.00036 0.000108 0.165812 1.203948 Radius,ft= 0.139167 455.4 0.00036 0.000144 0.191463 1.390199 Head,ft= 2 Q= 0.427907 455.5 0.00036 0.00018 0.214062 1.55429 Orifice coeff= 0.62 455.6 0.00036 0.000216 0.234493 1.702639 455.7 0.00036 0.000252 0.253282 1.839061 Orifice Area, sf= 0.060844 REQUIRED 455.8 0.00036 0.000288 0.27077 1.966039 Qpond= 0.428124 Glpond= 0.4 cfs 455.9 0.00036 0.000324 0.287195 2.085299 456 0.00036 0.00036 0.30273 2.198098 456.1 0.00036 0.000396 0.317506 2.305385 Outlet 2(Sharp Crested Weir 456.2 0.00036 0.000432 0.331624 2.407896 Q-C(L-0.2H)H^(3/2) 456.3 0.00036 0.000468 0.345165 2.506217 Weir Elev 457 456.4 0.00036 0.000504 0.358195 2.600825 IE to Overflow 455 456.5 0.00036 0.00054 0.370767 2.692109 456.6 0.00036 0.000576 0.382926 2.780398 p= 2 456.7 0.00036 0.000612 0.394711 2.865969 C=3.27+.4(H/P)= 3.27 456.8 0.00036 0.000648 0.406154 2.949058 p= 1 456.9 0.00036 0.000684 0.417284 3.029869 L=(1/2 Circ of 12") 3.14 457 0.00036 0.00072 0.428124 3.10858 PASSES REQUIRED 3.15 (Qbypass-Qpond) 457.1 0.00036 0.000756 0.438697 3.525734 ' Qbypass= 0 -0.43 457.2 0.00036 0.000792 0.449021 4.222441 457.3 0.00036 0.000828 0.459112 5.099854 457.4 0.00036 0.000864 0.468987 6.122459 Orifice 2(Bvpass) Radius, in= 4.5 <----- Gl= 3.107004 I E= 455 <----- Radius,ft= 0.375 Head,ft= 2.99 (assume 1'-9°freeboard) Orifice coeff= 0.62 Orifice Area, sf= 0.441786 REQUIRED C�bypass- 3.800867 Qbypass= 3.15 cfs wwHri2oia PROJECT REPORT Project Name: UP_NORTH Site Name: UP NORTH Site Address: City . Renton Report Date: 4/14/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : SO Percent of the 2 Year Sigh Flor+ Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 1.91 Pervious Total 1.91 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 0.64 Impervious Total 0.64 Basin Total 2.55 Element Flows To: I Surface Znterflom Groundrrater �I MITIGATED LAND USE � Name : Basin 1 II Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 1.91 Pervious Total 1.91 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 0.64 Impervious Total 0.64 Basin Total 2.55 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 ' Total Pervious Area:1.91 Total Impervious Area:0.64 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC �1 Total Pervious Area:1.91 Total Impervious Area:0.64 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flor+(cfs) 2 year 0.447405 5 year 0.640498 10 year 0.784908 25 year 0.986961 50 yesr 1.152207 100 year 1.330506 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitiqated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.447405 5 year 0.640498 10 year 0. 784908 25 year 0.986961 50 year 1.152207 100 year 1.330506 wwFn�2oi2 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: UP_SOUTH Site Name: UP SOUTH Site Address: City . Report Date: 4/14/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flo� Threshold for POC 1: 50 year I PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 5.16 Pervious Total 5.16 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 1.72 impervious Total 1.72 Basin Total 6.88 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Laam, Mod 5.16 Pervious Total 5.16 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 1.72 Impervious Total 1.72 Basin Total 6.88 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:5.16 Total Impervious Area:1.72 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:5.16 Total Impervious Area:1.72 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC �1 Return Period Flovr(cfs) 2 year 1.204782 5 year 1.725619 10 year 2.11529 25 year 2.66067 50 year 3.106818 100 year 3.588311 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.204782 5 year 1. 725619 10 year 2.11529 25 year 2.66067 50 year 3. 106818 100 year 3.588311 wwxiK2oi2 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: UP POND Site Name: UP POND ' Site Address: City . ' Report Date: 12/26/2013 Gaqe : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 ' I,ow Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold £or POC 1: 50 year , PREDEVELOPED LAND USE , Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No ' GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 5.1 Pervious Total 5.1 �i Impervious Land Use Acres I ROADS MOD 1.7 II Impervious Total 1.7 � Basin Total 6.8 � Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 5.1 Pervious Total 5.2 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS MOD 1.7 Impervious Total 1.7 ' Basin Total 6.8 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:5.1 ' Total Impervious Area:1.7 I Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 , Total Pervious Area:5.1 � Total Impervious Area:1.7 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Pzedeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.190773 5 year 1.705552 10 year 2.090692 25 year 2.62973 50 year 3.07069 100 year 3.596583 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.190773 5 year 1.705552 10 year 2.090692 25 year 2.62973 50 year 3.07069 100 yesr 3.546583 'To -�oW S��tle�. __ _ ---- ----------- 0.9 c�s -�� P o�d 3,1S�-�s ��tS Si�. Canyon Terrace City of Renton Conveyance Design Peak Rate Calculations (using the Rational Method as outlined in 2009 King County Manual) 25-year Event Peak Rates Basin Ai Ar C l kR 5 V Tt Tc ae bn la A Q (C=0.90) (C=0.25� composite ft total �cfs) 1 #DIV/0! 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.00 ftDIV/0! 2 0.08 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.08 0.20 3 0.09 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.09 0.22 4 0.12 D.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.12 0.30 401 032 0.20 0.65 200 20.1 0.020 2.a 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.52 0.92 5 0.12 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.12 0.30 6 D.OS 0.10 0.47 200 20.1 0.020 2.6 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.15 0.19 7 0.08 0.08 0.58 200 20.1 0.020 2.6 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.16 0.25 8 0.05 0.06 0.55 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.11 0.16 801 0.12 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.12 0.30 9 0.13 0.04 0.75 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.17 0.35 10 0.04 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.04 0.10 1001 0.03 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.03 0.07 i 11 0.03 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 l.11 63 2.66 -0.65 2J3 0.03 0.07 I 1101 0.07 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2J3 0.07 0.17 12 0.03 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.03 0.07 1201 OA3 D.00 0.90 200 201 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.03 0.07 ' 13 0.04 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.04 0.10 1301 0.04 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.04 0.10 14 0.06 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.06 0.15 1401 0.15 0.26 0.49 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.41 0.55 15 0.05 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.05 0.12 16 0.15 0.14 0.59 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 OZ9 0.46 19 0.07 0.04 0.66 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.11 0.2� 20 0.05 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.05 0.12 21 0.06 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.06 0.15 23 0.08 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.08 0.20 24 0.18 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.18 0.44 25 0.19 0.16 0.60 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 035 0.58 2501 0.08 0.00 0.94 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.08 0.20 26 a.06 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.06 0.15 2601 O.U9 0.20 0.45 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.29 036 27 0.09 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 69 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.09 0.22 28 0.06 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.06 0.15 2801 0.03 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.03 0.07 29 0.10 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.10 0.25 2901 O.U9 0.16 0.48 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.25 033 30 0.13 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.13 032 3001 0.18 0.12 0.64 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.30 0.52 31 0.10 0.24 0.44 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.34 0.41 32 0.08 0.15 0.48 200 20.1 0.020 2.E 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 D.23 0.30 33 0.14 0.30 0.46 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.44 0.55 34 0.10 0.06 0.66 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.16 0.29 35 0.09 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.09 0.22 36 0.10 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.10 0.25 49 0.06 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.06 0.15 4901 0.10 O.U4 0.71 200 20.1 U.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.14 0.27 50 0.06 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.06 0.15 5001 0.07 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.07 0.17 Sl 0.07 O.DO 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 63 2.66 -0.65 2.73 0.07 0.17 5101 0.07 0.00 0.90 200 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.17 6.3 2.66 -U.65 2.73 0.07 0.17 100-year Event Peak Rates Basin l0.i Av C l kR 5 V Tt Tc aa brt la A Q �c=o.9o) �c=a.zs� �m�� fe cotai ��fs� 1 0.00 0.00 0.60 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.00 0.00 2 0.08 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.08 0.23 3 0.09 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.09 0.26 4 0.12 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.12 034 Mead Hunt Kceot;o�o!coi�..i� Project No.4270600-132332 9/19/2014 401 0.32 0.20 0.65 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.52 1.08 S 0.12 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.12 0.34 6 0.05 0.10 0.47 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.15 0.22 7 0.08 0.08 0.58 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.16 0.29 8 0.05 0.06 0.55 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.11 0.19 801 0.12 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.12 0.34 9 0.13 0.04 0.75 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.17 0.41 10 0.04 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.04 0.11 1001 0.03 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.03 0.09 11 0.03 0.00 0.90 ]80 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.03 0.09 1101 0.07 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.07 0.20 12 0.03 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.03 0.09 1201 0.03 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.03 0.09 13 0.04 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.04 0.11 1301 0.04 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.04 0.11 14 0.06 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.06 0.17 1401 0.15 0.26 0.49 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.41 0.64 15 0.05 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.05 0.14 16 0.15 0.14 0.59 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.29 0.54 19 0.07 0.04 0.66 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.11 0.23 20 0.05 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.05 0.14 21 0.06 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.06 0.17 23 0.08 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.08 0.23 24 0.18 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.18 0.52 25 0.19 0.16 0.60 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 035 0.67 2501 0.08 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.08 0.23 26 0.06 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.06 0.17 2601 0.09 0.20 0.45 I80 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.29 0.42 27 0.09 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.09 0.26 28 0.06 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.06 0.17 2801 0.03 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.03 0.09 29 0.10 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.10 0.29 2901 0.09 0.16 0.48 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.25 039 30 0.13 0.00 0.90 I80 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.13 037 3001 0.18 0.12 0.64 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 030 0.61 31 0.10 0.24 0.44 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 034 0.48 32 0.08 0.15 0.48 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.23 035 33 0.14 030 0.46 180 20.1 0.020 2.6 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.44 0.64 34 0.10 0.06 0.66 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.16 0.34 35 0.09 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.09 0.26 36 0.10 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.10 0.29 49 0.06 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.06 0.17 4901 0.10 0.04 0.71 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 69 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.14 032 50 0.06 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 63 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.06 0.17 5001 0.07 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.07 0.20 51 0.07 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.07 0.20 5101 0.07 0.00 0.90 180 20.1 0.020 2.8 1.06 6.3 2.61 -0.63 3.19 0.07 0.20 TABIE 3.2.I.B COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD"iR"EQUATION QR=CIM cfs Storm aR bR Tt= L/60V P2= 2.0 2 years 1.58 0.58 L=flowpath P10= 2.9 5 years 2.33 0.63 V=kR(S�"o.s P25= 3.4 10 years 2.44 0.64 le=PRaa�T��-bN P100= 3.9 25 years 2.66 0.65 l=flowpath 50 years 2.75 0.65 5=flowpath slope(ft/ft) 300years 2.61 0.63 Tc=Tt(min.6.3 minutes) TABLE 3.2.1.0 kR VALUES fOR Tt USIN6 THE RATIONAL METH00 Forest with heavy�round litter and meadow 2.6 Fallow or minimum tiilage cultivation 4.8 Short Qnss pasture and lawns 7.1 Nearly bare�round 10.2 Gnssed waterway 15.1 Paved area(sheet flow)and shallow gutter flow 20.1 Mead Hunt KCRotionalCalcAsx Project No.4270600-132332 9/19/2014 � �� p�,�� , �^\ �^ v h � G �'� � ~`� o d ti° a � � a G� � �,� �� Z � � � r �� SZ�Z �� ,`�� ,'` N � �-�.'�- �� C.� C�`' '� ,�p �t �, �� '� f �� ti �� ,� 0� � (� cd2� ��0 U�� t, �� ti�, o`� � ZZ ( � ��p�l � � �� `�.� �d`� `6 ��_� a� �`'� 3� C� �g�" C�� ti� �� _ ��S4 � � C��6 �3 = C�2 ,�,__ �,3 � C.(515�` � ' ��'(� 70�� ti�� Ct�Zti 01 c��"� � ��b j� �� - �a � -�G�'� �' �o'�S � ��2Z � -�. � ��2bo1 C C9� �� p 1� C(� 1go\ �TdC� � S�w �� f� �. �.�`.0 oy Storr.. �ewer Tabulation Page1 Station Len Drng Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Gmd/Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Total Inlet Syst 3fze Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in►hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ff/a) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (it) (ft) 1 End 37.367 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 16.4 0.0 6.28 26.45 3.55 18 5.41 386.00 388.02 390.00 390.11 0.00 401.91 C637.3 2 1 76.803 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 16.1 0.0 6.28 4.99 5.12 15 0.51 388.02 388.41 390.31 390.93 401.91 400.73 CB37.2 3 2 71.029 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 15.9 0.0 6.28 4.98 5.12 15 0.51 388.41 388.77 391.04 391.61 400.73 399.54 CB37.1 4 3 35.326 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 15.8 0.0 6.28 4.99 5.12 15 0.51 391.07 391.25 392.32 392.60 399.54 398.85 CB37 5 4 98.758 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 15.5 0.0 6.28 4.98 5.12 15 0.51 391.25 391.75 393.00 393.80 398.85 396.91 C838 6 5 87.870 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 15.3 0.0 6.28 6.51 8.00 12 2.85 392.00 394.50 394.18 396.51 396.91 401.45 C839 7 6 23.019 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 15.2 0.0 6.28 4.02 8.00 12 1.09 396.50 396.75 397.50 398.11 401.45 404.16 CB40 8 7 69.418 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 15.1 0.0 6.28 10.86 8.05 12 7.92 396.75 402.25 398.99 403.21 404.16 406.67 CB17 9 8 74.595 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 14.9 0.0 4.26 12.03 5.69 12 9.72 402.25 409.50 403.21 410.37 406.67 412.56 CB18 10 9 106. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 14.5 0.0 4.26 5.48 5.88 12 2.02 409.50 411.65 410.37 412.52 412.56 415.55 CB19 11 10 23.809 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 14.4 0.0 4.06 5.86 5.65 12 2.31 411.65 412.20 412.52 413.05 415.55 415.36 CB20 12 11 83.332 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 14.2 0.0 3.94 14.64 5.56 12 14.40 412.20 424.20 413.05 425.04 415.36 427.34 CB21 13 12 97.821 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.8 0.0 3.79 8.37 5.41 12 4.70 424.20 428.80 425.04 429.63 427.34 436.41 CB22 14 13 49.825 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.6 0.0 2.37 8.64 6.85 12 5.02 433.30 435.80 433.66 436.46 436.41 439.12 CB23 15 14 23.709 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.4 0.0 2.17 3.96 4.06 12 1.05 435.80 436.05 436.46 436.68 439.12 439.24 CB24 16 15 115.691 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.5 0.0 1.73 11.08 3.58 12 8.25 436.05 445.60 436.68 446.16 439.24 449.44 CB25 17 16 127.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 10.8 0.0 0.95 11.73 2.63 12 9.25 445.60 457.40 446.16 457.81 449.44 460.65 CB26 18 17 102.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 7.7 0.0 0.44 9.81 1.99 12 6.46 457.40 464.00 457.81 464.27 460.65 468.21 CB27 19 18 55.506 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.22 8.19 1.67 12 4.50 464.00 466.50 464.27 466.69 468.21 471.64 C828 20 19 23.751 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.07 3.96 1.73 12 1.05 468.15 468.40 468.24 468.51 471.64 471.76 CB2801 21 8 114.401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.3 0.0 2.02 8.80 3.33 12 5.20 402.25 408.20 403.21 408.81 406.67 413.18 CB31 22 13 92.259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.7 0.0 1.42 2.72 1.83 12 0.50 428.80 429.26 430.09 430.20 436.41 434.08 CB29 Storm Sewer 1 091614 Number of lines:33 Run Date: 9/19l2014 NOTES:Intensity=102.61/(Inlet time+16.50)"0.82; Retum period=Yrs.25 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box Slortn Sewero V1O.00 Stori�� 3ewer Tabulation Pa9a2 I Station Len Dmg Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd I Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ftls) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 23 16 23.862 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.20 3.06 124 12 0.63 445.60 445.75 446.16 445.93 449.44 448.99 CB2501 24 17 23.752 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.36 3.96 1.79 12 1.05 457.40 457.65 457.81 457.90 460.65 460.77 C82601 25 21 85.230 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.6 0.0 1.61 9.94 3.48 12 6.64 408.20 413.86 408.81 414.40 413.18 418.14 C83101 26 25 87.159 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.9 0.0 1.61 9.81 3.74 12 6.47 413.86 419.50 414.40 420.04 418.14 422.72 C832 27 26 88.086 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.0 0.0 1.31 7.91 3.26 12 4.20 419.50 423.20 420.04 423.68 422.72 424.64 C833 28 27 199.21 0.00 O.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.76 8.11 2.48 12 4.42 423.20 432.00 423.68 432.36 424.64 435.87 CB34 29 28 66.330 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.47 9.94 2.19 12 6.63 432.00 436.40 432.36 436.68 435.87 440.03 CB35 30 29 110. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.25 11.15 1.76 12 8.36 436.40 445.60 436.68 445.81 440.03 449.56 CB36 31 22 122.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.84 2.72 2.05 12 0.50 429.26 429.87 430.26 430.25 434.08 433.01 CB30 32 31 32.686 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.52 2.86 2.26 12 0.55 429.87 430.05 430.25 430.35 433.01 433.19 C83001 33 22 23.637 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.33 3.97 2.69 12 1.06 430.75 431.00 430.95 431.24 434.08 434.10 CB2901 Storm Sewer 1 091614 Number of lines:33 Run Date: 9/19/2014 NOTES:Intensity=102.61/(Inlet time+16.50)^0.82; Return period=Yrs.25 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box � scorm sewero W o.00 �i � Page 1 Stor�� ewer Tabulation Station Len Dmg Area Rnofi Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Gmd/Rim Elev Llne ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Totat Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (iNhr) (cta) (cfa) (ft/s) (in) (°ti) (R) (Tt) (ft) (ft) (ft) (it) 1 End 37.367 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.6 0.0 7.32 26.45 4.14 18 5.41 386.00 388.02 392.00 392.15 0.00 401.91 C837.3 2 1 76.803 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.4 0.0 7.32 4.99 5.97 15 0.51 388.02 388.41 392.42 393.26 401.91 400.73 C837.2 3 2 71.029 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.2 0.0 7.32 4.98 5.97 15 0.51 388.41 388.77 393.41 394.19 400.73 399.54 C637.1 4 3 35.326 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.1 0.0 7.32 4.99 5.97 15 0.51 391.07 391.25 394.64 395.03 399.54 398.85 C837 5 4 98.758 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.8 0.0 7.32 4.98 5.97 15 0.51 391.25 391.75 395.57 396.65 398.85 396.91 CB38 6 5 87.870 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.7 0.0 7.32 6.51 9.32 12 2.85 392.00 394.50 397.18 400.34 396.91 401.45 CB39 7 6 23.019 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.6 0.0 7.32 4.02 9.32 12 1.09 396.50 396.75 401.33 402.16 401.45 404.16 CB40 8 7 69.418 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.5 0.0 7.32 10.86 9.32 12 7.92 396.75 402.25 403.34 405.84 404.16 406.67 C817 9 8 74.595 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.3 0.0 4.96 12.03 6.45 12 9.72 402.25 409.50 407.19 410.41 406.67 412.56 C818 10 9 106.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.0 0.0 4.96 5.48 6.59 12 2.02 409.50 411.65 410.41 412.56 412.56 415.55 CB19 11 10 23.809 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 12.0 0.0 4.73 5.86 6.32 12 2.31 411.65 412.20 412.56 413.10 415.55 415.36 CB20 12 11 83.332 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.7 0.0 4.59 14.64 6.18 12 14.40 412.20 424.20 413.10 425.09 415.36 427.34 C821 13 12 97.821 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.4 0.0 4.42 8.37 6.01 12 4.70 424.20 428.80 425.09 429.68 427.34 436.41 CB22 14 13 49.825 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.2 0.0 2.76 8.64 7.20 12 5.02 433.30 435.80 433.69 436.51 436.41 439.12 C823 15 14 23.709 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.1 0.0 2.53 3.96 4.34 12 1.05 435.80 436.05 436.51 436.73 439.12 439.24 C824 16 15 115.691 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 10.3 0.0 2.01 11.08 3.79 12 8.25 436.05 445.60 436.73 446.20 439.24 449.44 CB25 17 16 127.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 8.8 0.0 1.11 11.73 2.77 12 9.25 445.60 457.40 446.20 457.84 449.44 460.65 C826 18 17 102.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.52 9.81 2.09 12 6.46 457.40 464.00 457.84 464.30 460.65 468.21 CB27 19 18 55.506 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.26 8.19 1.75 12 4.50 464.00 466.50 464.30 466.71 468.21 471.64 C828 20 19 23.751 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.09 3.96 1.86 12 1.05 468.15 468.40 468.25 468.52 471.64 471.76 C62801 21 8 114.401 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11.4 0.0 2.36 8.80 3.66 12 5.20 402.25 d08.20 407.19 408.86 406.67 413.18 CB31 22 13 92.259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.3 0.0 1.66 2.72 2.11 12 0.50 428.80 429.26 430.25 430.42 436.41 434.08 CB29 Storm Sewer 1 091614 Number of lines:33 Run Date: 9/19/2014 NOTES:Intensity�127.16/(Inlet time+17.80)"0.82; Retum period=Yrs.100 ; c■cir e=ellip b=box s�om,sew.r:�,o.00 Stori,. 3ewer Tabulation Page2 Station �en Dmg Area Rnoff Aroa x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd/Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr To�l Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (iNhr) (cfa) (cTs) (ft/s) (in) ('h) (R) (tt) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 23 16 23.862 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.23 3.06 1.28 12 0.63 445.60 445.75 446.20 445.95 449.44 448.99 C82501 24 17 23.752 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.42 3.96 1.87 12 1.05 457.40 457.65 457.84 457.92 460.65 460.77 CB2601 25 21 85.230 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 10.8 0.0 1.88 9.94 3.69 12 6.64 408.20 413.86 408.86 414.44 413.18 418.14 C63101 26 25 87.159 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 10.2 0.0 1.88 9.81 3.95 12 6.47 413.86 419.50 414.44 420.08 418.14 422.72 C832 27 26 88.086 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 9.5 0.0 1.53 7.91 3.44 12 4.20 419.50 423.20 420.08 423.72 422.72 424.64 CB33 26 27 199.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.89 8.11 2.61 12 4.42 423.20 432.00 423.72 432.39 424.64 435.87 CB34 29 28 66.330 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.55 9.94 2.29 12 6.63 432.00 436.40 432.39 436.71 435.87 440.03 C635 30 29 110.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.29 11.15 1.83 12 8.36 436.40 445.60 436.71 445.82 440.03 449.56 CB36 31 22 122.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.98 2.72 1.47 12 0.50 429.26 429.87 430.49 430.56 434.08 433.01 CB30 32 31 32.686 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.61 2.86 1.87 12 0.55 429.87 430.05 430.61 430.37 433.01 433.19 CB3001 33 22 23.637 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.39 3.97 2.82 12 1.06 430.75 431.00 430.96 431.26 434.08 434.10 CB2901 Storm Sewer 1 091614 Number of lines:33 Run Date: 9/19/2014 NOTES:Intensity=127.16/(Inlet time+17.g0)"0.82; Return period=Yrs.100 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box s�orm sewers vto 00 o� �� I � -- - �0 ---- -- , � � .�_--- � a ,�.__d'�--`_' a� I i ___A� G�� °� - � °'` c�� cb �,, .,.�. �;i ,�° �d� ;°�� `� � `d.�� b ' ; '� x;� ! � c6'�� x� � �� '�R�1`"L` , ,.�� D2 t!" ' w� ��12�� i" C��Z C7�ni 4' 4 0� Gd�� I � q,� .. ' � �G�iZ�\ Q� �� i .�' ';� -' ��►y�, �� a r � ,�� ^ /� G�� ,%� ;�� 0\ �if �l7 �l t.------._ `;% / I __ - A1 w �..� �� ---- �,', — � �t So ; ca� o CpH01 , � �� D I'f�M /N��- 5 � o �z�`� p a � � �� t a u i Stori�� ewer Tabulation Page1 Station Len Drng Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGl Elev Gmd I Rim Elev Line ID ' coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Tofal Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up L(ne (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/s) (in) (%) (R) (it) (ft) (ft) (it) (ft) 1 End 50.705 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 45.0 0.0 5.10 20.21 7.17 18 3.16 388.00 389.60 388.51 390.47 0.00 393.75 CB1 2 1 21.110 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 44.9 0.0 5.10 19.34 4.81 18 2.89 389.60 390.21 390.47 391.08 393.75 396.21 CB2 3 2 37.630 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 44.6 0.0 3.62 7.98 5.46 15 1.30 392.75 393.24 393.34 394.01 396.21 397.38 CB201 4 3 154.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 43.8 0.0 3.62 9.36 4.58 15 1.79 393.24 396.01 394.01 396.78 397.38 399.89 CB3 5 4 98.392 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 43.2 0.0 3.40 6.15 4.39 15 0.77 396.01 396.77 396.78 397.51 399.89 401.35 CB401 6 5 23.787 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 43.0 0.0 2.48 7.03 3.63 15 1.01 396.77 397.01 397.51 397.64 401.35 401.13 CB4 7 6 193.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 41.2 0.0 2.18 11.24 4.74 15 2.58 397.20 402.20 397.64 402.79 401.13 406.97 CB5 8 7 23.781 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 41.0 0.0 1.88 10.61 3.93 12 7.57 402.20 404.00 402.79 404.58 406.97 407.09 CB6 9 8 138.861 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 39.9 0.0 1.69 9.32 3.67 12 5.83 404.00 412.10 404.58 412.65 407.09 417.10 CB7 10 9 54.181 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 39.4 0.0 1.44 14.69 3.42 12 14.49 412.10 419.95 412.65 420.46 417.10 423.33 CB8 11 10 127.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 37.7 0.0 0.98 13.86 2.81 12 12.91 419.95 436.40 420.46 436.82 423.33 439.75 CB9 12 11 34.801 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 37.0 0.0 0.63 14.25 2.41 12 13.65 436.40 441.15 436.82 441.48 439.75 444.67 CB10 13 12 32.553 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 36.1 0.0 0.46 17.04 2.29 12 19.51 441.15 447.50 441.48 447.78 444.67 44923 CB11 14 13 80.675 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 33.4 0.0 0.39 12.52 2.30 12 10.54 447.50 456.00 447.78 456.26 449.23 459.74 CB46 15 14 66.041 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 31.1 0.0 0.39 13.84 2.43 12 12.87 456.00 464.50 456.26 464.76 459.74 467,86 CB12 16 15 98.581 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 26.0 0.0 0.25 11.16 1.86 12 8.37 464.50 472.75 464.76 472.96 467.86 476.02 CB13 17 16 99.264 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05 7.77 0.92 12 4.06 472.75 476.78 472.96 476.87 476.02 478.78 DITCH 18 2 37.325 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.6 0.0 1.28 7.47 2.77 12 3.75 390.35 391.75 391.08 392.23 396.21 396.35 CB14 19 10 23.792 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.30 3.95 1.51 12 1.05 419.95 420.20 420.46 420.43 423.33 423.21 CB801 20 12 23.813 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 D.07 3.95 0.92 12 1.05 441.15 441.40 441.48 441.51 444.67 444.55 CB1001 21 15 17.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.07 4.10 1.75 12 1.13 464.85 465.05 464.94 465.16 467.86 468.06 CB1201 22 16 17.740 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10 4.58 1.27 12 1.41 472.75 473.00 472.96 473.13 476.02 476.01 C61301 StO�m POnd Number of lines:25 Run Date: 9/22/2014 NOTES:Intensity=102.61/(Inlet time+16.50)^0.82; Retum period=Yrs.25 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box , st«m sewxs vto.00 I Stori�� ewer Tabulation Page2 Station Len Dmg Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd I Rim Elev Line ID coeN (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/s) (in) ('/.) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 23 18 85.585 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.58 10.43 2.14 12 7.30 391.75 398.00 392.23 398.32 396.35 402.48 CB15 24 23 57.258 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.46 9.30 2.35 12 5.82 398.00 401.33 398.32 401.61 402.48 404.40 C616 25 18 26.524 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.55 2.70 2.69 12 0.49 393.87 394.00 394.18 394.31 396.35 396.09 CB1401 Storm POnd Number of lines:25 Run Date: 9/22/2014 NOTES:Intensity=102.61/(Inlef time+16.50)^0.82; Retum period=Yrs.25 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box s�om,sewero vto.00 Storr�� ewer Tabulation Page1 Station Len Drng Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd/Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/s) (in) (°h) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (Tt) 1 End 50.705 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 28.2 0.0 5.98 20.21 7.53 18 3.16 388.00 389.60 388.56 390.54 0.00 393.75 C61 2 1 21.110 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 28.1 0.0 5.98 19.34 5.11 18 2.89 389.60 390.21 390.54 391.15 393.75 39621 CB2 3 2 37.630 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 28.0 0.0 4.26 7.98 5.75 15 1.30 392.75 393.24 393.40 394.08 396.21 397.38 CB201 4 3 154.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 27.2 0.0 4.26 9.36 4.89 15 1.79 393.24 396.01 394.08 396.85 397.38 399.89 CB3 5 4 98.392 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 26.7 0.0 4.00 6.15 4.68 15 0.77 396.01 396.77 396.85 397.58 399.89 401.35 CB401 6 5 23.787 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 26.5 0.0 2.92 7.03 3.85 15 1.01 396.77 397.01 397.58 397.70 401.35 401.13 CB4 7 6 193.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 25.0 0.0 2.58 11.24 4.87 15 2.58 397.20 402.20 397.70 402.84 401.13 406.97 CB5 8 7 23.781 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 24.9 0.0 2.24 10.61 4.21 12 7.57 402.20 404.00 402.84 404.64 406.97 407.09 CB6 9 8 138.861 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 24.0 0.0 2.02 9.32 3.93 12 5.83 404.00 412.10 404.64 412.71 407.09 417.10 CB7 10 9 54.181 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 23.6 0.0 1.73 14.69 3.65 12 14.49 412.10 419.95 412.71 420.51 417.10 423.33 C88 11 10 127.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 22.2 0.0 1.20 13.86 3.02 12 12.91 419.95 436.40 420.51 436.86 423.33 439.75 CB9 12 11 34.801 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 21.6 0.0 0.79 14.25 2.60 12 13.65 436.40 441.15 436.86 441.52 439.75 444.67 CB10 13 12 32.553 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 20.9 0.0 0.59 17.04 2.48 12 19.51 441.15 447.50 441.52 447.82 444.67 449.23 C811 14 13 80.675 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 18.8 0.0 0.50 12.52 2.46 12 10.54 447.50 456.00 447.82 456.29 449.23 459.74 CB46 15 14 66.041 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 17.0 0.0 0.50 13.84 2.61 12 12.87 456.00 464.50 456.29 464.79 459.74 467.86 CB12 16 15 98.581 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.32 11.16 1.99 12 8.37 464.50 472.75 464.79 472.98 467.86 476.02 C813 17 16 99.264 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10 7.77 1.20 12 4.06 472.75 476.78 472.98 476.91 476.02 478.78 DITCH 18 2 37.325 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.0 0.0 1.49 7.47 2.92 12 3.75 390.35 391.75 391.15 392.27 396.21 396.35 C814 19 10 23.792 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.34 3.95 1.55 12 1.05 419.95 420.20 420.51 420.44 423.33 423.21 CB801 20 12 23.813 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.09 3.95 0.99 12 1.05 441.15 441.40 441.52 441.52 444.67 444.55 CB1001 I� 21 15 17.750 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.09 4.10 1.88 12 1.13 464.85 465.05 464.95 465.17 467.86 468.06 C81201 22 16 17.740 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11 4.58 1.26 12 1.41 472.75 473.00 472.98 473.14 476.02 476.01 CB1301 Storm Pond Number of lines:25 Run Date: 9/22/2014 NOTES:Intensity=127.16/(Iniet time+17.80)"0.82; Return period=Yrs.100 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box Stortn Sewxs v10.00 � Pa9e 2 I Stor�r� �ewer Tabulation Station Len Dmg Area RnoH Aroa x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd I Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr Total Inlet 3yst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (iNhr) (cfs) (cfs) (it/s) (in) (°ti) (it) (ft) (it) (ft) (it) (ft) 23 18 85.585 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.68 10.43 2.25 12 7.30 391.75 398.00 392.27 398.34 396.35 402.48 CB15 24 23 57.258 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.54 9.30 2.46 12 5.82 398.00 401.33 398.34 401.63 402.48 404.40 CB16 25 18 26.524 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.64 2.70 2.81 12 0.49 393.87 394.00 394.20 394.33 396.35 396.09 C81401 StOml Pond Number of lines:25 Run Date: 9l22/2014 '� NOTES:Intensity=127.16/pnlet time+17.80)"0.82; Retum period=Yrs.100 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box I s�o�sewer��io 00 �1r�.ian u�S ivoliyd�CS ►d ��J11�(v7 01.. �Q �� 5��1 4�, Z�`t�� _------_—z3�M� F``` -- —_.�—�— \ — s . JdMS ,,L� � � a �� , ti ,� .� � , � 1,� '��u � t , , � ,� 1 � 4` 1 U,1'14� ZOS.ti�9� .s� ��►0�� ``, e � �� 5 � �� o�� Stor�� ewer Tabulation Page1 Station Len Dmg Area RnoH Area x C Tc Raln Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Gmd/Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Incr Total Incr To�l Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) �a�) (a�) (�) (min) (min) (iNhr) (��) (��) (�s) 1i�) �'�) �n) (ft) (n) 1n) In) 1ft) 1 End 68.918 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5.7 0.0 2.72 13.55 4.02 12 12.33 381.00 389.50 382.00 390.21 0.00 390.50 SWPE 2 2 1 10.276 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5.7 0.0 2.72 13.56 4.59 12 12.36 389.50 390.77 390.21 391.48 390.50 393.50 SWPE 1 3 2 124.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5.1 0.0 2.72 13.55 4.59 12 12.34 390.77 406.15 391.48 406.86 393.50 411.13 CB42 4 3 107.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4.6 0.0 2.72 11.55 4.59 12 8.97 406.15 415.75 406.86 416.46 411.13 420.71 CB43 5 4 153.681 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.8 0.0 2.72 13.55 4.59 12 12.33 415.75 434.70 416.46 435.41 420.71 439.73 CB44 6 5 56.718 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.5 0.0 2.72 13.84 4.59 12 12.87 434.70 442.00 435.41 442.71 439.73 446.33 C845 7 6 72.055 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.2 0.0 2.72 14.83 4.02 12 14.78 441.65 452.30 442.95 453.01 446.33 455.33 CB4500 8 7 22.893 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.1 0.0 2J2 5.10 4.59 12 1 J5 452.30 452.70 453.01 453.41 455.33 457.05 CB4501 I� 9 8 23.537 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10 5.03 0.93 12 170 45270 453.10 453.41 45323 457.05 456.84 CB4502 I 10 8 22.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.62 14.78 4.46 12 14.67 452.70 456.00 453.41 456.69 457.05 459.74 CB46 CT BypBSS 2 Number of iines:10 Run Date: 9/22l2014 NOTES:Intensity=102.61/(Inlet time+16.50)"0.82; Return period=Yrs.25 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box ' s�om,sewers��o.00 Stori�� ewer Tabulation Pa�, Station Len Dmg Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd I Rim Elev Line ID cceff (I) flow full Line To Incr Totai Incr Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (it) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (iNhr) (cfs) (cis) (ft/s) (in) (•/.) (ft) (Tt) (ft) (ft) (ic) (it) 1 End 68.918 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.5 0.0 5.03 13.55 6.53 12 12.33 381.00 389.50 383.00 390.42 0.00 390.50 SWPE 2 2 1 10.276 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.5 0.0 5.03 13.56 6.66 12 12.36 389.50 390.77 390.42 391.69 390.50 393.50 SWPE 1 3 2 124.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3.1 0.0 5.03 13.55 6.66 12 12.34 390.77 406.15 391.69 407.07 393.50 411.13 CB42 4 3 107.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.8 0.0 5.03 11.55 6.66 12 8.97 406.15 415.75 407.07 416.67 411.13 420.71 CB43 5 4 153.681 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.4 0.0 5.03 13.55 6.66 12 12.33 415.75 434.70 416.67 435.62 420.71 439.73 C844 6 5 56.718 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.3 0.0 5.03 13.84 6.66 12 12.87 434.70 442.00 435.62 442.92 439.73 446.33 CB45 7 6 72.055 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.1 0.0 5.03 14.83 6.53 12 14.78 441.65 452.30 443.43 453.22 446.33 455.33 CB4500 8 7 22.893 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 2.1 0.0 5.03 5.10 6.66 12 1.75 452.30 452.70 453.22 453.62 455.33 457.05 C64501 9 8 23.537 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.15 5.03 1.04 12 170 452J0 453.10 453.62 453.26 457.05 456.84 C64502 ', 10 8 22.500 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.88 14J8 6.48 12 14.67 452.70 456.00 453.62 456.91 457.05 459.74 CB46 � CT Bypass 2 Number of lines:10 Run Date: 9/22/2014 NOTES:Intensity=127.16/(Inlet time+17.80)"0.82; Retum period=Yro.100 ; c=cir e=ellip b=box �i st«m sswsre vlo.00 Appendix F - Gary Flowers Geotechnical Report i Gary A. Flowers, PLLC Geological & Geotechnical Consulting 19532 12�'Avenue NE Shoreline,WA 98155-1106 February 14,2005 Project No. GFO5001 Ravenna Deveiopment,LLC John Minden/Charlie Spaeth c/o JM Architects 12115 100�'Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Subject: Geological and Geotechnical Engineering Study Plat of Fleuve des Voiles SE 192nd Street @ 124�'Avenue SE King County,�Washington This report presents the results of our gaological and geotechnical assessment for the�roposed = 39 lot plat to be located north and west of the intersection of SE 192°a Street and 124 Avenue `'' SE in King County, Washington. The plat will be comprised of three separate tax parcels. At � this time only the center parcel has any previous development. The purpose of our site evaluation was to document existing shallow soil and ground water conditions on the property, including existing slope sta.bility, and to provide data for the desi�n and construction of the planned improvements. Preliminary site plans by Taylor Engineering Consultants, dated September 15, 2004 were used as a reference for this study. PROJECT&SITE CONDITIONS According to the preliminary site drawings provided to us, the subject parcel encompasses about 7.7 acres, and is irregulaz in shape. It is bounded on the north and east by undeveloped pmperty, on the w�est by single family residences, and on the south by single family residences or SE 192nd Street. A total of 39 building lots are planned for the plat along with improving 124th Avenue as an entrance road, new internal streets and utilities and storm water treatment and infiltration facilities. See Figure l; Site&Exploration Plan. :; 1 The subject site is comprised of several distinct areas. The lower portion of the site is relatively � �; flat, heavily vegetated with bramble bushes and small decidnous trees along with a few larger ;� evergreen trees, and is undeveloped. The entrance road, storm water management facilities, �j recreational facilities and a native growth protection area will be located within this area. �� ! �3 Gary A.Flowers,PLLC ; :S�3� 12�'Avenue NE Shoreline,Wazhington 98155-110b 206-417-7640 �� I 1 . _ j ' . i . , PlatofFleuve des Yoiles GeologicaUGeotechnical.4ssessment Kent,King County, Washingron The central portion of the property slopes upwazd to the west at an overall slope gradient on the order of 23 percent. Relief is about 84 feet over a horizontal distance of 355 feet. Several steeper and flatter areas are located cm the central portion of the site. These areas all appear to be the result of past cutting and filling operations on the site for pas# and current roads/driveways, and development of a single family residence (Thompson residence) and large garage/shop. The areas that have been oversteepened by past cutti.ng and filling are on the order of 10 feet or less in height except immediately below the existing homeowner's large garage/shop where the slope is on the order of 14 feet in height. All of the oversteepened azeas appear to be currently stable with no obvious visual evidence of slope movement. The area is heavily vegetated with evergreen and deciduous trees, some bramble bushes and other native understory. The upper {westernmost) edge of the property is located at the top of the east facing slope. This area is previously undeveloped except for a couple of small sheds. This area is nearly flat and is heavily vegetated with bramble bushes and both evergreen and deciduous trees. No evidence of standi.ng, flowing or emergent water was observed on the sloping area of the site. No viseaal indications of slope instability,either current or past,were observed. Subsurface Soil and Ground Water Canditions � r In order to characterize the shailow subsurface soil aud ground water conditians on the property a total of 14 exploration pits were excavated on the pazcel on January 26, 2005. The explorations were placed at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. Four pits were excavated on the lower portion af the property to evaluate the soils for potential � I, infiltration of storm water and/or potential ground water impacts to treatment ponds. Another 'I twelve pits were excavated around the site to evaluate the soils for slope stability, foundations, � utility placement and pavement support. ' All of the pits encountered a layer of forest duff and organic topsoil that was generally on the order of 12 to 14 inches thick. This layer was only 4 to 7 inches thick in EP-4 and EP-7, both areas that were disturbed by past grading operations. The topsoil tayer was 21 to 32 inches thick in EP-3 (fill?),EP-12 and EP-16. Fill soils were encountered in EP-7, alongside ttie existing gravel driveway, overlying a relic topsoil layer. �'he f�ll soils were about 18 inches thick and consisted of loose, brown, moist, silty sand with some gravel. The upper 32 inches of soil in EP-3 may also be fill, although the material is almost entirely organic topsoil. FiII soils were not observed in any of the other explorations. However, we anticipate that additional fill soils will be encountered along the ; slope below the existing driveway, residence, shop and drain field areas near the center of the �i site. These soils will be removed or regraded during site grading operations. ; Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 19532 12w Avenue NE Shoreline,Washington 98155-1106 206�17-764d 2 i Plat ojFleuve des Voiles Geologico!/Geotechnical Assessment Kent,King Couniy, Washington Underlying the organic topsoil layer in exploration pits EP-1,2,3, 4, 8, 13, 14, 15,and 16 a loose to medium dense, brown to reddish brown to grayish-brown, sand, gravelly sand or sandy gravel with trace to some silt was encountered. This material'is interpreted to be recessional outwash sediments that were deposited by meltwater streams emanating from the retreating glacial ice sheet during the Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation. All of the exploration pits where this sediment was encountered, except for EP-8 and EP-I3, aze located near the valley bottom. Exploration pits EP-8 and EP-13 are located slightly higher up the side of the slope and may be ice contact sediments that were deposited along the marg-in of the ice sheet as it was retreating. The recessional outwash sediments extended the full depth of the explorations pits in EP-1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 15 and 16, to a m�imum depth of 13 feet beneath existing ground surface. In EP-8 and EP-13, the recessional outwash or possible ice contact sediments, were underlain by dense to very dense, brownish-gray to grayish=bmwn, sandy gravel to gravelly sand. This material is interpreted to be advance outwash sediments that were deposited by meltwater streams in front of � an advancing ice sheet d"n'ng the Vashon stade of the Fraser giaciation. As such, these sediments have been consolidated by the overriding weight of several thousands of feet of glacial ice. In exploration pits EP-6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12, beneath the forest duff and organic topsoil, or , beneath the fill soils in EP-7, medium stiff, moist, brown, sandy silt with some gravel over very � dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty sand with gravel was encountered. This sedi.ment is I interpreted to be Vashon age lodgement till. Lodgement till is a nonhomogenous mixture of sand � ,; and gravel in a silt/clay ma�-ix that was deposited at the base of an advancing ice sheet and i subsequently overrun and consolidated by thousands of feet of gtacial ice. T'he upper couple feet of this unit have been weathered to a less dense, finer grained condition. The lodgement till extended to the bottom of all the exploration pits where it was encountered. � According to the Geologic Map of King County, Washington, by Booth, Haugerud and Sacket, 2002, the subject site is mapped as Vashon age till on the hillsides and Vashon age recessional outwash sediments near the valley bottom_ Our interpretation is in general agreement with the published map for the area. Hydrology No indication of standing or flowing water was present on the property at the time of our field work. There was no evidence of erosion anywhere on the parcel. Water infiltrates relatively easily into the upper soil straturri. As a result, it is anticipated that most storm water currently infiltrates into the subsurface sediments and then moves as interflow atop the unweathered Iodgement till until it encounters the sands and gravels of the recessional and advance outwash deposits where it is able to further infiltrate. Interflow generally follows surficial topography and for this project �vould flo��towards the east. Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. ]9�32 ]2`'Avenue NE Shoreline,Washington 98155-1106 206-417-764U ; Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Geological/Geotechnica!�4ssessment Kent,King Cour�ty, Washington Ground water was encountered in exploration pits EP-1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 13, 14 and 15 during our field work. In EP-1, 2, 3, 14, and 15 the ground water is anticipated to be actual regional ground water table for the area. This water table was encountered from about 3 to 9 feet below existing ground surface, depending upon the location of the pit, withi.n the recessional sediments. In EP- 4, S, 9 and 13 rapid ground water seepage was encountered at a depth of abont 4 to 4'/� feet withi.n the recessional or advance outwash sediments. With the exception of EP-4, these pits were all located on the slope area Seismic Hazards Generaliy, there aze four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these to impact the site is discussed below. No surficial faulting or earth rupture has been documented to date in this area of King County. The nearest known fault zones are a branch of the Seattle fault that is located more than 10 miles to the north and a branch of the Tacoma fault that is located more than 10 miles to the south. New studies are underway in the region in order to better understand and Iocate new faults: These siudies may someday indicate the presence of a fault closer to the site than we currently know. Slopes on the project site, with the exceptions of several small areas of oversteepened slopes due to past cutting and filling, are generally quite moderate, on the order of 23 percent grade. Given the underlying geologic conditions, either very dense lodgement till or very granuiar sands and gravels, it is our opinion that the potential risk of damage to the site, by seismically induced landsliding, is low. The existing oversteepened areas that generally appear to be caused by past grading operations will be removed or significantly reduced by project grading. Future steep cuts will be supported by retaining structures. Liquefaction is the resnit of the loss of shear strength in soils when they are subjected to saturated conditions and seismic shaking. Typical soils that are susceptible are those that aze saturated, poorly graded (all one size), relatively fine-grained and in a loose condition. During a seismic event, severe shaking may cause liquefaction to occur and differential settlement may result. Based on the density and granular nature of the encountered sediments in the proposed building areas, it is our opinion that the risk of liquefaction is negligible and no mitigation is recommended. Based on the encountered stratigraphy, it is our opinion that any earthquake damage to the � proposed structures, when founded on suitable foundation bearing strata in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report, would be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated with the event and not any of the above-discussed impacts. Design of the project Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 19532 12�'Avenue NE Shoretine,Washington 98155-1106 206-417-7640 4 Plat of Fleuve des Yoiles GeologicallGeotechnical Assessment Kent,King County, Washington should be consistent with 2003 International Building Code (IBC) guidelines. In accordance with the 2003 IBC,the following values should be used: Site Class C(Table 1615.1.1) SS= 135% (Figure 1615.1.2j1]) S1=44% (Figure 1615.1.2[2]) Infiltration Potential In order to detercnine an approxi.mate infiltration rate for the receptor soils, we utilized both the USDA Textural Triangle and gradation testing. Use of both methods allows correlation and a higher degree of confidence in the findings. Both of these methods are approved by Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) in their 2001 Manual. The design engineer should decide which method is mosf applicable for this project The design engineer must also consider the depth to water table in the design. The depth to water table at the time of our field study was on the order of 9 feet below existing grade in the area of the proposed infiltration facilities. Our � study was performed during the middle of winter and we do not anticipate that the water table will rise significantly over the remainder of the year. . Based on laboratory anaiyses, and the USDA Textural Triangle, the receptor soils are classified � ' as loamy sand with an estimated short-term infiltration rate, as per Table 3.7, of 2 inches/hour. The receptor soils were relatively homogenous in our exploration pits and borings except for a thin layer of denser, silty sand that was encountered in each exploration at a depth of 3 approximately 7 feet. As per Table 3.7, a minimum conection factor of 2 must be used, thus ' E providing an estimated long-term infiltration rate of 1.0 inches/hour. For actual design purposes, the design engineer should apgly a further correction factor, if appropriate. Based on the ASTM gi�adation testing method, the D10 size for the sand samples tested ranged from .075 to 0.18mm with the higher values for soils on the southern portion of the site (south end of Tract 998 and Tract 995. As per Table 3.8,the estimated long-term infiItration rate for the receptor soils would range from 1.4 to 3.2 inches/hour. Again, an appropriaie correction factor should be inaplemented by the design engineer. Copies of the sieve analyses are attached. Should a higher infiltra�ion rate be necessary for design purposes, or if County code requires it, field infiltration testing would be necessary to determine the actual infil�ation capacity of the � receptor soils. Water table was encountered about 4 feet below the planned bottom of infiltration pond elevation (379.0). Therefore, the potential impact of ground water mounding should also be modeled. ,; +l . t; Gary A. �'lowers,PLLC. ' m �� 19532 12 Avenue NE Shorelinq Washington 98155-1106 206-417-7640 ;,3 5 Plat ofFleuve des Voeles GeologicaUGeotechnical Assessment Kent,King County, Washington Within each of the exploration pits that was excavated in a planned infiltration pond area, i.e. EP- ' 3, EP-14 and EP-15, a single layer, or interbed, of siltier, higher density sediment was encountered above water table. This layer was encountered at a depth of 8 to 9 feet in EP-3, 66 to 77 inches in EP-14 and 78 to 84 inches in EP-15. This layer, if continuous throughout the infiltration facility, wi11 have an adverse impact on the infiltration rate. As such, either the pond bott�m must be below this layer or the layer must be thoroughly penetrated during construction of the facility. We recommend that the location and elevation of each of these three exploration pits be surveyed in order to provide a more exact elevation of the relatively impermeable layer and the water ta.ble. It is also important to �understand that the design infiltration rate may be compromised if the contractor is not careful to avoid compaction or siltation of the receptor soils. Should either of these conditions occur,the receptor soils must be overexcavated and loosened andlor the upper 2 to 3 feet overexcavated and replaced to remove unwanted silt that has washed i.nto the pond area The pond must not be used as a silt containment pond during canstruction. The infiltration rate can also be compromised if adequate pretreatment of the influent is not provided or if the facility is not properly maintained to remove any siltation or biomass buildup. CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS Our expioration indicates that, from a geotechnical s�andpoint,the subject site is suita.ble for the proposed development provided the recommendations contained herein are properly foll�wed. The slopes are relatively gentle and are generally undertain by dense, glacially con.solidated sediments or coarse grained recessional or ice contact sedunents that are considered sta.ble at the slope inclinations encountered on the site. The encountered soils in the lower portions of the site are generally suitable for infiltration of storn� water; however, due to the presence of some fine grained component in the receptor soils, and a relatively high water table,the usable infiltration rate v��ill be quite low. Additional, in-siiu testing may be necessary in order to ascertain the actual infiltration rate potential for the soils. Site Grading The site should be cleazed of all existing struchues, foundation elements and utilities. Vegetation, topsoil, forest duff and trees, that aze not required as part of the landscape plan, should also be cleared and removed from the site. Permanent cut slopes on the project should not exceed a gradient of 2H:1 V (horizontal to vertical). Slopes for the cells of the wet pond and for the infiltration pond should be excavated at gradients no steeper than 3H:1 V. Temporary cuts may be steeper depending upon the encountered soils, generally 1 H:1 V for the recessional outwash sediments and weathered Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 19532 I2'�AvenueNE Shoreline,Washington 98155-1106 206-4�7-7F4Q 6 � Plat of Fleuve des Yoiles Geologica!/Geotechnical.4ssessment Kent, King County, Yi'ashrngton lodgement till and .75H to .SH:1 V for the glacially consolidated advance outwash sediments and unweathered Iodgement till. In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibiliry of the contractor since they aze on-site at all times, and should be determined during construction. The above slope angles are for areas where ground'water seepage is not encountered, and assumes that surface water is not allowed to flow across the temporazy slope faces. If ground or surface water is present when the slopes aze excavated, flatter slope angles may be required. As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. Fully detailed grading plans were not available at the time this study was completed. As such, we are unsure whether any structural fill wiil be placed on the site. If structural fill is placed it must be compacted to a dense, nonyielding condition. Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the engineering geologist, placed in maxunum 8-inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to at Ieast 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. The top of aIl compacted fill should extend horizontally ouiward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the location of perimeter footings or pavement edges before sloping down at a maximum angle of 2H:1 V. Structural fill placed in foundation excavations must eactend a m�nimum distance of 2 feet beyond the edges of the footings. The recessional and advance outwash soils should generally be suitable for re-use as structural fill on the project. The till soils are much finer grained and moisture sensitive and will be more difficult to place except under ideal moisture conditions. 'r All a.reas to be paved should be cro��ned or sloped to direct stornl water flo«�t� ihe edges of the F roadway and pazking areas. The subgrade should then be compacted to a dense and nonyielding condition (minimum 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density) with a minimum 20 ton vibratory roller. Prior to application of the pavement section the areas to be paved should be proofrolled with a fully toaded, tandem axle dump truck. Any soft or yielding axeas identified during proofrolling should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill. Both the compaction of the subgrade and the proofroll should be witnessed and documented by a representati��e of this 1irm. Foundation Recommendations Shallow foundations may be used for support of the planned structures when placed on undisturbed or recompacted natural soils or approved structural f 11 placed atop these materials. An allowable soil bearing value of 2,000 psf may be used in the design of these footings, including bottz dead and live ioads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings for a11 proposed structures should be buried a min.imum of l8 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection. Settlement of footings for residences � placed as detailed herein should be negligible. However, foundations placed on disturbed soil may result in increased settlement. All foundation excavations should be inspected by a Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. t 9�?2 12�'Avenoe 1JE Shoreline,vb'uhington 98155-1106 206�17-7640 7 Pla1 of Fleuve des Voiles GeologicaUGeotechnical Assessment Kent,King County, Washington representative of thzs fum, prior to concrete placement,to�verify that the design bearing capacity of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. The governing municipality may requue snch inspections. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the supporting soils, andlor by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557 to achieve the passive resistance provided below. The structural fill must extend horizontally outward from the embedded portion of the foundation a distance equal to at least three times the embedment depth over which the passive resistance is appiied. We recommend the following design parameters. • Passive equivalent fluid=300 pcf • Coefficient of friction=0.30 The above values are allowable and include a factor of safety of at least 2.0. Floor Support Recommendations For concrete slab-on-grade floors, we recommend that the upper twelve (12) inches of natural soil beneath the slab be recompacted to a firm, unyielding condition with a density of at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor ma�timum density using ASTM:D 1557. as the standard. Any yielding areas should be overexcavated and filled with approved structural fill. For areas where moisture intrusion through the floor slab is undesirable, a minimum of 6 inches of pea gravel or very coarse, washed sand should be placed as a capillary break layer. If sand is used it must be compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor maxi.mum density. A heavy duty (minimum 10 mil) polyethylene plastic vapor barrier shouid be provided under the floor slab to prevent moisture vapor transmission through the slab. If the vapor barrier becomes compromised in any way during construction it should be replaced or an additional layer added. Retaining tiYalls Due to tl�e sloping nature of the site we anticipate that multiple retaining walls will be required for development of this site. However, the location, type and height of the walls have not been � ascertained at this time. Following aze general design recommendations for any reinforced concrete walls that are planned. Retaining walls taller than 3 feet must be lined v�rith a min;mum of 12 inches of washed rock to within 1 foot of finish grade. The washed rock must tie into the footing dra.in for the wall footing. Retaining walls up to 8 feet high, that are free to rotate, may be designed for an active pressure of 35 pcf with level backfill or 50 pcf with sloping backfill. Additional surcharges such as traffic, other structures, or heavy equipment must be added to these design values. If any retaining walls taller than 8 feet are planned, we should be contacted to evaluate the walls and provide design recommendations. Gary A.Flowers,PLL,C. 19532 12�'Avenue NE Shoreline,Washington 98]55-1106 206-417-7640 8 � Plai of Fleuve des ['oiles GeologicaUGeotechnical Assessment Kent, King County, Washington Rockeries At this time we are unsure if rockeries will be used during plat development. However, the following information is provided in the event that rockeries aze pIanned. Rockeries should generally only be used to face, stable, free standing, natural soils. Rockeries that face fill slopes greater than 3 feet in height should not be used in place of retaining walls unless the backfill soil is suitably reinforced, especially where structures and roadways are adjacent to them. In all cases,structures and adjacent rockeries should be set back from rockeries so that a 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) line extending up from the rear base of the rockery does not contain a lnad from roadways,foundations, or other rockeries. It should also be noted that, although rockeries aze commonly used, they should be considered a long-term maintenance item. The following notes shouid be used in the construction of the rockeries. A) The base of the rockery should be started by excavating a trench to a minimum depth of 12 inches below subgrade into firm, undisturbed native ground. If loose, soft, or disturbed materials e�st at the base rock Iocation, they should be removed and replaced with free-draining sand and graveI or crushed rock. B) The base excavation should extend out level from the front face of the rockery on native soil at least 2 feet before sloping down at a maxirnum 2H:1 V slope. C) The base rock should have a minimum��dth(perpendicular to the line of the rocker5r) of 40 percent of the height of the rockery. All rocks should also meet the following weight requirements: Hei�ht of Rockery Minimum Wei�ht of Rock Above 5 feet 500/2200 pounds, graded,top/bottom rocks 5 feet or iess �00/1000 pounds, graded, top,�bottom rocks D) The rock material should all be as nearl}� rectangular as possible. No stone should be used which does not extend through the wall. The rock material should be hard, sound, durable, and free from weathered portions, seams, cracks or other defects. The rock density should be a minimum of 160 pounds per cubic foot. E) Rock selection and placement should be such that there will be minimum voids and, in the exposed face of the wall, no open voids over 8 inches across in any direction. The rocks should be placed in a manner such that the Iongitudinal axis of the rock v�711 be at right angles or perpendicular to the rockery face. Each rock should be placed so as to lock into h�o roeks in the lower tier. After setting each rock course, � Gary A. Flowers,PLLC. ; -�32 12`�Avenue NE Shoroline,Washington 98155-1106 206-417-7640 9 Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Geologica!/Geotechnical Assessment Kent,King County, Washington aIl voids between the rocks should be chi.nked on the back with quarry rock to eli.minate any void suf�icient to pass a 2-inch-square probe. F) A drain consisting of rigid, perforated PVC pipe enclosed in a 12-inch-wide pea gravel trench should be placed behind the lower course of rock to remove water and prevent the b�aildnp of hydrostatic pressure behind the rockery. The remainder of the rockery backfill should consist of quarry spalls witt� a ma�cimum size of 4 inches arzd a minimum size of 2 inches. This material should be placed to a 12-inch-minimum thickness between the entire wall and the cut material. The backfill material should be.placed in lifts to an elevation approximately 6 inches below the top of each course of rocks as they are placed, until the uppermost course is placed. Any backfill material falli.ng onto the bearing surface of a rock course should be removed before the setting of the ne�ct course. ` G) Any asphalt paving should be sloped to drain away from the rockery. In addition, the areas above rockeries should be planted with grass as soon as possible after rockery construction,to reduce erosion. � Where fill soils are required, and they are to be faced with rockeries greater than 3 feet i.n height, they should include the use of geogrid reinforcement. The reinforcement shouid extend from the back of the rock into the fill at least a distauce equal to the height of the rockery. The horizontal spacing of the geogrid layers shall be a m�imum of 2 feet and each Iayer sha11 be wrapped around the face of the succeeding layer a minimum distance of 4 feet. The soil behind the rockery shall be compacted to a fum and unyielding condition at or near the optimum moisture content of the soil. Pavement Subgrade Recommendations All areas to be paved should be crowned to direct storm water flow to the edges of the roadway and parking areas. The subgrade should then be compacted to a dense and nonyielding condition (minunum 45 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density) with a minimum 20 ton vibratory roller. Prior to placement of the pavement section the subgrade should be proofrolled with a fully�loaded, tandem �le dump truck. Any soft or yielding areas identified during proofrolling should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill. Both the compaction of the subgrade and the proofroll should be witnessed and documented by a representative of this firm. In the case of utility trench hackfill, the structural fill should be placed and compacted in accordance with cunent local or county codes and standards. The top of all compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the pavement edges before sloping down at a maximum angle of 2H:1 V. Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 19532 12`�Avenue NE Shoreline,Washingcan 98155-1106 206�17-7640 10 Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Geological/Geotechnical Assessment Kent,King County, Washington I � Site Drainage All perimeter footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing Ievel. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The Ievel of the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches below the bottom of the footing at all locations, and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity dischazge away from the building. Roof and surface riuiofF should not discharge into the footing drain system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain that discharges into an approved storm water conveyance system. In plarming, exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage. Care should be taken to avoid any grading or construction of any berms or other structures that may cause stomn water to flow under the pavement section. Water introduced under the pavement seciion could result in an unstable subgrade and filture pavement failures. During construction there may be areas of subsurface water that are encountered as was done in exploration pits EP-4, EP-8,EP-9 and EP-13. Should this occur, it may be necessary to construct interceptor drains to control the water. One such location may be along the west property line of Lot 27. Due to the wetland located upslope of this lot, subsurface water at a shallow depth is likely and may be the source of water encountered in the exploration pits downslope of that location. The overalI need for interceptor drains should be determined during plat developmen� Infiltration of storm water appears to be a feasible option for this site. Infiltration rates based on the 2001 Washington State Department of Ecology Storm VJater Control Manual are provided � above in the In�ltration Potential section. As per the rnanual, these rates generally are considered relatively conservative. If higher rates are needed for the project design in-situ � infiltration testing should be performed to confirm an actual design infiltration rate. Care must be taken during construction to avoid compaction of the soils in the infiltrati�n pond area or to alIow sediment laden water into the infiltration pond. Should either of these conditions occur, the design infiltration rate of the pond soils may be reduced unless corrective acrion, as discussed above, is provided. Erosion Control The sediments encountered on the upper portion of the subject site generally contain significant fines and are subject to erosion under both sheet flow and channelized flow regimes. The sediments encountered on the middle and lower portions of the project were coarser grained with �' lower erosion potential especially under sheet flow. Typical erosion control measures `� implemented on most construction sites will be suitabie to mitigate the hazard of erosion on this � site. Tbis should include a silt fence around the low poi.nt of the cleared area, covering stockpiles with plas�ic and re-vegetating cleared areas as soon as possible after construction is completed. '� A rock mat at the construction entrance should be provided to reduce tracking of soils off of the ;; � :� : � Gary A. Flowers,PLLC. -j 19532 12�'Avenue NE Shoreline,Washington 96155-1106 206�17-7640 a ll Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Geologica!/Geotechnical flssessment Kent, King Counly, Washington site. Extra precautions should be taken to prevent any silt laden water from contaminating tiie soils in the areas of the proposed infiltration facilities. SUMMARY Based on our site reconnaissance and subsurface explorations the site appears to be suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations given herein are properly implemented. �. We recommend that we be retained to review those portions of the plans and specifications that pertain to earthwork, foundations and infiltration to detemune that they are consistent with the recommendations of this report. Construction monitoring and consuitation services should also be provided to verify that subsurface conditions are as expected. Should conditions be revealed during construction that differs from the anticipated subsurface profile, we will evaluate those conditions and provide alternative recommendations where appropriate. Our findings and recommendations pravided in this report were piepared in accordance with generally accepted principles of engineering geology and geotechnical engineering as practiced in the Puget Sound area at the time this report was submitted. VVe make no other warranty, either express or implied. Sincerely, � �'�� W a a h ��`,��,`��'� r.;- ,.,��,� m� ��f (:,�';';!iit ' `" '':.:.;-=,� 't � �.��.{': r'�-: ;,`.� �7�" Cq � , / r� - '�r - ._,; ,� 7 . . :i, `r .�w �)•�1� i �:`~ . ` :� � 1`��°` � `�J . �� l p 1 4,�� • ; �- " . - . �s�d G�°�� ;�= �.�.. '�� . C3ary A. Flowers �:_+�':.,..._��z0��..� Gary A. Flowers, P.G., P.E.G. Engineering Geologist Robert M. Pride, P_E. Geotechnical Engineer , Attachments: Figure 1- Site &Exploration Plan Appendix A—Exploration Logs ;� Appendix B —Laboratory Sieve Analyses Gary A. Fiov��ers,PLLC. 19532 12�'AvenueNE Shoreline,Washington 98155-I]06 206-417-7640 12 i � �� r :' •- '� � ' , � � � �ii�;'/� '%��. ��4; ��; � va � �:� uvo.�.'.iit�i/; .;�<�� 1!,�� /' � . ; , t � + .�.. � , � ��a f Irp nLxa r � t' Gr�IQ � ��+ t�r" ,r�''� .r ,' , -! t.�� ; :� • ��f� ��`1.:1 � y�.l l � .�� `.�'�. ;u• � , „�,:»..,�, ,�,, �, �;�,,��:,; ��ao,;!� EP-13��, , , EP-14 � �� ;� •� ' �, �, � , � .'�.��'ei�� %' r''- r�;.i'•.i'�; 1 �� i . � ? . t � . ,(�' r •" �.�_;1' ;%< r '� i t � t 4�. , ' • ' ; .,ia _ '=� ((' I .i� � i t i 999 �;y ,., r t� ' ri!�° �F � � �. ��,� �, � �1 ��y� . ' � , z, ;�� , EP-9%� �.��: � •`�"� r` � , � E -��M.'-� i � ----�— ____�� ' � �� . t-�:° i ;�'fl"� ' i �; ;r;, i a:; � ¢. �.�"� - - ��. "1 N �, �' �r.• .j�� )j . 7` � � " i t�• 1� �� . ��. ., r, ,.lwn.!? . I'1 ;1r3f l f. �v�/�.��', , .Jq ! � ,• ♦� � '�,u ' �, .� � �, �, , a':��;;;,';�r;;1� ;� �-^�.eR; � ' ,•� EP-115,. ', +,��; �s ; �: • ,� EP-11 � `' ' � � . �,;� r � � � ,, �t, : ��, �. f` EP-8� � �,�, � '_y � f ,,, s �� ' /�� :;. � " � -i A • v, \'�' `� i�," r 1 �' � �+ . � . }�i ` �,�� :� 1 � .. /� �{��1�-� ! ,�..�.I� �r�� f' .9 �1 t � �Sr� r 1 �.I�: I��,'�`�'jl��,l ,�� : � ' �j/ : /J '�• �I;q � , � �� s - .. ..:�....' 1 '��' i7��„� � �;ti�,J��r' � 'f�r' .�= - EP-y � •�---.t �� , � r �< <�� ;,� .,; ,,� '�,,� �ti�� - � EP-16`i 4 ' . �.� � .:• ,' . �,� � . . ,� �� J � EP 12`��,�',s ,� ;,�;' ' i' .. �EP- a, ,,_ ; � .`' �" �jr �� .�d .s � '; m � / � ; �� e� �"` � � ` t ; � �,s- , , r�� , , =,s �c�' i,; ;�=�� EP �� ;y , � �. i •� ' ! 1 �i� ( I ! 1�: �ivri,- \.��{ . i � • i.wary� �.` ,� � _ �"'_ i. '� �'r ' �"' �,%�� f�_�I ' " �I; "� 1��;��, �� T'�,.. ��1 °•,.nu�yrTiS+'��t3�J"� ,4 � '�r , , ,,�.,,��,�'.. a �� _ : � , '� ' � EP-2 ; �,a`��1 . f�� .'Y} ��/. ,';ri r ,. t � �7� � �j� a ):.,� �.. �u�u� i{ . r r ' � �. '� �--�J'� r t � , :;� � ,t��i t �.�� `�� Ep �'� ' ' r � r � � EP- ' �r��+ � � ��.>.� � � �, � r'�`*i� :� � ', �� .�' i,, �_ , +:e� . -- -- ;� ,,t�1 � � I �� ;�, �� , � , � 'i � ��,,. �� , r �� , ,` i �i r� s '�� , i=t -- — ;� " � � ,�..' ��:, ' � ��' 1�r�� ,'4, ; �: ti ��r�" �4 + �` i � � tr , � x . �'„�,.. . C. t \ �t ''r`� �� +� t�1 4' � : �, �.� r' ';��.s�1 � . �� . 1 a� �N. t t � g. i . ; i,i , Y �r� � '�'��•}� � �, ��' • �: ' . �'s �� ;;i�a»�` �� < �a �i� . � x`�,-. � .�v' �..>wv EP�� ' . :,`�t'i;} . i s.r�.-.• � . :r t�; {��M.o�` ; z, . ' 2�: a 1 n5±' ,��'« � . t -t�•. ; I f -,n� -� � i _., _ _ - ..�,u�, �,� ',; . ��, �};��; . . , ' . �Y� . � ` , � . . i i i !� . - :; - � : , ' fl . i i1t tl ;�;' t � .-�'�::K e, t0.:, __� t ��• . i � �, �-�fi t( rde�� J � +-� )r r�'/",r� / .. . � -- '-�_� �tz�,Jl" --�°--�-.'�J .��.�� f I Y ✓�J,j � i i� r ��. _ rriw• ` �� , �-� �E�,��-� i . ; -,� �� . . • t:..17 ..1 . �-�v+j .t.-�.n«-.. � i-r,�':-r� r � [. � .. :.�1' '�=.' � .� ,4-�, ,_ e..a� 3 �•S a g t � � � � � i1 _.-.'�-. - r�-��-r f-F� � � 1 _r-�—1 i ". �i . ( .... t i �.d 1. � -, . . ��!a�_ J. _ '�, �. , . . .•.., ) ':;_ , . ..�;�. N LEGEND � EP-1 � Approximate location of exploration pit I 0 80 REFERENCE: TAYLOR ENGINEEf21NG CONSULTANTS. SCALE IN FEET SITE AND EXPLORATtON PLAN FIGURE 'f GARY A. FLOWERS, PLLC PLAT OF FLEUVE DES VOILES DATE 1/05 KENT, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PROJECT NO. GF05001 i F Plat ofFleuve des Voiles GeologicaUGeotechnicalAssessment Kent King County, Washington i APPENDIX A EXPLORATION LOGS Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 19532 12`"Avenue NE Shorolina,Washingtor 98155-1106 2Q6-417-7640 EXPLORA�fION PIT LOG o Number EP-1 Forest duff/topsoil 1 2 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH Loose becoming medium dense with depth, very moist to saturated, brown, medium-grained SAND with gravel and trace silt 3 4 BOH @ 4' Moderate caving 5 Ground water at 33 inches 6 - 7 I ; i � 8 � 9 - 10 11 — 12 13 --- Subsurface conditions depided represent our observat:on at the time and locat+o^of this exploralcry hole,modified by geologic in(eroretation,engioeering ana!ysis,and j.:dament. They are no'rF�ssar,ly rewesertative o`o,�V tlrnes ar,�locat;o�. YJe w�li nct ��cept res;��ns�i rty?or tn_�us.�or rterp•�'a:�cn`;y�L`�e;�of infon-iaCo�p�essn'ed oc tn�a iog Plat of Fieuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPLQRATION PfT. LOG o Number EP-2 Forest duff/topsoil � � 1 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Loose becoming medium dense with depth, very moist to saturated, grayish-brown, oxidized, medium-grained SAND with gravel and trace silt 3 4 — BOH @ 4' No caving 5 Ground water at 32 inches 6 — 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Subsurtace condi!ions cepicteC represent our observa:ior at the time and locatien of tMs expicratory ho�e,modified by geologic interpretation,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are nol necessar;y representative of other times and location. We wilf not accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of infortnation presented on ihis log. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 I EXPLORATIUN PIT LOG Q Number EP-3 Forest duf�/brownish-black, sandy silt with organics (fill?) 1 ' 2 — 3 • RECESSIONAL OUTWASH Medium dense, moist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with trace silt; gravels to 6" diameter 4 5 6 7 � 8 At 8'-9' and 11'=12' interbeds of dense, moist, grayish-brown, silty SAND with gravel 9 - 10 11 12 BOH @ 13' No caving; rapid ground water seepage at 10-112' 13 - Subsur`ace conditions depicted represer,t our observation at the time and loca6on of this exp:o'a:ory hole,modified oy geo�a;ic i�'ernretalior,engineer�g analysis,and jud�m��'. fiey a e not necessarily represe-,tative a�tne�L'me=_and ioatior: We wi!!no: ac��ept respc,�s�'b'llty(or the use cr int�rcre'a'�o��by ott�i?rs of�n�c��mallon present=d on tnis la: Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARl�A. FLDW�RS, PLLC Rroject No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPL4RATION PIT LO� a Number EP-4 Forest duff/to soil RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 1 Medium dense, moist to saturated, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL 2 with trace silt; gravel to 6"diameter 3 — 4 5 6 7 — 8 --- — BOH @ 8' No caving 9 Rapid ground water seepage at 4' 10 11 12 � 13 Subsurfaca conditions depided represent our ebservalion at the time and loaton of this er.ploratory hol=,modifi�d Dy geoiog�c in;erpretaGon,engineering analysis,and judgment. Tney are nol r�ecessanty represen!ative ot other t�mes and iocation. We wiii nol axept responslbfliry ior the use or interpretation by others of iniortna[ion presented on this log. Plat of Ffeuve des Voiles ';, Kent, King County, Washington �� G�IRYA. FL��/ERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPLt�RATlON PIT LC�G a Number EP-5 Forest duff/to soil ADVANCE OtJTWASH 1 _ Dense, moist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with trace silt 2 --- 3 4 BOH @ 4' No caving � No ground water 6 7 I I 8 9 -- 10 11 12 13 �� Suosu-`.ace condit ons de,..cted represent o�r observat o�at the t�me and la:ation of t�`,is explcre�ory hcle modified oy geologic interpre:atlon,engireering ana!ys!s,and judgmert They a-e not necessarly representative of other ti�es and',oa:ion. We m��'not accepi respons(bility for the use or interpretation by others of iniorma6on presented on this Iog. ' � 1 It i t Plat of Fleuve des Voiles ` Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 � January 2005 EXPL4RAT14N PIT LC�� o Number EP-6 Forest duff/topsoil � — - -- ---- WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL Medium stiff, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel 2 LODGEMENT TILL 3 Very dense, moist, grayish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel . ADVANCE OUTWASH 4 Dense, moist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAtJD with trace silt 5 fi 7 BOH@7' — No caving. 8 No ground water � 9 , i � 10 11 ' 12 13 Subsurtace ccndiC,ons depided represent our obsetia`.ion at the time and bcation ot this exploratory hole,modified by geologic inter�retation,engineering analysis,and judgment Tney are no`necessarfly representaCrve of othertimes and location. We wll oot accept responsibiiity for the use or interpretation by others of infortnation presented on this log. Plat of Fleuve des Voi)es Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWE'RS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPLQRATI4N PiT LO� o Number EP-7 Forest duff/topsoil FILL � Loose, moist, brown, silty SAND with some gravel 2 RELIC TOPSOIL LAYER Loose, moist, brownish-black, sandy SiLT with organics 3 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TlLL Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel 4 5 6 LODGEMENT TILL 7 — Very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 8 BOH @ 7-1/2'—� — — No caving No ground water 9 10 — - 11 12 — � — � 13 Subsu-fa:e car.d�!iens depic!eC rep�esen'wr observaC;,n;!the lime an�location of this exploratory hole,modfied by geologic inter�re;ation,engineering analysis,and juegmeat. They are not necessarily representative oT other Gmes end location. We wil�not aocepi responsibifity for the use or interpretation by others ot Intamation presented on this log. Plat �f Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARY�I. FLOWERS, PLLC . Project No. GF05001 January 2005 i , EXPLORATION PIT LOG Number EP-8 � o ; Forest duff/topsoil 1 . RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Loose to medium dense, moist, brown SAND with some silt and gravel 3 --- - ADVANCE OUTWASH 4 - Dense, very moist to saturated, brownish-gray, gravelly SAND with trace silt 5 — — ---------------- ------ BOH @ 5' - - No caving 6 Rapid ground water seepage at 4' 7 — � 8 --- 9 — 10 11 - 12 13 Subsuriace conditions depided represent our observation at the time end lo�tion of this explo�atory hole,modifed by geclogi� Interpretation,engineering analysis,end judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other limes and location. We wil;no� accept responsibility tor the use or interpretation by others of infortnatlon preserled on this log. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOW�RS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPLOI�ATION PIT LOG o Number EP-9 Fo�est duff/topsoii 1 I —_T ___ I WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL 2 � Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel 3 4 - - - LODGEMENT TILL Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 5 6 —_—_ BOH @ 6' - No caving 7 Rapid ground water seepage at 4' � 8 s 9 10 - 11 12 — 13 - Subsurface cond;ions depic,ed represent our observat�on at the time and Iecation of th s exploratory hole,moc:fied by ge��oyrc � � interpretaGon.engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessanly representative of other times and location. We will not } acrxpt responsibility Tor the use or interpretation by others of ir(ortnation presen:ed on ihis log a a :� Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King Caunty, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPLaRATlO� PiT LO� o Number EP-10 � Forest duff/topsoii ; 1 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL 2 Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel 3 — LODGEMENT TILL 4 Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 5 6 - BOH @ fi' No caving 7 No ground water • 8 9 -- 10 11 12 13 i; Subsurface condition;depided represent cur observation at the[ima a�d location of th�s explorato�y�hole,modifed by gedogic interpretation,esgine=nng analys;s,anc judgrnen.. They are not necessarily rapresentat�ve of oNe�tim=s and ior.a!'an. 1�'e wiH not axept responsibility for the use or interpretation by athers of Infortnation presenled on this{og. s; Pla# of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington • '' GARYA. FL4�lI/ERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 . E�CPLORATI4N PIT L4G o Number EP-11 Forest duff/topsoil 1 - WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL 2 Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel LODGEMENT TILL 3 Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 4 5 _ BOH @ 5' No caving 6 No ground water 7 - 8 9 � 10 11 12 — 13 Subsu�face conditions deo�cted repr2sent ou�ob=e��ation a!the time and I�cation of this exploratory ho{e,modified by geologic in;erpretat:cn,engmeenr�,ana!ysis,and juogme�,t They 2•e nol necessar:ip;epresenta;ive of other times and location. We will no' accepl responsibility for the use or in2erpretation by others of informatlon presented on ihis log. �i ;i _� , Plat of Fleuve des Voiles =! Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLQWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 � January 2005 EXPL�RAT�C�N PIT L�G ; � o Number EP-12 � l I � Forest duffltopsoil 1 2 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL �i Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel I � � � LODGEMENT T(LL Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravef I�� 4 I 5 I 6 —- -- -�____--- -- - - � � BOH @ 6' No caving '� 7 No ground water � ', • ' 8 ' 9 II 10 11 , � � � 12 � 13 Subsurface conditions tiepicted represent our observa[ion at the Gme anC loca:ion ot this exploralory hole,modified by geofog:c ir.terpretation,eng'rn=ering aralysis,and judgme�t. They are net r.acessarily representative of other times and!oaTon. 1Ne will not accept respo�sibili!y for the use or iMerpre[ation by others of infortration present>�or fais�og. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles • Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 ' January 2005 � :� EXPLORATION PIT LOG o _Number EP-13 j Forest duff/topsoif � ------ — - -- - RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Medium dense, moist, brown, silty SAND with gravel 3 4 ADVANCE OUTWASH i Dense to very dense, moist to wet, grayish-brown, sandy GRAVEL to gravelly SAND with trace silt; gravels to 12" diameter 5 6 - - ----_ --- --------- - ---- BOH @ 6' i �, No caving I I 7 -- Moderate ground water seepage at 55" ; �i 8 — 9 - 10 19 - 12 13 - S�bsurface cendifons depicted represent our observation ai Lh>time and location of this exploretory hole,modified by geologic inte•pretation,engi�eerir.g ara!yss,and judoment They are no:necessarity representative of other times and location. We wiil not arcept resoonsibiliN tcr the use or in'erpr<tation by cthers cf i�formation presenteC or G`�is;og. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington G��/A. ��.��75� ��.L� Project No. GF05001 ' January 2005 EXPLO�ATION PIT LOG o Number EP-14 � Forest duff/topsoil 1 _ RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Medium dense, moist, reddish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 3 Medium dense, moist to saturated, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL, trace silt 4 — 5 At 66"-77" interbed of dense, grayish-brown silty SAND with some gravel 6 7 • 8 9 10 - 11 BOH @ 1 0-1/2' No caving Moderate ground water seepage at 9' , 12 13 Subsurface c�ndit��^s de�icted re��esen'eur cCseroatio��at Ih?tirne and location of this exploratory hole,modfied by geologic interpretacon,eng'neerin�analy;is,anc judgment They are not necessariry representative of othzr times and location. We will not accept responsibiliiy for the use or interpretation by others of infortnation p�sented on this log. !� Plat of Fleuve des Voiles • I� Kent, King County, Washington � G�tRYA, �L�W��S, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 � EXPL�F�.ATION PIT LQ� o Number EP-�5 Forest duff/topsail 1 — -- — — —-------- RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Medium dense, moist, reddish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 3 — Medium dense, moist to saturated, grayish-brown, gravefly SAND with trace silt 4 5 — 6 At 78"-84" interbed of dense, grayish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 7 8 9 10 ; 11 12 '' I BOH @ 13' Moderate caving below 9'; rapid ground water seepage at 9' 13 SubsuAace condi5ors depicted represent our observation at the time and loca6on of this expbratory h�le,modined by geoiog�� interpretatlon,engineering analysis,and judgment. They are not necessariiy representative o1 other fimes and locatfon. We will rot accept responsibflity for the use or interpretation by otners of informa;ion presented on this fog. . Plat of Fleuve des Voiles ;; Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS� PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 � EXPLC�RATI�N �' I� LC�G ' '� o Number EP-16 � � Forest duff/topsoil 1 — 2 _, � -- RECESSIONAL OUTWASN Medium dense, moist, reddish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 3 � Medium dense, moist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with trace silt 4 5 - - BOH @ 5' Na caving g No ground water 7 - � , 8 9 — � 10 - 11 — �i 12 I�I a ' 13 �� Subsudace canditions depided re�esent our observalion at the time and location o`;his explora[ory hole,m�diFea Cy geoiogic ' ir,terpretation,er.gineering analysis,and judgmenL They are not necessarily representaHve ci other times and iOCa:loh. WE W:I:n0l �i accep;responsibiliiy for the use or interpretation by others of info�nz,ion pr=sented on this log. Plat of Ffeuve des Voiles • Kent, King County, Washington �ARYA. FLOVE/ERS, PLLC Project No. GF05009 January 2005 Plat of Fleuve des Voiles GeologicallGeotechnical rlssessment Kent,King County, R'ashington APPENDIX B I SIEVE ANALYSES [ I � 1 � � i ki . i; 1 � Gary A. Elowers,PLLC. ;4j=> ;?"Ave:tuci.c Shoreiine,�z,'ashinz�c�r.?E1��5-1106 ��i`i-4:7-7�;qn _...----___-------._.—._ _____. � - --- --..._ I s��Ana�YS�s _.._------ 5ieve E1na sts �� Slze opening in lnthes Number of Mesh per[nch,US S�andard� I '� l ) 2 1 S 1 y� ift LE t/t M 0 10 16 SP�S M � __ _ �o +o w ,� � Sievc Sizc %Passin • min max � ' 2.00° �pp ,� 90 - - L50" g$ __ _ _ - _ - - • 1 84 so 3/4" �g I _ --_ - _ — ...._ — S/8" 76 � �u --- _ 1/2" 72 _ — — — 3/8" 6q eo - - — — 1/4" 55 - — � 50 � . S� -- — - �0 39 � - - _ NIG 35 I °Q - - 1f30 29 � - - �140 24 iso = _ _ — -_ #50 l9 � - #100 q ' Zo - —_ t�200 5.5 i I io - i - — I i o — — _ ii°° ` to i � • o.i � Graln Size(ow)_Corps of I:ngineera Unlform Soil Classl(ication 0.01 , Material: Brown avell sand �am�le Number De th R Classification Source: EP-3,G-8' no75 Nat.W.C. L.L. P.L Pro'ect: C-Soos Creek P1at Pro"ect#: 402 GF 05001 Date Rec'd: /24/ 5 � Iievicwcd I y: Sieve90751127/?005 MAYES TEST/NG ENGINEERS �Va Make a D►Nareo SieveAnal sis 'icve Ana ysis Siu opening in Inehes Nnmbcr of Mah pet Inch,US Snnd�rd SP�� Sievc Sizc %Passin min max 100 � a �s �u �n v� �u �� e m nn m �tn �m xn �t� 100 90 -----_--_— — - -- ---- (�16 89 so —- — — — —_ — _ - - N40 62 - -- — — --- --- — ----- .. -------- — — — ... — lJ50 47 �o ----_---- — _—_ -- _ __— _-- -- — — _— - — — --- — #100 24 o bo __=_ —=—=__ — _ -- — _— — a2oo 13.9 .� 50 = _--__— _— _ — _- — -- a, — — --- — -- __.....— — — --.._.._ — — — --- � — a ao -- ----_ _-- — - — — --- — - — ——— --— — —— —. ...--- --- — 10 =--_--- _ —_ _ — — --_- — _.___._� —_ . _ �.�__—.� . ._.__. � ZO _—_.�-_.�._—_—_..–_— �_ _ ��— -- — ` 10 —— �-- '—_ — _ =-- _ — -- -- 0 _— — I �p0 l0 I 0.1 0.01 Gra in Size(mm)-Corps of Enginecrs Uniform Soll Claasifiotlon ' Material: Brown vcll sand Source: EP-3 6-8' Sam lc Number De th ft Classification Nat.W.C. L.L. P.I. Pro�ect: C-Soos Creek Plat 9075A Pro�cct#: 4025 GFO5001 Date Rec'd: 4/OS Rcvicwed y: 'C MAYES TESTING ENG/NEERS Sieve9075A1/27/7_005 "We Maks a Off/eronce" .._ ____...._-._.__. , ------- . ' ----- Sicve Anulysls �IeVC AIIa�ySiS ` Size opeeing in Inches Num6er of Mesh Der IncA.US Sundud —' 100 � a 1 ts t v� �n aro w w $�CCS R _ ° 79 t6 w �o � �� Sievc Size %Passin _ min max _ 2.00" �pp vo ' _ _ — 1.SQ" 95 -— — -- � 92 so —' — -- — _— � 3/4" 92 — — — . 5/8" 90 70 --- _-- 1/2" 89 i --- — 3/8" 8G � bo — -- -- — -- - 1/4" 82 f _ — — � � � 79 � �8 72 � so = — — - #10 70 Y — _ /t 16 — � �o - — _" #30 56 � ——---—— — — _ �140 47 � sn — _ M50 3G � —-— _ — IE 100 18 i =o �___ _ _ If200 9.G � - � io i — — I 0 � 104 � 10 � 0.1 0.01 ' Cr�in Size(nuu)_Corps of Engloeers Uniform SoI1 Classificalbn �-- Matenal; $rown avelly sand Sam�le Number De th ft Classification Sourcc: EP-14,5-6' �� Nat.W.C. L.L, p,I, 1'ro'ect: C-Soos Crcek Alat Pro'ect#: 4025 GF OSOOI . Date Rec'd: p Rcvie� d by: -�„ :;��e��a�e v2�r,�oo5 MAYES TESTING ENG/NEERs "We Mako�DlHeren ►eve Ana sis � Sievc Anal sis _ y , Sire opening in Inchcs Number o(Mesh Ott Inch,US Standard � $PCCS�` 100 � � •c va �n v� �u u � � �R �n �n �cn im mn SICVC SIZC %r8SSll1g'� min m:►x — —_ _' _. _— _' #�� 100 9p -`_-=�-_-^`_ = - - _ -= - -- - - NIG 94 so =_ _-- _ - - --- - - � l�40 67 - - ..__-- --_.� _ -- _ _ - _-__ - #50 52 �o �_ --_--- -- - _., . ------- --_� _. �_ _ �.._ - T -�_--- #l00 26 _-__� �..�--- --..—.� - ---- - - - � 60 --_--_ _ - _ -'- _ - #200 13.7 � so Y =---= _ --- _ _ - _- -- d - --- -- - -- - - ; ao =-_-- -_ -- - - - - - - __- - _ — - - - ----- - "�� _ - -- -- - --- - _ -- -. -_. ,-�. _._._� —-.. so --- — — --- ---.. —_ — ---- _ —.._— 20 _._..,—;==.—=�__—_=—'� _.---— _. "__— — io �---_ -_._-_ _ = --�_--- - -- --- - � _ ^_ � . �.__-----=c�.—_•�--� _ — 100 10 1 0.1 O.OI Grain Size(nun)-Corp+o[Engineers UuiCorm Soil Cbesl6cat�on Materiai: Brown avell sand Source: EP-14'S-6' Sam le Number Ue tli it) C]assification Nat.W.C. L.L. P.I. Pro�ect: C-Soos Creek Plat 9076A Pro'ect#: 025 GFO5001 Date Rec'd: 2005 Rcvicw•c by: � - /:: MAYES TEST/NG ENO/NEERS SievB9076A 1/2$/2005 "We Make a Dlffarence" ,........�......»..._ ._ �---------__i_�.�_—_i______ �` Sicve Analysis�.�.`—_-- �--•• I S��OO�^��e�„U�Cs SieveAnal sis - �, '� � r+, � Numbcr of Mcah per Inch,US Standud y * I 100 � � z �s � e �n �� a �o w �oo =� Sicve Sizc %PBssin Sp�cs I _ — 2.00" min max v� — _„ — I00 — __. — 1.50" 100 --- — _ — � 91 ao .— --- _ — 3/4" 84 i — — -- 5/8" 80 �o �— -- _ 1/2" 7A "_' —— _ — 3/8" 70 � cu _ — — — 1/4" � ( -- — — — #a G� i 56 — — — #8 54 t °' ___ — _ —_ — #]0 S3 ( s <v —. — — • — tt30 49 43 " — — — �� 37 i30 _ — — — — — t�50 29 ` = t�100 16 i izo _ _ _ — __ _`� #200 9.4 io — — — � � _' —-- _ _,_ --- � ioo �o —' .._ � � o.t ` Crain Sizt(mm)_Corps of Englnecrs Uniform Soll Classillca(ion �•01 Material: Brown veil sand Sam�le Nutnber� De�t►i ft ClassiGcation Source: Nat.W.C. L.L. P.1. EP-14 8_9� �Q�� Pro'ect: C-Soos Creek Plat Pro�ect I�: Q4q25(GF05001), Date Rec'd: � 5 . Revicwcd 1� ; � c Sieve90771/28/20p5 MAYES TEST/NG L°NG/NEERs "We Mako a d(ysrenc . . _ �.-_:�. ..... . . ... _._ . . ::_.�_ _,W„�.-� :.�,m,n,, , .._,�. .... .... . -..-„-�,,:.. ste��AnArosis 5ieve Ana ysis � Siu opening in Inchu Mimber of Mesh Der Inch,US Siandard S[ri:cs« � Sieve Sizc °Jo Passin min m�.r l00 • � r s �� w vn va u e .n _ �n �n �tn _ �m _ 7m —- - -- -'_ _ �� 10� 90 __ � . ,. �'a � �� --_'_"�� ' �� 6E�� ' ��., �� B� � --- - �� ' � � � �� C � � -„ � o ��-• � ... �� ,, �� :, � ..,.r.� � ` �� a �� o � �� 8 - � �� "�`- �� a - � E ��c �� ., _ J .� ��= ._.� " -o ,� ar��g � �� E�� '�� .,=r ., =� � � 8 � -- -- 'c'...''�:�E _,,,. , , � � o �� 5 „_„�• � � ...� , �' �� '' �-� �"" e==� ` ' �iiv �� .,_ . , �` ��e � � �� , �� = � '�""� � � � =� , , �� o_. =�a�..., � a_ __ �� ..':� ' C "" ��-- �.,,, �: �- = o..- � ...,,�o � �" .. CI OC ..��..��C: C; ,�� @ �� ' c�=� ��=�� . �� o � 8� ��_� „ �..C�=�.. ��OC C�� „ ��ii � . ! , . �� .�- =�=-�� • ••� �� . . � � -, �� .� . �� , i . „ __.....___--- ....�.... _ � Sicvc Anal sis _51CV8 II1� S1S , - • � Sixe o ening in Inches Numbtt of Mesh per IncA,US 5unda�d $P�5 � $ICVC$l7C %�8551I1 Ii11t1 ITIBX i 100 � � � �•' � v� �n ?n� �n u n m u �n an cn �nn _ �m - - .—__�_ __ — __ --- - — - �� OQ , _ .. —.._'— � so — -- --=_— — — --- ---_ _---- — #1( 89 — —_` —_ — — -- _. — — .._....._ � 8o V_ — ....��_ '— -- �___— —_ -- -- — — � _—_...�.. .—_�.._..__"_' —� ..T �'— ---- . .� .�. J_ ..�. 70 -----=---- — � � � � ._ —�. #5� 44 ------'— —�--- - _ ....---- — — —�—-'——_....._.._� ..._ .� —�- ' — '�.._.— — ---- � M GO — ---_---_ _ - --- __— --- IIIOO 2I � - ------- -- — _— _ --- - _ _ #200 12.0 so --_ -- -- - — - — — a — — — — - e 40 _ _ -___=__ ._ _ _ — —_ —__ ____ — �_—_�. _� ' �. —__..__ ...._' _ �— '._. ... ._ Igp ....'__ �___—___ �..�._....—__ _—.. ....__ .. '-- j20 =_�__`.�"-� —,`—___ '- _— — �_i=_ ��_ ..._ � io =_�!_.._..— —�— -.--�— .._ —_—_-----_ __=----. — --— — � j o _..._.._--c_�====�. -- _-- �=--_------ — too i u 1 0.i o.01 4'nfo Size(mm)-Corpv of Gaqineerx Uni(orm Soil Ciassi6cntlun I_.. Matcrial: Brown avcll sand Source: #15,8-9, Sarn le Number De th ft Classification Nat.W.C. L.L. P.I. Pro�ect: GSoos Crcek Plat 9079A Pro'ect#: 4025 GFO5001 �_^ ' Datc Rcc'd: 1/24/2 _ / Rcvicwcd by: MAYES TESTING ENGINEERS �' :' .- 'Wo Meke a D1Rar�erco" Gary A. �towers, PI��C Geotogical �i Geotechnieal Con�ulting 1953212t4 Avenue NE �horeline,WA 98155•1I06 Maecl�26,2006 Project No. GFO5001 � Ravenna Deveiopment, LLC 6839 R.avenna Avenue 1�TE, Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98115 Attention: Mr. Chariie Spaeth Subject: GealogicaUGeotechnical Assessment II�' Cogger Short Plat ' LUSD Fiie No, L45S004� � 12200 Block of SE I92nd Street ' King County, Washington - Dear Mr. Spaeth: This report presents the results of our geotechnical assessment for the propased Cogger short plat to be iocated in the existing 12200 block of SE 192nd Street in King County, Washington. This 8 Iot plat is lacated along the south side of the Plat of Fleuvc des Voiles which a�as the subject of a subsurface explorahon,geological and geotechnical engineering study perFormed by fhis office in �'ebruary 2005. Subsurface information from our previous study, along with recent hand dug explorations at �2244 SE 192'� Street (L.enway residence) and our recent reconnaissance of the Cogger property,will be used as the basis for this report. � The puipose of our site evaluatian was to verify existing shallow soil and ground water � conditions on the propeity, incIuding existing slope stabiJity, and to provide data for the design : and construction of the planned improvenzents. A preliminary site plan by Taylar Engineering ' Consultants,revised June 21,2005, was used as a reference for tt�is study. i PROJECT&SITE CONDITIONS � � According to the prelimi.nary site drawings provided to us, the subject parcel encompasses ' slightly under one acre and is trapezoidal in shape. It is bounded on the north, west and east by singte family residences and on the south by SE 192"d Street. An e�cisting house and detached garage are located on the property. A total of 8 building lots are planned for the plat along with a cul-de-sac extension off of the proposed SE 191�` Street within the Plat of Fleuve des Voiles to seivice the propei�ties. Gary A.Flowers,I'LI.C. 19532 12t°Avenne NE Shoreline,R'ashington 98155-!106 206�1?-7640 1 Cogger Sltor!Pla! Geologica!/Geotech»icQl Assessment Kent,King County, if�ashington The subject site is comprised of several dis#inct areas. The central poi�ion of the property is relatively flat with a gentle slope downward to the east. Along the northwest property line, in the northeast corner and just below tlie east property tine are some steep slope areas. All of these steep slope areas appear to have been created by legal grading to create driveway access or building pads for the various residences. None of the steep slopes are over 20 feet in height with the taliest stopes along the east side,just offthe property, (maximum 16 fcet high) and the other steep slopes on the order of 10 feet in height. As such these slopes shoutd be unregulated slopes under the King County Sensitive Areas Ordinance. All of the slopes aze heavily vegetated and there was no visual indication of standing, flowing or emergent water on any of the slopes. No visual indications of slope instability, either current or past, were observed. It is anticipated that these slopes will be significantly reduced in heighf through grading of the Cogger and Fleuve des Voiles plats. Subsujface Soil and Ground Water Corrditions No subsurface exploration v��as performed on the Cogger property for purposes of this report. Subsurface information from our previous study for the Plat of Fleuve des Voiles, togetl�er with recent hand dug explorations on the Lenway property located immediately west of the Cogger property provide sufficient informarion for our evatuation. A total of 14 exploration pits were excavated on the Fleuve des Voiles parcel on January 2b, 2005 and 5 hand dug exploration were excavated on the Lenway properly on March 22,2006. Based on ihe subsurface information described above it appeazs that Qvt(Vashon age glacial till} is found above elevation 432 in this area. The entire Cogger property, and the steep stope areas on the boundaries of the properiy, all lie above this elevation and are likely all comprised of weathered and unweathered glacial till. The loosex, finer grained, vveathered till is typically on the order of 2 to 3 feet thick and averlies the unweathered till. Some f li soils may also be encountered due to the past development on the property. A 7 to 10 inch fhick topsoil layer will also likely be encountered during grading. i According to the Geologic Map of King Coujtty, Washi»gton, by Booth, Haugerud and Sacket, 2002, the subject site is mapped as Vashon age titl. Our interpretation is in general agreement with the published map for the area. , � Hydrology � i No indication of standing or flowing water was present an the property at the time of our field work. There was no evidence of erosion anywhere on the parcel. Water infiltrates relatively ; easiiy into the thin upper soil stratum. As a result, it is anticipated that most storm water currently infiItrates into the subsurface sediments and then moves as interflow atop the c8ry a FiaWe�,rLLc. 19532 12'"A�•enue 11B Shaefine,ll'ashington 9E155-I 106 2Q6-417-76�0 2 Cogger Shorl P!a! GeologlcaUGeolecJmlca!Assessmerrt Ke�tl,King County, Washtngton unweathered lodgement till. Inter�low generally follows surficial topography and for this project would generally flow towards the east. Based on our previous study and recent hand explorations it is not Iikely that ground water will be encountered during grading opei�ations on the Cogger short plat except for some interflow as described above Seismic Haza�ds All seismic hazard information as presented in our previous study for the Plat of Fleuve des Voiles should apply to this project as well. As per the 2003 IBC guidelines the property is classified as Site Class C. CONCLlIS10NSAND RECOMMENDATIONS Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the s�ibject site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations contained herein are properly followed, The property is generally underlain by dei�se, glacially consolidated sediments that have t�een stable for many years at the slope inclinations encountered on the site. Site Grading The site should be cleared af all existing shvctures, foundation elements aud utilities. Vegetation, topsoil, forest duff and trees, that are not required as part of the landscape plan, should also be cleared and removed from the site, In our opinion, stahle construction slopes should be the respousibility af the contractor since they are on-site at ail tin�es, and should be determined during construction. However, for plaruung purposes permanent cut slopes on the project should not exceed a gradient of 2H:1 V(horizontal to vertical), Temporary cuts may be steeper depending upon the encountered sails, generally ; 1 H:1 V for weathered lodgement till and .SH:1 V for the unweathered lodgement till. The above � slope angles are for areas where ground water seepage is not encountered, and assumes that ' surface water is not allowed to flow across the temporary siope faces. ff ground or surface water is present when the slopes are excavated, flatter slope angles may be required. As is typicat Krith earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may accur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should he followed at all times unless a geotechnical professional is retained to monitor steeper stope cuts. If structural fiil is required for site development it must be compacted to a dense, nonyielding condition. Siructural fili is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the engineering geologist, ptaced in maximum 8-inch loose lifts with each lifi being compacted to at least 95 percent of the Gsry A.Flowers,PLLG 19532 12�Aveaue NE Shoreline,\Vashington 98155-1 I06 206-417-7b44 3 � • Cogger ShorJ Pla� Geological/Geoteclrnical Assessme�rt Kent, K�ng County, Washington modified Proctor maximum deusity using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. The top of all compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet heyond the location of perimeter footings or pavement edges before sloping dovvn at a maximwn angte of 2H:1 V. Structural fil� piaced in foundation excavations must extend a minimum distance of 2 feet beyond ti�e edges of the fo�tings. The till soils fliat will be encountered are fine grained and moisture sensitive and will be difficult ta place except under ideal moisture conditions. All areas to be paved slionld be crowned or stoped to direct storm water flow to the edges of the roadway and parlcing areas. The subgrade should t�en be compacted to a dense and nonyielding condition (minimum 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density) with a minimwn 20 ton vibratory roller. Prior to application of the pavenient section the areas to be paved shouId bc proofrolled with a fully loaded, tandem axle dump truck. Any soft or yielding areas identified during proofrolling should be overexcavated and bacI�illed with structural fitl. Both the compaction of the subgrade and the proofroll should be witnessed and documented by a representative of this firm. Foundation Recomntendalions Shaltow foundations may be used for support of the planned st�vctures when placed on undisturbed or recompacted natural soils or approved structurai fill piaced atop these materials. An a.Ilowable soii bearing value of 2,000 psf may be used in the design of these footings, including both dead and live Ioads. An increase of one-tivrd may be used for short-terni wind or seismic laading. Peruneter footings for all proposed structures should be buried a minimum of 18 inches into the surcounding soiI for frost protecrion. Settlement of footings for�residences placed as detailed herein should be negligible. However, foe�ndations placed on disturbed soil may resalt in increased settlement. Alt foundation excavarions should be inspected by a representative of this fum,prior to concrete placement, to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soi�s has beet�attained and that construction conforms to the recotnmendarions contained in this report. The governing muiucipaiiry may require such inspections, Latera! loads can be resisted by friction between the foundatian and the supporting soils,and/or by passive earth press�ue acting on the buried portious of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with structural SIl compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557 to achieve the passive resistance provided below. The struchual fill must extend horizontally outward from the embedded portion of the faundation a distance equal to at least three times the embedment depth over��vhich the passive resistance is applied. We recommend the foilowing design parameters. e Passive equivalent fluid=300 pcf e Coefficient of&iction=0.30 ' T7ie above values are altowable and include a factor of safety of at least 2,0. Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 14532 12i°Avrnue NE Shonline,lYashington 98155-1106 20b-419-7640 4 Cogger Shor!Plat Geologica//Geoteclrr�lcal Assessnrent Kent, K/ng County, Washington Floor Support Recommendations For cancrete slab-on-gi•acle floors, we recommend that the upper twelve (12) inches of natural soil beneath the slab be recompacted ta a firm, unyield'uig condition. Any yielding areas should he ovei�excavated and fiiled with approved structural fill. For areas where moisture intrusion through the floor slab is undesirable, a minimum of 6 inches of pea gravel, washed crushed rock or very coarse, washed sand shoald be placed as a capillary break layer. The crushed rock and sand must be compacted to a dense and unyielding condition prior to concrete placement. Where moisture thronga the slab is undesirable, a heavy duty (minimum 10 mil) polyethylene plastic vapor barrier should be provided under the floor slab to prevent moisture ��apor transmissian through the slab. If the vapor barrier becomes compromised in any way during construction it should be replaced or an additional layer added. Retaining Walls Due to the stoping nature of the site we artticipate that multiple retaining watls will be requu•ed for development of this site. However;the locaEion, type and height of the walls have not been ascertained at this time. Following are general design recommendations for any reinforced ' concrete walls that aze planned. Retaining walls taller than 3 feet must he lined with a minimum of 12 inches of washed rock to ��t�in 1 foot of finish grade. The washed rock must tie into the footing c�rain for the wall footing. Retaining walls up to S feet high, that are free to rotate, may be designed for an active presswe of 35 pcf with level backfill or 50 pcf with sloping 6ackfill. Fully restr�ained walls should be designed for an at rest pressure of 50 pcf with level backfill or 65 pcf with sloping backfill. Additional surchazges such as h•affic, other structures, or heavy equipment must be added to these design vatues. I#'any retaining walls taller than 8 feet are plaaned,we should be contacted to evaluate the walls and provide design recommendations. Rockeries i At this time we are unsure if rockeries will be used during plat development. If rockeries are ' planned they should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations provided in our ; � report for the Plat of Fleuve des Voiles. Rockeries should generally only be used to face, stable, ' free standing,natural soils. Rockeries that face fill slopes greater than 3 feet in height shouid not be used in place of retaining walls unless the backfill soil is suitably reinforced, especially where structures and roadways are adjacent to them. In all cases, structures and adjacent rockeries ' should be set back from rockeries so that a t H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical} line extendiug up from the rear base of the rockery does not contain a load &om roadways, foundations, or other � rockeries. It shoutd also be noted that, although rackeries aze commonly used, they should be considered a long-term maintenance item. ; Gary A.Flowers,PLLC. 1953212m M�cnue NE Shoreline,R�uhington 98155-i 106 20b-417-7640 S Cogger Slrort Plnt Geological/Geotechnlcal flssess�nent Kent,King Coimty, A'ashington Pavemenl Subg��ade Recommendations All areas to be paved should be crowned to direct stoim water flo��v to the edges of the roadway and parking areas. The subgrade should then be campacted to a dense and iionyielding condition (minimum 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximeu� density) with a minimum 20 ton vibratory roller. Prior to placemeni of the pavement section the subgrade should be proofrotled with a fully Ioaded, tandem axle dump truck. Any soft or yielding areas identified during proofrolling should be o��erexcavated and backfilled with structural fill. Both fhe compaction of the subgrade anc! the proofroll sf�outd be witnessed and documented by a representative of this firm. In the case of utility trench backfill, the structural fill should be piaced and compacted in accordance with cu�rent local or county codes and standards. The top of all compacted fill should extend horizontalty outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond ttte pavemerrt edges before sloping down at a inaXimum angle of 2H:1 V. Site Drai�rage Ali perimeter foonng walts should he provided with a drain at the footing level. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel.- The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches betow the bottom of the footing at all locations, and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. Roaf and surface run.off should not discharge into the footing drain system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain that discharges into an approved stoim water conveyance system. In planning, exteriar grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage. Care should be taken to avoid any grading or construction of any berms or other struciures that may cause storm water to flow under the pavement section. Water introdnced under ti�e pavement section could result in ari unstable subgrade and future pavement failures. .Er•osion Coratrol ; The sediments that will be encountered on the subject site generally contain significant fines and are subject to erosion under both sheet flow and channelized flow regimes. Typical erosion controI measures implemented on most conshvction sites will be suitable to nnitigate the hazard of erosion on this site. This should include a silt fence aronud the]ow point of the cleared area, covering stockpiles with plastic and re-vegetating cleared areas as soon as possible after , conshvction is cotnpleted. A rock mat at the construction entrance should be provided to reduce tracking of soils offof the site. Gary A.Ftowers,PLLC. 19532!2�Aventw IVE Shoreline,Washington 98l SS-1106 20b-417-76A0 6 Cogger Slror�Plat Geotoglcal/Geolech�rica!Assessmenl � Kenl, Krug Cot��rty, !f'aslringtorr SUMM�IRY Based on our site recounaissance and subsu�face explorations the site appeaxs to be suitable for tlie proposed development provided the recommendatioi�s giveu herein are properly implemet�ted We recommend tha# «�e be retained to re��iew those portions of t�ie plans and specifications that pertain to eai�th«�ork, foundations and infiltration to deteimine that they are consistent with the recommendations of this report. Construction monitoriug and cousultation services should also be provided to verify that subsurface conditions are as expected. Should couditions be reveated during consttuction that differs from the anticipated subsu��face profile, we will evalltate those conditions and provide alternative recomu�endations��here appropriate. Our findings and recommendations provided in tlus report were prepared in accordance vvith generally accepted principles of engineering geology�nd geotechnical engineeruig as pi�acticed iu the Puget Sound area at the time tlus report was submitted. We make no other ��varranty, ei#her express or implied. Sincerety, ��o wM��'�r i r--� ot W a s. ,�' 0�� '� t: c''b � t y�,�<� �� . 9�p � �y , . Z l�� ! _� �� '� -. , +�, R`1 ci�7�1 ,Q. . o��,�I��.�, �iG+ � ��tiy~ - '�14;•lAL�ti p�$�d Ge°�� a�+s Exa�REs ` �/ E#ery A. Ftow�rs ' Gary A. Flo�jers, P.G., P.E.G. Robert M. Pride,P.E. Engineering Geologist Geotecluucal Engineer � Gary A.Flo�i•ers,PLLC. 19532 12'^Arenuc NE Shoreline,lYashingtoa 98 t 55-1106 206-417-7640 7 Appendix F - Associated Earth Sciences Geotechnical Report a s s o c i a t e d earth sciences n ., �� r r... ., r � t P �^l April 24, 2014 Project No. KE130637A Summit Homes 16000 Christensen Road, Suite 303 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Mr. Bryan White Subject: Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Summit Homes Renton SE 192`� Street and 124`'' Avenue SE Renton, Washington Dear Mr. White: We are pleased to present these copies of our preliminary report for the referenced project. This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazards, and geotechnical engineering studies, and offers preliminary recommendations for the design and development of the proposed project. Our report is preliminary since project plans were under development at the time this report was written. We should be allowed to review the recommendations presented in this report and modify them, if needed, once final project plans have been formulated. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations presented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, LNC. Kirkland, VVashington ,�. `� � ..r� �•�� i .� Matthew A. Miller; P.E. Principal Engineer MM/pc KE130637A2 Projeccs12013063T�KEt WP Kirkland Office � 911 Fifth Avenue � Kirkiand,WA 98033 P � 425.827.7701 F� 425.827.5424 Everett Office � 2911%Hewitt Avenue,Suite 2 � Everett,WA 98201 P �425.259-0522 F � 425.252.3��8 Tacoma Office � 1552 Commerce Street,Suite 102 � Tacoma,W'A 9R402 P � 253.722.2992 F � 253J22."t993 www.aesgeo.com � _� ��- < .��'�� ::� � 4_�, :_� � GeotecFinicaCEngi.�ieering A�sociated Earth Sciences, lllC. �. Serving the Pacific Northtivest Since 1g81 _�_ , Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and `- �, ��,.:, Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report 11�ater 2Zesources Summit Homes Renton � Renton, Washington � `! �`�' _ .� Prepared for �'�rv ironmentaC.�ssessm ents n-nc�Re7��e��iation SUrilIlllt HOIIleS � - Project No. KE130637A April 24, 2014 - - ,�" Sustai.ncz6Ce DeveCopment Se��vices � 3 } : ��' "�-- s: ; GeoCogic .�ssessments SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS, AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Summit Homes Renton Renton, Washington Prepared for: Summit Homes 16000 Christensen Road, Suite 303 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 S`" Avenue Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827-7701 Fax: 425-827-5424 April 24, 2014 Project No. KE130637A Subsurface Fxploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engtneering Repon Renton, Washington Project and Site Conditions I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazards, and preliminary geotechnical engineering studies for the proposed new residential subdivision at the subject site. The location of the subject site is shown on the "Vicinity Map," Figure 1. The approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the "Site and Exploration Plan," Figure 2. l.l Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical engineering design recommendations to be utilized in the design of the project. This study included a review of selected available geologic literature, completing exploration pits, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and shallow ground water. Geotechnical engineering studies were completed to establish recommendations for the type of suitable foundations and floors, allowable foundation soil bearing pressure, anticipated foundation and floor settlement, earthwork recommendations, and drainage considerations. This report summarizes our fieldwork and offers preliminary recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. We recommend that we be allowed to review the recommendations presented in this report and revise them, if needed, when a project design has been finalized. 1.2 Authorization Authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Summit Homes. Our work was completed in general accordance with our revised scope of work and cost proposal, dated November 26, 2013. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Summit Homes and its agents for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is located north of SE 192nd Street, just west of 124`h Avenue SE in Renton, Washington. The site includes four parcels (King Counry Parcel Nos. 6199000-241, -240, -260, and -101) with a total area of approximately 14 acres. The site slopes down to the east at Apri!24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTN SCIENCES, INC. LM;pc-KE130637A2-Projeds120l3A6371KEIWP Page 1 Subsurface Ezploration, Geologic Hazards, and • Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Renton, Washington Project and Site Conditions an inclination up to approximately 40 percent with an overall vertical relief of approximately 100 feet. There are no existing structures currently on the site; however, two homes previously occupying the southern side of the site have been demolished. The site is densely vegetated with evergreen and deciduous trees and various understory plants. The project will involve developing the subject parcels, constructing 72 single-family homes. We anticipate that the homes would be of wood-frame construction and would utilize conventional foundations with relatively light loading conditions. Based on the plans provided to us, there will be cuts and fills up to about 20 feet with mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls being used for grade separation. Under separate cover, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) is preparing designs for MSE walls up to 15 feet in height. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our subsurface exploration completed for this project included completing 12 exploration pits on January 7, 2013. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the explorations completed for this study. The locations and depths of the explorations were completed within site and budget constraints and are included in the Appendix. • 3.1 Exploration Pits Exploration pits were excavated with a large track-mounted excavator. The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by an engineering geologist from our firm. Disturbed soil samples were selected from the pits, placed in moisture-tight containers, and transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as needed. Testing was limited to visual-manual classification of the collected samples, grain size analysis, and Proctor testing in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard practices. After logging the exposed soils all exploration pits were backfilled with the excavated soil and lightly tamped with the excavator bucket. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of selected applicable geologic literature. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and • Apri124, 2014 ASSOClATED EARTN SCIENCES. INC. LM/pc-K£13A537A1-Projects1201306371KEIWP Page 2 Subsurface F.�cploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Renton, Washington Project and Site Conditions the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. 4.1 Stratigraphy Forest Duff/Topsoil Our pits generally encountered up to a 1-foot-thick surficial layer of topsoil or forest duff. Topsoil and forest duff is not suitable for structural support, and should be stripped from structural areas. Excavated topsoil may be suitable for reuse in landscape areas. Fill Fill soils (those not naturally placed) were encountered in explorations EP-7 and EP-9 and are anticipated to be found around the demolished homes and other areas of past grading, and over buried utilities. The fill at EP-7 (up to 2 feet thick) was related to an old, overgrown driveway or roadway. The fill encountered at EP-9 extended up to 7 feet in depth and was the building pad of one of the demolished homes. Generally the fill consisted of loose to medium dense, sand with silt and few to little amounts of gravel. Fill soils are considered to be unsuitable for foundation or pavement support. Existing fill should be removed from below planned building areas and should be re-worked anywhere it will remain under new paving. Excavated existing fill material may be suitable for reuse in structural fill applications if it is at a moisture content that allows compaction to the specified level for the intended use, and if all organic materials and any other deleterious materials are removed prior to use in structural fill applications. At the time of exploration, we estimate that the existing fill that we observed was above optimum moisture content for compaction purposes, and therefore may require drying during favorable weather prior to compaction in structural fill applications. Vashon Recessional Outwash Vashon recessional outwash was encountered near the toe of the slope on the east side of the site, at the locations of exploration pits EP-3, EP-4, EP-8, and EP-11, overlying the lodgement till where encountered. The recessional outwash generally consisted of inedium dense to dense, moist sand with variable gravel contents and trace to few amounts of silt. The upper 2 to 3 feet of the deposit was in a loose condition. Vashon recessional outwash was deposited by meltwater streams that emanated from the retreating glacial ice during the latter portion of the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation approximately 13,000 years ago. Recessional outwash soil is considered suitable for support of residential structures and paving with proper preparation. Excavated recessional outwash material may be suitable for reuse in structural fill applications if it is at a moisture content that allows compaction to the specified level for the intended use. At the time of exploration, we estimate that the recessional outwash that we April 24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. L'N/pc-KE130.537A?-Projects1201306371KE1WP Page 3 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and , Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon ' Renton, Washington Project and Site Conditions , observed was near optimum moisture content for compaction purposes. However during the ' wet season, shallow ground water may be encountered and these sediments may require drying ' during favorable weather prior to compaction in structural fill applications. � Vashon Lodgement Till All explorations except for EP-11 encountered lodgement till sediments. Lodgement till consists of an unsorted mixture of sand, silt, clay, gravel, and occasional cobbles. It was deposited at the base of an active continental glacier and was subsequently compacted to a very , dense condition by the weight of the overlying glacial ice. The lodgement till was occasionally stratified, interbedded with coarse-grained sands, especially at the north end of the site and near the transition between lodgement till and the assumed underlying advance outwash ', sediments. In general, these transitional sediments share characteristics of both lodgement till and advance outwash in varying proportions. Lodgement till rypically possesses high-strength , and low-compressibility attributes that are favorable for support of foundations, floor slabs, ', and paving, with proper preparation. Lodgement till is silty and moisture-sensitive. In the '� presence of moisture contents above the optimum moisture content for compaction purposes, lodgement till can be easily disturbed by vehicles and earthwork equipment. Careful I management of moisture-sensitive soils will be needed to reduce the potential for disturbance of wet lodgement till soils and costs associated with repairing disturbed soils. Excavated ' lodgement till material is suitable for use in structural fill applications if it can be compacted to the specified level for the intended use. At the time of exploration, we estimate that most of ' the lodgement till soils that we observed were above optimum moisture content for compaction ' purposes, and therefore may require drying during favorable weather prior to compaction in ' structural fill applications. ' Uashon Advance Outwash ' EP-1 and EP-2 encountered very dense, stratified granular sediments with trace to few amounts of silt below the lodgement till that were interpreted to represent advance outwash sediments. The advance outwash was often interbedded with layers or lenses containing significant amounts silt. Advance outwash was deposited by meltwater streams at the base of an advancing glacier, and was subsequently compacted by the weight of the overlying glacial ice. Advance outwash is suitable for support of shallow foundations and paving with proper preparation. Excavated advance outwash sediments are expected to be suitable for reuse in most structural fill applications, and are expected to be moderately moisture-sensitive; somewhat less moisture-sensitive than lodgement till. At the time of exploration, we estimate that the advance outwash that we observed was near optimum moisture content for compaction purposes. Apri124, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SClENCES, INC. LMipc-KE130637,12-Projedsl2013063TKElWP Page 4 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Renton, Washington Project and Si[e Conditions Published Geologic Map Our interpretations of subsurface conditions on-site are generally consistent with published geologic maps of the area (Derek B. Booth, Kathy A. Troost, and Aaron P. Wisher, 2007, Geologic Map of King County, Washington: Universiry of Washington, GeoMapNW, scale 1:100,000). The referenced map indicates that the project area is expected to be underlain by lodgement till with recessional outwash exposed on the eastern edge of the project area. 4.2 Hydrology Shallow ground water seepages were observed in EP-2, and EP-4 through EP-8. Ground water seepages were especially prevalent perched in the top 2 to 3 feet within the drainages on the slope particularly at the locations of EP-6 through EP-8. The observed water is interpreted to be perched ground water, which occurs when surface water infiltrates down through relatively permeable soils, such as the recessional outwash or weathered till, and becomes trapped or "perched" atop a comparatively impermeable barrier such as the unweathered till. This water may travel as interflow and typically will follow the ground surface topography. The duration and quantity of interflow seepage will largely depend on the soil grain-size '� distribution, topography, seasonal precipitation, on- and off-site land usage, and other factors. I 4.3 Infiltration Potential Potential infiltration receptor sediments encountered during our subsurface exploration include recessional outwash and advance outwash. Grain size analyses of selected samples of these deposits were completed in our laboratory and are attached to this report in the Appendix. The recessional outwash sieve data indicates a content of fine-grained material (passing the No. 200 sieve) of up to about 7 percent. The advance outwash sieve data indicates a content of fine- grained material (passing the No. 200 sieve) of up to about 20 percent. In general the advance outwash consisted of stratified coarse-grained sand and gravel with occasional thin layers of silty material. The higher fines content reflected in the advance outwash grain size analyses is primarily a result of these observed silty layers. Based on the observed subsurface conditions and laboratory sieve data, both the recessional outwash and advance outwash appear to be suitable receptor soils for infiltration of storm water runoff. However, field infiltration testing will be required to deternune design infiltration rates for these sediments. The installation of ground water monitoring wells is also recommended to determine the level of seasonal high ground water which will be critical in the design of any infiltration facilities. Infiltration testing and installation of monitoring wells were not part of our current scope of work; however, this work has been scheduled and will be addressed under a separate letter. Apri!24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, /NC. LM/pc-KE130d37A2-Projtcts12013063TKE1WP Page 5 Subsurface Faploration, Geologic Hatards, and 'I Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report ' Renton, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations I II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS I The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, slope, and ground and surface water conditions, as observed and discussed herein. The discussion will be limited to seismic and erosion issues. 5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS Earthquakes occur regularly in the Puget Lowland. The majority of these events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur, as evidenced by the 1949, 7.2-magnitude event; the 2001, 6.8-magnitude event; and the 1965, 6.5-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within a given 20-year period. Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: 1) surficial ground rupture, 2) seismically induced landslides, 3) liquefaction, and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is discussed below. 5.1 Surficial Ground Rupture The nearest known fault to the project is the Seattle Fault Zone, located approximately 10 miles north of the site. Studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (e.g., Johnson et al., 1994, Origin and Evokttion of the Seattle Fault and Seattle Basin, Washington, Geology, v. 22, p.71-74; and Johnson et al., 1999, Active Tectonics of the Seattle Fault and Central Puget Sound Washington - Implications for Earthquake Hazards, Geological Society of America Bulletin, July 1999, v. 111, n. 7, p. 1042-1053) have provided evidence of surficial ground rupture along a northern splay of the Seattle Fault. The recognition of this fault is relatively new and data pertaining to it are limited, with the studies still ongoing. According to the USGS studies, the latest movement of this fault was about 1,100 years ago when about 20 feet of surficial displacement took place. This displacement can presently be seen in the form of raised, wave-cut beach terraces along Alki Point in West Seattle and Restoration Point at the south end of Bainbridge Island. The recurrence interval of movement along these fault systems is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess of several thousand years. Due to the suspected long recurrence interval, the potential for surficial ground rupture is considered to be low during the expected life of the structure. Apri!24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LM/pc-KE130637A2-Projects1201306371KEtWP Page 6 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations 5.2 Landslide Hazards The Critical Areas Regulations section (4-3-050) of the City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC) defines landslide hazards and steep slopes as follows: 1. Landslide Hazards: Low Landslide Hazard (LL): Areas with slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). Medium Landslide Hazard (LM): Areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or glacial till. High Landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent (40%o), and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%} and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. Very High Landslide Hazards (LV): Areas of known mappable landslide deposits. 2. Steep Slopes. Slope, Protected: A hillside, or portion thereof, with an average slope of forty percent (40%) or greater grade and having a minunum vertical rise of fifteen feet (15'}. Slope, Sensitive: A hillside, or portion thereof, characterized by: (1) an average slope of twenty five percent (25%) to less than forty percent (40%); or (2) an average slope of forty percent (40%) or greater with a vertical rise of less than fifteen feet (15'), abutting an average slope of twenty five percent (25%) ta forty percent (40%). This definition excludes engineered retaining walls.` The existing slopes on-site and surrounding the site meet the criterion above for Medium Landside Hazards with portions of the site meeting the above definition of Sensitive Slope. Where these types of geologic hazards are present on the site of a proposed development, a geotechnical report is required to demonsvate that the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions. Observations were made of the slope during completion of our subsurface exploration. The trunks of the observed trees generally appeared to be straight and vertical, with no significant bowing. No tension cracks, emergent seepage, hummocky topography, mid-slope terraces, or ' Reproduced from City of Renton Municipal Code, December 9, 2013, Code Publishing Company Apri124, 2014 .�SSOCIATED EARTN SCIENCES, lNC. LM/pc-KEl3P637A2-Projectsi201306371KE1WP Page 7 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report ' Renton, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations other indications of slope instability were observed on any of the site slopes. We understand that the inclination of the site slopes will generally be reduced by future planned project grading. In addition to cuts and fills to reduce existing slope grades, retaining walls will be used for grade separation and for support of steep cuts. Given the apparent lack of evidence of slope instability, the proposed site grading, and the subsurface conditions observed (very dense lodgement till or medium dense to dense coarse-grained sand and gravels), it is our opinion that the risk of damage to the proposed development and adjacent properties by landslide activiry is low. 5.3 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a process through which uncorisolidated soil loses strength as a result of vibrations, such as those which occur during a seismic event. During normal conditions, the weight of the soil is supported by both grain-to-grain contacts•and by the fluid pressure within the pore spaces of the soil below the water table. Extreme vibratory shaking can disrupt the grain-to-grain contact, increase the pore pressure, and result in a temporary decrease in soil shear strength. The soil is said to be liquefied when nearly all of the weight of the soil is supported by pore pressure alone. Liquefaction can result in deformation of the sediment and settlement of overlying structures. Areas most susceptible to liquefaction include those areas underlain by non-cohesive silt and sand with low relative densities, accompanied by a shallow water table. The subsurface conditions encountered at the site pose little risk of liquefaction due to the relatively high density and coarse-grained nature of the observed sediments. No detailed ' liquefaction analysis was completed as part of this study, and none is warranted, in our opinion. 5.4 Ground Motion Structural design of buildings should follow the current applicable building code. The applicable code at the time this report was written is the 2012 International Building Code (IBC). The 2012 IBC defines Site Classification by reference to Table 20.3.-1 of the American Society of Civil Engineers publication ASCE 7, the current version of which is ASCE 7-10. In our opinion the subsurface conditions at the site are consistent with a Site Classification of "C" as defined in the referenced documents. 6.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The following discussion addresses Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) erosion control regulations that will be applicable to the project. The City of Renton definition April 24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LM/pc-KE130637A2-Projeas12013U637tKElWP Page 8 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and ' Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report ! Renton, Washington Geofogic Hazards and Mitigations �� of Erosion Hazards is dependent on United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation I!I Service (SCS) map designations. The published SCS map for the site indicates that the site soils consist of Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, with slopes inclined up to 30 percent that are ' considered by the City to be a High Erosion Hazard. In our opinion, implementation of the '� following recommendations should be suitable to address the City and Ecology requirements for management of erosion hazards. The Ecology Construction Storm Water General Pernut (also known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] permit) requires weekly Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) inspections, turbidity monitoring and pH monitoring for all sites 1 or more acres in size that discharge storm water to surface waters of the state. Because we anticipate that the proposed project will require disturbance of more than 1 acre, we anticipate that these inspection and reporting requirements will be triggered. The following recommendations are related to general erosion potential and mitigation. Project planning and construction should follow local standards of practice with respect to temporary erosion and sedimentation control. Best management practices (BMPs) should include but not be limited to: 1. Construction activity should be scheduled or phased as much as possible to reduce the amount of earthwork activity that is performed during the winter months. 2. The winter performance of a site is dependent on a well-conceived plan for control of site erosion and storm water runoff. The site plan should include ground-cover measures, access roads, and staging areas. The contractor should be prepared to implement and maintain the required erosion control measures to reduce the amount of exposed ground. 3. TESC measures for a given area to be graded or otherwise worked should be installed soon after ground clearing. The recommended sequence of construction within a given area after clearing would be to install TESC elements and perimeter flow control prior to starting grading. 4. During the wetter months of the year, or when large storm events are predicted during the summer months, each work area should be stabilized so that if showers occur, the work area can receive the rainfall without excessive erosion or sediment transport. The required measures for an area to be "buttoned-up" will depend on the time of year and the duration the area will be left un-worked. During the winter months, areas that are to be left un-worked for more than 2 days should be mulched or covered with plastic. During the summer months, stabilization will usually consist of seal-rolling the subgrade. Such measures will aid in the contractor's ability to get back into a work area after a storm event. The stabilization process also includes establishing temporary Apri124, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LM�pc-KE130637A1-Projecfs1201306371KE1WP Page 9 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Prelirrtinary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations storm water conveyance channels through work areas to route runoff to the approved treatment/discharge facilities. 5. All disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. If it is outside of the growing season, the disturbed areas should be covered with mulch, as recommended in the erosion control plan. Straw mulch provides a cost-effective cover measure and can be made wind-resistant with the application of a tackifier after it is placed. 6. Surface runoff and discharge should be controlled during and following development. Uncontrolled discharge may promote erosion and sediment transport. Under no circumstances should concentrated discharges be allowed to flow over the top of steep slopes. 7. Soils that are to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner as to reduce erosion from the stockpile. Protective measures may include, but are not limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, or the use of silt fences around pile perimeters. It is our opinion that with the proper implementation of the TESC plans and by field-adjusting appropriate mitigation elements (BMPs) during construction, the potential adverse impacts from erosion hazards on the project may be mitigated. Apri!24, 2014 ASSOCIATED F.ARTH SCIENCES, INC. LM/pc-KE130637A2-Projeas120130637tKEIWP Page 10 Subsurface Ezplorarion, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Hoines Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton, Washing�on Preliminary Design Recommendations III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 7.0 INTRODUCTION It is our opinion that from a geotechnical standpoint, the site is suitable for the proposed residential development provided that the recommendations provided herein are properly followed. Medium dense to very dense native soils were encountered at relatively shallow � depths in our exploration pits on the site. Fill soils were encountered in areas surrounding the previously demolished houses. Existing fill is not suitable for structural support and should be removed from building areas. 8.0 SITE PREPARATION Existing buried utilities, vegetation, topsoil, and any other deleterious materials should be removed where they are located below planned construction areas. All disturbed soils resulting I, from demolition activities should be removed to expose underlying undisturbed native ', sediments and replaced with structural fill, as needed. All excavations below final grade made I for demolition activities should be backfilled, as needed, with structural fill. Erosion and � surface water control should be established around the clearing limits to satisfy local requirements. Once demolition has been completed, any existing fill should be addressed. Fill soils were encountered in areas surrounding the previously demolished houses. We recommend that existing fill be removed from below areas of planned foundations to expose underlying undisturbed native sediments. If structural fill is required for restoration of the planned foundation grade, our recommendations detailed in Section 9.0, "Structural Fill" should be followed. Removal of existing fill should extend laterally beyond the building footprint by a distance equal to the depth of overexcavation. For example, if existing fill is removed to a depth of 2 feet below a planned footing area, the excavation should also extend laterally 2 feet beyond the building footprint in that area. Where existing fill is removed and replaced with structural fill, conventional shallow foundations may be used for building support. 8.1 Site Drainage and Surface Water Control The site should be graded to prevent water from ponding in construction areas and/or flowing into excavations. Exposed grades should be crowned, sloped, and smooth drum-rolled at the end of each day to facilitate drainage. Accumulated water must be removed from subgrades and work areas immediately prior to performing further work in the area. Equipment access may be limited, and the amount of soil rendered unfit for use as structural fill may be greatly I Apri!24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LAl�Pc-KE130G37A2-Projeds120130G3TiKE1WP Page 11 Subsurface Erploration, Geologic Hazards, and • Summit Homes Renron Preliminary Geotechnica!Engineering Report Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations increased if drainage efforts are not accomplished in a timely sequence. If an effective drainage system is not utilized, project delays and increased costs could be incurred due to the greater quantities of wet and unsuitable fill, or poor access and unstable subgrade conditions. Shallow ground water was observed in some of the exploration pits, particularly within the drainages and channels on the slope at depths of about 2 feet and below. We anticipate that perched ground water will be encountered in excavations completed during construction, especially during the wet season. We do not anticipate the need for extensive dewatering in advance of excavations; however, contractor should be prepared to intercept any ground water seepage entering the excavations and route it to a suitable discharge location. 8.2 Subgrade Protection If building construction will proceed during the winter, we recommend the use of a working surface of sand and gravel, crushed rock, or quarry spalls to protect exposed soils, particularly in areas supporting concentrated equipment traffic. In winter construction staging areas and areas that will be subjected to repeated heavy loads, such as those that occur during construction of masonry walls, a minimum thickness of 12 inches of quarry spalls or 18 inches of pit run sand and gravel is recommended. If subgrade conditions are soft and silty, a • geotextile separation fabric, such as Mirafi SOOX or approved equivalent, should be used between the subgrade and the new fill. For building pads where floor slabs and foundation construction will be completed in the winter, a similar working surface should be used, composed of at least 6 inches of pit run sand and gravel or crushed rock. Construction of working surfaces from advancing fill pads could be used to avoid directly exposing the subgrade soils to vehicular traffic. Foundation subgrades may require protection from foot and equipment traffic and ponding of runoff during wet weather conditions. Typically, compacted crushed rock or a lean-mix concrete mat placed over a properly prepared subgrade provides adequate subgrade protection. Foundation concrete should be placed and excavations backfilled as soon as possible to protect the bearing surface. 8.3 Proof-Rolling and Subgrade Compaction Following the recommended demolition, site stripping, and planned excavation, the stripped subgrade within the building and pavement areas should be proof-rolled with heavy, rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a fully loaded, tandem-axle dump truck. Proof-rolling should be performed prior to structural fill placement. The proof-roll should be monitored by the geotechnical engineer so that any soft or yielding subgrade soils can be identified. Any soft/loose, yielding soils should be removed to a stable subgrade. The subgrade should then be scarified, adjusted in moisture content, and recompacted to the • Aprrl 24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. 4K.�pc-KE13A537A2-Projects12013063TKE�WP Page 12 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations required density. Proof-rolling should only be attempted if soil moisture contents are at or near optimum moisture content. Proof-rolling of wet subgrades could result in further degradation. Low areas and excavations may then be raised to the planned finished grade with compacted structural fill. Subgrade preparation and selection, placement, and compaction of structural fill should be performed under engineering-monitored conditions in accordance with the project specifications. 8.4 Overexcavation/Stabilization Construction during extended wet weather periods could create the need to overexcavate exposed soils if they become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated moisture content and/or weather conditions. Even during dry weather periods, soft/wet soils, which may need to be overexcavated, may be encountered in some portions of the site. If overexcavation is necessary, it should be confirmed through continuous observation and testing by AESI. Soils that have become unstable may require remedial measures in the form of one or more of the following: 1. Drying and recompaction. Selective drying may be accomplished by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry and warm weather. 2. Removal of affected soils to expose a suitable bearing subgrade and replacement with compacted structural fill. 3. Mechanical stabilization with a coarse-crushed aggregate compacted into the subgrade, possibly in conjunction with a geotextile. 4. Soil/cement admixture stabilization. 8.5 Wet Weather Conditions If construction proceeds during an extended wet weather construction period and the moisture-sensitive site soils become wet, they will become unstable. Therefore, the bids for site grading operations should be based upon the time of year that construction will proceed. It is expected that in wet conditions, addirional soils may need to be removed and/or other stabilization methods used, such as a coarse crushed-rock working mat to develop a stable condition if silty subgrade soils are disturbed in the presence of excess moisture. The severiry of construction disturbance will be dependent, in part, on the precautions that are taken by the contractor to protect the moisture- and disturbance-sensitive site soils. If overexcavation is necessary, it should be confirmed through continuous observation and testing by a representarive of our firm. Apri124, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LM�c-KE130637A2-Projects1�013063TKEIW'P Page 13 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations 8.6 Temporary and Permanent Cut Slopes In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined during construction. For estimating purposes, however, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes in the lodgement till and advance outwash may be planned at 1 H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical). Cut slopes in the recessional outwash or existing fill may be planned at 1.SH:1V. As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur, and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. If ground water seepage is encountered in cut slopes, or if surface water is not routed away from temporary cut slope faces, flatter slopes will be required. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. Permanent cut and structural fill slopes that are not intended to be exposed to surface water should be designed at inclinations of 2H:1 V or flatter. All permanent cut or fill slopes should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM:D 1557, and the slopes should be protected from erosion by sheet plastic until vegetation cover can be established during favorable weather. 8.7 Frozen Subgrades If earthwork takes place during freezing conditions, all exposed subgrades should be allowed to thaw and then be recompacted prior to placing subsequent lifts of structural fill or foundation components. Alternatively, the frozen material could be stripped from the subgrade to reveal unfrozen soil prior to placing subsequent lifts of fill or foundation components. The frozen soil should not be reused as structural fill until allowed to thaw and adjusted to the proper moisture content, which may not be possible during winter months. 9.0 STRUCTURAL FILL All references to strucmral fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type and placement, and compaction of materials, as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this report, the value given in that section should be used. After stripping, planned excavation, and any required overexcavation have been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground in areas to receive fill should be re-compacted to a firm and unyielding condition, as determined by the geotechnical engineer. If the subgrade contains silty soils and too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain, and should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical, placement of an April 24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LN,pc-KE130637A2-Projects12013Q5371KE1RP Page 14 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendatiorrs engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of the free-draining layer by silt migration from below. After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free-draining rock course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts, with each lift being compacted to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. Soils excavated on-site are acceptable for use in structural fills if they can be moisture conditioned and compacted to project specifications for the intended use. In the case of roadway and utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with current City codes and standards. The top of the compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the locations of the perimeter footings or pavement edges before sloping down at an angle of 2H:1V. The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 72 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered moisture-sensitive. Use of moisture-sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. Some of the native soils present on-site contained significant amounts of silt (lodgement till) and are considered highly moisture-sensitive. In addition, construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. If fill (particularly stockpiled on-site lodgement till) is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a clean, free-draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free-draining fill consists of non-organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction with at least 25 percent retained on the No. 4 sieve. A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in-place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses, and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a suitable monitoring and testing program. April 24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Lrtfipc-XE130637.1�-Projecul201306371KEfRP Page 15 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations 10.0 FOUNDATIONS Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on suitable medium dense to very dense native soils or structural fill placed as previously discussed. The depth to foundation bearing soils was approximately 2 to 3 feet in all exploration pits except EP-9 where existing fill was encountered to depths up to 7 feet. We recommend that an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (ps fl be utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings require only 12 inches burial. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no footing should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. It should be noted that the area bound by lines extending downward at 1 H:1 V from any footing must not intersect another footing or any filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a 1.SH:1V line extending down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils. Anticipated settlement of footings founded as described above should be on the order of �/ inch or less. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing j placement could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI '� prior to placing concrete to verify that the design bearing capaciry of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required by the governing municipality. Perimeter footing drains should be provided, as discussed under the "Drainage Considerations" section of this report. 10.1 Drainage Considerations Foundations should be provided with foundarion drains. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe sunounded by washed pea gravel. The drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the proposed buildings. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain. Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the buildings at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. We recommend that a gradient of at least 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeters be provided, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. Apri!24, 2014 ASSOCJATED EARTH SCIENCES, lNC. LM/pc-KE130637A2-Proj�crs1201306371KEIWP Page 16 i Subsurface Ezploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations 11.0 FLOOR SUPPORT � Floor slabs can be supported on suitable native sediments, or on structural fill placed above suitable native sediments. Floor slabs should be cast atop a minimum of 4 inches of clean, washed, crushed rock or pea gravel to act as a capillary break. Areas of subgrade that are disturbed (loosened) during construction should be compacted to a non-yielding condition prior to placement of capillary break material. Floor slabs should also be protected from dampness ; by an impervious moisture banier at least 10 mils thick. The moisture barrier should be placed between the capillary break material and the concrete slab. 12.0 FOUNDATION WALLS � � All backfill behind foundation walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our I recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally backfilled walls, which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pounds per cubic foot (pc�. Fully restrained, horizontally backfilled, rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent fluid of 50 pcf. Walls with sloping backfill up to a maximum gradient of 2H:1 V should be designed j using an equivalent fluid of 55 pcf for yielding conditions or 75 pcf for fully restrained ', conditions. If parking areas are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in determining lateral design forces. As required by the 2012 IBC, retaining wall design should include a seismic surcharge pressure in addition to the equivalent fluid pressures presented above. Considering the site soils and the recommended wall backfill materials, we recommend a seismic surcharge pressure of 15H and 20H psf, where H is the wall height in feet for the active and at-rest loading conditions, respectively. The seismic surcharge should be modeled as a rectangular distribution with the resultant applied at the midpoint of the walls. The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill consisting of excavated on-site soils, or imported structural fill compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D 1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended, as this will increase the pressure acting on the walls. A lower compaction may result in settlement of the slab-on-grade or other structures supported above the walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by our firm during placement. Surcharges from adjacent footings or heavy construction equipment must be added to the above values. Perimeter footing drains should be provided for all retaining walls, as discussed under the "Drainage Considerations" section of this report. April 24, 2014 ASSOClATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. LM/pc-KE13Q637A2-rroject,r120l30637110E1WP Page 17 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum, 1-foot-wide blanket drain to within 1 foot of finish grade for the full wall height using imported, washed gravel against the walls. A pre-fabricated drainage mat is not an acceptable alternative to the washed gravel blanket drain unless all backfill behind the wall is free-draining. 12.1 Passive Resistance and Friction Factors Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the natural glacial soils or supporting structural fill soils, and by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with structural fill and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density to achieve the passive resistance provided below. We recommend the following allowable design parameters: • Passive equivalent fluid = 250 pcf • Coefficient of friction = 0.30 13.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING Our report is preliminary since project plans were not finalized at the time this report was written. We recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way, we can confirm that our earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during I', construction. The integriry of the foundation system depends on proper site preparation and I construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know, and we will prepare a cost proposal. A ri!24 2014 II p . ASSOCIATED F.ARTH SCIENCES, INC. r.wa-xE��A2-r.o��u�zolsa6.in�wp Page 18 Subsurface Erploration, Geologic Hazards, m�d Summit Homes Renton Preliminary Geotechnica!Engineering Report Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, Ii�'C. Kirkland, Washington ,�Ntiw A. � � Q�� pf ,� S'�i� F ��Q y� � � � � ! G S��sT� ��c?��v �� U . oc��E Z .-�. Luke Mi szewski, L.G. Matthew A. Miller, P.E. Senior Staff Geologist Principal Engineer Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site and Exploration Plan Appendix: Exploration Logs Laboratory Test Results April 24, 2014 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, I�VC. L41 p<'-KE13(��,'.4:-Projects 201�063?�tiEiR'P Page 19 , , .:� . , - ��S /� i:�l • � `,'..' �� ; d_'— '_ r .. `-. �� i i, ; �; � ' .�' �l �� _-,.�' � -- � � �( , � �� t� �� 'a � . . ��, �-'^.1� � �t � if � �� 'r-1` t ` ' �+ � � �� ` I tit`i� � !- _.�� tr ` :�� 4 '� �: .��._ ., � �,� � `� _�- Q : `�� ., , � ��`, ` �' '�, ' � -- �� .� ,� � � ' � �,+�. `' ' au� - � - l t� � i � +f�nvpoo�d.�.� ';� �� ; � , , � Ga� u�d �ul r � . 1r.. '�, � i i"�l 'j � t ; ,'� ��L�� . � `' }� Y ' �. ' '.-`�'.``;+ • :_ , l� . �� _ - � : '' � `�� ` ,\ � ..�.," _�' ,.: r.� ..,-- - -;�` � � � ' .� ' �� 1 , � � ::f� ,-�`�L �.. .1 •�• �\ � �•C. . � � 'k q,y ,�� b �.� ��!` � _ �` J ' � _ J { � .:k,~ •� �;`' � � ��. ;� ��,�;�.�•; ; S� � ;. �`� ti :� t' ' `�.`� r); � .1��-,� �� I. f � iI � i � „ � �.` - -�. , :� t ' i ,;; �,A `� , '� - � •a. �� . \ � .J�` i `�. ��•y�� ._. t � `.� ��_2t �� / • . , � �•3 • '�.... � 1 �:� . � , ' '-� � .��.. ' ,'. .� i ! % �{ � i•'t _'� . ' _ 1y _� 1 '33 �' J�r`-J� '�� - L`� � A'1` • •��C '�, �� t ~,\t� •'; '.0\� ��J .l . . . -�..__ ,, -� �� ,�' Il r' �'1 � ' �, � r , � • , _` . �: �',� �, � , -'T � ` :. �y } f ' WT , .. � ��' ( 3 1 4-� �{i . � ;r i� •�; ,. � _ SITE .t��- , � .i. • sn : � l �. '" �,. ,� �. .�. • _J �' ,,� ,' ; ,s . ;Z, �.5• ;� ',\i �� Jr .� ' 't • \ .. �_, ; '�� j � .�. 'J: ��,�� . j ` • • • `t r � • s•�• ( ..,.•�r. • •,s93 ' 1 � i .i� .� � \ 1 `� �� Y� • ��• 1 � �t� ��--; ' �j � � \ �,1�" •�, � �T�� 1 I ; , � � _� � �� . ��=�� :�� - ' �� :. � ;:��` s . -{�� 0 � �nn --- -, � ---- i . �„•• +a. css z �'i'�� ,�- f '�. �� ,'�; _l� "__ " ' � w ��'. � ��' .�-�=��_ � •.1�. , - . G� - - � f' .� �'� '�- 'p �;�`°, - �, � (.� �, �� ,�� . ' ' �� -�_ . v� � .� �p '� 1 • � , � f•� \ [ '` �� .,l . ��; . .: � \ s _ ' � . .e. //.-� '1.l t`� �'.. , \ r V-• r� ! .-� l� �{-+�~ �t�� , �`'' K� � ( � --�- ;� � � e i—.�-'� � � T \� ' �� 5' --- 1 � SE \ t y,,,, ' �. '• w �� I' • ,�� ;.l ` /1S .i �._'�� .. � .. � ( .-1 •' � .\ •�t 7 '�, � � , i �/ .•J. � . i.� l � . •' . � j; �i- - �� l � .i n \ � i��,j . . . •� �l'.r �. _ •r^'•_ � . � ,� w_ �, .,,yi . !,,-. j f�� N u � ��'. �' , �' 'r. A � � �; •t �:. ��; � ':��.` ' /,� g / _ � . � � ` � _ i ' � � �� ` • • 1 � u \ + L �: `;l' v i '` PatR�: ` . . �� , Ci .� .ch , o �o00 2000 � NOTE: BLACK AND NMITE REPRODUCTION OF THIS COLOR ORIGINAL MAY FEET � REFERENCE: USGS TOPO! REDUCE ITS EFFECTIVENESS AND LEAD TO INCORRECT INTERPRETATION. � E Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 � SUMMIT HOMES RENTON �a,r� tna � � a � � RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ.NO. KE130637A ! � � � I : _�� ,,.,, �a"' cc!usntucnow t �.y �•u „,� EMftlWCE � � vrr �� GRADtNGLMNTS-, '., � t � , _ r` � ca `F -___.._-�--�_'.-'__—,__ �-�__� __ " � - �' y "�i '' - O IO a � �h� -_._.. ___ _ _____ -_ ' � ` _ _ . _- . _ ��- J g- __ -- � vr-�°N� 3�;�--"��,�e— r, >, , EP-2 EP-1 .r_f:, ai L �� -�+,'�rr- . ��,, �� ,� �Ep'f"r�' REC `,, ?i . ; i �. '_��,i �r _ f�-i �''��.,��..�, ; _f � , TNC PARCEL � 1 2 � ��J --� .-�-..�_- - - - - -a __ �;�: �. 'a � ; � ` - � ----- -- --- #3323059G10 i�}Gpq 4 I � � �' �i' �]EP-16 �� _ 'S� � � i r � TRACT ~ � ' g�� - �.t-�i.� o i � �-� �� -�'� �, /� - —_.,_\\ ��f� �r s�s�!�!'��a�.�-�.�s � � / � 1i' ` , ` 2 1 -� NGPA �" �� `• -� r� � t . .<,'. . . .I.� TRAGT �s '• -- � % Cr7EP-3 } ex:s�*+c r ; ��:� :��-s• _ _ -- � EP-15 , E�� ; � f '• -�I� .� V-'""�_ ,� �,, a UT...,T„ � j- i '�.� _ ("'v'^'',- -- _�` � J � ;.� � �, - � t .` - �,(— _��, _G � - _ --� c r-�F�EP-14 � �4 ._ _�h c . 1: • : l+ I � � : ; ,?F_�� 1.,: } . Q ,C ��. 2 =Y .:FfOJSF ,_ j I . K 1` 1�� j� I I�I 1�1 "!� �EP-4 � � F /�'�� /� ;�]EP� - �� a - �� '.�-° l 1!� �I i I'tI I j�l �� c y ' '`� �; _��.� _ _ '� i � � ,�. _ � , � ,1 ��1 4;y �rF ss 1 s� �� 68 , - , � EP-5 '1 - - , , � -- � � 1� � 65 �f � ,i� �� ' C t � :/ ' � `,�_ ' ^ Y� t 'o; "�`" `' s3 ' i � 11� l�I ! � � ' �- -� '��,�-� , ,��. 5 �` � .�� _ � . , - = � � � �- , a.� v�` ` �} �EP�� .��_�, ; �- T,,:. - ;�' �' _ - --- - - _ � , \ �� 35 �,� P 1 � �JEP�- i ��. 6Q ,� 4- •1 a .r ._' �� J ��_ +--- .�-- { _. .__�- __ � ��.r � �\ �\ _ �\ E:.�STiNG NCUSE-, I � . _ - �E - � Z m' _ -- - - �.. _ . _ . „ , — --. „� � . � , i� < <`_-. _ _ ,--y � \ - - _ _ � EP-8 \ 3s� . _ - - _. Y� 59 `\ - 7 , - � _ �� - aono�, � _ _ � , � '=~� . �j � � t - � �- �!- ' -- i � 3•'' ``� _ /' '� e�� ;,, 1 c�sron+s j # � . K" � -, { ' �EP-13 38 �`\ �1 - ' \�•- I f , corvst�ucnor+ i ' "A� ,.e-� �� - i � i i ,�5 ';, �� % � �- � , E�tx�+tf ; ` � '�, 1 ` ' ,:,i / '-� 7,f� � • "� �;- � � �" �i ��' ' `'�.� � 4 �� ! �F_ I�( q5 44 43 �� 42 i�' 41 ;i+ 4a �{��` � �_ _ .� _ -- `� - ~�� i y �r �\`�351.11, _50i�`'� 49��'48 y�47 �t� 46��` i ;' l EP$ 4 �� - -- _ � EP-7 OPEN � � ,j> EP-1 ,, � , , . � , OPEN � , � ``` '�r y , _J�� r^� � �- _ `'� ;%/ - '<: �'''k�EP-9 34 -- � � -- S?RCE �, � :-- SPACE _ -� � � 'r � � 52 ; i F- - ' ; , � �" .��---� �t`- T ,,' . �� ,.,.- J �+- ' k � " `� - � ...: t , ��: i _ ,a ___•;��, f �s l�� •, � • � _ - ____,-- EP-5 � , � � _ -�� - _ � � ; _ . , I ' TR4CT ; � � � ' �� Y �� z� RACT .� .� - — MW \�\\i � - ' �,.i � . � ! \;.� :.. � : , ,. -- _ _ ��~ E �' ,', J ,� .. ��" � -- - ,,.a � � � � . . �--_-�. 9 ��- �. , N� . � �t . 1 �� : � ., . . � �� . __ _ � {` — . ��!i . -„'f_.� _. _ ��.�i:..1 _.:J�,-�:+� � r` �i� x �t N ..___s _Y {!: _ P �� _ � �- � i -�� ' ' -�:�� 57 ' � 58 ( " :��" � � -- i - - -- ` �3j'`,� ' , `�. 7� ' �_ ' f, i � - � '�EP 2 ,� � �j( , �-� �_,� �� , .�.Y: -�� .-� �$�� != _ „ ��_EP-12 _ ,. � - �� ` `y; `' J�L. �� " �� ',�� — — — _�' ..`'_ � �a"'i�!--_�1� ' �'� 3Q � � - __� , ' ` .;� � 4� f' ' o " '�:;� _� i�,t- — -�---'�c-�'s' �. � `.� }' - i � � `i I 9�' � 29 `\� ;:; y,. '�-:o �. # � � 1'i I � I � ^' , „ oPEN � Ep-1Q � 2s i I 27 .� �EP-7 \. . , � ;.,. ` � � " —�_ �x�_f' SPACE '� '. �� . I 1 i i�J �� j I `1� j � P6�° . 'r�� 1 i' f} r ' ...I � � � � � � ��` TRACT -• _ - _ _ , _ . ' ' � - = -- - .r'----=-- —_---_—__.._` � t �. k .�". �-• , , - ,- _ _. _ �• � � � � t - ; t _ _ . _ ,. _ ; _ ,. . >. � ' �' OPEN _ :- `'- _� - - - 3- ,: . _- 3 �. . i t• a - � • a st- ' 3.r i� �-�__� �� " � �-s. � � .c' 1 -- ' - - -- -- � SPACE ` �' ' . � � � - ! ' ---------- - APPROXIMATE LOCATION _ �� _ 4 ; �r. o _ --. �.�� ._ t ._ T��p-12 �� ; � ' �.��:.:;a�, ; ' OF EXPLORATION PIT ,Y , �.�a� �— — # $t, ^ '�i�___ �._ � � _ - �' r- PFIVR'E 4:�8C -� n., ' GARY FLOWERS, PLLC, 2005 ! � �� - / ,� l � ; �' � , � lYp � � i! r, �"" �� ,T i�, f�� `I"- ; � �EP-10 ' �, � f�` r '' _- '�23 � ; z � � -;' o i z� �II Z��EP-11 ' 1s !+I 1� ��i �s 'if �5 '! � �a ' r; yi1 � � i � � � � � � ;�—i i EP-6� � � ��_� ; �4! �'� i�f{ u� , � W ` - - �` - t �-�''t_ --�-I`��r� _ �_�l� �1 r I._ J t '_ _ �.. �c �� . . _ . 1 - .- . v � .s,, y„ � . � ' ^ f . ' � . . . . !: �tr.k..�, z Q , �. a j � � ' � �! tJSFCi%96.:�.�Or yv'��a � �-�'% �='-"+'��3i:.StrGti I � � �j i� i--- ----- APPROXIMATE LOCATION � i ` I � ' " � ! z � I - -- ` �S �T�}6';Id,7_l _ � �� ; OF EXPLORATION PIT � AESI -TYP � � � � ? ' o so �oo � REFERENCE: MEAD�HUNT FEET �� Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 2 SUMMIT HOMES RENTON DATE 1/14 � � � � � RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ.NO. KE130637A APPENDIX Exploration Logs Laboratory Test Results � •o� Well-graded gravel and Terms Describing Relative Density and Consistency LL g o000 Gw 9ravelwith sand,littleto Dens' SPT�blows/foot o LL o no fines Coarse- Very Loose 0 to 4 � m o o LAOSe 4 to 10 > o m �°�°�° Poorhr-graded gravel Graned Soils � v i'n v��o°o GP Medium Dense 10 to 30 Test Symbols � � o 0 0 0 o and gravel with sand, Dense 30 to 50 o °o o�o�o little to no fines y�,pe� �50 G=Grain Sae N oe z �o�o� M=Masture Content Z N a Consistency SPT�Z�blows/foot A=Atterberg Limits � � °�o Silty gravel and silty very soft o to 2 C=Chemical � ��`— o ,0,C GM gravel with sand Fine- �tt 2 to 4 DD=Dry Densiry � �� LL � Grained Sals Medium Stiff 4 to 8 K=Permeability �:? �� ae Stiff 8 to 15 � y � Clayey gravel and yery� i 5 to 30 � � GC clayey gravel with sand Hard >so � � Component Definttfons L � :;� Well-graded sand and Descriptive Term S¢e Range and Sieve Number � g sand with gravel,little Boulders Larger than 12' � LL g : to no fines Cobbles 3'to 12' � " '�'�'�''� Gravel 3'to No.4(4.75 mm) � � m � �- �- Poorly-graded sand Coarse Gravel 3'to 3/a� > �' �-= - c°n c>N N -�� sP and Sand with gravel, Fne Gravel 3/4"to No.4(4.75 mm) 0 o v I'�tle to no fines c � o Sand No.4(4.75 mm)to No.200(0.075 mm) � �z Coarse Sarxl No.4(4.75 mm)to No.10(2.00 mm) � Silty Sand and Medium Sand No.10(2.00 mm)to No.40(0.425 mm) L� ° h � : � S� Silty Sand with Rne Sand No.40(0.425 mm)to No.200(0.075 mm) vo a � . . :. gravel Silt and Cla Smaller than No.200 0.075 mm � a Y � ) Y1 � � : sC Clayey sand and �3>Estimated Percentage Moisture Content � N clayey sand with gravel Percentage by Dry-Absence of moisture, Component yyeight dusry,dry to the touch Sift,sandy silt,gravelly silt, Trace <5 Slightly Moist-Perceptible c � M� siR with sand or gravel Few 5 to 10 moisture > Little 15 to 25 Moist-Damp but no visibie v� � , With -Non-primary coarse water o '—�°h � Clay Of bw to medium constituents: >15% Very Moist-Water visible but `� v m i -Fines content between not free draining a �y , !�C� Plasticiry;silt�r,sandy,or y m E �j„i gravelly clay,(ean Clay 5%and 15% Wet-Vsible free water,usually a '�� ,� f ro m b e l o w w a t e r t a b l e a �� _— Organic clay or silt of low Symbols o � = OL piasticity Biows/s'or � __ �P�� portion oi 5 Cement an o — Type / surtace�I Elastic silt,clayey silt,sift 2�„� / Sampler Type � MH with micaceous or $p�it-Spoon m �s�Dtion c) ealtorite �i � diatomaceous fine sand or � � Sampler 3.0'OD Split-Spoon Sampler . �. Fiiter pack with y W o S�� S� 3.25 OD Split-Spoon Ring Sampler �.� : �� b�ank casing � �o Clay of high plasticity, ��mple �'�1Of o �r CH sandy or gravelly clay,fat 3.0�OD Thir�Wall Tube Sampler ��s«eened casine � �J / clay with sand or gravel � (nduding Shelby tube) •.-,�fl�k c9 N v_ Grab Sample � 'v :;i-;i; Organic clay or silt of o Portion not recovered �� LL J ;;;,%; oH medium to high �,� �,� ��i�,� Percer�tage by dry wei9rn Depth ot ground water ��i�j plastiCity � (SP�Standard Penetration Test TM D-1586 � ATD=At Gme of drilling � � � ) Static water level(date) ,,.� p Peat,muck and other � ��neral Accordarx:e wim � .g,�,� pT highly organic soils Standard Practice for Description �Combined USCS symbols used for J =O and Identfication of Sals(ASTM D-2488) fines between 5%and 15% � Classifications of so�s in this report are based on visual field end/a IaboraWry observations,which incqde density/co�sistency,moisture condition,yrain s¢e,and S plasticny esun,ates ana snould noc he conswea eo unply flea or labo►atory testing unless presenced nereh.vmua�-manual and�or�aeoracory dassillcation �' melhods of ASTM D-2487 and D-2488 were used es an identification guide ta the Unified Soi Classification Sysiem. � � Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. � � � � � � EXPLORATION LOG KEY FIGURE A1 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-1 � z This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be E ' � read together w'ith that report for com�lete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the ; v time of excavatwn.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are j I � a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. E i � DESCRIPTION � ' Forest Duff � i 1 � � i � 2 Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till " � 3 Loose to medium dense, very moist, reddish brown to brown,fine to coarse SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel; diamict(SM). i 4 Vashon Lodgement Till ! ' S ' s Dense to very dense, moist to very moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel (diamict), occasional layers(<1cm)of fine sand,few silt(SM). 7 8 i i �f 9 Very dense, moist, brown to gray, laminated SILT, layers(1 to 2 inch thick)of fine to coarse sand, I few to little silt(SM). 10 11 : 12 Vashon Advance Outwash 13 Very dense, moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND,few silt, little fine to coarse gravel, layers(1 to 2 inch thick)of silt; strat�ed. � 14 � 15 �6 Very dense, moist,gray,fine to medium SAND,few silt, trace to few fine to coarse gravel, lenses(1 to 2 inch)of little silt; stratified (SP). �� Bottom of exploration pit at depth 16.5 feet No seepage. No caving. 18 19 �—�— ' s N r Summit Homes Renton � Renton, WA a' " Associated Earth Sciences Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM � 1 a Approved by: � *❑� s�-_:. _� r �'-�� 1/7/2014 i � U I Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-2 � This log is part of the repoA prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be � read together with that repoR for complete interpretation.This summary applies o�ly to the location of this trench at the � time of excavation.Subsurface condi6ons may change at this location with the passage of Ume.The data presented are � a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. � DESCRIPTION Forest Duff � Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till 2 Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, fine to coarse SAND, little silt,few to little fine to coarse gravel (SM). i 3 4 Vashon Lodgement Till 5 Dense,very moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND,few to little fine to coarse gravel, little silt,with lenses of fine to coarse sand (diamict), with silt(SM). 6 7 -? � 8 9 Very dense,very moist, brown, fine SAND,few medium to coarse sand, little silt, little fine to coarse j 1 O sand (diamict),with 1 to 2 inch layers of fine to coarse sand,few silt(SM). 11 �2 � Vashon Advance OutwashNashon Lodgement Till Very dense,very moist, mottled brown,fine SAND,few medium to coarse sand, little silt, little fine to 13 �arse gravel (diamict),with wet lenses(1 to 2 feet thick)of fine to medium sand,few silt(SP-SM). � � 14 qs above. j �5 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 14.5 feet � Seepage at 3 feet and below 10 to 12 feet. No qving. � 16 17 18 ' 19 � I . �^ s � r Summit Homes Renton : Renton, WA 'a � Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM 1 a APProved by: � a -5.;:_: � '�� /7�2��4 r U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-3 '� This I is art oi the re re ared b Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. AESI for the named Y og' p port p p y ( ) project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretaGon.This summary applies only to the location of this Vench at the j � time of excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION ' Forest Duff � � � Weathered Vashon Recessional Outwash � 2 Loose to medium dense,very moist, reddish brown,fine SAND, few medium to coarse sand,few silt, little fine to coarse gravel(SP}. 3 Vashon Recessional Outwash Dense to medium dense,very moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse gravel, few silt; � 4 stratified (SP). 5 I 6 ' 7 8 ' 9 10 i Dense, moist to very moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND, little fine to coarse gravel,few silt; stratified 11 --: �SP�' I ; 12 Vashon LodgementTill �3 �Very dense,very moist, brown, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel,with lenses r (1 foot thick or less)of fine to coarse sand,with silt(SM). � 14 gottom of exploration pit at depth 12.5 feet No seepage. No caving ' 15 16 17 18 19 � ��_ r L� s N z Summit Homes Renton A : Renton, WA � Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. g Logged by: LDM Project No. KE130637A ' � � ` ; : � � �, Approved by: � +. 1/7/2014 5 .,,� � - �''�` ° U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-4 � This log is paA of ihe report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and shoutd be t read together with that reporl for com�lete interpretation.This summary appiies only to the location of this trench at the � time of excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff � Vashon Recessional Outwash 2 Medium dense,very moist, reddish brown,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand,few silt,few to little fine to coarse gravel(SP). 3 Dense, moist to very moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND,trace to few silt, little fine to coarse gravel; stratified (SP). 4 5 6 Dense,very moist, brown,fine to medium SAND,trace coarse sand,few silt, little fine to coarse gravel,with layer(<6 inches)of fine to coarse sand,with silt(SP). 7 � 8 � 9 I �� Vashon Lodgement Till Very dense, very moist, brown,flne to coarse SAND,few silt, interbedded with fine sand, trace �� medium to coarse sand,with silt, little fine to coarse gravel(diamict)(SP/SM). 12 13 14 �5 Very dense, wet,brown, fine to medium SAND,trace coarse sand, little silt, little fine to coarse �gravel,with lenses of silty sand; stratified(SM). � �s Bottom of exploration pit at depth 15.5 feet Seepage at 15 feet. No caving. 17 18 ; 19 I nn � 0 N r Summit Homes Renton � ' Renton, WA 'a � Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A � Logged by: LDM � a Approved by: � a 4-:s,{�: . � � �n�2��4 � U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-5 � This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)tor the named project and should be L read together with that report for complete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the � time of excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff � Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till 2 Medium dense,very moist to wet, reddish brown,fine SAND,few medium to coarse sand, little silt, few to little fine to coarse gravel(SM). 3 4 Vashon Lodgement Till 5 Dense,very moist to wet, brown to gray,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel; diamict(SM). 6 7 8 ; Very dense, moist to very moist, gray ,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand,with silt, little fine to i 9 coarse gravet, trace cobbles; diamict(SM). 10 As above. I 11 gottom of exploration pit at depth 10.5 feet Seepage at 4 to 5(eet. No caving. 12 13 � 14 15 16 17 i 18 I 19 �� . Lv -- - 0 � r Summit Homes Renton . A Renton, WA a n Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM 1 F Rpproved by: %:_ � ��_, � � 1/T/2014 U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-6 � This log is paR of the report prepared by Associated EaRh Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be L read together with that report for com�lete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this irench at the � time of excava�on.Subsurface conditions may change at this location Nnth the passage of Ume.The data presented are 0 I a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. I DESCRIPTION Forest Duff i ' � Weathered Vashon Lodgement Tiil ; ' 2 Medium dense,very moist to wet, reddish brown, fine SAND,few medium to coarse sand, little silt, few to little fine to coarse gravel (SM). i 3 Vashon Lodgement Till ; Dense to very dense,very moist to wet, mottled gray,fine SAND, trace medium to coarse sand,with silt,few fine to coarse gravel(diamict)(SM). 4 � ! 5 As above, but very moist, gray(SM). , 6 7 I 8 ' I, 9 As above. �'� 10 11 Bottom of exploraGon pit at depth 11 feet 12 Heavy seepage in top 2 to 3 feet. No caving. I i 13 � 14 � 15 � � 16 i 17 ; 18 19 .�_ s � �. Summit Homes Renton : Renton, WA � a � Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. pro ect No. KE130637A � Logged by: LDM 1 � Approved by: � � '-.� � ��` 1/7/2014 U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-7 z This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Ina(AESI)for the named project and should be L read together with that report for complete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the m time of excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location w'ith the passage of time.The data presented are ; o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION I, Fill � Loose,very moist, brown,fine to medium SAND,with silt, little fine to coarse gravel{SM). i 2 Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till 3 Loose,wet, reddish brown,fine SAND, trace medium to coarse sand,with silt,few fine to coarse gravel(SM). ' 4 Vashon Lodgement Till i i I 5 Very dense,very moist, mottled brown to gray,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel;diamict(SM). 6 7 8 9 ; 10 Very dense, moist to wet, brown,fine SAND, trace medium to coarse sand,with silt, few to little fine �� to coarse gravel,trace cobbles; diamict(SM). � � � Bottom of exploration pit at depth 11 feet ! 12 Heavy seepage top 3 to 4 feet. Slight caving top 3 feet. i I ' 13 14 I � 15 16 17 18 I 19 i �� Zu s ' N z Summit Homes Renton � � Renton, WA a' g Logged by: LDM Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE130637A � aoo � ;� . a APProved by: � c-... 1/712014 � U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-8 � This log is pa�t of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be r read together with that report for comPlete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the d 6me of excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are 0 a simpification of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Forest Duff � Vashon Recessional Outwash 2 Medium dense, very moist, reddish brown,fine to coarse SAND,few to little silt, little fine to coarse gravel;stratified, (SP-SM) , 3 Wet. I 4 ! 5 Dense, very moist to wet, brown,fine to coarse SAND,with fine to coarse gravel,trace to few � cobbles, few silt; stratified (SP). 6 — 7 8 Vashon Lodgement Till ' 9 Very dense, very moist to wet, brown to gray,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel,trace cobbles(diamict)(SM). 10 — , 11 12 13 14 15 As above. �6 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 15.5 feet Seepage below 3 teet. No caving. 17 18 19 �� <— — - s N z Summit Homes Renton � Renton, WA a " Associated Earth Sciences Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM ' 1 ' � � � � j � �, Approved by: � -� 1/7/2014 � U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-9 � This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be t read together with that report for complete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this Uench at the y time of excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are o a simplfication oi actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Fill � Loose,very moist, brown,fine SAND,with silt,few fine to coarse gravel(SM). I 2 3 4 5 6 Relic topsoil (6 to 7 feet). 7 Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till 8 Medium dense,very moist, reddish brown,fine SAND,trace medium coarse sand, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel; nonstratified(SM). � 9 Vashon Lodgement Till �O Very dense, very moist, brown to gray, fine SAND, trace medium to coarse sand, little to with silt, ��little to with fine to coarse gravel(diamict)(SM). � Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet 11 No seepage. No caving. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ; 19 � — �� . .:� s N z Summit Homes Renton w ' Renton, WA � 0 � Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM 1 a APProved by: -:-Y:f < .`��; � � 1/7/2014 � U Y i LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-10 � This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be L read together with that report for complete interpretation.This summary applies only to the localion of this trench at the y time oi excavation.Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are � p a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoil � Weathered Vashon Lodgement Till 2 Medium dense, very moist, reddish brown,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand, little silt,few fine to coarse gravel(SM). 3 Vashon Lodgement Till Very dense, moist to very moist, gray,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand, with silt, little fine to ; coarse gravel(diamict)(SM). , 4 � � 5 6 � � 7 i , 8 As above. 9 ' ! 10 As above. � Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet 11 No seepage. No caving. , � 12 13 i 14 15 -� i 16 -7 17 18 19 i � s N z Summit Homes Renton 6 Renton, WA � � 'a ° Associated Earth Sciences Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM f � a Approved by: a � ;�;�-; � '��` 1/7/2014 � U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-11 ' � This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for the named project and should be : L read together with that report for complete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this Vench at the m time of exca�ation.SubsurFace conditions may change at this location witFi the passage of time.The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION i Forest Duff ; I � Vashon Recessional Outwash 2 Medium dense, very moist, reddish brown, fine SAND,few medium to coarse sand,few to little silt, little fine to coarse gravel(SP/SM). 3 � i � 4 Dense, moist, brown,fine to coarse SAND, trace silt,with fine to coarse gravel,trace cobbles; stratified (SP). 5 --* � 6 As above,few cobbles. 7 I 8 I 9 - � 10 As above, very moist. � 11 12 As above, very moist to wet. I 13 gottom of exploration pit at depth 12.5 teet ' � I No seepage. No caving. I, 14 � 15 16 17 18 19 �� Z — s � z Summit Homes Renton . : Renton, WA � a � Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM 1 a Approved by: a � � � � �` 1!7/2014 r U Y LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-12 4 � This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences,Inc.(AESI)for ihe named�roject and should be L read together with that report for com�lete interpretation.This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the � time of excavation.Subsurtace conditions may change at this location with the passage of time.The data presented are o a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoii � Weathered Vashon Lodgement Tili 2 Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, fine to coarse SAND, little silt,few to little fine to coarse gravel (SM). 3 Vashon Lodgement Till Very dense, moist, gray,fine SAND,trace medium to coarse sand,with silt, little fine to coarse gravel (diamict)(SM). 4 5 As above. 6 7 $ As above. 9 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 8.5 feet No seepage. No caving. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 i 19 - �� r « 0 N z Summit Homes Renton a � Renton, WA 'a � Associated Earth Sciences Inc. Pro ect No. KE130637A g Logged by: LDM � � � APProved by: � � ;#;:;<,.- .,.;_ ��` 1/7/2014 � U Y i i • i I . � . EXPLC�RA�Fi�N �IT LOG ' I o Number EP-1 . Forest duff/topsoil 1 2 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH Loose becoming medium dense with depth, very moist to saturated, brown, medium-grained SAND with gravel and trace silt 3 4 BOH @ 4' Moderate caving � 5 Ground water at 33 inches 6 7 � 8 9 10 11 . 12 13 SubwAace cond�tions depic[ed represent our observation at fhe time and bcation M fhie exploratory hWe,mod�ed by geolopic interpretation,engineering analysis,end judgment. They�rc not necessarily represertative ot other Gmes and location. We w11 rwt � aocept responsiWilfy fa the use or interpretation by othe�s of informalion presented on�his loy. d Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 � January 2005 i 1 � . � EXPLORATION P[T L4G a Number EP-2 ' i _ Forest duff/topsoil 1 • RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Loose becoming medium dense with depth, very moist to saturated, grayish-brown, oxidized, medium-grained SAND with gravel and trace silt 3 4 BOH @ 4' No caving 5 Ground water at 32 inches 6 7 � 8 9 10 11 � 12 13 SuDsixface wndifions depideQ represent our observalim et the twne and loption of ttiis exploratory hole,modified by geolopic fnterpretaQon,engineering�nalysis,and judgmeM. They are no!necessarity represenbtive o1 other Gmes and locetion. We wilf rat axepl reeponsibility for the use or Interpretatlon by others of infortnation presenled on fiis log. I� Plat of Fleuve des Voiles � Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS� PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 EXPLORATION PIT LOG o Number EP-3 I Forest duff/brownish-black,sandy silt with organics (fill?) 1 ' 2 3 • RECESSIONAL OUTWASH Medium dense, mvist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with trace silt; gravels to 6" diameter 4 5 6 7 8 � At 8'-9' and 11'-12'interbeds of dense, moist, grayish-brown, silty SAND with gravel 9 10 11 12 BOH @ 13' No caving; rapid ground water seepage at 10-1/2' 13 Subsurface condi5ona depicted represent our observation at t�e Gme and bcatim ol tfiis explwatory�de,modiAed by geolopfc i�tupreta6on,engineering analysis,and judgmmt. Th�y are nM necessxily representa6ve of other imes and locatloo. We wR!not accept responsbllity for the use or irrterpretation by others of iniamafion preseMed on Ihis bg. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWLRS, PLLC ProjectNo. GF05001 January 2005 � EXPLORATION PIT L�G o Number EP-4 Forest duff/to soil RECESSIONAL OU7WASH 1 Medium dense, moist to saturated, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL 2 with trace siit; gravel to 6" diameter 3 4 5 6 . 7 8 � � BOH @ 8' . No caving 9 Rapid ground water seepage at 4' 10 11 , 12 13 �� SuOsuAaca conditions depided represent our observation at Me lime and location of thic exploretory Mle,n�ed by geolog:c � interpretaCon,engineerinp analysis,and judgment. They are not necessarily rcpresmtative of olher t,mes and loca�on. We wdl not sccept responslbl(iry for the use w Interpretation by others of infortnation presmted on this kg. !i i ;� �! Plat of Fleuve des Voiles �� Kent, King Couniy, Washington GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 i EXPLORATI4N P�T LQG o Number EP-5 Forest duff/to soil �vANCE ourwA � 1 Dense, moist, grayish-brown, grave ace silt � 2 3 4 BOH @ 4' No caving 5 No ground water 6 � ;� 7 � �I 8 9 10 11 12 � 13 Subsuriace condiGons dapicted represent our observation a:lhe time and location of this exploratory hole,mcdified by geologic interpretauon,enpineering analysis,and fudgmenL They are not necessarily representaGve d cther dmes and locatfon. We wilf nol �� accept responsidlity tor the use or inlerpratation by others ot information presented on this log. �` t� i� �: Plat of Fleuve des Voiles �� Kent, King County, Washington ' GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Projecf No. GF05001 � January 2005 T k EXPLORATION PIT L�G o Number E P-6 Forest duff/topsoil 1 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL Medium stiff, moist, brown, sandy SiLT with some gravel 2 3 LODGEMENT TILL Very dense, rrioist, grayish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel . � ADVANCEOUTWASH 4 Dense, moist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with trace silt 5 6 7 BOH @ 7' No caving. 8 No ground water ;' 9 10 11 12 ; ii 13 �' I Subsurface condi6ons Qepided represent ou-obrervation at the time and loca6on of this explorstay hole,moCifietl by geologic 'I i interExetafion,engineerirg analysis,ond Judgment. They ere nol necessarily representative oi other Cmes and location. We will not '� i accepl respans�ility for the usa a h[erp•etation by others of Inlormalion presented on Ihis log. �� '! ' Plat of Fleuve des Voiles �� Kent, King County, Washington !� GARYA. FLOWE'RS� PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 � � EXPLURATION PIT L�G � 0 Number EP-7 I' Forest duffltopsoil FILL � Loose, moist, brown, silty SAND with some gravel , 2 RELIC TOPSOIL LAYER Loose, moist, brownish-black, sandy SILT with organics i 3 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel i 4 � � 5 � 6 I � L�DGEMENT TILL . 7 Very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel '� BOH @ 7-9/2' ; 8 No caving ;� No ground water ,� 9 � f �I 10 11 12 13 SubsuAace oondilions depided represen[our observation at the time and bration of this expl62!ory hole,modifed by geologic Mlerprete6on,engineenng analysis,and Judpment. TAey are not necessarily represen!ative of ottier limes and bcation. We will not accept responsibilify for Ihe use or fnteryreiation by oUxrs of information presented on this log. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOW�RS� PLLC . Project No. GF05001 January 2005 i � EXPLORATiON PIT LOG ' o Number EP-8 f Forest duff/topsoil 1 . RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Loose to medium dense, moist, brown SAND with some silt and gravel 3 ADVANCE OUTWASH 4 Dense,-very moist to saturated, brownish-gray, graveily SAND with trace silt 5 BOH @ 5' No caving g Rapid ground water seepage at 4' 7 - '�I 8 9 10 11 . 12 13 Subsurlace conditions depiUed represent our observatim al the time and location of tbis ezploratory Aole,modi(ied by gecbgic Interpretation,engineering analysis,and Judgment. Tbey are not necessarity represenUtnre of other times and iocation. We w�ll nol accept responsibiGry lor the use or inlerpretation by others o�informatlon preser�ted on this log. Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERSr PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 i � � ( I EXPLOI�ATIC7N PIT LQG � 0 Number EP-9 � ' Farest duff/topsoil 1 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL 2 � Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel 3 I � i 4 LODGEMENT TILL Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 5 6 � BOH @ 6' No caving 7 Rapid ground water seepage at 4' 6 9 10 11 12 . 13 Subsurface cond'Rions depided'represenl our observalion at the time and locatian of this ezpbntory hole,modifed by peologic y InterpreteGon,engineering analysis,end Judgmenl They are not necessarlly represenlaUve of otnar Iimes and Ixetion. we wilt ra1 accept responaibiGty tor the use a Interyretatbn by othen d informaHon presented on this log. � . � � ! Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOWERSr PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 i ; � � EXPLORATION P17 LOG � o Number EP-10 Forest duff/topsoil 1 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL 2 Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel 3 LODGEMENT TILL 4 Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 5 6 BOH @ 6' No caving 7 No ground water 8 I�, 9 10 11 12 13 SubsuAace conditions depided iepresent our observe6on d�e time and laxtion of this expbretory hde,modified by gedog�c interpretaGon,en�neertn9 enalysts,md JudgmenC They are not necessarity representafrve of oMer iimes and location. We wiN no! accept responsibility tor the use or inter;,reta6on by others of Intamation presenled on this bg. � �J � Plat of Fleuve des Voiles �; Kent, King County, Washington ' GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 i � I . EXPLORATION PIT L�G � o Number EP-11 I Forest duff/topsoil 1 � WEATHERED LODGEMENT TILL 2 Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel LODGEMENT TILL 3 Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel 4 5 . BOH @ 5' No caving 6 No ground water 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 13 Subsur(ace con6tions depicle0 represenl ou observalion at lhc tlme and location of this exploratory hde,modified by geolopic � interprelalion,engineering anatysis,and judgment. They are no!necesserity representative of other times and locatior.. We wiU nd � sccept responsibility for the use or Inlerprelatbn 6y olhers of iniortnation present>d on this 109. � � Plat of Fleuve des Voiles , Kent, King County, Washington ' GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 � � �xP�o��r�oN �i� �o� o Number EP-12 Forest duff/topsoil 1 2 WEATHERED LODGEMENT TtLL II Medium dense, moist, brown, sandy SILT with some gravel II 3 LODGEMENT T(LL Dense to very dense, moist, brownish-gray, silty SAND with gravel ', 4 �I 5 6 � BOH@6' No caving 7 No ground water 8 � 9 � 10 11 12 e 'f 3 �� Subsurface conCitions depicted represent our observation at lhe time and bcation of this ex�loratory hole,mod�ed by geWogic !I interpreta�n,engineereng enatysis.an0 judgment. They are no!necessarily represmtative ot other Gmes and IocaHon. We wii nat �� accept responsibility for the use a Interpretation hy others of infortnaCron presen�ed on Ihis Iog. `i 'I i Plat of Fleuve des Vailes `` Kent, King County, Washington '� GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 :� � EXPL�RATION PIT L�G o Number EP-13 Forest duffltopsoil � 1 — RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Medium dense, moist, brown, silty SAND with gravel 3 4 VANCE OUTWASH ��` � ws • Dense to very dense, moist to wet, grayish-brown, sandy GRAVEL to gravelly SAND with trace silt; gravels to 12" diameter 5 6 BOH @ fi' � No caving � 7 Moderate ground water seepage at 55" � � ', I /�� I� 6 9 10 11 — 12 13 Subsurface conditions depded represent our observation at ihe time and laca[ion of this expioratory hae,motlifed by geologic interpreta4on,engineedng ana!ysis,and judgmenL They are not necessa��y represenlative of other limes and locaiion. We N��I not accepl r�;ponsibility for lhe us>or interprelaUon by othe��af information presented on th;s;og � Plat of Fleuve des Voiles Kent, King County, Washington GARYA, FLOV!/�RS, PLLC ProjectNo. GF05001 �5 January 2005 � EXPLORATION PIT LOG o Number EP-14 Forest duffltopsoil 1 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Medium dense, moist, reddish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 3 Medium dense, moist to saturated, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL, trace silt 4 5 � At 66"-77" interbed�of dense, grayish-brown silty SAND with some gravei 6 . 7 . ;� $ ;1 �) 9 10 11 BOH @ 10-1/2' No caving Moderate ground water seepage at 9' 12 13 Suhsurtace condrtions depcted represent our observalion at[he trcne and focation of this axploretory hde,modified by geologic � InteryreWtion,engineerinQ analysls,and Juopmenl. They are not necessarily represontative of oMer times end bcation. We wi:l oot t accept responslbiGty for tha use or interpretatlon by othen o�infortnatlon presenle�on Ihis log. ?' t �. Plat of Reuve des Voiles �. Kent, King County, Washington GARYA. FLOW�RS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 , January 2005 � EXPLORATI4N PfT LC�G o Number EP-15 Forest duff/topsoil 1 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 2 Medium dense, moist, reddish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 3 Medium dense, moist to saturated, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with trace silt 4 5 � 6 � I At 78"-84" interbed of dense, grayish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel � i � 8 ;� S ,`:� , 10 11 12 $ �1 BOH @ 13' Moderate caving below 9'; rapid ground water seepage at 9' �� 13 '` �: Subsurfact conditions depideC represent our observation at the 4me and bwtlm of fhia e�laatory hole,mod�ed by 9eologic inlerpreta6on,engineerfny a�alysis,and judpme�[. They are not neceseariry representatNe of other dmes and bptlon. We rvitl rot ;j accept responsibikty for tFe use or IMerprctation by others of informatio�prcsenled on thls log. �� 1'. (� �i t . Plat of Fleuve des Voiles � Kent, King County, Washington � GARYA. FLOWERS� PLLC ProjectNo. GF05001 : January 2005 II i ; � � EXPL4F�AT[QN PiT LOG ` o Number EP-16 � ; Forest duffltopsoil � 'I 2 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH Mediurn dense, moist, reddish-brown, silty SAND with some gravel 3 t�{edium dense, moist, grayish-brown, gravelly SAND with frace silt 4 5 BOH@5' , No caving , s No ground water ', 7 8 �' I !� 9 10 '(1 12 _� 13 Subsurface condifions deplqed represanl our observation at the time and�owtion of Ihis ettplocatory hole,modfied by geologic � fnterpretalion,engineering anatysis,and judgmenl. They are not necessarfly representative oi other times and location. We will not accept responsibiG,ylor the use ot interpre?a+Jon 6y others of in'a-mation presented on this bg. ;i . �i Plat of Fleuve des Voifes '� Kent, King County, Washington - GARYA. FLOWERS, PLLC Project No. GF05001 January 2005 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - MECHANICAL Date Sampled Project Project No. Soil Description 1l16/2014 Summit Homes Rrenton KE13063TA Sand with gravel few silt Tested By Location EB/EP No Depth Intended Use/Specification MS Onsite EP-1 12' Wt.of moisture wet sample+Tare 306.42 Total Sample Tare 33L57 Wt.of moisture d Sample+Tare 289.11 Total Sample wt +tare 1253.11 Wt.of Tare 98.78 Total Sample Wt 921.5 Wt.of moisture D Sam le 190.33 Total Sample Dry Wt 844.7 Masture°,6 9% S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained %Retained %Passin Minimum Maximum 3.5 90 100.00 - - 3 76.1 - 100.00 - - 2.5 64 - 100.00 - - 2 50.8 - 100.00 - - 1.5 38.1 - 100.00 - - I 1 25.4 - 100.00 � ' 3/4 19 46,23 5.47 94.53 � � 3/8 9.51 201.48 23.85 76.15 S #4 4.76 318.42 37.70 62.30 ' � #8� 2.38 407.23 48.21 51.79 ' j #10 2 423.58 50.14 49.86 � #20 0.85 501.96 59.42 40.58 I #40 0.42 607.52 71.92 28.08 i #fi0 025 684.67 81.05 18.95 i #100 0.149 710.16 84.07 15.93 i #200 0.074 721.25 85.38 14.62 i US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. I 3" 3/4" N0.4 N0.76 NO.� N0.200 � 100 80 � c 60 LL « C m 4� a 20 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Gravel Sand Silt and Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Grain Size,mm ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 911 5th Ave.,Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-827-7701 FAX 425-8275424 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - MECHANICAL Date Sampled Project Project No. Soil Description ; 1116l2014 Summit Homes Rrenton KE130637A Sand little silt trace gravel Tested By Location EB/EP No Depth Intended Use/Specification MS Onsite EP-1 16' Wt.of moisture wet sample+Tare 381.21 Total Sample Tare 408.76 . Wt.of moisture d Sample+Tare 344.05 Total Sample wt +tare 1066.04 Wt.of Tare 99.22 Total Sample Wt 657.3 i Wt.of masture D Sam le 244.83 Total Sample Dry Wt 570.7 ` Moisture% 15% S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained % Retained %Passin Minimum Maximum 3.5 90 - 100.00 - - ; i 3 76.1 - 100.00 - - i 2.5 64 - 100.�0 - - 2 50.8 - 100.00 - - 1.5 38.1 - 100.00 - - 1 25.4 - 100.00 3/4 19 - 100.00 3/8 9.51 - 100.00 #4 4.76 2.17 0.38 99.62 #8 2.38 4.51 0.79 99.21 #10 2 5.33 0.93 99.07 #20 0.85 13.35 2.34 97.66 #40 0.42 56.61 9.92 90.08 #60 0.25 331.97 58.17 41.83 #100 0.149 431.69 75.65 24.35 #200 0.074 459.33 80.49 19.51 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 3• 3/4" N0.4 N0.16 NO.� N0.200 100 80 � c 60 �i LL �.. C O V � 40 a 20 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Gravel Sand Silt and Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Grain Size,mm ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 911 Sth Ave.,Suile 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-E27-7701 FAX 425-827-5424 s i � I GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - MECHANICAL Date Sampled Project Project No. Soil Description 1H6/2014 Summit Homes Rrenton KE13063TA Sand few silt trace gravel Tested By Location EB/EP No Depth Intended Use/Specification MS Onsite EP-2 12' WL of moisture wet sampie+Tare 372.22 Total Sample Tare 312.92 Wt of moisture d Sam le+Tare 338.01 Total Sample wt +tare 959.44 Wt.of Tare 97.86 Total Sample Wt 646.5 Wt of moisture Sam le 240.15 Total Sample Dry Wt 565.9 Masture% 14% S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained % Retained % Passin Minimum Maximum 3.5 90 ' - 100.00 - - 3 76.1 - 100.00 - - 2.5 64 - 10a.00 - - 2 50.8 - 1�0.00 - - 1.5 38.1 - 100.00 - - 1 25.4 - 100.00 3/4 19 - 100.00 318 9.51 10.97 1.94 98.06 #4 4.76 17.37 3.07 96.93 #8 2.38 29.8 5.27 94.73 #10 2 38.3 6.77 93.23 #20 0.85 94.41 16.68 83.32 #40 0.42 351.56 62.12 37.88 #60 0.25 484.67 85.65 14.35 #100 0.149 510.91 90.28 9J2 #200 0.074 520.65 92.00 8.00 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 3' 3/4" N0.4 Np�g N0.40 N0.200 100 80 .. c 60 LL .+ C O 0 40 a 20 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Gravel Sand Silt and Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Grain Size,mm ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIEAICES, INC. 911 5ih Ave.,Suita 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-827-7701 FAX 425-8275424 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - MECHANICAL '' Date Sampied Project Project No. Soil Description � 1/8/2014 Summit Homes Rrenton KE130637A Gravel with sand few stlt I Tested By Location EBlEP No Depth Intended Use/Specification I MS Onsite EP-3 3' Wt.of moisture wet sample+Tare 278.75 Total Sample Tare 295.75 Wt.of moisture d Sam le+Tare 265.58 ' Total Sample wt +tare 1090.14 ' Wt.of Tare > 101:59 Total Sample Wt 794.4 Wt.of moisture D Sam le 163.99 Total Sample Dry Wt 735.3 Moisture�0 8% S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained %Retained %Passin Minimum Maximum 3.5 90 - 100.00 - - 3 76.1 - 100.00 - - 2.5 64 - 100.00 - - 2 50.8 - 100.00 - - 1.5 38.1 ' - 100.00 - - 1 25.4 36.3 4.94 95.06 314 19 114.79 15.61 84.39 3/8 9.51 264.22 35.93 64.07 #4 4.76 368.09 50.Ofi 49.94 #8 2.38 438.03 59.57 40.43 #10 2 `448.59 61.OU 39.00 #2� 0.85 497.58 67.67 32.33 #40 0.42 565.38 76.89 23.11 #60 0.25 635.93 ' 86.48 13.52 #100 0.149 671.29 91.29 8.71 #200 0.074 686.51 93.36 6.64 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 3• 3/4" N0.4 N0.16 NO.� N0.200 I 100 80 � c 60 LL M C � � a40 j i 20 II 0 �I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Gravel Sand Silt and Clay I'I Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine II Grafn Size,mm , ASSOCIATED EARTN SCIENCES, INC. ''� 911 5th Ave.,Suite 100 Kirldand.WA 98033 425-627-7701 FAX 425-8275424 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - MECHANICAL Date Sampled Project Project No. Soil Description 1/8l2014 Summit Homes Rrenton KE130637A Gravel with sand trace silt Tested By Location EB/EP No Depth Intended Use/Specification MS Onsite EP-4 3' Wt.of moisture wet sample+Tare 453.54 Total Sample Tare 518.97 Wt.of moisture d Sam le+Tare 438.38 Total Sample wt +tare 1669.25 Wt.of Tare 100.73 Total Sample Wt 1150.3 Wt.of moisture D Sam le 337.65 Total Sample Ory Wt 1100.9 Moisture% 4% S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained % Retained %Passin Minimum Maximum 3.5 90 - 100.00 - - 3 76.1 - 100.00 - - 2.5 64 - 100.00 - - 2 50.8 - 100.00 - - 1.5 38.1 81.16 7.37 92.63 - - 1 25.4 147.19 13.37 86.63 3/4 19 170.5 15.49 84.51 3/8 9.51 393.67 35.76 64.24 #4 4J6 539.76 49.03 5U.97 #8 2.38 649.67 59.02 40.98 #10 2 868.69 60.74 39.26 #20 0.85 762.51 69.27 30.73 #40 0.42 897.55 81.53 18.47 #60 0.25 1008.93 91.65 8.35 #100 0.149 1047:33 95.14 4.86 #200 0.074 1058.93 96.19 3.81 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 3' 3!4' N0.4 Np�g N0.40 Np.ppp 100 80 � c 60 LL �+ C � O � a 20 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Gravel Sand Silt and Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Grain Size,mm ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 911 51h Ave.,Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-E27-7701 FAX 425-0275424 s GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS - MECHANICAL Date Sampled Project Project No. Soil Description 1/8/2014 Summit Homes Rrenton KE130637A Sand with gravel trace silt Tested By Location EB/EP No Depth Intended Use/Specification MS Onsite EP-71 3' Wt.of masture wet sample+Tare 405.31 Total Sample Tare 518.55 Wt.of masture d Sam le+Tare 391.92 Total Sample wt +tare 1315.55 Wt.of Tare 98.25 Total Sample Wt 797.0 Wt.of masture Sample 293.67 Total Sample Dry Wt 762.2 Moisture% 5% S ecification Re uirements Sieve No. Diam. mm Wt. Retained % Retained % Passin Minimum Maximum 3.5 90 - 100.00 - - 3 76.1 - 100.00 - - 2.5 64 - 100.00 - - 2 50.8 - 100.00 - - 1.5 38.1 - 100.00 - - 1 25.4 - 100.00 3/4 19 83.54 10.96 89.04 3/8 9.51 215:95 28.33 71.67 #4 4.76 357.78 46.94 53.06 #8 2.38 458.88 60.20 39.80 #10 2 477.26 62.61 37.39 #20 0.85 562.85 73.84 26.16 #40 0.42 650.88 85.39 14.61 #60 0.25 706.49 92.69 7.31 #100 0.149 724.09 94.99 5.01 #200 0.074 729.6 95.72 4.28 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. 3" 3/4" N0.4 N0.16 NO.� N0.200 100 80 : � c 60 LL .. c 0 0 40 a 20 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Gravel Sand Silt and Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Grain Size,mm ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIFNCES, INC. 911 5fh Ave.,Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-827-7701 FAX 425-8275424 Associated Earth Sciences , Inc . ProctorAnalvsis ��, .r.-.�.��. � ASTM D1557, D698 f`�„`N.. � �... �.. Date Sampled Project Project No. Soil Description 1/8/2014 Summit Homes Renton KE130637A Tested B� Collected By Location EB/EP No. Depth Brown to gray sand with silt little g ravel MS LDM Onsite EP-9 9' Percent passin 3/4"sieve: 90% ASTM D1557 Method C Automatic Tam r I A Mold Number 1 2 3 4 Remarks B Water Added field dry wet wet i C Wt. of Wet Soil+ 22 705 21.905 22.325 22.125 Mold Ib D Wt. of Mold (Ib) 11.830 11.830 11.830 11.830 E Wt. of Wet Soil (Ib) 10.875 10.075 10.495 10.295 F Wet Density, (pcfl 146.073 135.328 140.969 138.283 G Wt. of Pan(Ib) 0.485 0.490 0.460 0.500 H Wt. of Wet Soil + 1.505 1.450 1.315 1.435 �� Pan Ib � Wt. of Dry Soil + 1.425 1.400 1.230 1.335 Pan Ib K Wt. of Water(Ib) 0.080 0.050 0.085 0.100 M Wt. of Dry Soil (Ib) 0.940 0.910 0.770 0.835 ; N Moisture Content 8.5 5.5 11.0 12.0 O Dry Density(pc� 134.6 128.3 127.0 123.5 Z For a 6 inch mold:Z= 0.074449 For a 4" mold:Z= 0.0333 �ao.o ......................................................................................................................... Test Results: Optimum Moisture Percentage: 8.5 135.0 Maximum D Densit : 134.6 � Caracbon for wersize:ASTM D4718 9� ��'� Corrected Moisture Percentage: 7.7 � � Corrected Maximum D Densit : 137.4 � �25.0 Assumed Specific Gravity 2.7 120.0 • 0.0 5.0 10.� 15.0 20A moistur�cont�nt,•/. ASSOCIATED EARTH SClENCES, lNC. 911 Fifth Ave.,Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-627-7701 FAX 425-827-5424 Appendix F - AESI Infiltration Technical Memo � � a s s o c i a t e d � e� rth sciences � � i n c o r p o r a t e d 3 �'i, Technical Memorandum � � � 2014 Page 1 of 2 � Date: May 8, � To: Summit Homes } Project Name: Summit Homes Renton � ' From: Matt Miller, P.E. ' �l� ' Project No: KE130637A � � Subject: Preliminary infiltration ra e Y "; � , This technical memorandum presents the results of our infiltration testing at the subject site on April 28, 2014. � ', Associated Earth Sciences completed one Pilot Infiltration Test (IT-i) within the footprint of the proposed � infiltration facility near the toe of the site slope on the central eastern edge of the site. The test method � ''a generally corre5ponded to the procedure described as a small-scale PIT in the 2012 Washington State � a Department of Ecology Stormworer Managemenr Manua!for Western Washingron (Ecology Manual) and the s 2009 KiRg CountyStorm WaterDesign Manual(KCSWDM). � Testing Procedure The existing ground surface at the test location was approximately 390 feet, based on the provided to�ographic plan. A pit was excavated to 4 feet below ground surface to an elevation of about 386 feet. Water was - introduced into the pit using an electronic flow meter with instantaneous flow rate and total flow �olume readouts. The flow meter was equipped with a diffuser to minimize turbulence and scouring of the test base � during testing. The meter was connected ta a water truck located approximately 150 feet south of the test � area. The flow entering the pit at IT-1 ranged from 4.5 to 4.8 gallons per minute (gpm�. Water was introduced into the pit at a sufficient rate to maintain a relatively constant head of about 6 inches..i'he in.filtration test was - run for approximately 7 hours to confirm steady-state conditions were achieved. Flow info the PIT was � � s discontinued and falling head measurements were obtained for approximately� hour. � . ; Upon completion of the testing,.the infiltration areas were overexcavated to a depth of about 16 feet below existing ground surFace (12 feet below the level of the test): 1) document the types of soils the water infiltrated through; and 2� identify any soil layers that would restrict the downward flow of infiltrating water. _ Overexcavation within IT-1 exposed wet,stratified,fine to coarse sand with few arnounts of silt and little gravel. Very little water was observed seeping back into the pit during excavation; however, significant ground water was encountered at de�ths of 10 feet and below existing ground surface, at an elevation of approximately 380 feet. During the overexcavation occasionaf silty lenses or layers were observed within the native sediments (recessional outwash). Infiltration Rate The infiltration field rate was calculated to be about 15 inches per hour (in/hr) in IT-1. Based the Simplified Method for determining the preliminary design infiltration rate, shown on page 5-59 of the 2009 KCSWDM, we Kirkfand Office�411 Fifth Avenue�Krkland,WA 98033�P((425)827-7701•f� (425)827-5424 Everett Office.2911 K Hewitt Avenue,Suite 2•Everett,WA 98201•P(�425)259-0522•F�(425)252-3408 Tacama Office•1552 Commerce Street,Su1te 102.Tacana,WA 98402•P�(253}722-2992.F � (253)722-2993 Iwww.aesgeo.com i i - Associated Earth Sciences, inc. TechnJcaJ Memorondum estimate that design rate would be on the order 1 to 2 inches per hour, assuming that the pond bottom can be designed to be 3 feet above the seasona( high water table. The water table at the time of exploratifln was at about elevation 380 feet. The ground water level was likely higher in the wetter months, earlier in the year. Therefore, we recommend that the design of the facility should assume that the seasonal high water table will not be higher than 383 feet. The design rate will be strongly influenced by the shape of the pond and the ground water mounding anafysis. To refine this estimate for design, a ground water mounding analysis is required by KC SWDM 2009 (Pages 5-58 and 5-59),as stated below: � DESl6N INFILTR�4TlON RAl'F I The design infrltration rare shaf!be derermined using an analytica/groundwater model to investigate the effects of rhe loarl hydrologic conditions on facility performance. � I Groundwater modeling (mounding analysisJ of the proposed rnfiltration facility shall be done using rhe ' design infiltrQtion rate and the estimared maximum groundwater elevation determined for the proposed ' facifity locarion. MODRET or an equivalent model must be used unless ODES approves an alternative ana/ytic technrque. Developed condition hydrographs should 6e exported from the KCRTS model of che , projed site for the groundwater mounding analysis. Test hydrographs should indude ar a minimum rhe ful/ year 8 syntheric record and at leasr one other runoff event that is the highest volume, peak flow � event identified through KCRTS analysis of the infiltrafion facility. Note that an iterarive process may be ; required beginnrng with an estimated design rate, KCRTS sizing, then groundwater model resring. � � � � � � � � � � � . � � � 1 i � Date: 5/8/2014 Project No: KE130637A Page 2 i Appendix F - HB�S Consulting Wetland Report �� ` & �_ onsulting , WETLAND EVALUATiON AND DELlNEAT10N REPORT SOOS CREEK PLAT PROJECT SITE King County, Washington Section 33, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. prepared for Boston Design and Development , ' 13425 E. Lk. Kathieen Dr. SE , Renton, WA 98059 r � prepared by H 8� S Consulting P. O. Box 731695 Puyaliup, WA 98373 253 732-6515 mheckert�a qwest.net :, � May 2fi, 2004 !i S�6�►A�v+�` �r� 44 i V � 3 . S . 1 P. O. Box 731695 • Puyallup WA 98373 (253)732-6515 mheckert@qwest.net (360)893-6779 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Soos Creek Plat Project Site is approximately 7.26 acres in total size and located to the east of the City of Renton, King County, Washington. The project site is comprised of three parcels; ( Parcel # 6199000220, 6199000240, 6199000260). The project site is dominated by mature and sub-mature forest, with singfe-family residences, managed and maintained lawns, and unmanaged portions. Onsite assessment of the project site fol(owing the procedures outlined in the Washington State Wetlands ldenti�cation and Delineation Manual (Wash. Manua() and the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) resulted in the identification of finro areas that exhibited hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation consistent with the established criteria of both the Wash. and 1987 Manuals. This assessment, completed in accordance with King County regulations, included an evaluation of the function and value rating for the identified wetlands, a class�cation of the wetland following the U.S. Fish and Wildlife methods, and an identification of the standard King County buffer width required for these wetlands. WETLAND SIZE CLASSIFICATION KING FUNCTION STANDARD ONSITE (USFWS} COUNTY AND VALUE BUFFER WIDTH (square RATING RATING � feet) A Offsite- PFOE 1 High 100 ft. Buffer onsite B "'998 PSSC 3 non- Low Not regulated re ulated "connqtes wetland continues off-site PFOE palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded PSSC palustrine, shrub-scrub, seasonally flooded/saturated The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Kin�g County, as well as a number of other locat, state, and federal agencies, regulate activities in and around identified wetland and drainage corridor areas. Such regulations f��cus on the avoidance of adverse impacts to wetlands, streams, associated buffers and the mitigation of such impacts that cannot be avoided. King County has established criteria to categorize wetlands for purposes of regulation and the establishment of buffers. In addition, King County allows a limited I amount of alterations to wetlands (i.e. isolated wetlands, roadway crossings) provided � such impacts are mitigated pursuant to an approved mitigation plan. The Selected Action Plan of the Soos Creek Plat project site focuses on the creation of independent lots suitable for the development of single-family homesites consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. . � ��: i� ;� - TABLE OF C�NTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. l STUDYPURPOSE......................................................................................................... 1 SITEDESCRIPTION..................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND INFORMA'I'ION................................................................................2 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPPING....................................................2 STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES .......................2 STATE OF WASHINGTON STREAM CATALOG.....................................................2 KING COUNTY SENSITNE AREAS MAPPING.......................................................2 SOILSMAPPING..........................................................................................................2 ONSITE EVALUATION-WETLANDS.......................................................................3 WETLAND STUDY 1VIETHODS..................................................................................3 FIELDOBSERVATION................................................................................................4 WETLAND AND STREAM D�TERMINATION........................................................6 WETLAND FIJNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT.............................................7 ONSITE WETLAND VALUATION............................................................................. 8 REGiJI.ATORY CONSIDERA.TION................................................... ....................... 10 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - SECTtorr 404 ............................................... 10 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY.................................. 11 KING COUNTY- "ENVIRONIv�NTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS"OR.DINANCE 21 A.24...... 11 SELECTED ACTION PLAN........................................................................................ 13 FI GURE S......................................................................................................................... 14 REFERENCELIST........................................................................................................ 15 APPENDIXA.................................................................................................................. 16 ATTACHMENT1 .......................................................................................................... 17 , ,�. !(� E STANDARD OF CARE Prior to extensive site planning, this document should be reviewed and the wet)and boundaries verified by the appropriate resource and permitting agencies. Wetland boundaries, wetland classifications, wetland ratings, and all proposed wetland restoration and enhancement activities must be reviewed and approved by King County and potentially other regulatory staff. The above consultants have provided professional services that are in accordance with the degree of care and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work accomplished. No other warranties are expressed or implied. The consultant is not respon.sible for design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate resource and permitting agencies. . `;;..�� Mark Heckert H 8� S Consulting . I � I i �I� a � � td INTRODUCTIDN This_report details the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertaken to complete both a wetlands evaluation and a wildlife habitats assessment as an elemenfi of the planning and site development of the Soos Creek Plat Project Site. The project area is approximately 7.26 acres in total size and generally located within a quickly urbanizing area east of the City of Renton, King County, Washington (Figure 1). The evaluation and delineation of onsite and adjacent wetiands and drainage corridors is a vital element in the planning and selection of a site development action. The goal of this approach is to assure that planned site platting does not result in adverse environmental impacts to such areas. Wetlands are generally defined as "those areas of King County that are inundated �I or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient �� to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of I, vegetation typicaily adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." i (King County Environmentally Sensitive Areas). STUDY PURPOSE This purpose of this document is to present the results of the onsite assessment and evaluation of the wetland/drainage corridor areas and the wildlife habitats within the project area. Included within this report is an assessment of the proposed impacts and compensatory actions to be taken to ensure that proposed onsite actions do not adversely impact environmentally sensitive areas. This study was designed to accommodate site planning and potential regulatory actions. This report is suitable for submittal to federal, state, and lacal authorities for wetland boundary verification and permitting actions. , SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is comprised of three parcels; ( Parcel # 6199U00220, 6199000240, �, 6199000260). The project site is dominated by mature and sub-mature forest, with a ' single-family residence, managed and maintained lawns, and unmanaged portions. ' The forested portion of the site is dominated by a mixed forested plant community of mature Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesi�) and mature big leaf maple (Acer ; macrophyllum). The project site is generally sloping to the east. There is a constructed ditch along the northwestern boundary of the site, to convey surface water from an adjacent development east down the slope. There is no evidence onsite of a continuous stream channel other than fhe ditch. 031103 Boston 124"'Ave. SE- 1 i ._. .. ._ * I BACKGROUND INFORMATION i NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPPING The National Wetiand Inventory (NWI) mapping comple#ed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource did not identify any wetlands on the project site. This resource identified a wetland immediately off-site to the east as palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded (PFOC) Palustrine, Scrub- Shrub, Seasonally Flooded (PSSC), and palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded (PEMC) (Figure 2). � STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES � The State of Washington Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource identified Big Soos Creek within the immediate vicinity. STATE OF WASHINGTON STREAM CATALOG The State of Washington Stream Catalog for Puget Sound was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource did not identify a�y streams within the project site. Offsite, adjacent to the east, a st�eam corridor was identified as Big Soos Creek. This creek was identified to provide habjtat for resident and anadromous fsh species. ' KING COUNTY �ENSITIVE AREAS MAPPING r The King County Wetland Inventory was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This � mapping resource did not identify any wetlands on the project site. This resource identified a wetland immediately off-site to the east as Map Folio Wetland 5402, Class � 1(C), 134 acres. This resource also identifred Big Soos Creek transecting the wetland as a Class 2S stream. SOILS MAPPING A review of the mapping of soil types within the project area completed by the U.S. Soils � � Conservation Service (SCS) identified that the onsite soils consist primarily of Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (Soils Survey of King County Area Washington, Nov. 1973). This soil is described as: AQC - Alderwood qravellv sandy loam: This series consists of moderately well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 to 40 inches. This soil is on uplands and formed in glacial deposits. A #ypical pedon of Alderwood soils from 0 -12 inches is ' dark brown (10YR 4/3) gravelly sandy loam. From 12 to 27 inches the soil is 031103 Boston 124'�Ave.SE-2 Wetland Report � E� i � i grayish-brown (2.5YR 5l2) gravelly sandy loam with many medium, distinct mottles. This soil series is not listed as a hydric soil. ONSITE EVALUATION - WETLANDS WETLAND STUDY METHODS Presently accepted wetland identification is based on a three parameter criteria test as established within both the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1967 Manual) and the Washington Stafe Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash. Manual). These criteria are: 1. A predominance of hydrophytic vegetation. 2. The presence of hydric soils, and �s 3. The presence of wettand hydrology. Initial onsite assessment and evaluation was completed during several site visits in 2003 and 2004. Specific identification of wetland boundaries was completed on December 17, 2003. Assessment transects were established on a north/south pattern through the project area. Wetland assessment within the project site followed the methods and prooedures outlined in both the Wash. Manual and the 1987 Manual. Onsite assessment noted that there were no differences in the identified wetland boundaries as a result to using either the Wash. Manual or the 1987 Manual. Drainage ' corridors were assessed and ident�ed in accordance with the criteria established by 9 King County and the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030). The site characteristics were assessed on April 2, 2004 with King county staff(N. Gillen) to confirm wetland categorization and discuss mitigation options. The boundary between wetland and non-wetland areas was established by examining the transitional gradient between wetland criteria along transects through the site. Delineation was performed using the roufine methodology for areas gr�eater than five acnes as detailed in the 1987 Manual. Field data sheets are provided in Appendix A. Identified boundaries were marked in the field with number flagging. These boundaries were then surveyed and made a part of the site plan mapping. 031103 Boston 124"'Ave.SE-3 Wetland Report . i FIELD OBSERVATION � I • Vegetation I The dominant onsite species was Douglas fir and big leaf maple. These mature trees formed open stands across the treed portion of the site. Additiona! tree species occurring onsite included Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), cherry , (Prunus spp}, and cascara (Rhamnus purshiana). The understory included a wide � variety of shrubs and herb species including� vine maple (Acer circinafum), salal (Gaultheria shallon), Oregon grape (Berfieris spp.), hazelnut (Corylus comufa), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procera), evergreen blacicberry (Rubus laciniatus), Pacific red elderberry (Sambusus racemosa), snowberry (Symphoricarpus albus), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium), and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). Throughout the project site this plant community had been altered by prior�.management actions. This plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic (i.e. typical of non-wetlands). In the northwestern portion of the site, at the northwest corner, an isolated depression occurs. The p(ant community in this area is shrub-scrub, dominated by salmonberry, spiraea (Spiraea douglasir), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), buttercup (Ranunculus repens), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), softrush, and lady fern (Afhyrium filix-femina), with alder (Alnus rubra) saplings occurring intermittently. . This piant association was identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of wetlands). ; OfFsite to the east a large.stream corridor occurs: The plant community in this area is � shrub-scrub, dominated by red-osier dogwood (Comus stolonifera), spiraea (Spiraea ! douglasii), salmonberry, Sitka wilfow (Salix sitchensis), slough sedge {Carex obnupta), � butte�cup (Ranunculus repens), and Vvillow-weed (Polygonum lapathifolium). . This � plant association was identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of wQtlands). ' • Soils As ident�ed by numerous sample plots throughout the project site,,the majority of the site exhibited a soil profile typical of the Alderwood soil series. The soil w�s defined as gravelty sandy loam with a soil matrix color of dark brown (10YR 3/3) to brown (10YR 4/4). These soils did not exhibit redoximorphic features such as prominent soil mott4es, oxidized root channels, or glayed soil layers within the first 20 inches of soil depth. The majority of the project site exhibited soi! which would not be considered "hydric." Representative sample plots are ident�ed. (Special note - many more sample plots were completed during the field assessment than are reported within Appendix A). - s'. Sample plots within the defined isolated depression exhibited a mixed gravelly loam soil ` texture. These soils appeared to be mineral in character. Soils ranged in color from very daric brown (10YR 3/1) to dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2). Redoximorphic features � � � 031103 Boston 124"'Ave.SE-4 WeUand Report were present and often very prominent. Soils within these areas exhibited "hydric" characteristics. • Hydrology Onsite hydrology appeared to be the result of seasonal stormwater runoff from onsite and adjacent properties. In addition, the pattern of surface water movement appeared to have been modified by prior land use activities. These activities have included the development of offsite homesites, the development of roadways and utilities, and the placement of culverts. The general movement of surFace water runoff across the site was generally to the east. Surface water through the site was captured in boundary and roadside ditches which occur at the north and south boundaries of the site. Within the isolated depression, evidence of seasonal soil saturation was documented. This area was in a small depression, and had been impacted by prior fand use actions (i.e. grazing, compaction, pasture management). Based on field indicators (i.e. water stained leaves, drift lines, soil saturation, oxidized root channels, wetland drainage pattern) this depression met the wetland hydrology criteria of the 1987 Manual and the Wash. Manual. This depression apparently drained to the ditch which flows east along the northern boundary of the site. Within the stream corridor area located offsite to the east of the site evidence of seasonal soil satu�ation was also documented. This area was part of a large wetland � complex, and had been impacted by prior and on-going land use actions (i.e. utility corridor development}. Based on field indicators (i.e. water stained leaves, drift lines, soil saturation, oxidized root channels, wetland drainage pattern) this depression met the wetland hydrology criteria of the 1987 Manual and the Wash. Manual. � 031103 Boston 124�'Ave.SE-5 Wetland Report i i WETLAND AND STREAM DETERMINATI�N Wetland determination was based on sample plots which contained hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology in accordance with the 1987 Manual and the Wash. Manual. Based on these methods two wetland areas were identified onsite (Attachment 1). No area was identified onsite to exhibit characters typical of a "stream" (i.e. a continuous pattern of surface water movement, either permanent or intermittent). Also one area, noted to have been intentionally created in an upland area, captured residential runoff. , WETLAND SIZE CLASSIFICATION KING FUNCTION STANDARD ONSITE (USFWS) COUNTY AND VALUE BUFFER WIDTH (square RATING RATING feet) A Offsite- PFOE � 1 High 100 ft. Buffer onsite B *998 PSSC 3 non- Low Not regulated { r ulated 'connotes wetland continues off-site PFOE palusfine, emergent,seasonally flooded PSSC palustrine, shrub-scrub,seasonally flooded/saturated � Wettand A: This wetland was identified within a large wetland/stream complex off-site to the east of the project site. This wetland was dominated by a shrub — scrub plant community adjacent to the project site, and was fo�ested further away from the site. This plant community was managed apparently to maintain the utility corridor access and maintenance road. This wetland exhibited shallow ponded surface water during the winter and early growing season as a result of topography. Wetland A was identified to meet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as palustrine, shrub-scrub, seasonally flooded/saturated (PSSE). Based on the size of the wetiand, association with a Class 2(S) stream, and the forested plant community this wetland complex was identified to meet the criteria for designation as a King County Class 1 Wetland. The standard buffer for a Class 1 Wetland is 100 ft. as measured perpendicuiar to the wetland edge. Wetland B: This wetland was identified within an isolated depression in the northwest corner of the project site. This wetland was dominated by a shrub-scrub plant community. This wetland was hydrologically supported by road and roof runoff conveyed by a ditch from an off-site single-family �esidence. This wetland exhibited shallow ponded surface water during the winter and early growing season as a result of topography and roof runoff. Wetland B was identified to meet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as palustrine, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded/saturated (PSSE). Based on the size of the wetland and the shrub-scrub plant community this wetland was 031103 Boston 124�'Ave.SE-6 Wetland Report identified to meet #he criteria for designation as a King County Class 3 Wetland. However, since this wetland is smaller than 2,500 sq. ft. in tota! size, this wetland is apparently not regulated by King County. i WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Wetlands are known to perform significant roles in the ecosystem, some of which are of immediate value to society. These roles vary greatly with the size, type, F�ydrology, vegetation, and location of wetland areas. Although the ecological functions performed by this wetland are complex, interrelated, and difficult to assess and quantify, methods have been developed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Adamus et al. 1987: Reppert et al. 1979). The functions provided by wetlands include hydrologic support, shoreline protection, storrnwater and floodwater storage, water quality, groundwater recharge, and provision of wildlife habitat. _, The HYDROLOGIC SUPPORT FUNCTION is defined by the measure of hydrologic stability and environmental integrity which the wetland provides. This function is measured by the frequency of inundation and saturation by tidai actions, stream flow, �unoff, and precipitation. Wetlands permanently i�undated or saturated, or intertidal wetlands are valued as high. Medium valued wetlands are seasona(ly flooded or are open water systems that remain saturated during most of the growing season. Wetlands that are intermittently flooded or hydrologically isolated are considered of low value. The SHORELlNE PROTECTION FUNCTION is defned by the measure of shielding from wave action, erosion, or storm damage which a wetland provides. ' This function is measured by the location and width of the wetland along � shoreline areas, types of vegetation present, and the extent of development along the shoreline. A high value is given to wetlands along a shoreline that have a width greater than 200 yards and dense woody vegetation. A medium value is given to a wetland with a width of 100 to 200 yards, sparse woody vegetation, and dense emergent vegetation. Wetlands less than 100 yards in width and emergent or lacking vegetation are considered of low value. The STORMWATER AND FLOODWATER STORAGE FUNCTfON is defined by the ability of a wetland to store water and retard #low during periods of flood or storm discharge. Wetlands of larger size are generally considered to have greater ability to provide this function. In addition, wetlands nearer to urban or potentially develop-able areas are also considered to provide greater flood protections than wetlands which are in undeveloped areas. The WATER QUALITY FUNCTION is defined by the physical, biological, and ; I chemical processes which wetlands provide to naturally purify water. This � function removes organic and mineral particulates through natural fittration. In general, wetlands of greater size, more dense vegetation, and those which are 031103 Boston 124°i Ave. SE-7 WeUand Report . � close to point sources of pollution are considered to be of higher value. ' Wetlands which are small (<5 acres), lacking dense vegetation, and not clos� to ' point or non-point sources of pollution are considered of low value. The GROUNDWATER RECHARGE FUNCTION is defined by the interaction of the underlying geology and soils, and the surFace topography. This function provides for the movement of surface water into groundwater systems. Important to this function is wetland size, period of inundation, and depth of standing water within the wetland. High vatue is given to permanently inundated wetlands greater than 10 acres in size. Medium value is given to wetlands which are seasonally flooded and 5 to 10 acres is size. Wetlands less than 5 acres in size, } isolated, and temporarily saturated are considered of low value. The NATURAL B10LOGiCAL FUNCTION is defined by the complexity of � physical habitats and biological species within the wetland area. The value given to a wetland depends upon its ability to provide habitat for nesting (spawning), incubation, feeding, rearing, and cover of aquatic and terrestrial animal and fish species. ln addition, the ability of a wetland to provide support for varying food ' chains is an important element.in v�lue assessment. Wetlands of high species diversity, three or more habitat types, unique habitat features, large in size, and ! associated with a permanent stream or tidal marsh are considered of high value. a Wetlands with moderate species diversity, two habitat types, moderate in size, ' and associated with an intermittent s�tream or high salt marsh are considered of medium value. A low value is given to wetlands of Iow species diversity, small size, and isolated. � ; These six functions are rated low, moderate, or high, based on the criteria outlined above. These criteria are guidelines compiled from Adamus (1987) and Reppert (9979) and professional judgment must be exercised in assessing these criteria. Overali ' values for a wetland are assigned, based on a synthesis of individual values. In addition to intrinsic functions, extrinsic functions are also recognized. These extrinsic functions provide social values that have indirect benefits to wetiands. Education and recreational opportunities are most often mentioned as extrinsic functions. Associated values are often subjective and are thus difficult to evaluate. As such, these functions are not rated, but are nonetheless important when considering creation, restoration, or enhancement projects. ONSITE AND OFFSITE WETLAND VALUATION Fo!lowing the function and value assessment process noted above Wetland A (Located offsite) was rated as exhibiting a High rating: � • Water Quality Benefits - This wetland was part of a large complex � associated with Big Soos Creek. 1'his complex had been impacted by prior and on-going utility corridor land management. This wetland appeared to retain more than 50% of the runoff which occurred witF�in the local area. This 031103 8oston 124°t Ave.SE-8 Wetland Repo�t _ wetland also exhibited a wide vegetation diversity. The primary water quality benefit provided by This wetland was a significant amount of biofiltration of ' surface stormwater. • Stormwater Storage - This wetland are part of a large wetland complex and had been impacted by prior land uses. These wetland was located in a rapidly developing part of King County. This wetland was large exhibited a substantial capacity to store stormwater. • Hydrologic Support - This wetland appeared large, and noted to pond a substantial amount of surface water throughout the growing season. � , Evidence of seasonal ponding;and saturation to the surface was significant. ` • Groundwater Recharge - This wetland appeared large, and to pond a significant amount of surFace water throughout the growing season. Evidence of seasonal ponding and saturation to the surface was substantial. • Natural Biological Function - This wetland was large, and exhibited an extensive range of plant diversity and vegetation complexity. Unique habitat featuces (i.e. snags, fall�n trees, mature trees along the wetland boundary) were limited adjacent to the project site. � E ;. Following the function and value assessment process noted above Wetland B were �, rated as exhibiting a low rating: } • Water Qualify Benefits - This wetland was small and had been impacted by prior grazing and pasture and land management. This wetland appeared to retain less than 25% of the runoff which occurred within the local area. This '� wetland also exhibited a limited vegetation diversity as a result of prior grazing and land use. The primary water quality benefit provided by This wetland was a very limited amount of biofiltration of surface stormwater. � • Stormwater Storage - This wetland appeared within a topographic depression and had been irnpacted by prior land uses. This wetland was located in a rapidly developing part of King County. This wetland was smalt and exhibited a very limited ability to store stormwater. • Hydrologic Support - This wetland appeared small, and noted to pond a limited amount of surface water early in the growing season. Evidence of seasonal ponding and saturation to the surface was limited. • Groundwater Recharge - This wetland appeared small, and to pond a fimited amount of surface water ea�ly in the growing season. Evidence of seasonal ponding and saturation to the surface was limited. 031103 Boston 124"'Ave.SE-9 WeUand Report i • Natural Biological Function - This wetland was small, and exhibited a very limited range of plant diversity and vegetation complexity. Unique habitat features (i.e. snags, fallen trees, mature trees along the wetland boundary) were absent. ` REGULATORY CONSIDERATION The proposed alteration of lands defined by various federal, state, and local authority ru(es and regulations as "wetlands" raises environmental concerns that are generatly addressed in the development review process. These concerns center around the developmenYs potential adverse impacts to the structure, functibn, value, and size of these "wetland" areas. Such adverse impacts may include a reduction in wildlife habitats, reduced surface water quality, reduced water retention, a reduced ground ; water recharge rate, reduced plant species diversity, and the reduction in the function and value of other associated wetland and non-wetland characteristics. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - Section 404 Section 404 csf the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of`the United States" without a permit from the Corps of Engineers (Corps}. The �Corps has jurisdiction over freshwater systems watervvard from the ordinary high water line of a water body or waten�vard from the upland boundary of the adjacent wetland. The definition of fill materials includes the replacement of aquatic areas with d .ry land, grading which changes the surface contour of a wetland, and rnechanized land clearing in wetlands. For the purposes of Section 404 permitting the Corps makes the final determination as to whether an area meets the wetland definition and would be subject to regulation under the Corps program. � Currently the Corps has two specific types of permits which apply to wetland fill proposals. These two iypes are a series of specific Nationwide Permits and the � Individual Permit. The Nationwide Permit process ident�es specific categories of work tha# can be undertaken following a set of specific conditions applicable to each Nationwide Permit number. For example; NWP#12 allows for the limited, short term impacts to wetlands for the placement of utilities, and NWP#14 allows for a limited impact to wetlands as a part of the development of a roadway crossing. The Corps has noted several times within information papers, documents, and workshops that a project proponent that places fill within a wetland without specific Corps authorization does so - at the proponent's own risk. The Corps requires an Individual Permit where a proposed activities within an identified jurisdictional wetland area can not be authorized under one of the Nationwide Permits. Within the Individual Permit process the Corps undertakes a much more in- ! depth review of the proposed project and the proposed impacts. The Corps must � evaluate whether the benefits derived from the project outweigh the foreseeable environmental impacts of the project's completion. i 031103 Boston 124�'Ave.SE-10 ' Wetland Report STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Proposed action undertaken through either of the Corps of Engineers processes (Nationwide, Individual, or isolated) are also subject to the provisions of the Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Certificafion Process. Projects that may be exempt from Corps of Engineers Section 404 jurisdiction may still require review by the Washington State Department of Ecology to ensure consistency with State water quality ' protection provisions. KlNG COUNTY- "Environmentaliy Sensitive Areas" Ordinance 21A.24 • Wetland and Stream Classes King County regulates activi.ties in and around wetland areas. Such regulations also require that an undisturbed native vegetation buffer be retained along the upland side of ' the identified wetland areas. To assist in this regulation the County has defined classes by which to regulate wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer area. These categories are based on such features as size; the presence of endangered or threatened plants, fish, o� animals; regionally rare wetlands; wetlands of local significance for wildlife or stormwater functions; the number of wetland classes and � subclasses; and percentage of open water. A Ciass 1 Wetland means a wetland assigned the Unique/Outstanding rating in the King County Wetlands Inventory; or any wetland which meets any of the folldwing criteria: . 1. The presence of species listed by the federal government or state as endangered, or threatened, or the presence of critical or outstanding actual habitat for those species; 2. Wetlands having 40% to 60% permanent open water in dispersed patches with two or more classes of vegetation; 3. Wetlands equal to or greater than ten acres in size and having three or more wetland classes, one of which is open water; or : 4. The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence. 3� A Class 2 Wetland means a wetland assigned the Significant #2 Rating in the King County Wetlands Inventory; or any wetlands which meet any of the following criteria: ! i 1. Wetlands greater that one acre in size; 'I 2. Wetlands equal to or less that one acre in size and having three or more j wetland classes; 3. Wetlands equal to or less than one acre that have a forested wetland class; � 4. The presence of heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees. 031103 Boston 124�'Ave.SE-11 Wetfand Report A Class 3 Wetland means a wetland assigned a Lesser Concem #3 Rating in the King County Wetlands Inventory, 1983, or uninventoried wetlands that area equal to or less than one acre in size and that have two or fewer wetland classes. King County does not regulate wetlands less than 2,500 square feet in total size within the Urban Growth Boundary of King County. King county defines "Streams" as those areas in King County where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed, not including irrigatlon ditches, canals, storm or ' surface water run-off devices or other entirely artificial watercourses, unless they are used by salmonids or are used to convey streams naturally occurring prior to construction in such watercourses. • Required Buffers King County has established a standard buffer to be applied to a wetland or stream to � assure protection of the wetland function and value. This buffer area is measured perpendicular to the defined wetland edge or perpendicular to the identified ordinary high water mark of a stream. WETLAND STANDARD BUFFER CLASS WIDTH 1 '100 feet '� 2 50 feet � 3 25 feet � King County allows the standard buffer to be mod�ed where such actions would : provide additional protection to wetlands or enhance the wetiand's functions (21A.24.320.6). Buffer averaging may be allowed as long as the total area contained in ' the buffer on the development proposal site does not decrease and the minimum width of the final buffe� is not less than 65% of the standard buffer width. � k � �'; f; � : (: 031103 Boston 124°i Ave.SE-12 Wetland Report SELECTED ACTION PLAN The Selected Action Plan of the Soos Creek Plat project site focuses on the creation of independent lots suitable for the development of singie-family homesites consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. ' A primary feature in the creation of these homesite lots will be the establishment of � protective buffer adjacent to the identi#ied offsite wetland consistent with the King County Environmental Sensitive Ar�as Ordinance. Wetland B will be fiNed in accordance with King County regulation. i Preliminary developr�ent and mitigation plans are submitted by the Owner (Boston Design & Development) as an attachment to this report. a ; .,� . � � I � � � F � 031103 Boston 124"'Ave.SE-13 Wetland Report FIGURES , � i � � � � 1 , � ; r � � II 031103 Boston'124"'Ave.SE-14 ' WeUand Report ',{ a � 1 :?i�73 G:Y.}° Q3?B .1'S25 �,;3n ,�i`"y,h)'�,C..�/�� ' .�•�—�- 43'1]0 '. t ni40 0�8rJ X�`'ly�• 431L� ` �� Mti� M%C~� v�t� �r_. „r. ;`r,h,� -�y::ti�:.x V � ,�� ' Cr1YJ.'r SE 188TH_S7 �� -`- t3A3�3 �t�� h�}�}' � �Y�Fr120 �, !i'r13 C422 �X�": 4�! Qn tz.� UiQ�� r.12C1�1 a:}ZI L�:�Y � tf''t V�:@ p,�q? (?�1� �'�+1`.� C r T C U ri �-� '�ix; _5E 188TH pL '�' Cti:S�i . C�Z1' �� ' �i�;.'� USS� � vll� U[(fJ C42: G�,r,v1 `}i� �l52!S rFrp 0`.�.97 C•3!�? �:;r Ozar �z<�,; � CraS� �;,.��, � �; U5?� v5r3 :��o .r'2;��.r:2Q't VJ rr3;�ci � SE 169� Us�_a �u� `;�ay, ctizs� �� ,� �';;��y-' "�1 r>�.� U6'1? � Y''n.�� , ez?a �:h,,<:. oy�o �i <;, titi-/� W 02yU tti2tK_� a �`1, USZEi G�2J _�.4. 4' L!�?S�J j----�... '�r�� II! 423�] � Gv�'� U�'�3 �s42 0485 U1:n C_%7:J i. ; �{ Q670� -7 ��26�? �Y,uy� {�, r , `'.�4:r ctF.aU N af� �'7�= �.i3i0 p'd3 �iu�(iZ(TS r�� 'T?'.'r;;��-r' `?6h^ a ;r krYy- GIO� �,� r-�• o)F4 t��%-l'• L'�yi! ��3�14 �j-.r$! . 0724? +?ioe «. U-Z�g Gl.�, D�1 qts. •Nyj<g� 'i G)34 � ' SE 192N0_S� ii�.''��, .� (3TACi d%b4 v� y, ' �71U W '.'�i:�:�i-.:� v` : .t2�1 �'W �: r� rv_:.;3 :;k:;ir•�• i\XY� �'i �� f!}r i �{l� J 2' ��ii f �ti:�' . .��x .� �[1�� 4' O� �•�•� ..y r�l��iY.`r( �'f''!V .�n �X.�rv N vi p._v_, �_.a� , k,�;�n,��> ; ;' x��•�s:�' �.]ctZS N :,:s� rc;�� y .w,v�'�?�1,� "Y�^Y�Sl'..• '. :�,fr) i ;��J` <'''=�1 `�.> y�'�\�� .\�.?i .. r'r-,•_ ( '''X y�^��Y`��',ti: ,��.` � GYY}? G;i4 r}'"7r� �}-�� '�� r �:,:�.`' v,�,. �� "Y � y.> r '�: ��k f _�rr_•. tY_�f rx.iSS rr•v7� '?='la •:�';';rti?;�,�. {C)2DDS Kiny County � a_.,�p 84ft ; ... ry � � Legend ', Se�::1ad FeaSures �;�s� � Stfeets � C�.vs2�escl�a 4/ � _ P3t�h31 � G'a_z2syrnsd �� ish and D"Ach f✓ ccr�.3 , - 4Y�7rihTe Kets�atk ' �nd�:`� I SAQ Stream � SAO N�etland ' cur.! i `{ � . i', i' �t �;=' Y�� Figure 1. e� '�� r � Site Vicinity -=- i� 1&�� . �; Cansulting And I�ng County ' Wetlands Map � II II Soos Creek Plat '�� .: �:;::�:�_ �� } , � - .�:.:..,.::.. ', :.:�:�``�::=�` �`�; � E _ :.i' � ' .J� �.e ;'�'.� .y� �. lf�i+�t�s'' - ..-' �'.'�: w � - , ; •:f .. . . . . • .� . I ,',.i �^.-j ' � �•' '. � }}-�":4 .t ��'' '�'e.• �'i _:-�� S R �l:-".,��' °?:': li � � :�'- ..�.. +,� .i�• - :�� ':�^: i t i'f tc�' •5 �� .�'• �_t�• �'•ti:� �I I � •L ;%S:•.. I �'� -- '.�.: _ i 'ti ',i± _ � ��rj - , _'_�: �1.. -."�Y,,:�:. �.1.�• 'S' _ j - " � "_: - �•��:. .:� I :;;r:`s':" `:;�. - - r=•,•..';Y�0•.�:. �`•�. °.t- +�� .M1:. � l�.-._ ' . . . . . . .�• I _ :`:� - .,�'..' :Y. I :.Rr � :� i ( � ..�• �� • ••l'•: :• •• 1�� .:S •',� ' :�;t:��:� � ! i�...:. � �I:•' :l• :'�:' I � . ��. �r � . . . • • , �•' r � V.D�� _ II � ••t '.l �Y. I - �!L�:•\; •.� ;�ti,. ,5�: .�1., �'�r� •'� I :Si .:�t_ (�— -- -- :� :1�•' '.. - �� , . •.�; .; ..�ly•,^ _ ^I i• :�. , .•�` : _ ':':�a ..:_ :.L�,.`:. :i� .:�� II �� ~� r� , Jr:� :�: :,:: �; � I : '�� .;: �� :,':� ��. ■ •� .`' � ''�:•"•'.+ •` � '�� s�.'•.;'' _ - - --- � '�'�3 't=.: '\ w a�� • .� '��, t ` �� I rt � , '� ••,ti•' �•.1-� _"•l •' J4 �tj�'� `�'�- �� ,. '.. .:• „ 'i": 1 � 1• 'Ja. ,•�?'� °a:•�`'ci1 � ��IY,�� _. . . . :;::��:; 1 � � I :_ ' �..:". � `,` '" I , � �4: :.' :'i�_�M " � � `�' � �• P�� . � . .;.�: --T� / � 4 _� � `! ' I . � � � � � ,e : •�.�� 1 \,\ � ' ' Afwr��' •�..,�� .I�i,��: t ` ,� E�.� }K_ ..Y�� 1 � r ,\� ...._ it, ... " ' " ..' ' .5 J�5•' �t ! . . . �.-F'�'� i !� , O.Q6 0 0.06 0.72 Miles �� /�,/ Renton nwi Renton nwi � 0 PEMC - PEMF � ,�, � F�gure 2. P�FOC So '� �SSC os Creek P[at � NWI M s ap i I i i REFERENCE LIST Adamus, P.R., E.J. C(airain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young, 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87, � U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Racific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Horner, R.R. and K.J. Raedeke. 1989. Guide for Wetland Mitigation Project Monitoring. Washington State Department of Transportation. contract number GC8286, task 6. King County Department of Natural Resources. 1993. DRAFT Wildlife Management in King County: Issue Paper. Mikol, S.A. 4980. Field Guidelines for Using Transects to Sample Nongame Bird Populations. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Sen�ice publication FVVS/OBS - 80/58. Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. '1979. Wetland Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, lnstitute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of King County Area Washington, Nov. 1973. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, Publication Number 96-94. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and � Salmon Utilization, Volume 1., 1975 � :, 03i103 Boston 124"'Ave.SE- i5 WeNand Report . � APPENDIX A FIELD DATA FORMS i � � . : � , � � � � � � � �� . � ' � Ei 031103 Boston 124�'Ave. SE-16 � . Wetland Report � il ' I � Job Number. 031103 � Data Form c�cy: �o� Routine W�tland Determination Wettand Data Poin� SP 1 ._..__. Project/Site: Boston 124th Ave.SE Qate: December 17,2003 Applicant/Owner: Boston Design&Davelopment Co. County: KEng Inveetigator: M.Neckert State: Wa [X]Do normai circumstances exist on the sife? �J Community ID: Forest ( j Have vegetation,soils,or hydrology been disturbad9 Station ID: j J Is the area a potenti�i prnblem areg? Plot ID: Vegetation Dominant Species Common Name _f__ %Cover Indicator He ceous ' X F?haleris arvndinacea Orass,Reed Canary 5D FACW ru X OemJeria cerasiformis Indian Plum 25 FACU X Rubus armeniacus Blackberry,Himalaya 50 FACU �X Ainus rubra Alder,Red 66 FAC %Species that are OBI,FACW,or FAC(except FAC-}: SO Cowardin Classification: Remarks appears to drain welf Wydralogy Prfmary Wetland Nydmlogy lndicato►s Secondarq Kydr�loqy/ndicafors [ ]Recorded(3ata(describe in remarks} ( j Inundated ( j Oxidized root channefs [ ]Stream.Lake,or Tide Gage [ ]Saturated In upper 12�ches [ ]Water-stained leaves I 3 Aarial Photograph [ J Water marics [ ]Loral soil survey data ( j Other(describe in remarks) ( ]Drift lines [ J FAC-Neutral test Field Observations: I 1��ment deposits [ j Other(explain in remarks) � Depth of Surface Water(in.): U I 1�rainage paftems in wetlands Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): >24 Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): >24 Remarks � appears to drain wefl ' $CI�S Depth Hor. Matrix Moltle!2nd Mottle Texture, �in.) Color _ oor A undance on rast Structure,etc. 0-6 A idYR 3/2 Coarse Sandy Loam stooes 6-18 B 10YR 313 Coarse Sandy Loam stones Hydric Sor7s Indicators � ]Histosoi ( ]ConcreGons ' [ ]Hisfic Epipedon [ j Nigh Organic°�in SurFace Layer � , [ j Sulfidic Odor ( ]Organic Streaking � [ ]Probable Aquatic Moist Regime ( }Listed on Local Hyctric SoiEs List ( ]Reduang Conditions [ j listed on Natlonal Hydric Soits List [ j Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ( ]Other(explain in remarks) Unii Name: 7axonomy: Drainage Class: [ ]Fieki Observatfons matCh map Remarks appears to drain waU ' Wetland Determination ; I [ ]Hydrophytic Vegetation Present [ ]This�ata Point is a Wetland , Ii [ ]Hydric Soi[s Present - , I, [ ]Wetland Nydrology Present ' 'I Remarks ', fill I weNand crlteria NOT met appears to drain well ! i 'E Paae 1 of 10 � Job Number. 031103 1, I Data Form City: none ' Routine Wetland Determination Wetiand Data Point: SP 2 ; ProjecUSite: Boston 124M Ave.SE Date: December 17,2003 i Appl'rcanttOwner: Boston Destgn b Development Co, County: King ( Investlgator. M.Heckert State: Wa i (XJ Do normal ciroumstances exist on the site? Community ID: . [ ]Have vegetation,soils,or hydrology been disturbed7 5tation ID: [ j Is the area a potantial problem area? Piot ID: �/�@�t10[1 Dorninant Specfes Common Name •�Cover Indicato� H aceous X Phaleris srundinacee Grass,Reed Canary 90 FACW ShX b Rubus spectabilis Berry,Salmon 25 FAC X Spiraea doualasir Spiraea,Douvias' 25 FACW °�Species that are OBL,FACW,or FAC(except FAG): 100 Cowardin Classification: psse � Remarks appears to drain pooriy ; Hydrology Primery WeUand Hydrofogy Indicetors Secondary Hydrology lndicators [ ]Recorded Data(describe in remadcs) ( ]Inundated (X]Oxidized root ctiannels , [ ]Stream,Lake,or Tide Gage [X]Saturated in upper 12 inches j j Water-stained leaves [ �Aeriaf Photograph �XJ Water marks ( ]Local soil survey data ' [ ]Other(describe in remarics) [ j Drift lines [ �FAC-Neut�al lest Field Obsenations: [X]SedEment deposits ( ]Uthe�(explain in remarks) Depth of Surface Water(in.): 0 I ]Drainage pattems in weilands � Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 12 Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 12 � Rema rks ° appears to drain poorly SOI�S Depth Hor, Mattnc Mottle!2nd Moftle Texture, �in.) Color _ o or u ance on rast Structure,etc. 0-6 A tOYR 312 ' Coerse Sandy Loam cobbles 6-18 B 10YR 3/3 10YR 5I8 common distind Coarse Sandy Loam stones Nydric Soils lrrdicafors ( ]Histosol [Xj Concretions ( ]Histic Epipedon [ j High Organic°r6 in Surface Layer � [ ]Sutfidic Odor [X]Organic Streaking [Xj Probable Aquatic Moist Regime [ ]Lfsted on Local Ffydric Soiis List [X�Reducing Conditions ( ]ListarJ on National Hydric Soils Ust [X]Gleyed or i.ow-Chroma Colors [ J Other(e�lain in remarks) Uni!Name: Taxonomy: Drainage Class: [ ]F�Id Observadons match map Remadcs appears to drain poorly Wetland Determination [X]Ffydrophytic Vegetation Present [XJ This Data Point is a Wetland (X]Hydric Soils Present [X]Wetland Hydrology Present ; Remarks fill wetland criteria MET appears to drain poorty wl A A1 to A22 � i Paae 2 oi 10 Job Number: 031103 Data Form c�cy: none Routine Wetland Determination Wetland Qata Paint: 3P 3 Project/Site: Boston 124th Ave.SE Date: December 17,2Q03 ApplicanVOwner: Boston Deslgn 8�Deveiopment Co. County: King Investigator: M.Heckert State: Wa [XJ Do normaf ciroumstances exist on the site? Community ID: Palustrtan shrubl [ j Have vegetatfon,soils,or hydrology been disturbed7 Statlon!D; [ j Is the area a potenGal problem area? Plot ID: Vegetation Dominant Species Common Name �.Cover Indicafor . Herhacenus � X PhsfaRs arundinacea Grass,Reed Canary 90 FACW S X Salix sitchensis Wiilow Sitka 70 FACW %Species that are OBL,FACW,or FAC(except FAC-): 100 Cowardin Classification: pssc Remarks . appears to drain poody Hydl'OlOgy PrimaryWet(and Hydrology Indicat�rs Secondary Hydrology Irxficators [ ]Recorded Data(describe in remarks) ( ]Inundated [Xj O�adized root channels ; ( J Stream,Lake,or Tide Gage [XJ Saturated in upper 12 inches [X]Water-stained leaves [ jAeriai Photograph [ J Water marks [ j Local soil survey data ( j Other(describe in remarks) [ j Drift lines [ )FAC-Neutral test Field Observatians: [X]Sediment deposits O Other(explain in remarks) Depth of Surfaee Water(in.): 0 [X]Drainage patterns in wedands Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 6 Depth to Saturated Soils(in.}: 6 Remarks appears to drain poorly $O1�S Depth Hor. Matrix Mottle/2nd Mottle Texture, (in.? Color o or un ance ntras Structure,etc. 0-6 A 10YR 3/1 Coarse Sandy Loam pebbles 6-18 A/B 10YR 4/1 10YR 5/6 common distinct Loamy Sand stones Hydric Sals/ndicators � ( ]Histosol [ )Concretions [ ]Hlstic Epipedon [ )High Organic%in Surface Layer [ ]Sutf�dic Odor [ ]Organic Streaking [ ]Probable Aquadc Moist Regime � ]Listed on local Hydric Soils List [ j Reducing Conditions ( ]Usted on Natlonaf Hydric Soi1s List [ ]Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors [ ]Other(e�lain irt remarks) Unit Name: Taxonomy: Drainage Class: [ j Field Observations match map Rsmarks appears to drain poorly Wetland Determination [XJ Hydrophytic Vegetation Present [X]This Data Point is a Wetland i (X)Hydric 5oils Present I [X]Wetiand Hydrology Present �� Remarks on edge weUand criterfa MET appears to drefn poody ;� 3� :� { ii ;3 � � I Paae 3 of�i 0 . i Job Number: 037103 Data Form c�ry: �o�• Routine Wetland Determinatiqn Wettand Data Point SA 4 ProjecUSite: Boston 124th Ave.SE Date: December 1T,2003 Applicant/Owner: Boston Design d�Development Co. County: King lnvestigator: M.Heckert State: Wa [X)Do normal cfrcumstancss exist on the site? � Community ID: [ j Have vegetaGon,soils,or hydrology been disturbed7 Station ID: [ ]Is the area a potentia(problem area? Plot ID: Vegetation Dominant Specles Common Name °k Cover Indicator Ner6aceous X Phaleris eru�dfnacea Grass,Reed Canary 80 FACW SbX b Rubus armeniacus Blackberry,liimalaya 25 FACU X Salix hookersna Wi(Iow,Hooker 6 FACW- X Popu/us trichocarpa Cotton-Wood,black 40 FAC %Species that are 081,FACW,or FAC(except FAC-): 75 Cowardin Class�cation: PSS-PFO Remarks appears to drein poorly Hydrology Prrmary Wetlend Nydrology Indicators Seoondary Nydrology Indicators [ ]Recorded Data(describe in remarks) [ 1 Inundated [X]��dized root channels [ ]Siream,Lake,or Tide Gage [XJ Seturated in upper 12 inches ( ]Water-stained(eaves [ J Aeria(Photograph [X]Water marics [ ]Local soil survey data [ ]Other(describe in remarks) [ ]Drift lines [ ]FAC-Neutral test Field Observations: [ ]Sediment deposits [ j Other(explain in remarks) Depth of Surface Water(in.}: 0 IXj Orainage pattems in weUands Depth to Free Water in Pit(in.): 3 Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): S Remarks � appears b drain poorty $O1�S Depth Hor. Matrix Mottle!2nd Mottle Texture, (inJ Color o or bun ance ontrast Structure,etc. 0-16 AJB 10YR 4/2 10YR 5/6 common distlnct Coarse Sandy Loam pebbles Hydric Sals lndicators ( ]Histosol [ j Concretions ' [ ]Histic Epipedon [ J High Qrganic 96 in Surface Layer ` [ )Sutfidic Odor [X]Organic Streaking [XJ Probabte Aquatic Niast Reglme [ j Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (X]Redudng Conditions [ }Listed on National Hydric Soils List (XJ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Co4ors [ ]Other(explain in remarks) Unit Name: Texonomy: Drainage Class: [ ]Field Observations match map Remerks appears to drain pooriy Wetland Determination [X]Hydrophytic Vegetation Present [XJ This Data Polnt is a Wetland (Xj Hydric Soils Present [X]Wetland Hydrotogy Present Remarks wetland criteria MET appears to drain poorly ' Paae 4 of 10 Job Number: 031103 D8t8 FO[iT1 City: none � aoutine Wetfand Determination Wedand Oata Point SP 5 Pro�ect/SRe: Boston 124th Ave.3E Date: December 1T,2003 AppNcanUOwner: Boston Design 8 Deveiopment Co. County: King Investigator: M.Hecke�t Stete: Wa (Xj Do normal circumstances exfst on the site? � Community 10: PaluaWan shruW [ j Have vegatation,soits,or hydrology been disturbed? Station ID: [ j Is the area e potential problem area? Pfot ID: Vegetation Dominant Spacies __ Common Hame _ y.Cover Indicator Herbaceous X Phalaris aru»du�aCea Grass,Reed Canary 90 FACW ShX b Spiraea douglasii Spiraea,Douglas' 30 FACW X Sa!'a sitchensis Willow,Sitka 25 FACW X water blrch 21 °�Species that are OBL,FACW,or FAC(except FAG): 75 Cowerdin Classification: pssc Remarks appea�s to drain poorly hydrology Primery WeHand Hydrology lndicetors Secondary Hydrology Mdicators � ( ]Recorded Data(describe 3n remarks) [ ]Inundated (X];Oxidized root channefs ( ]Stream,Lake,or Tide Gage (X�Saturated in upper 12 inches [X]Water-stalrted leaves { ]Aerial Photograph �X]Water marks [ ]Local soi!survey data ( j Other(dascribe in remarics) [ )Drift lines [ J FAGNautral test Fi@Id Obseroations: I ]Sediment deposits � J Other(explaln in remarks) Depth of SUrface Water(in.): 0 I j Drainage pettems in wettands Depth to Free Water in Piqin.): 8 Depth to Saturated Soils(in.): 8 Remarks appears to drain poorty $OIFS � Deptfi Hor: Matrix Mottle I 2nd Mottla Texture, [nJ Cobr ____ o or undance ontras Structureyetc._ 0-16 A!B 10YR 4/2 10YR 5/6 common distinct Loemy Sand Hydric Sals Indicafors [ J Histosol [ ]Concretions [ ]HisUc Epipedon [ j High Organic 9'o in Surface Leyec ( ]Sulfidic Odor [ )Organ{c Streaking [ j Probable Aquatic Moist Regime [ ]Ltsted on Local Hydric Soifs List ( ]Reducing Conditions ( ]Listed on Nationaf Hyd�ic Soils List ( j Gteyed or Low-Chroma Colots [ J Other(explain U remaiicsy Unft Name: Taxonomy: brainage Class: [ )Field Observations match map Remarks appears to drain poorfy Wetland Determination {X]Hydrophytic Vegetation Present (X]This Data Point is a Wetland [Xj Hydric Sofis Present ' [Xj WeUand Hydrology Pre6ent . Remarks wetland crtteria MET appears to drain poorfy t � i' ;, Paae 5 of 10 I. - , i I ! 1 ATTACHMENT '1 � , WETLAND DELINEATION MAP i �� F��c,n s�rzv�Y ,�Y �ve2G9�n, �rzccrsisN surcvfl-�NG- I i � � I � . � I I � 031103 Boston 124�'Ave.SE-17 WeUand Report _... - �� .—.__ -- ---.1 i � � � mr�tt r�ws��rrrs'iu�..�i�cea r �„" I . �� '� / � "` ' /�//// � i f � , �,sms J � / � � � / / � � I I � � l � ' ' % �; � f � � � ��-� � ` � i � � ; � � � � ' � `� . ' � ` � l � � � � I � ` � � � �� v' O', \ � �� \ ` 1 � �� ! ti ,.� �{.� J � �, , � � \ � � i � � �� . ,,ro �, � c�, / � � , � 1 1 � li � b � � � � � / , � � j � i �� ` + �� ' �' � ' � ' � t ° _ � � � �, � � � . i � � `� � . ei �I i � � � � t iI � , c�,.� � �. � I 1 , Q ', a �� . �/ � `'� � � � ► i - e � . � � � � � , � � � p � � � , � � � L f � � � � � / � � '� I " � � a � - �, � ' y�.es�-�—� , " � I I .� •-'�"' , � � .�. �� i . �� ' ' - �� S.E. f92ND ST — "—' � � ( � I i — � New Culvert - 124th Intersection Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Input Data Roughness Ccefficient 0.010 Channel Slope 0.05980 ft/ft Normal Depth 0.58 ft Diameter 1.50 ft Discharge 10.43 ft'!s Cross Section Image il 1.50 ft T �I 0.58 ft I� �L Y:1 � H: 1 BenUey Systems,Ine. Haestad Methods SoIBl�otli�brMaster V8i(SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 319fZ01b 11:24:15 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 0679b USA +�.pp3-756-1666 Page 1 of 1 WWHI�2012 I PROJECT REPORT Project Name: Big Soos Upstream of Canyon Estates Site Name: Big Soos Canycn Est Upstream Site Address: City : Rentcn Report Date: 3/9/2C15 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 � Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 I Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year I � High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year � �I PREDEVELOPED LAND USE i I Name : Basin 1 I Bypass: No � � GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Forest, Flat 14 C, Pasture, Flat 9.5 C, Lawn, Flat 10 Pervious Total 33.5 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 6.5 Impervious Total 6.5 Basin Total 40 Element Floa�rs To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: Nc Pervious Land Use Acres C, Pasture, Flat 9.5 C, Lawn, Flat 10 C, Forest, Flat 14 Pervious Total 33.5 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 6.5 Impervious Total 6.5 Basin Total 40 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:33.5 Total Impervious Area:6.5 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:33.5 Total Impervious Area:6.5 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 3.629921 5 year 5.138735 10 year 6.257546 25 year 7.812384 50 year 9.076487 100 year 10.434123 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC �1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 3.629921 5 year 5.138735 10 year 6.257545 25 year 7.812384 50 year 9.076487 100 year '�0.434123 Z � � � C � a a a i �' ��,)� Mead I�! � , ,-(f-� � unt � � ' 1�1y I Mead&Hunt,Inc. I ' pp M d�son,W153 9 � i � I Pbone:60&273-&380 UPSTREAM BASII�AREA � , � meadhunt.com (SEE UPSTREAM BASIN MAP� -� i ' ' � , �. , � m � m , I �' � �-' � � -- � � ; � � �'� � � . � , u �. `""� ' � �-:-� � � ; �� . � �' �� ;----------------• ' � � ` - _ �� '�- � ------------^� ,. �' � � '� , � � � , ` ' �' - ' - �UPSTREAM BASIN AREA (' '�e:,:��, , � ; : , . ""°,. .,,, . , ;_. , �� :.� �....�.a,. , � , , i ' � ' ' (SEE UPSTREAM BASIN MAP °'""°"'°`°""""°'"°` , --- �. ------ - � i ��,.W:,:�m�.d _— � • \� - , ��_� _1 ' '�°�o.�.. . , , . ; m �,, . ----- ��_� , �-�------- �-O-�EQIMENT TRAP - ,---, ,- �-- � - __ — ___, _ N �— , Q, � - .;,, ,,� -- _,----'' --'--- __ — --- �; . '�� . ' �i � —_ —__`�47�— ^�,. ,,,,_� --- � __ _,\ 2.��A�. -_;\ � _\ _- _;,'' ,_-, -___—_ _a ,� , _-, � y�; , , . , �.. ' (n � T ' =_-�`-� `i -' '�� '--' \� a`' ��_----" `� �-- -- _ �--- - ;, � -I < � �___-_ -___ �,_� �------� . _ �� / � � •� ,- �� J• � �, ---_—l—====�'�!l••-- -' '_1 ; m 1 --_�, , ; �� - _,---_ - - __�� , , , , . _ , _ < . , ' -�-� � �- �i� �� ,,,� �� ._, ' •__�' -' - - ' H � v�„ x �. �' , _ ,, . �i � -- �� a�'� �— (n . \ ` �. � � � �.,' � , . . - . . �o � . . � �� --- � �a; , i� - �.�, . ��\ i '---___ .. . � i' �� /,i _.. \\ . � ..-� . i . 5�� ' � � �, \` i � � ._-�' � '<t i � � .�i \ ' - �i�_�..� ��. � . � � , . , � ��, . �. Q . :' . � \ � �_� . �' i� �Y�'i�� ,� � , s�, �i \ `. � �� _�-__ � ; �_ � , � � ��---___ �� \ _ � W r. � _\ -- � .,' �-asc � �\ Q :�� ' � \\ `:.. .' ,�� . �'. � . - - -.4q' __, i� ��.\� _ . � �.. �� 4ac---� l . . ��\ � � (W � � y ,y� , Qap � �� - . _ , � , --, SEDIMEIy. `- , �� .� � � i .__ , 0 .�.� �.-___—i r i . � . i �G�. � t � �-- ,=— '-----, TRAP:#� �— �a.<c-- � � Z _ , , , � — — � ----- . �' � i , . �_—�,a00 SF �, � ,,— „ � O Q i � � , -- ,— '-------- � a__� -_ r _ � � - - � �' - - � � • "�------- ��4�C��\ -��' - �.�..a3 ��,, . ��- ='� � ��\� �� _ _,-- ---- . .. .. ..a . - �ae. W � ; . , , __- _ �,,_ - TC� SEI�IMENT_P4f�l-D #�a__- -- --_ _ -, Q � � � — ;3�---- �� _-- ' _-- —a�:— ----_---- �--_,_ _—, __ , Z � ;, ; � _ � , i �__ _ , , c) , .I�. . / .i: . �� // \1-;.-_-_-- . � ' �� _ /� i 1': . i i � / � .( , � � .. . � �� ' � ___ �� --' � � =-�� TO SED�AA�NT POND -- '------�_, _4.7�A_ �-- --, ----------�---- �" � > I�. - � . �-� -- �� . _ � -___ __ "�_�1 ---- �_ � � �� ., _ ` � . - .t ;, � � �\ ___ , , ' - rSEDIMENT � _ ,� � � � ,- ;,�.----< __- � 3EDIMENT ' � POND#1 O �- � ---- 4.86 AC---� � ----_- , , �_, 'OND#2 ; ' 4,30Q SF c�.i ---- --- � � - �, , —,_�' ---- — ---�c---�---- ,,—' _ � � — :. _ _ ,___ ,— ------- ----- ---- �,__ ,—_ : ,, ,,` ;,—' --' _ _--------- — s� -- —°0p-------- -- � � t 4��SF . � .; — ` - . �Jr,� , ' ' , ---,--- —� ,' '�_.,---__" j j � � � i n r� .. � ✓ � . : `r� �'\ -- --�� . . � , ---- , / t �� _ cn z , � � r ;-_ �S r� � -� i � -_, ��,�o � �\ _ ,.�--_----�-�� /' � --" � , ,J. ' i j � ,_--� \-'--'� � � �---� • i��- - �� --- --- —�� ___=��_�eeA�TOSILTFENCE �- � _ � � i � 3«. ------' , � �� 2:1 MAX,<1�0'�zV.SC�--�� -' � �i�� / i � / \ - � � i i J � /, , - _ /� �I 1' — — �� i � � : � . � � - - � ' � �� a--'�� i � �� - _ i ——� —,..� �� ,/ �:..-a- i F � � � -_ _ �_ ' — � � ' � I ' � i � ; � ��. � ��'_ . / ___ � �� . ``_�_- i �^�' � . � � _ � ._ ' � '. .� � �n„�""�� / � � --- �� , � • �i , �-----c---�� i � _ - --- - ,�' TQS�ttT FENCE 0.64 A� � , 3 � ' ��/ -J`---- _- NOTFORCANSTRUCTION I � � � � � ' �" � _�- _ �� _ �►' � '(�• ,�, � �,. � ,',� i �. �,: �/ /.� �—�_-`= ,w w: �S � l J ///--/'� /_ 0 � 50 100 �� , � , _ xxx � �', � --"-----� ,-'% / �„.�.. � ��.. �ocx \ � a -- ---- _- .. � �-124th AVENUE SE EXISTING CONDITION BASIN AREAS '��'�"�"'�E� � BASIN NAME AREA-IMPERV• AREA-PERV` AREA-TOTAL �IMENT TRAP FLOWS SEDIMENT POND#1 FLOWS SEDIMENT POND#2 FLOWS ; TESC �I � POND#1 2.66 AC 2.09 AC 4J5 AC V PERIOD FLOW(CFS) ',RETURN PERIOD' FLOW(CFS) RETURN PERIOD i FLOW(CFS) POND#2 2.72 AC 2.14 AC 4.86 AC •YR 0.71 � 2-YR 1.18 2-YR 1.21 ""'� or � TRAP 1.62 AC 1.28 AC 2.90 AC i_YR 1.12 10-YR 1.83 10-YR 1.87 x � "AREAS ARE BASED ON DEVELOPED CONDITION PERCENTAGES, BUT � � REFLECT ACTUAL AREAS TRIBUTARY TO TRAP AND POND Canyon Terrace TESC BMP Sizing Sediment Trap Size Overflow Spillway Sizing Q2= 0.71 cfs Per KC 5.3.1.2 From KC D.3.5.2 use 2080 sf/cfs H 0.3 SA= 1477 q100 1.69 SA Provided =2,000 SF L= 2.484054 Use 6' Sediment Pond Size(Pond#1) Q10= 1.83 cfs From KC D.3.5.2 use 2080 sf/cfs SA= 3806 SA Provided =4,177 SF Sediment Pond Orifice Sizing Overflow Spillway Sizing Per KC 5.3.1.2 Ao As'(2h)^0.5 4.81(10"-6)'As'h^0.5 H 0.3 0.6'3600Tg^0.5 q100 2.77 As 4177 L= 4.531615 Use 6' Ao 0.028413 d 0.385 Use 3/8" Sediment Pond Size (Pond#2) Q10= 1.87 cfs From KC D.3.5.2 use 2080 sf/cfs SA= 3890 SA Provided -4,496 SF Sediment Pond Orifice Sizing Overflow Spillway Sizing Per KC 5.3.1.2 Ao As*(2h)^0.5 4.81(10^-6)'As`h^0.5 H 0.3 0.6*3600Tg^0.5 q100 2.83 As 4496 L= 4.645368 6' Ao 0.030583 d 0.414 Use 7/16" Overflow Spillway Sizing Per KC 5.3.1.2 H 0.29 q 100 5.53 1= 10.33521 Use 10.5' wwxrs2oi2 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: SEDIMENT POND Site Name: SEDIMENT POND Site Address: City . Report Date: 5/1/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Lova Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year Hiqh Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, La�vn, Mod 2.09 Pervious Total 2.09 Zmpervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 2.66 Impervious Total 2.66 Basin Total 4.75 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Lavm, Mod 2.09 Pervious Total 2.09 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 2.66 Impervious Total 2.66 Basin Total 4.75 Element Florvs To: Surface InterfloN Groundrrater � ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC �1 Total Pervious Area:2.09 Total Impervious Area:2.66 Mitiqated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:2.09 Total Impervious Area:2.66 Floa Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC �1 Return Period Floa(cfs) 2 year 1.178494 5 year 1.560504 10 year 1.829643 25 year 2.188856 50 year 2.470755 100 year 2. 765219 Florr Frequency Return Periods for Mitiqated. POC �1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.178494 5 year 1.560504 10 year 1.829643 25 year 2.188856 50 year 2.470755 100 year 2.765219 wwArs2oi2 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: Sediment Pond Wet Pond Site Name: Site Address: City . Report Date: 5/1/2014 , Gaqe : Seatac I Data Start : 1948/10/O1 I Dats End : 2009/09/30 �I Precip Scale: 1.00 i Version : 2013/10/17 j Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year I High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Forest, Steep 4.86 Pervious Total 4.86 Impervious Land Use Acres Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 4.86 Elea►ent Flows To: Surface Interfloar Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Lsnd Use Acres C, Lawn, Mod 2.14 Pervious Total 2.14 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 2.72 Impervious Total 2.72 Basin Total 4.86 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater ANALYSIS RESUI,TS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:4.86 Total Impervious Area:O Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:2.14 Total Impervious Area:2.72 Floov Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.217479 5 year 0.346419 10 year 0.43014 25 year 0.531391 50 year 0.602897 100 year 0.670895 Flovr Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.205313 5 year 1.596129 10 year 1.871486 25 year 2.239014 50 year 2.527447 100 year 2.828747 ww�2oi2 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: SEDIMENT TRAP Site Name: Sediment Pond Site Address: City . Report Date: 1/7/2014 Gage : Seatac Data Start : 1948/10/O1 Data End : 2009/09/30 Precip Scale: 1.00 Version : 2013/10/17 Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flox Threshold for POC 1: 50 year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Larvn, Mod 1.28 Pervious Total 1.28 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 1.62 impervious Total 1.62 Basin Total 2.9 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres C, Laan, Mod 1.28 Pervious Total 1.28 Impervious Land Use Acres ROADS FLAT 1.62 Zmpervious Total 1.62 Basin Total 2.9 Element Flows To: Surface =nterfloN Groundwater ANALYSIS RESUI,TS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:1.28 Total Impervious Area:1.62 Mitiqated Landuse Totals for POC �1 Total Pervious Area:1.28 Total Impervious Area:1.62 Flo�+ Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.718329 5 year 0.951447 10 year 1.115721 25 year 1.335013 50 year 1.50713 100 year 1.686942 Floa Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC �1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.718329 5 year 0.951447 10 year 1.115721 25 year 1.335013 50 year 1.50713 100 year 1.686942 Cross Section for TESC TRAP DITCH OUTFALL Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Input Data Roughness Ccefficient 0.020 Channel Slope 0.01000 R/ft Normal Depth 0.26 ft Left Side Slope 2.00 ft/ft(H:� Right Side Slope 2.00 ft/ft(H.� Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 1.69 ft'Is Cross Section Image T 0.2b ft � r2 OO ft � � A 1 �� e��,, �� Kcr � 3_�. � V:1 � H: 1 BenUey Systems,Ine. Ha�stad IlAathods SoIBliotl�ulVwAAaster V81(SELECTserits 1) [Oe.t1.01.03] bN12014 5:15:24 PM 27 Siamons Company Drive Suke Z00 W Watartown,CT 08785 USA +1407-755-1666 Page 7 of 1 Cross Section for TESC TRAP PSLOPE OUTFALL Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Input Data � Roughness Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.02000 fUft Normal Depth 0.54 ft Diameter 0.67 ft Discharge 1.69 ft'/s Cross Section Image 0.67 ft 0.54 ft ''i Y: 1 ^ I� H: 1 B�ntl�y Systems,Inc. Haestad M�thods SolB�otll�ef�wMaster V8i(SELECTs�ries 1) [08.17.07.03j 6Hl2074 5:12:32 PM 27 Sfemons Company Drive Suite 200 W WabRown,CT 06795 USA �1-203-755-1666 Page 1 0( t