HomeMy WebLinkAbout03721 - Technical Information Report �
� . .
� �ake Wash�ngton V�ew Estates
LUA 08-057
4200 Block of Lake Washington Bivd. North
Renton, Washington
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT
February 15, 2013
Prepared for:
Greg Fawcett
33609 Redmond-Fall City Road
Fall City, Washington 98024
(425) 466-5229 offiae
Submitted/Prepared by: Z, L. p'�
'�o��°A��rj ,..
Offe Engineers, PLLC � � �
Darrell Offe, P.E.
13932 SE 159�' Plaoe _ A �
Renton, Washington 98058 7832 �
(425) 260-3412 offioe �
(425) 227-9460 fax $ION��� ,,
��E�� � ` ���
��� �2�
E��� �� 2��:. .
__ �
7
3 ,2/
Project Description
The proposed project is called Lake Washington �iew Estates(LUA08-057) and is an
approved preliminary plat for 13 single family lots on 5.53 acres of property. The preliminary
plat was granted approval in September 2008. The property is located in the north end of
the City of Renton at 4200 Lake Washington Blvd. North. The existing tax parcel number is
�;;t'� 4 �'9A8�►
The project has several sensitive areas located on and adjoining the property. There are
wetlands, steep slopes, May Creek (stream) and their associated buffers located on the
property. These areas were delineated during the and sit-aside within an open space tract
as part of the platting approval process. The open space tract (Tract A) divides the 13 lot
plat into two separate areas. Area 1 is the westerly side of the 5.53 acre property where lots
1-12 are proposed; Area 2 is the easterly side of the property where Lot 13 is proposed.
These two areas do not connect due to the open space tract.
The property is currently heavily vegetated with blackberries and trees. Access to the
weste�y side of the project will be off of Lake Washington Blvd. Access to Lot 13 will be off
of Meadow Avenue NE from a pipe stem driveway. Further discussion regarding the
� property soils and drainage characteristics will be provided within the remaining body of this
report.
Project Evaluation
Review of Resouroes
Resources reviewed for this project indude: City of Renton existing and potential flooding
and erosion data, utility system maps, FEMA maps, sensitive areas folios, USDA sols reports, '
King County Soils Survey, wetland inventory maps, Renton erosion maps, and Renton
landslide maps. �
Critical Drainage Area Map
• May Creek/ Lake Washington Watershed
Flood plain/floodway (PEMA) Maps
• The May Creek floodplain has been established as part of the plat approval process.
The FEMA maps were used to establish the floodplain. As part of the preliminary plat i
approval, the City of Renton required as condition, to evaluate the floodplain on May
Creek based upon a future potential floodplain using 1059 cubic feet per second (cfs)
flow. The analysis of this flow (1059) is part of this report and concludes that the '
"1059 floodplain"does not impact the future building lots. The 1059 floodplain ',
elevation is located within the sensitive area buffer and therefore should not impact I
on the future lots. The 1059 floodplain is shown within the engineering plans for the �;
project. I
Sensitive Areas
• Streams and 100 Year Flood Plains— May Creek is located on the north side of
the property with the associated buffer shown.
• Erosion / Landslide Hazard Areas— Due to the steep slopes located on the
easterly side of the property, landslide and erosion hazard are possible. These
sensitive areas and buffer (setbacks) are located within the open space tract
I'i (Tract A) to reduce impact on the future homes. Lot 13 is located near this hazard
area.
• Seismic Hazard Areas—The area is not mapped as a seismic hazard area.
• Coal Mine Hazard Areas—The property does not appear to be located within a
designed coalmine hazard area.
, • Groundwater Protection Areas - The project area is not located within the City of
Renton Zone 2 aquifer protection area.
Soils
• The soils on the project range from poorly graded gravels (GP) to silty sands (SM)
and include areas of inorganic silts (ML). There are three separate soil reports that
were prepared for this project by Bergquist Engineering Services and are attached to
this report. Further discussion of the under-lying soils can be found within these
reports.
Summary ofsoils fo�the use ofstormwater management.
o Lot 13 is located within an area of inedium graded sands (see Geotechnical
Report dated January 21, 2013). The stormwater management for Lot 13 will
be to utilize infiltration technics such as infiltration trenches and/or dry wells.
o Lots 1-12 are located within areas of non-homogeneous soils. This area will
be mass graded as part of the construction process.
■ The area of Lots 7-12 adjoining the sensitive areas buffers will be
utilized for stormwater treatment. This area is outside the sensitive
area buffer and not included within the mass grading of the project.
This strip of un-disturbed existing soils will be used for infiltrafion
trenches serving the future impervious areas of these lots (7-12).
■ Lot 1-6 is an area of mass grading (excavation). Soil logs and borings
show areas of high ground water and unsuitable soils for infiltration,
The stormwater treatment of these lots (1-6) will be to collect the
stormwater and treat within underground vaults. Additional
stormwater BMP's will be discussed later in this report.
Storm Water Treatment
Flow Control / Water Quality design —
The project would be required to meet the 2005 King County Drainage Manual
(Modified by the City of Renton) for design and sizing.
The stormwater treatment will consist of the following BMP technics for the project:
(A) Lots 7-13 will utilize infiltration discharge BMP's. The BMP's for lots 7-12 will be
installed as part of the construction improvements due to the location between
the rockeries and sensitive area buffers (Tract A). Lot 13 will install the BMP's as
part of the individual building permit (this Iot can utilize both dry-wells and/or
trenches). The BMP's for Lot 13 will be located as part of the building permit
drainage plan.
(B) Lot 1-6 will utilize several BMP's for stormwater treatment:
a. Flow control (detention) treatment within two stormwater vaults;
b. Individual on-lot perforated pipe connection from the future imperious
area into the conveyance system ;
c. Impervious area restrictions utilizing Restrictive Covenant
(C) The on-site roadway section and the frontage improvements along Lake Wash.
Blvd. will utilize flow control/water quality treatment within the two stormwater
vaults.
Project review of the 8 Core Requirements and 5 Special Requirements of the
2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual�
OfFe Engineers has reviewed the Core and Special Requirements in Chapter 1 of the King
County Surface Water Design Manual, and addresses each of the requirements as follows:
Core Requirement No. 1 —Discharge at Natu�a/Location
The current property sheet flows from the south towards May Creek in the north. Along
Lake Washington Blvd (in the west) a ditch line flows from the south to the north to a point
discharge located just south of the May Creek bridge crossing. The proposed development
will utilize several different stormwater discharges: infiltration, dispersion, and point
discharge. �he point�ischarge alqng Lake Wash. Blvd�will remain as the collection point for
the stormwater vaults discharge. �Infiltration will be utilized for Lots 7-13. ,
Core Requirement No, 2—OtJ�si�e Ana/ysis
There are several upstream areas flowing onto and through this project. Starting in the east
and moving west; the property on the south side of Lot 13 sheet flows onto the project and
is collected within the sensitive area and buffers. The drainage from the sensitive areas is
not proposed to be modified or changed. Therefore runoff from contributing areas offsite
that contribute to the sensitive areas will not be impacted or modified after development.
Along the south side of lots 1-6, this offsite area is a developed apartment complex that
collects the stormwater on the property and discharges into the road side ditch along Lake
Wash. Blvd at the southwest corner of Lake Washington View Estates. Other than lawn or
landscaping areas between the structures and the south property line, the stormwater from
the south flows west and into Lake Wash. Blvd.
Along Lake Washington Blvd areas south of the property flow into the roadside ditch and
then is conveyed in an open ditch or cross culverts to the May Creek Bridge in the north.
The roadside ditch will be replaced with conveyance pipe to provide for the required frontage
improvements.
Co�e Requir�ement No. 3—F/ow Contro/
The property is located within the City of Renton, peak flow rate control standards —
(existing site conditions). The stormwater runoff form the proposed impervious areas will be
managed using BMP technics to minimize the need for flow control. The area of the project �
that requires flow control (as a BMP) is lots 1-6 and the roadway section improvements.
Since the roadway onsite is graded to a high point near lot 3 and the lack of available space,
two separate vaults are proposed; west vault and an east vault. The sizing for these two
vaults is provided within the calculation section of this report.
Core Requirement No. 4—Conveyanae Sys�em
The proposed on-site conveyance improvements will include curb, catch basins and a pipe
network for collection of surface runofF from landscape, driveways, roadways, and sidewal .
Stormwater conveyance calculations have been provided as part of this report. The
proposed runoff was analyzed at the 25 year event— 15 minute intervals. There are no
storm structures that overtop at the 25 year event; most structures have 2 feet of free
board.
Core Requirement No. 5—Erosion and Se,diment Contr�v/ I
A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan implementing the Best Management �
Practices have been designed as part of the engineering construction plans for the pro� ,,
accordance with City of Renton requirements. The temporary pond facility has been sized '
using the 2 year— 15 minute interval storm event. The calculations for the temp. pond is
included within this report. A Department of Ecology SWPPP plan and permit will be
required due to the location of May Creek and the proposed clearing and grading exceed 1
area (43,560 sq. feet). This DOE permit is not part of this report and therefore needs to be
obtained by the developer/contractor installing the improvements.
Core Requir+ement No. 6—Maintenanae and Operations ��
The Maintenance and Operations for the Lake Washington View Estates Plat inclu
public and private system. Within this report are the maintenance requirements for the
facilities being installed as part of the plat and the facilities to be installed as part of the
residential building permits.
Core Requirement No. 7—Financia/Guarani�ees and Liabi/ity
The Financial Guarantees and Liabilities will be required prior to the project being finalized by
the City of Renton. Bond Quantity worksheets are provided within this report.
Core Requirement No. 8— Water Qua/ity
The project is required to provide water quality treatment since the developed imperious
areas will exceed 5,000 square feet of new PGIS (pollution generating impervious surface).
The water quality treatment is provided as dead storage within the two stormwater vaults.
Specia/Requirement No. 1 —Adopiaed Area Specit"ic Requirements
There is no special overlay or requirements within the City of Renton that afFect this
property.
I Sp�ecia/Requirement No. Z—F/andp/ain/F/oodway Die/ineaiion
The current FEMA floodplain was delineated during the preliminary plat process by the
Surveyor. The City of Renton required a potential future 1059 cfs floodplain be delineated
and shown on the construction plans. The current FEMA or 1059 floodplain elevation exceed
the elevation of the edge of the future open space tract (Tract A). Therefore neither
floodplain is located on the proposed lots.
Speaa/Repuirement No. 3—F/oad Proteci�ion Faci/ibes
Based upon both floodplain reviews, flood protection is not required.
Speoia/Re�quirement No. 4—Sourae Contro/s
This requirement does not apply because the project is located in the basic water quality
treatment area.
Specia/Requirement No. 5—Oi/Contro/
This requirement does not apply.
APPENDIX
A- CALCULATIONS
West Basin �
Detention Sizing
Water Qua/ity Sizing
East Basin
Detention Sizing
Water Qua/ity Sizing
B- PROPOSED BM P's
C- MAINTENANCE OF BMP's
D- BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET
E- OFF SITE ANALYSIS
F- GEOTECH REPORT
G- 1059 cfs Floodplain Analysis
�
�
0
�
�
�
V
J
a
V
�
a
BKtAkuuvYN ur BH�iN�
FebruaN 12, 2013
Overall E�ristin�Site Conditions
Total
Area Im ervious Wetlands Forest Notes
On Site 5.53 ac 0.00 ac 0.81 ac 4.45 ac
fronta e O.i3 ac 0,i3 ac
5.66 ac
Developed Site Condition�
PrOpelty Total Design Nervious rorest
Area Im rvious Gra landsca e 0 n S Notes
On Site W 14 0 3 sf
Roadwa 5704 2775sf WestBasin
Roadwa 3 687 sf � 1842 sf East Basin �
Lot 1 760 sf 3 Oa0 sf � 3 760 sf Perf.Pi e Connecfion West Basin
Lot 2 5167 sf 3 OOOsf � 2167sf Perf. Pi Connection WestBasin
Lot 3 5 674 sf 3 000 sf � 2 674 sf Perf. Pi Connection East Basin
Lot 4 5 420 sf 3,000 sf 1410 sf Perf. Pi Connection East Basin
Lot 5 5 252 sf 3 000 sf 2 Z52 sf Perf. Pi Connection East Basrn
Lot 6 4 569 sf 3 000 sf 1569 sf Perf. Pi Connection East Basin
Lot 7 7 329 sf 0 sf 15D0 sf Full Infiltration Dis rsion
Lot 8 7158 sf 0 sf 0 sf Full Infiltratron Dis rsion
Lot 9 5 995 sf 0 sf 0 sf Full Infiltra6on Di� rsion
Lot 10 5 999 sF 0 sf 0 sf Full Infiltra�on D�s rsion
Lot li 5 251 sf 0 sf 0 sf Full Infiltration D� rsion
Lot 12 6 210 sf 0 sf 0 sf Full Infiltration D� rsion
Lot 13 11766 sf 0�f 0 sf Full Infiltration
Wetlands 35 366 sf 35 366 sf
M Creek 11912 sf 11912 sf
NGPE 97 049 sf 97 049 sf
Fronta e 5 670 sf 1800 sf 3 870 sf West Basin �
Tota! .feet 146 550 sf Z9186 sf 14 8Z9 sf 144 317 sf
Totals Acres 5.66 ac 0.67 ac 0.57 ac 3,31 ac
.
/'� / '� �.
,,%/ ' .
; ,
� �; � , •,,
, ,, ,
� ' / �� ��� �, SUUfII FUGE Vf� MF;Y _,RC�II: ��
i � ; ,
. � '�i� ��� �� �i
,
' i� -�,,' � � �\ I
,
� ` , � �.
; : ■ / 1�'741 CF5 FLOOUPIAiN
�
/ , , ., ._______.�_� ��
�
� '
, , r ,
f � �
�� ,;��'.�
,=a,< <r, , ,• , �_.~�` �_ ._
♦ j t� �' _
� 0�f Yr�• ��� � '1��."'�-32'�'/' ' - `\` ~ '
( /����?i ��/%:.� t:;� _�I., -`�''-. ti `
� �.
, ,�.
,�.y./ .'�a .. �. ,_. `� �-'
� � �\
�� '��� � � - .� � ``i��� � � t`., � \\
-// . �. � : � �\ .��\ �� � � � �` '\ .
��� 1 1 ���7 '\ `l`• j � �
, , ,
.
�/ �`, � ��• ' Ii� '`Sc� �\ �� _ I y � _ ��
� ,�}�' ''` : ♦ '-' `' ~ �� C� 1 __�_ �
. �
---.:.;�.
� - '�. � T�"� � ----- \\
�� �` � � _ _--`=�... ��,,�� - - .�=. -..---`_!- :�
, ,, � • -,-�.�`-- � �� _ •---=::--i-.-...--- ..-- r_ - _. ,
/ j '��w r-�_ _ '-.y.T.'—_ '-�-���`---'_"_`--'�- ---._.__,_ _ .. �\ �,
,;; �n. `�c3-- ��` - ' . -__=-----,�5.-[��}--�----- �
�'-`�._� � �, �
,� _`__
; l t �n _dci.o , '�, -�--__�--_- y-_ . � _ ..- �a----" �1" �
r ?�� � � � (as _� - _--- '`t-_- -�� l,F { 1 � � ��,
� �'•` ♦, ! � , ``' �'-�, ^ `s�--_��-.��r ��,�ti�i`� --- (so ;-�r__ � °b�,
... "^'"� .,'. 1 ,. _-_t 01 0 ; % \ `�' � � n. I 1 .;..� -..�`� „ ��� '- ..¢g (� `�\` \ nlA .
r ^ .. � �. ,
`ree' j . "t.. 1�'.-ht) �t �k/ry� i }Ty `\`�7`Q rC`� � i.l'r___ ,l`il �` � /� �ii �'\
`
` ).e 4�,,..,. � 5��./_..� ���'��C� 7 r%�i«� � ��'j0 i�j�`..���'�.� �i ._ �l�� �i ��� �4� ��V♦
, , `` �
� ...
'� r
';; r.. , �v,� i ,�� '� ��,` ,1 aS��"�� '�y�,h h,�, •, r, i �i \ ,��� _ � j_� ��\
�
, -
.. ,
, _ , _ , .
, _ ..,. i. d�hf. ' 4, � :� .. .
,: ��Sf� ..4 / ,;; ,� `,� ,. 'R��,�k ``,,r �o `,`� � � _. ^ ��` - � �. !�`?o, ,,\\
/ { y..,
� n, �� �� 1.� � � ��� �, ,� �' �
. S R,(� ' � - �`--`__` .\av \ � •�,��r�r��- !� \ �`_.. ) ( ,� �.�^�( �,.
� F� ' . -
_
�!, ..
�i' ' ♦ kQ$o � °'� 7 � ti� _ �; � _,..�_ _.-_�.--- f 4__ � _ .i i ,1'.
_. �
�, , . � g -_. ��,, ,,.;� __.� � �.-- ��"----- - -- s i" � t_ ` `�J
��,� � � ; � ' ,� J
. u/ . f�===,��._/_' - _1��`_ ( •r. �� � � ���.`�`�, �,� �'�,_ � _ �;�,3
�{W �' _ �.! 'o+ ! ri 1 ` _- �- ��_ l''� � --�# �-__
, �
, : �
% !' �♦ �' / /` ��'1.,\ -3 ° n e, � � ` \ _� - ... .
,
; ir r , ._ �, �y;. .. ` , , o
! tr ,:' ' i.� . �'/' •�� r._` �. �--r � U' ` _ _ -' �'c-9` � `� _ - � �6`t';.:
,
, �\ �
' /J/ �� � ;,�� ��/ � `� ��}- �'Fd,ti J�•..,.� , _' .._.. ��� � � ...,,�` � � ..._�. ��; \� /i b�� �;
� i i �� i � �` ?d 1� 1,, _ .-_ 9 -t�t3 � � � 1 � � �`� \.� _�� -/f.,�`�
// / i�i �
, .., .' � , ` �
,,/ ;'r;;;; ;, . � r�;-_ ><�. � _... ,.� -,,i� � �,�i; � \ ��` to
� „ ;;, - ;�� , �_ -se ■ , •. �
i,( 1� u�i i �; i i �' �,I � ] � _ �� , � �
, �
..
� � � f �%�:i�i : / iXl�� �;c1� �+f i � �- - i' I ' ��` �\ �I`i.\ , � I \\ . .
/,/' ' � ,i i � � � i F11 , � � `',--�I.�_f *� i II i I �3` 1
�y I i
,.�� ! ,�•j�,:�P,�//ii/ / � � pk. � _ iAl i ) .-_..�. -. j; . 'Ii ��J�� i �\.t �' � � 1 `..j � �• .
�
. ; : �* vY�( � / 1 U� ( Gfi� � . � i �_� I'.-. ... i i i��i � . � � o p
f� V/� ' � ,..., � �r.�_ J �.�h' '' ��, �� � i�. ` '/., � �/.' _.. _,
�i�� ,, r � / i� •...\\.\_-t_ (.� ..� N 5'��-1 - \
^ � �.� � ... •,� i 48 � '{. � �� _ i
�'.-.: (ih�S T'�&C,� ..1 !T `��,\�,�� i� �jJn �7.� .�..�f i --i� i....._.__ � � �`..I.�{� 1 r`i `o O�. \ �i i �r�`b ,� � � _ � O
. � `� \
iu; a�t _.;�� /��/ ..._._ V... f r '�'�"%h�."q4A�� i i ''� ���) .. �Ti ''iJl i�}i.. � I�{. �'�/' `l,�i��'�i, � y'�
t �r�'.�=_ a.A,� i --'� J� P�� ���.y 1 i ZA._, -.. ��i -,-P �i i�� �!!Y �� � �,'���.,� � �� �S?} .� � ��,�� /� .
' ✓���.,1 / 1 , ,� ,':-x._ ( » x.'o ' I't-. wY � ` , � -
- _ .... I, ��._ ,r ,
��� � � ' U�������f �, l SF__ � �;f�:�� i l I ����� 7i�,T3 � ' - 6 1; DIFt� �0.0� `,� I ty�.� n8�•;- � � � .� ' -
�-� , � � �
�.
� _.. , -
r "
'� _ 4J "• __- l� -'. \ ( ` �j '� � ^4a��
�� '
, •I. ! 4 /O ���`r`• . . , iO ,��\�� _ O'hS r�-w.._ �. ���_��� � ��- 2?'S' i
,�;=� ���,'� ��-� � -.���i -1'.�Sil'� 4�� ~ <k, . \. �..
� , •��f���������.� � 5��� �., �',� ,6 �
�-��. .. ...�fP�� \ +�
, � r' { �
i„�'� ��,•<'�`� �s��
r� �'c> -�� �,
West Basin - Detention Ca/cu/ations
,i __
�I
West Basin Predeveloped
�'r [.arxi Use Surnmary -
Area - - —-.._, �
Till Forest �.�� �cr�$
Till Pas#ure �.a� ��res,
Till Grass a.00 �cres
Qutwash Farest 0.00 acres
Ouiwash Rasture 0•00 acres'�
Ouiwash Grass 0.00 acres'
1Ffetland 0.00 acres'
Impervious 0.�0 acres�
Total--- ----,
0.66 �cres:
Scale Factor : �1.00 Hnurly Reduced
Time Series: WBpredev >7
Compute Time Series �
Modiiy User Input �
----- ----____.__ _ ______. _____-- ----_ _._______ _---- __ _ _------ ---___. ---
File for computed Time Series [.TSF]
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:wbpredev.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Feak rlow Rates--- -----Fiow Frequency r'lrialysis-------
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) Period
0.042 2 2/09/O1 18:00 0.053 1 100.00 0.990
0.012 7 1/G6/02 3:00 0.042 2 25.00 0.900
0.031 4 2/28/03 3:00 0.032 3 10.00 0.900
0.001 8 3/24/04 20:00 0.031 4 5.00 0.600
0.018 6 1/05/OS 8:00 0.027 5 3.00 0.667
0.032 3 1/13/06 20:Q0 O.C18 6 2.00 0.500
�0.027 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.012 7 1.30 0.231
0.053 1 1/09/08 9:00 0.001 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks 0.049 50.00 0.980
West Basin Developed
i� Land Use Summary � -�. , � ���Y~
Area _.__ --- ?
Till Fores# 0.00 acres`,
� Till Pasture �.QQ acre '
II Till Grass 0.35 acresl� �
Outwash Forest O.DU acres;
Ouiwash Rasture 0.00 acres
Ouiwash Grass 0.00 acres'
1Netland' 0.00 acres
Impervious 0.31 acres'.
_ ---_——_ ---
Total- -----:
�
U.66 acres'
Scale Factar: 1.00 Hourly Reduced
Time Series: WBdev »
Compu#e Time Series �
Modify User Input �
._____._____--_____-----�-- -----------___---------___ -- ----- -___., _____,_--__.
Fil� for computed Time Series [.TSF]
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:wbdev.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
--Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----r^l�w Frequency �.naiysis------
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) Period
0.107 5 2/09/O1 2:00 0.220 1 100.00 0.990
0.082 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.129 2 25.00 0.960
0.129 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.122 3 10.00 0.9C0
0.084 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.113 4 5.00 0.800
0.102 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.107 5 3.00 0.667
0.113 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.102 6 2.00 O.SCC
0.122 3 10/26/06 0:00 0.084 7 1.30 0.231
�'0.220 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.082 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks -0.190 50.00 0.980
��..,.e-o.,eo�,al.yr.-rc4n_-.F�z.� - .- . . e,o-
0
O !NJ!L QJ' '�
WB�rgeLdur ♦''�
. ,^,f._�i:;�ndo-- �
a
0
i
R
•_ -.
y o -_
� LL O
v �
�
1
W
L
Q O
I �
I I
0
0 00 '____'___
O
O � �
10 5 10� 10 3 10` 10 � 10�
Probebi6ry Fxceedence
Duration Ccrtparison Fnaylsis
Base File: wbpredev.tsf
New File: wbrdout.tsf
Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS
-----Fraction of Time----- ---------Check of Tolerance-------
Cutoff Base New $Change Probability Base New �Change
0.009 I O.10E-01 0.55E-02 -46.0 I O.10E-01 0.009 0.008 -10.2
0.011 I 0.66E-02 0.53E-02 -19.6 I 0.66E-02 0.011 0.008 -29.5
O.C14 I 0.51E-02 0.91E-02 -19.0 I 0.51E-02 0.014 O.C12 -13.7
0.016 I 0.38E-02 0.30E-02 -18.7 � 0.38E-02 0.016 0.015 -11.4
0.019 I 0.29E-02 0.25E-02 -13.6 � 0.29E-02 0.019 0.017 -$.9
0.021 I 0.22E-02 0.18E-02 -16.4 I 0.22E-02 0.021 0.020 -8.1 '
0.024 � 0.15E-02 0.1'0E-02 3.2 � 0.15E-02 0.024 0.024 1.3 I
0.026 I O.10E-02 0.98E-03 -6.3 � O.10E-02 0.026 0.026 -2�1 ` �
0.029 I 0.65E-03 0.80E-03 22.5 I 0.65E-03 0.029 0.030 5.1
0.032 I 0.34E-03 0.46E-03 33.3 I 0.34E-03 0.032 0.033 3.2 �
0.034 I 0.23E-03 0.18E-03 -21.4 I 0.23E-03 0.034 0.034 -C..1 �
0.037 I 0.16E-03 0.33E-04 -80.0 I 0.16E-03 0.037 0.035 -4•.9
0.039 � 0.11E-03 O.00E+00 -100.0 I 0.11E-03 0.039 0.035 -9�.2
0.042 I 0.16E-04 O.00E+00 -100.0 I 0.16E-04 0.042 0.037 -12�0
'1 0/
Maximum positive excursion = 0.002 cfs ( 6.6$} � �v �t7
occurring at 0.029 cfs on the Base Data:wbpredev.tsf
and at 0.030 cfs on the New Data:wbrdout.tsf
Maximum negative excursion = 0.004 cfs (-35.2�) '
occurring at 0.012 cfs on the Base Data:wbpredev.tsf �i
and at 0.008 cfs on the New Data:wbrdout.tsf i
�
�_ 1
Retention/Detention Facility
Type of Facility: Detention Vault
Facility Length: 35.00 ft
Facility Width: 35.00 ft ,
Facility Area: 1225. sq. ft �
Effective Storage Depth: 6.20 it 'i
Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft I
Storage Volume: 7595. cu. ft
Riser Head: 6.20 f�'��
Riser Diameter: 12.00 incfie�
Number of orifi.ces: 2
Full Head Fi.��
Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diame-�r
(ft) (in} (CFS) (i-.
1 0.00 0.38 0.009
2 4.25 - ���'
Top Notch Weir: No�.
>�:t=1c��; R��t_,_-�c� =ur`,�e: I�d��_.
�tage �l�•aario�� �rorage i,; ���ha�g� re_�o�atio�,
(ft} (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs)
0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.01 0.01 12. 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.02 0.02 25. 0.001 0.001 0.00
0.03 0.03 37. 0.001 0.001 0.00
0.14 0.14 172. 0.004 0.001 0.00
0.24 0.24 294. 0.007 0.002 0.00
0.35 0.35 429. 0.010 0.002 0.00
0.45 �.45 551. 0.013 0.003 0.00
0.56 0.56 686. 0.016 0.003 0.00
0. 66 0.66 809. 0.019 0.003 0.00
0.77 0.77 943. 0.022 0.003 0.00
0.87 0.87 1066. 0.024 0.004 0.00
0.98 0.98 1201. 0.028 0.004 0.00
1.08 1.08 1323. 0.030 0.004 0.00
1.19 1.19 1458. 0.033 0.004 0.00
1 .29 1 .29 1580. 0.036 0.004 0. 00
1.40 1.40 1715. 0.039 0.005 0.00
1.50 1.50 1838. 0.042 0.005 0.00
1. 61 1.61 1972. 0.045 0.005 0.00
1.71 1.71 2095. 0.048 0.005 0.00
1.82 1.82 2230. 0.051 0.005 0.0�
1.92 1.92 2352. 0.054 0.005 0.00
2.03 2.03 2.487. 0.057 0.005 0.00
2.13 2.13 2609. 0.060 0.006 0.00
2.24 2.24 2744. 0.063 0.006 0.00
2.34 2.34 2867. 0.066 0.006 0.00
�.45 ?..45 3001. 0.069 0.006 0.00
2.55 2.55 3124. 0.072 0.006 0.00
2.66 2.66 3259. 0.075 0.006 0.00
2.76 2.76 3381. 0.078 0.006 0.00
2.87 2.87 3516. 0.081 0.006 0.00
�. 97 2. 9� 3638. 0.084 0.007 0.00
fl:�l'rl �J;. � .�J,..�.� .�i 'S'�F: • O v _• O
00'0 GZI'S SGZ�U �liUHo Cv'8 GG"8
00'0 086 '6 ZZZ'0 '8L90 G6'L 06'L
00'0 0€8'b 6TZ'0 'SSSS 08'L 08'L
00'Q 089'b LTZ'0 '££b6 QL'L OL'L
00'0 OZ5'6 bZZ'0 'uti�6 09'L 09'L
00"0 09£'6 TZZ'0 "88T6 OS'L OS'L
00'0 06T'b 8dZ'0 '5906 Ob'L Ob'L
00'0 OLO' 6 cOZ'0 '£558 Q£'L Ov'L
GO'u" u£8'� ZOZ'0 'vZ88 OZ'L G�'L
00'0 0£9'E OOZ"0 "n698 OT"L GT"L
00'0 0£b'� :.6I'0 'GLSS 04'L 00'L
u0'G OTZ'E Y6T'0 '�.S'vu Ob'9 06'9
00'G OL6 'Z �6I'0 "0�£8 08'9 G8'9
00'0 OTL'Z 88T'0 '80Z8 OL'9 OL'9
QO'0 0£b'Z 98i'0 '5808 09'9 Q9'9
00'0 0'v9'T �ST'G '�96L OS'9 OS'a
00'0 606"0 OST'0 '068L Ob'9 0�'9
Ou '0 96E'0 LLT'0 '8ZLL ��'Q OE'9
�G '0 L£0'0 bLT'0 'S6SL OZ'9 OZ'9
�0'0 5i0'0 ZL�'0 '�8'vL ZT.'9 IZ'9
uv"0 SEO'0 69T'^v "GS£L CO'9 00'9
00 '0 fi�EO'0 99Z'0 '8ZZL 06 'S 06'S
0�'0 6£0'0 �9Z'0 '£60L 6L'� 6L'�
u:�'0 �£0'u 09T.'0 'GL69 69'S 69"S
U^v '0 ZEO'0 LSI'0 "9£89 8S'S 85'S
��' '� L£Q'Q b5I'0 '�iL4 86'S 86'�
��0 '0 0�.0'0 ZS�'0 'zsLS9 L�.'S Li'�
GU'0 6Z0'0 8bT'0 "95�9 LZ'S LZ'S
UO'0 LZO'0 Sbt'0 'TZE9 9T'S 9t'S
r,0 'Q 9Z0'0 Z6T'0 'S5i9 an•c 9Q•c
�0 '0 SZO'0 6£T'0 '�909 S6 "v S6"v
00 'p bZ0'Q 9£T'0 'Tb6S S8'b S8' �
OC'0 ZZO'0 ��Z'0 'L08S bL'i� 6L' �
'Jr •0 OZO'0 0£T'0 '689G b9'b 69 '�
�0"0 6ZG'0 LZZ'G '6`v�� ��"v £�'b
CO'0 9I0'0 SZZ'0 'LZ6S £b'b �Ti'6
u0 '0 ETO'0 ZZI'G 'Z6ZS ZE'b ZE'b
nJ •p E?0'0 IZC'0 '08ZS ?£'6 I£' 6
uu '0 ZTO'0 ZZi'u '89Z� v"•£'Y G£'Y
00'0 ZIO'0 ZZT"C 'SSZS 6Z'b 6Z'�
�0'0 600'0 QZZ'0 '�tiZG 8G'tr 8Z'b
CG"u 8G0'C OZT'G '��ZS LZ'L LZ'Y
00'0 800'G GZT 'G '6TZ5 9Z'b 9Z'b
00 'U 800'0 OZT '0 '90ZS SZ'6 SZ' 6
00 '0 800'0 5LI'G "G8?S EZ"6 £Z' t�
u0'u" 8G0'0 �I�'G "6S0� �.T.'L �T "v
00'0 800'0 �TZ'0 'SZ6� ZO'b ZO"V
�0'0 800'0 OTT'0 'Z08� Z6'� Z6'�
nn•0 L00'0 LO?•p •L9gb rg•� T8'£
Gu'0 LGO'0 bGI'0 '�b�6 �L'£ T�'£
00 '0 L00'0 TOT'0 'OT6b 09 '£ 09 '£
00 'Q L00'0 860'0 '88Zb OS'E OS'E
00'Q LOQ'0 S50'0 '£5Z6 E£'£ 5E'£
uG'G LOd'G �6u'0 'OzOY 6Z'£ 6Z'�
CC'0 L00'0 680'0 "968E 8I'E 8� '£
00'G L00 '0 L80'a '�LLE 80'E 80 '�
Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage
Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft)
1 0.22 0.05 0.12 6.23 6.23 7629. 0.175
2 O.11 ******* 0.04 6.16 6.16 7548. 0.173
3 0.13 ******* 0.03 5.50 5.50 6742. 0. 155
4 0.12 ******* 0.03 5.06 5.06 6196. 0. 142
5 0.11 ******* 0.01 4.35 4 .35 5323. 0. 122
6 0.10 ******* 0.01 4.10 4 .10 5022. 0.115
7 0.08 ******* 0.01 3.91 3.91 4794. 0.110
8 0.08 ******* 0.00 1.97 1. 97 2412. 0.055
Route Time Series through Facility
Inflow Time Series File:wbdev.tsf
Outflow Time Seri_es Fi]e:rdout
Inflow/Outflow Analysis
Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.221 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.124 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Reservoir Stage: 6.23 Ft
Peak Reservoir Elev: 6.23 Ft
Peak Reservoir Storage: 7629. Cu-Ft
. 0. 1'75 Ac-Ft
Flow Duration fr_cm Time Series File:rdout.tsf
Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability
CFS g $ $ i
0.001 7_8357 46.244 46.244 53.756 0.538E+00
0.002 9425 15.370 61.614 38.386 0.384E+00
0.003 5187 8.459 70.073 29.927 0.299E+00 '�
0.004 6183 10.083 80.157 19.843 0.198E+00 �,
0.005 4413 7.197 87.353 12.647 0.126E+00
0.006 3398 5.541 92.895 7.105 0.711E-01 '
0.007 1954 3.187 96.081 3. 919 0.392E-01 �I
0.008 1553 2.533 98. 614 1.386 0.139E-01 �,
0.009 506 0.825 99.439 0.561 0.561E-02
0.010 11 0.018 99.457 0.543 0.543E-02
0.011 6 0.010 99.467 0.533 0.533E-02
0.012 3 0.005 99.472 0.528 0.528E-02 '
0.013 22 0.036 99.507 0.492 0.492E-02
0.014 36 0.059 99.566 0.434 0.434E-02
0.015 34 0.055 99.622 0.378 0.378E-02 i
0.016 24 0.039 99.661 0.339 0.339E-02 �i
0.017 21 0.034 99.695 0.305 0.305E-02
0.018 15 0.024 99.720 0.280 0.280E-02 �
0.019 14 0.023 99.742 0.258 0.258E-02
0,020 18 0.02.9 99.772 0.??_8 0.22.8F-02 '
C.021 19 0.031 99.803 0.197 0. 197E-02 �
0.022 10 G.016 99.819 0.181 0. 181E-02 �
0.023 5 0.008 99.827 0.173 0. 173E-02 i
U.024 `7 0.011 99.839 0. 161 0.161E-02
0.025 8 0.013 99.852 0. 148 C. 148E-02 ',
0.026 17 0.028 99.879 0. 121 C. 121E-02 '
0.027 15 0.024 99.904 0.096 0.962E-03
0.0?_8 5 0.008 95.912 0.088 0. 881E-03
0.029 3 0.005 99. 917 0.083 0.832E-03
0.030 5 0.008 99. 925 0.075 0.750E-03
0.031 7 0.011 99. 936 0.064 0.636E-03
0.032 1?_ 0.0?.0 99.956 0.044 0.440E-03
0.033 7 0.011 99.967 0.033 0.326E-03
0.034 3 0.005 99.972 0.028 0.277E-03
0.035 7 0.011 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03
0. 036 4 0.007 99.990 0. 010 0.9�8�
�
West Basin - Water Quality Ca/cu/ations
Wetpool Sizing Calculations
Per 2009 King County Stormwater Management Manual
Project Name: La�e ;�Vasi-�irg+c�; G`ie:�- �s�u'�s
Project Number:
Facility Description: ?.'R�sst�asir;
Step 1: Identify required wetpooi�olume factor(f).
f= Per KCSWDM 6.4.1.1
Step 2: Determine rainfall(R)for the mean annual storm.
R= �.�� Per KCSWDM Fig. 6.4.1.A
Step 3: Calculate runoff from the mean annual storm (V�)for the developed site.
V�_ (0.9A;+ 0.25At9 +0.10A,f+ 0.01Ao)X(R/ 12)
where: A; = Impervious Surface Area= �3.5i�4 s.f.
A,9 =Till Grass Area = ��.2�6 s.f.
A,f =Tilf Forest Area = �� s.f.
Ao = Outwash Area = �' s.f.
V�= 667 c.f.
Step 4: Calculate required wetpool volume(Vb).
Vb= fxV�
Vb= 2,000 c.f.
z
�
m
�
�
W
East Basin - Detention Ca/cu/ations
East Basin Predeveloped
�� � � ��- �
� Lsnd Use Summary
Area- ----- � ,
Till Forest D.58 acres':
Till Pasture 0.00 acresi
Till Grass O.UD acres
Ouiwash Far�st U.00 acres:
Ouiwash Pasture 0.00 acres'
Ouiw�sh Grass �.00 acres'
1+Vetland O.OQ acres'
Impervious'. D.00 acres
- ----------_----
- Tatal __..-------
0.58 acres
-------_.____._.___.
Scale Factar: 1.00 Hourl�r Reduced
' Time Serie�: EBpredev »
Compute Time 5eries �
-
Modiiy User Input �
____. _._ _________ ___---- --._------ . -____ .__ ------------ ----__ _____----
File for computed Time 5eries [.TSF]
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:ebpredev.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow Frequency Analysis-------
Flow Rate Rank 2'ime of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) Period
0.036 2 2/09/O1 18:00 0.047 1 100.00 0.990
0.010 7 1/06/02 3:00 0.036 2 25.00 0.960
0.027 4 2/28/03 3:00 0.028 3 10.00 0.900
0.001 8 3/24/04 20:00 0.027 4 5.00 0.800
0.016 6 1/05/05 6:00 0.024 5 3.00 0.667
0.028 3 1/18/06 20:00 0.016 6 2.00 0.500
0.024 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.010 7 1.30 0.231
0.047 1 1/09/08 9:00 0.001 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks 0.044 50.00 0.980
--�
, �
, i
��_ _�
1
'' I
I
East Basin Developed
�� - �
� Land Use Sumrnary .�' h� � �� �.� � I ' ���
� - Area__.__ ___._ �
Till Forest O.Da acres �
Till Pa�ture 0.00 acres
Till Grass' 0.22 acres�
Ouiwash Forest 0.00 acres
Ouiwash Pasture. O.OU acres':
Uutwash Grass �.UO acres:
Wetland' 0.00 acres''
Imper�rious 4.3� acres
__-----_ - --- _.__
-Total __ _____.
0.55 acres
_._ ._----_-__ ___
Scale Fa�tar: 1.00 Hourly Reduced
Time Series: EBdev� »
Compute Time Series
_. _ _ - __ _ _ _ __�
; Modify User Inpu# �
____.------__ ___._._ _- --_____.__ __--------___ ---_ _._ ._-------- -
File for camputed Time Series [.TSF]
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:ebdev.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- ----Flow Frequency Analysis------
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob
(CFS) (CFS) Period
0.107 6 2/09/O1 2:00 0.217 1 100.00 0.990
0.087 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.136 2 25.00 0.960
0.129 3 2/27/03 7:00 0.129 3 10.00 0.900
0.094 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.114 4 5.00 0.800
0.113 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.113 5 3.00 0.667
0.114 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.107 6 2.00 0.500
0.136 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.094 7 1.30 0.231
0.217 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.087 8 1.10 0.091
Computed Peaks 0.190 50.00 0.980
I �
� i
� �
�
�-j .
_ `.k
���Paused-Duration Analysis-KCRTS � � . �����
`t
0
o EE�d'vu'.tiur
EBtarget.dur • ',
r�
0
0
�
� -��^ti.
U .
m N _
p� O
� O
L
G
H
❑
O
O 00
. �- -_ -`'�.�
O
O
. O 0 � :�--�-�� �
- 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-z 10-� 10�
Probability Exceedence
Duration Comparison Anaylsis
Base File: ebpredev.tsf
New File: ebrdout.tsf
Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS
-----Fraction of Time----- ---------Check of Tolerance-------
Cutoff Base New �Change Probability Base New oCh D �
0.00.8 I 0.99E-02 0.11E-01 15.6 I 0.99E-02 0.008 0.008 0:3 n"v
0.010 � 0.64E-02 0.58E-02 -9.4 I 0.64E-02 0.010 0.008
0.012 I 0.50E-02 0.51E-02 1.0 I 0.50E-02 0.012 0.012 1.1
0.015 I 0.38E-02 0.36E-02 -4.7 I 0.38E-02 0.015 0.014 -2'.7 I J '
0.017 I 0.29E-02 0.26E-02 -7.4 I 0.29E-02 0.017 0.016 -3.3
0.019 ( 0.22E-02 0.20E-02 -11.1 I 0.22E-02 0.019 0.018 -4'.5
0.021 I 0.16E-02 0.14E-02 -10.4 � 0.16E-02 0.021 0.020 -4•.5
0.023 I 0.11E-02 0.80E-03 -24.6 I 0.11E-02 0.023 0.023 -1'.4
0.025 I 0.65E-03 0.49E-03 -25.0 I 0.65E-03 0.025 0.024 -5.1
0.028 ( 0.34E-03 0.21E-03 -38.1 I 0.34E-03 0.028 0.027 -3.5
0.030 I 0.21E-03 O.00E+00 -100.0 I 0.21E-03 0.030 0.028 -6.9
0.032 � 0.16E-03 O.00E+00 -100.0 I 0.16E-03 0.032 0.028 -12.7
0.034 � 0.11E-03 O.00E+00 -100.0 I 0.11E-03 0.034 0.029 -16.6
0.036 I 0.16E-04 O.00E+00 -100.0 I 0.16E-04 0.036 0.029 -20.3
��Maximum positive excursion = 0.000 cfs ( 3.8$) .� ��0
occurring at 0.013 cfs on the Base Data:ebpredev.t
and at 0.013 cfs on the New Data:ebrdout.tsf
Maximum negative excursion = 0.002 cfs (-21.5%)
occurring at 0.010 cfs on the Base Data:ebpredev.tsf
and at 0.008 cfs on the New Data:ebrdout.tsf
Retention/Detention Facility
Type of Facility: Detention Vault
Facility Length: 29.00 ft
Facility Width: 29.00 ft
Facility Area: 841, sq. ft
Effective Storage Depth: 8.80 ft
Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft
Storage Volume: 7401. cu. ft
Riser Head: 8.80 ft
Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches
Number of orifices: 2
Full Head Pipe
Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter
(ft) (in) (CFS) (in)
1 0.00 0.35 0.010
2 5.50 4.63 0.019 4.0
Top Notch Weir: None
Outflow Rating Curve: None
Stage Llevation Storage Discharge Percolatior_
(ft} (ft) {cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) {cfs)
0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.01 0.01 8. 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.02 0.02 17. 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.03 0.03 25. 0.001 0.001 0.00
0.18 0.18 151. 0.003 0.001 0.00
0.33 0.33 278. 0.006 0.002 0.00 I
0.48 0.48 409. 0.009 0.002 0.00 '
0. 63 0.63 530. 0.012 0.003 0.00
0.77 0.77 648. 0.015 0.003 0. 00 i
0.92 0.92 774. 0.018 0.003 0. 00
1.07 1.07 900. 0.021 0.003 0.00
1.22 1.22 1026. 0.024 0.004 0.00
1.37 1.37 1152. 0.026 0.004 0.00 '
1.52 1.52 1278. 0.029 0.004 0.00
1. 67 1.67 1405. 0.032 0.004 0.00
1 .82 1.82 1531 . 0.035 0.004 0.00 I
1. 97 1.97 1657. 0.038 0.005 0.00
2. 12 2.12 1783. 0.041 0.005 0.00 ,
2.27 2.27 1909. 0.044 0.005 0.00 ,
2.42 2.42 2035. 0.047 0.005 0.00
2.56 2.56 2153. 0.049 0.005 0.00 �
2.71 2.71 2279. 0.052 0.005 0.00 �,
2.86 2.86 2405. 0.055 0.006 0.00 '
3.01 3.01 2531. 0.058 0.006 0.00 i
3.16 3.16 2658. 0.061 0.006 0.00 �
3.31 3.31 2784. 0.064 0.006 0.00
3.46 3.46 2910. 0.067 0.006 0.00 �
3. 61 3.61 3036. 0. 070 0.006 0.00 '
3.76 3.76 3162. 0.073 0.006 0.00
3. 91 3.91 3288. 0.075 0.007 0. 00
4.06 4.06 3415. 0.078 0.007 0. 00
,
- - - -- - i
00'0 OZI'S SOZ'0 'SZ68 09'OI 09'Oi
00'0 OL6 '� £OZ'0 'TE86 OS'OT OS'Oi ,
00'0 OZ8'6 TOZ'0 '9bL8 Ob'OT 06'OT
00'0 OL9'6 66I'0 'Z998 OE'Oi 0£'OI
00'0 OZS'b L6I'0 '8LS8 OZ'Oi OZ'OT
00'0 OS�'b S6T'0 'b6�8 OT'OT OT'OT
OQ'0 08T'b £6T'0 'OT�8 00'OT 00'OT '
00'0 000'b I6T'0 '9Z£8 06'6 06'6
00'0 OT8'� 68Z'0 'Z�Z8 08'6 08'6
00'0 OZ9'£ L8T'0 '8Si8 OL'6 OL'6 ',
00'0 OTb'� S8i`0 '6L08 09'6 09'6
00'0 OOZ'� E81'0 '066L OS'6 OS'6
00'0 096'Z T8T'0 'S06L Ob'6 Ob'6 �
00'Q OTL'Z 081'0 'IZ8L 0£'6 0�'6 '
00'0 OZ6'Z 8L-C"0 'LELL OZ'6 OZ'6
00'0 0£9'Z 9LZ'0 '£S9L OT'6 OZ'6
00'0 T06'0 bLt'0 '69SL 00'6 00'6
00'0 L�E'0 ZLT'0 'S86L 06'8 06' 8
00'0 6Z0'0 OLI'0 'Z06L 08"8 08'8
00'0 6Z0'0 89T'0 '80�L 69 '8 69'8
00'0 8Z0'0 S9L'0 'Z8TL 6S'8 bS'8
00'0 8Z0'0 Z9T'0 '9SOL 6E'8 6£'8
00'0 LZO'0 6SI'0 '0£69 �Z'8 6Z'8
00'0 LZO'0 9ST'0 'b089 60'8 60'8
00'0 9Z0'0 �ST'0 '9899 S6'L S6'L
00'0 SZO'0 TSti '0 '0959 08'L 08'L
00'0 SZO'0 86I'0 'b�69 S9'L S9'L
00'0 bZ0'0 SbT'0 '80E9 OS'L OS'L
00'0 £ZO'0 Z6T'0 'T8I9 SE'L S�'L
00"0 �ZO'0 6£Z'0 'SS09 OZ'L OZ'L
00'0 ZZO'0 9ET'0 '6Z65 SO'L SO'L
00'0 iZ0'0 E£Z'0 'E08S 06'9 06'9
00'0 OZO'0 0£T'0 'LL9S SL'9 SL'9
00'0 OZO'0 LCL'0 'ZSSS 09'9 09'9
00'0 6i0'0 SZZ'0 'bZ�S Sb'9 S�'9
00'0 8T0'0 ZZT'0 '86ZS 0£'9 0�'9
�0'0 LZO'0 6ZT'0 'TBTS 9t'9 91'9
00'0 9I0'0 9II'0 '6505 i0'9 CO'9
00"0 bT0'0 £ZT'0 '8Z66 98'S 98'S
00'0 ETO'0 OTZ'0 "Z08b TL'S TL'S
00'0 OZO'0 LOT'0 '9L96 9S'S 9S'S
00'0 OTO'0 LOT'0 '899b SS'S SS'S
00'0 OTO'0 LOZ'0 '6S96 bS'S �S'S
00'0 OZO'0 LOZ'0 'TS9b �S'S �S'S
00'0 600'0 LOT'0 "Z696 ZS'S ZS'S
00'0 800 '0 90I'0 'b�9b TS'S ZS'S
00'0 800'0 90t'0 '9Z96 OS'S OS'S
00'0 800 '0 b0T'0 'Z�S� Ob'S 0�'S
00'0 800'0 IOT'0 'STb� SZ'S SZ'S
00'0 800'0 860'0 '68ZV OT'S Oi'S
00'0 L00'0 960'0 '£9t6 S6'b S6' b
00'0 L00'0 £60'0 'LEOb 08'V 08'b
00'0 L00'0 060'0 ' [i6� S9'b S9'6
00'0 L00'0 L80'0 'S8L£ OS'b OS'b
00'0 L00'0 b80'0 '859� SE'b S£' �
00'0 L00'0 T80'0 'Z6S£ TZ'b TZ' 6
I
H d Infiow Outflow Peak Stora e II
Y g
Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft)
1 0.22 0.05 0.11 8.83 8.83 �423. 0.170
2 0.11 ******* 0.03 8.52 8.52 7166. 0. 165
3 0.13 ******* 0.02 7.52 7.52 6328. 0.145
4 0.11 ******* 0.02 7.39 7.39 6212. 0.143
5 0. 11 ******* 0.02 6.00 6.00 5049. 0. 116
6 0. 07 ******* 0.01 5.42 5.42 4556. 0. 105
7 0.09 ******* 0.01 4.99 4. 99 4200. 0.096
8 0.09 ******* 0.01 3.30 3.30 2777. 0.064
----------------------------------
Route Time Series through Facility
Inflow Time Series File:ebdev.tsf
Outflow Time Series File:EArdout
Tnflow/Outflow Analysis
Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.217 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.112 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8
Peak Reservoir Stage: 8.83 Ft
Peak Reservoir Elev: 8.83 Ft
Peak Reservoir Storage: 7423. Cu-Ft
. 0.170 Ac-Ft
Fl.ow Duration from Time Series File:ebrdout.tsf
Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability
CFS � % �
0.000 28188 45.969 45. 969 54.031 0.540E+00
0.001 7844 12.792 58.761 41.239 0.412E+00
0.002 3052 4. 977 63.738 36.262 0.3b3E+00
0.003 4577 7.464 71.202 28.798 0.288E+00
0.004 5927 9. 666 80.868 ].9.132 0.19]_E+00
0.004 4713 7.686 88.553 11.447 0. 114E+00
0.005 2826 4.609 93.162 6.838 0. 684E-01
0.006 251 0.409 93.571 6.429 0. 643E-01
0.007 1720 2.805 96.376 3. 624 0.362E-01
0.007 1455 2.373 98.749 1.251 0. 125E-01
0.008 386 0.629 99.379 0. 621 0. 621E-02
0.009 3 0.005 99.384 0. 616 0. 616E-02
0.010 5 0.008 99.392 0. 608 0.608E-02
0.011 29 0.047 99.439 0.561 0.561E-02
0.011 17 0.028 99.467 0.533 0.533E-02
0.0].2 16 0.026 99.493 0.507 0.507E-02
0.013 19 0.031 99.524 0.476 0.476E-02
0.014 49 0.080 99.604 0.396 0.396E-02
0.015 24 0.039 99.643 0.357 0.357E-02
0.015 24 0.039 99.682 0.318 0.318E-02
0.016 20 0.033 99.715 0.285 0.285E-02
0.017 20 0.033 99.747 0.253 0.253E-02
0.018 14 0.023 99.770 0.230 0.230E-02
0.019 17 0.028 99.798 0.202 0.202E-02
0.019 7 0.011 94.809 0. 191 0.191E-02
0.020 21 0.034 99.843 0. 157 0. 157E-02
0.021 8 0.013 99.856 0. 144 0.144E-02
0.022 10 0.016 99.873 0. 127 0.127E-02
0.022 6 0.010 99.883 0.117 0.717E-02
0. 023 23 0.038 99.920 0.080 0.799E-03
0.024 8 0.013 99.933 0.067 0. 669E-03
0.025 5 0.008 99.941 0.059 0.587E-03
0.026 8 0.013 99.954 0.046 0.457E-03
0.026 6 0.010 99.964 0.036 0.359E-03
0.027 8 0.013 99.977 0.023 0.228E-03
0.028 3 0.005 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03
� �
�' 1I
i
I
�
� �
�I
_�
, �
�
II
East Basin - Water Qua/ity Ca/cu/ations
I
Wetpool Sizing Calculations
Per 2009 King County Stormwater Management Manual
Project Name: Laice VUashin�ton View Estates
Project Number:
II Facility Description: East Basin
Step 1: Identify required wetpool volume factor(f).
f= J Per KCSWDM 6.4.1.1
Step 2: Determine rainfall(R)for the mean annual storm.
R= i�.�� Per KCSWDM Fig. 6.4.1.A
Step 3: Calculate runoff from the mean annual storm (V�)for the developed site.
V�_ (0.9A;+ 0.25A�9 + 0.10A,f+ 0.01Ao)X(R/ 12)
where: A; = Impervious Surface Area = 15.G82 s.f.
A,9= Till Grass Area = �,5�3 s.f.
A,f =Till Forest Area = � s.f.
Ao = Outwash Area = � s.f.
V�= 647 C.f.
Step 4: Calculate required wetpool volume (Vb).
Vb = fxV�
Vb = 1,851 c.f.
�
�
a
�
m
0
W
�
0
a
O
�G
a
�
m
IC.2.2 FIJLL INFILTRATI�h
j FIGLRE C.2.2.0 TYPICAL DRYWELL INFILTRATION SYS'I`EM
�
I Roof Downspout
House
Catch Basin
I �(Yard Drain}
/
�Roof tlo�
Downspout
�
I DRY WELL ��nch Diameter
Hole Filled with
PLAN VIEW 1�+2-3"Washed
Drain Rock
I NTS
�
Roof Downspout
I Mark Center of Hole
House �—pye�oW or Oth Ca pped PVC
Spiash Blodc Topsoil Rush with Surface
t
� � - - - - - - � - = - 1' min.
tlo� _,_,e c, uD� .�O
c�°���a�'�°Co�°,
Fine Mesh Screen I Min.4"dia. ��o ��o ��o
PVC Pipe �-^�° �� R-�
Catch Basin g��� ���0
{Yard Drain) �
c� 48 Inch Diameter � ��eS
Sides of Hole �� Hole Filled with �
Lined with oC y��2-3"Washed �
Fifter Fabric Drain Rock �
15'min. °,-'�'�_ „�
��oo:,[��'�����d�❑
Min. 1'above Seasonal
DRY WELL High Groundwater Table
SECTION �
NTS
2009 5urface Water Design Manual-Appendix C 1/9l2009
. C-47
DRY - WE � � IN � I � TRATI ❑ N DETAI �
IC.2.11 PERFORATID PIPE CONNECTIO�I
{ O TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS
Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP(best management practice}called a
"perforated pipe connection,"which was installed to reduce the stormwater runoff impacts of some or ali of
the impervious surface on your property. A perforated pipe connection is a length of drainage conveyance
pipe with holes in the bottom,designed to"leak"runoff,conveyed by the pipe,into a gravel filled trench
where it can be soaked into the surrounding soil. The connection is intended to provide opportunity for
infiltration of any runoff that is being conveyed from an impervious surface�usually a roofl to a local
drainage system such as a ditch or roadway pipe system.
The size and composition of the perforated pipe connection as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan
and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval either from the
King County Water and Land Resources Divislon or through a future development permit from King
County. The soil overtop of the perforated portion of the system must not be compacted or covered with
impervious materials.
FIGURE C.2.11.A PERFORA'I'ED PIPE CONNF,CTION FOR A SINGLE FAMII.Y RESIDENCE
random fill
6" ��%�/%��%��%��%�%� tilter fabric
�\��\��\��\��\��\��\��
v o o, � ., o � 6"perf pipe
18"min °,�°a D �°a�o o�l
� o a'� �Q �Q � 1�/z"-3/a"washed rock
a oa p4oa ao opu�
0o p p a oQo � o 0 0
p� oQ o �� q o� o
o�p°o oCt4 ao�
O D `�' a o o � o 0
t �24" min—+1
TRENCH X-SECTION
NTS
slope �
to road
drainage system
2' X 10'
level trench
wlperf pipe
PLAN VIEW OF ROOF
NTS
2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix C 1/9/2009
' C-81
PERF�, PIPE C�NNECTI❑N BMP DETAI�
C.2.2 �'[JI�.INFII,TRATION
� FIGURE C.2.2.A TYPICAL TRENCH IlV�ILTR2�TIOl�T SYS'I'EM
t, �
Y �
roaf .�
�drain i
PLAN VIEW !
�4"rigid or 6"flexible i
NTS Ferforated pipe !
.--------------•-----------------------•----�'--• i
,`J �
�
,� �....��'�.����� ��.��������......�.......������-�,
infiflration trench �—sumR w/solid lid
PLAN VIEW roof drain
NTS
over`low —{�
�"rigid or 6`tlexib�e splash biock �J
��perforated pipe �
y��+j��.� i l ,���.i�����{�y������i��%��; ���\���
6., %i«, i:i. 1 T i:i.t.��: ..i,�nrai_
�!c_,�
-�— ' •------------------•------------•
6�. � �eQ�-----•., -
� '�t� U washed rock_�_�;=� =�� �= ��'min 5.0'min
12"I �- 1 1/2"-3I4' G� __ G"y��c" °' ,1'miri
� L-- ��'•------- --------------•------=={-�--�------==� r
I i�m Q�mesh �-CB sump wJsalid lid
I
� vari�s-
A
filter fabric—1
�
�� compacted bacMill
���
6" �1 �, �
} _ � 4"rigid or 6°flexible
..�`�
_ � � perforated pipe
24�� u 4 G J�i u
` c a u Qo
12" > ✓? V'�° �G pV v w�shed roCk
i a 4 ovo�� � ' 1 1/2'-3/4°
�.. i 'r\ P D p �J O
- �l� ., ^ Q'.�.�"..G.
/�`�`��� \..
\ ♦ � v
!�v>>`i,�,��r�� I
' I-.—zafl—�I
SECTION A
NTS
2U09 5urface Wazer Design Manual-Appendi�c C 1!9/2009 �
C�5 I
f
��� INF� ILTRATI � N TRENCH DETAI �
W
V
Z
a
z
W
�-
Z
�
a
�
�
V
_ � ,
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES
� Maintenance Defect or Problem Condfion When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is Performed
Structure Sediment Sediment exceeds 60°r6 of the depth from the Sump of catch basin contains no
bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the sediment.
lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is
within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe
into or out of the catch basin.
Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than Y:cubic foot which No Trash or debris blodcing or
is located immediately in front of the catch basin potentially blodcing entrance to
opening or is blocking capaaty 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 basin.
Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or vegetation I
odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within catch basin.
gases(e.g.,methane).
Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which would
volume. attract or support the breeding of
insects or rodents. I
Damage to frame Comer of frame extends more than'/.inch past Frame is even with curb. I
and/or top slab curb face into the street(If applicable).
Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of holes and cracks.
cracks wider than Y.inch.
Frame not sitting flush on top slab,i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. I
separation of more than'h inch of the frame from I
the top slab.
Cradcs in walls or Cracks wider than'F�inch and longer than 3 feet, Catch basin is sealed and
` bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch structurally sound.
basin through cracks,or maintenance person
judges that catch basin is unsound.
Cracks wider than'/z inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than'/,inch wide at
at the joint of any inleUouUet pipe or any evidence the joint of inleUoutlet pipe.
of soil partiGes entering catch basin through
cradcs.
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 of the No cracks more than%.-inch wide at
I inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of inleUoutlet pipes.
the catch basin at the joint of the inleUoutlet
pipes.
Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of
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.
InIeUOuUet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20%or more of the pipe. InleUoutlet pipes Gear of sediment.
accumulation
� Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inleUoutlet No trash or debris in pipes.
pipes(indudes floatables and non-floatables).
Damaged Cracks wider than'/rinch at the joint of the No aacks more than Y.-inch wide at
� inleUoutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entenng ihe joint of the inleUoutlet pipe.
i at the joints of the inleUouUet pipes.
i �.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1/9/2009
A-9
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES
NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES I'�
�
Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is Performed
Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than'/8 inch. Grate opening meets design
(Catch Basins) standards.
Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blodcing more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris.
of grate surface. footnote to guidelines for disposal
Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s)of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design
Any open structure requires urgent standards.
mair�tenance.
Manhole Cover/Lid CoveNlid not in place CoverAid is missing or only partially in place. Coverllid protects opening to
Any open structure requires urgent structure.
maintenance.
Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools.
Not Working maintenance person with proper tools.Bolts
qnnot be seated. Self-locking coverJlid does not
work.
Coverllid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover/lid can be removed and
Remove cover/lid after applying 80 Ibs.of lift. reinstalled by one maintenance
person.
I I
_!
`
I
�,I , .
�
I
� {
I I
l
�
� �
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A
A-l0
I
APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQLTREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL,CONVEYANCE,AND WQ FACILITIES
( NO.6-CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES
Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When
Component Maintenance is PerFormed
Pipes Sediment&debris Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds Water flows freely through pipes.
accumulation 20%of the diameter of the pipe.
Vegetationlroots Vegetation/roots that reduce free mo�ement of Water flows freely through pipes.
water through pipes.
Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials remo�ed and disposed of
pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations.
Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Damage to protective Protective coating is damaged;rust or corrosion Pipe repaired or replaced.
coating or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of
piPe.
Damaged Any dent that decreases the cross section area of Pipe repaired or replaced.
pipe by more than 20°k or is determined to have
weakened structural integrity of the pipe.
Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from
square feet of ditch and slopes. ditches.
Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20°�of the Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment
accumulation design depth. and debris so that it matches design.
Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation
constitute a hazard to County personnel or the removed according to applicable
public. regulations. No danger of noxious
vegetation where County personnel
or the public might normally be.
_ Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of
pollution as oil,gasoline,concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations.
�,_ Source control BMPs implemented if
appropriate. No contaminants
present other than a surface oil film.
Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through ditches.
through ditches.
Erosion damage to Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding.
slopes
Rock lining out of One layer or less of rock exists above native soil Replace rocks to design standards.
place or missing(If area 5 square feet or more,any exposed native
Applicable) soil.
2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix A 1/9/2009
A-11
( '
_---��'����'r�sl �
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECnRDED MAiL Tn:
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
CITY OF RENTON
1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY
RENTON. WA 98057
DECLARATION OF COVENANT
� � FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION OF FLOW CONTROL BMPS
Grantor:
Grantee: City of Renton
Legal Description:
Additional Legal(s)on:
Assessor's T�Parcel ID#:
IN CONSIDERATION of the approved City of Renton(check one of the following) ❑ residential
building permit, ❑ commercial building permit, ❑ clearing and grading permit, ❑ subdivision permit, or
❑ short subdivision pernut for Application File No. LUA/SWP relating to the
real property("Property")described above,the Grantor(s),the owner(s) in fee of that Property, hereby
{ covenants(covenant)with City or Renton, a political subdivision of the state of Washington,that
he/she(they)will observe,consent to,and abide by the conditions and obligations set forth and described
in Paragraphs 1 through 8 below with regard to the Property. Grantor(s}hereby grants(gant),
covenants(covenant),and agrees(agree)as follows:
1. Grantor(s)or his/her(their)successors in interest and assigns("Owners")shall retain,uphold,
and protect the stormwater management devices,features,pathways, limits, and restrictions,known as
flow control best management practices("BMPs"),shown on the approved Flow Control BMP Site Plan
for the Property attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
2. The Owners shall at their own cost,operate,maintain,and keep in good repair,the Property's
BMPs as described in the approved Design and Maintenance Details for each BMP attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit B.
3. City or Renton shall provide at least 30 days written notice to the Owners that entry on the
Property is planned for the inspection of the BMPs. After the 30 days,the Owners shall allow the City of
\ Renton to enter for the sole purpose of inspecting the BMPs. In lieu of inspection by the City,the
Owners may elect to engage a licensed civil engineer registered in the state of Washington who has
expertise in drainage to inspect the BMPs and provide a written report describing their condition. If the
engineer option is chosen,the Owners shall provide written notice to the City of Renton within fifteen
days of receiving the City's norice of inspection. Within 30 days of giving this notice,the Owners, or the
engineer on behalf of the Owners,shall provide the engineer's report to the City of Renton. If the report
is not provided in a timely manner as specified above,the County may inspect the BMPs without further
notice.
4. If the City determines from its inspection, or from an engineer's report provided in accordance
with Paragraph 3,that maintenance,repair,restoration,and/or mitigation work is required for the BMPs,
The City shall notify the Owners of the specific maintenance,repair, restoration,and/or mitigation work
(Work}required under RMC 4-6-030. The City shall also set a reasonable deadline for completing the
� Work or providing an engineer's report that verifies completion of the Wark. After the deadline has
{ passed,the Owners shall allow the City access to re-inspect the BMPs unless an engineer's report has
been provided verifying completion of the Work. If the work is not completed properly within the time
frame set by the City,the City may initiate an enforcement action. Failure to properly maintain the BMPs
is a violation of RMC 4-6-030 and may subject the Owners to enforcement under the RMC 1-3, including
fines and penalties.
5. Apart from performing routine landscape maintenance,the Owners are hereby required to
obtain written approval from the City or Renton before performing any alterations or modifications to the
BMPs_
6. Any notice or approval required to be given by one party to the other under the provisions of
this Declaration of Covenant shall be e�ective upon personal delivery to the other party, or after three(3)
days from the date that the notice or approval is mailed with delivery confirmation to the current address
on record with each Party. The parties shall notify each other of any change to their addresses.
7. This Declaration of Covenant is intended to promote the efficient and effective management of
� surface water drainage on the Property,and it shall inure to the benefit of all the citizens of the City of
Renton and its successors and assigns. This Declaration of Covenant shall run with the land and be
binding upon Grantor(s), and Grantor's(s')successors in interest and assigns.
8. This Declaration of Covenant may be terminated by execution of a written agreement by the
Owners and the City of Renton that is recorded by King County in its real property records.
� IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this Declaration of Covenant for the Maintenance and Inspection of
Flow Control BMPs is executed this day of ,20 .
GRANTOR, owner of the Property
GRANTOR, owner of the Property
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF KING )ss.
On this day personally appeared before me:
, to me known to be the individual(s)described in
and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they signed the same as
their free and voluntary act and deed,for the uses and purposes therein stated.
Given under my hand and official seal this day of , 20
Printed name
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
residing at
My appointment expires
, l
, -�
r I
}
I 1
(
; ; '
C.2.2.4 USE OF DRYWELLS FOR FULL INFILTRATION
Drywells are gravel filled holes as opposed to trenches and therefore may allow for a more compact
design in areas where the depth to the maximum wet-season water table is relatively deep (e.g., 6 feet or
greater). Figure C.2.2.0 on page C-47 illustrates the specifications for drywell infiltration systems as
outlined below:
1. When located in coarse sands and cobbles, drywells must contain a volume of gravel equal to or
greater than 60 cubic feet per 1,000 square feet of impervious surface served. When located in
medium sands, drywells must contain at least 90 cubic feet of gravel per 1,000 square feet of
impervious surface served.
2. Drywells must be at least 48 inches in diameter and deep enough to contain the gravel amounts
specified above for the soil type and impervious surface area served.
3. The gravel used for drywells must be 11/2-inch to 3-inch washed drain rock. The drain rock may be
covered with backfill material as shown in Figure C.2.2.0 (p. C-47) or remain exposed at least 6
inches below the lowest surrounding ground surface.
4. Filter fabrie (geotextile) must be placed on top of the drain rock (if proposed to be covered with
backfill material) and on the drywell sides prior to filling with the drain rock.
5. Spacing between drywells shall be a minimum of 10 feet.
6. Drywells must be setback at least 15 feet from buildings with crawl space or basement elevations that
are below the overflow point of the drywell.
C.2.2.5 USE OF GROUND SURFACE DEPRESSIONS FOR FULL INFILTRATION
Ground surface depressions (also called "infiltration depressions") are another option for full infiltration
� �
SECTION C.2 FLOW CON"I'ROL BMPs
other types of soils or f ll materials if designed by a civil en�ineer in accordance with the
infiltration facility standards in Section 5.4 of the SWDM.
� b) For purposes of determining whether full infiltration of roof runoff is mandatory as outlined in
Section C.13,the depth of soil to the maYimum wet season water table or hardpan must be at
least 3 feet. For any optional or mandatory application of full infiltration,the depth of soil to the
ma�cimum wet season water table or hardpan must be at least 1 foot below the bottom of a gravel
filled infiltration system and at least 3 feet below the bottom of ground surface depression used
for full infiltration.
2. For purposes of determining whether full infiltration of roof runoff is mandatory as outlined in
Section C.13,one of the following infiltration devices must be used in accardance with the design
specifications for each device set forth in Sections C.2.23,C.2.2.4,and C.2.2.5. Note:full infiltration
may be possible using other types and sizes of infiltralion devices rf designed by a civil engineer in
accordance with the infiltration.facility standards in Section 5.4 of the SWDM.
• Gravel filled trenches(see Section C2.23,p. C-42)
• Drywells(see Section C.2.2.4,p.C-43)
• Ground surface depressions(see Secrion C.2.2.5,p.C-43)
3. A minimum 5-foot setback shall be maintained between any part of an infiltration device and any
structure or property line. Lazger setbacks from structures may be specified in the design
specifications for each infiltration device. Infiltration devices may not be placed in sensitive area
buffers. A 50-foot setback is required between an infiltration device and a steep slope hazard area or
landslide hazard area(this may be reduced if approved by a geotechnical engineer or engineering
ReoloRist and DDES).
4. Infiltration devices are not allowed in critical azea buffers or on slopes steeper than 25%(4 horizontal
to 1 vertical). Infiltration devices proposed on slopes steeper than 15%or within 50 feet of a
landslide hazard area or steep slope haZard area must be approved by a,geotechnical en�ineer or
` engineering geologist unless otherwise approved by the DDES staff geologist.
5. For sites with septic systems,infiltration devices must be located downgradient ofthe primary and
reserve drainfield areas. DDES pernut review staff can waive this requirement if site topography
clearly prohibits subsurface flows from intersecting the drainfield.
6. The infiltration of runoff must not create tlooding or erosion impacts as determined by DDES. If
runoff is infiltrated near a landslide hazard area,erosion hazard area,steep slope hazard area,or a
slope steeper than 15%,DDES may require evaluation and approval of the proposal by a geotechnical
engineer or engineering geolo$ist.
C.2.2.3 USE OF GRAVEL FILLED TRENCHES FOR FULL INFILTRATION
Gravel filled trenches(also called"infittrallon trenches")are a good option where the depth to the
maximum wet-season water table or hardpan is between 3 and 6 feet. Figure C.2.2.A(p. C-45)and Figure
C.2.Z.B(p.C-46)illustrate the specifications for gravel filled trench systems as outlined below:
L When located in coarse sands or cobbles, infiltration trenches must be at least 20 feet in length per
1,000 square feet of impervious surface served. When located in medium sands, infiltration trenches
must be at least 30 feet in length per 1,000 square feet of impervious surface served.
2. Maximum trench length must not exceed 100 feet from the inlet sump.
3. The trench width must be a minimum of 2 feet.
4. The trench must be filled with at least 18 inches of 3/4-inch to 11/2-inch washed drain rock. The
drain rock may be covered with backfill material as shown in Figure C.2.2.A or remain exposed at
� least 6 inches below the lowest surrounding ground surface as shown in Figure C.2.2.B.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix C
C-42
SEC I lUV C? FLU\��CUN 1 kUL B\�tP;
3. The depression overflow point must be at least 6 inches below any adjacent pavement area and must
� be situated so that overflow does not cause erosion damage or unplanned inundation.
� 4. The depression side slopes must be no steeper than 3 horizontal to 1 vertical.
5. Spacing between multiple infiltration depressions shall be a minimum of 4 feet.
6. Infiltration depressions must be setback at least 15 feet from buildings with crawl space or basement
elevations that are below the overflow point of the infiltration depression.
7. Infiltration depressions may be any size or shape provided the above specifications and the minimum
requirements in Section C.2.2.1 are met.
8. The ground surface of the infiltration depression must be vegetated with grass or other dense ground
cover.
C.2.2.6 MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR FULL INFILTRATION
If the full infilttarion flow control BMP is proposed for a project,the following maintenance and operation
instructions must be recorded as an attachment to the required declaration of covenant and grant of
easement per Requirement 3 of Section C.133 (p.G18). The intent ofthese instructions is to explain to
future property owners,the purpose of the BMP and how it must be maintained and operated. These
instructions aze intended to be a minimum;DDES may require additional instructions based on site-
specific condirions. Also,as the County gains more experience with the maintenance and operation of
these BMPs,future updates to the instructions will be posted on King County's Surface Water Design
Manual website.
❑ TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS
Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice)called
"full infiltration,"which was installed to mitigate the stormwater quantity and quality impa�ts of some or all
` of the impervious surfaces on your property. Full infiltration is a method of soaking runoff from impervious
area (such as paved areas and roofs)into the ground. If properly installed and maintained,full infiltration
can manage runoff so that a majority of precipitation events are absorbed. Infiltration devices, such as
gravel filled trenches,drywells, and ground surface depressions,facilitate this process by putting runoff in
direct contact with the soil and holding the runoff long enough to soak most of it into the ground. To be
successful,the soil condition around the infiltration device must be reliably able to soak water into the
ground for a reasonable number of years.
The infiltration devices used on your property include the following as indicated on the flow control BMP
site plan: ❑ gravel filled trenches, ❑drywells, ❑ ground surface depressions. The size, placement, and
composition of these devices as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be
maintained and may not be changed without written approval either from the King County Water and Land
Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County.
Infiltration devices must be inspe�ted annually and after major storm events to identify and repair any
physical defects. Maintenance and operation of the system should focus on ensuring the system's viability
by preventing sediment-laden flows from entering the device. Excessive sedimentation will result in a
plugged or non-functioning facility. If the infiltration device has a catch basin, sediment accumulation must
be removed on a yearly basis or more frequently if necessary. Prolonged ponding around or atop a de�ice
may indiqte a plugged facility. If the device becomes plugged, it must be replaced. Keeping the areas
that drain to infiltration devices well swept and clean will enhance the longevity of these devices. For roofs,
frequent Geaning of gutters will reduce sediment loads to these devices.
1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual—Appendix C
G44
` D - BON D UANTITY WORKSH EET
Q
�
�
�
�
. ;
y
_ ,
� .i
,
, r
�
;
�}
;
�� �
__;
;
;
�
�
,
,
�
�=�
�
, ,
�
Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Original bond computatfons prepared by: � pp —{�� y�,�
Name: �/�� ��j�(�` �u`v �J 1,L'—vtJ ��1 1..� Date: � ! �R�'���
PE Registration Number. � � Z� Q Tel.#: L�-�j -?���¢j y
Firm Name: � ���C��C�. �
Address: (�.�j]� � ��"� p L. ProJect No:
r—�^' tN"� V�� ' —Igl3'�/�
ROAD IMPROVEMENTS&DRAINAGE FACILITIES FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS
PERFORMANCE BOND',•" PUBLIC ROAD&DRAINAGE
AMOUNT MAINTENANCE/DEFECT BOND',"
Stabilization/Erosion Sediment Control(ESC) (A) $ -
Existing Right-of-Way Improvements (B) $ ��' ����
Future Public Road Improvements&Drainage Facilities (C) $ �"/� _v�()-
7
Private Improvements (D) $ �� %U� -
Construction Bond"Amount (A+B+C+D) = TOTAL (T) $ �T`���
Minimum bond'amount is$1000.
(B+C)X (' �
MaintenancelDefect Bond"Total 0.20= $ �Z�J
NAME OF PERSON PREPARING BOND"REDUCTION: Date:
"NOTE: The word"bond"as used in this document means any financial guarantee acceptable to the City of Renton.
"NOTE:All prices inGude labor,equipment,materials,overhead and profit. Prices are from RS Means data adjusted for the Seattle area
or from loCal sources if not included in the RS Means database.
REQUIRED BOND*AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND MODIFICATION BY RDSD
Page 1 of 1 Unit prices updated:2/12/02
Version:4/22/02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xIs Report Date: 1/19/2010
Site improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Existing Future Public Private Quantity Completed
Right-of-Way Road Improvements Improvements (Bond Reduction)*
&Drainage Facillties Quant.
nit rice Unit uant. ost uant. ost uant. ost Complete Cost
GENERALITEMS No.
Backfill&Compaction-embankment GI-1 $ 5.62 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Backfill&Compaction-trench GI-2 $ 8.53 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Clear/Remove Brush,by hand GI-3 $ 0.36 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CiearinglGrubbing/Tree Removal GI-4 $8,876.16 Acre 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Excavation-bulk GI-5 $ 1.50 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Excavation-Trench GI-6 $ 4.06 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fencing,cedar,6'high GI-7 $ 18.55 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fencing,chain link,vinyl coated, 6'high GI-8 $ 13.44 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fencing,chain link,gate,vinyl coated, 2 GI-9 $1,271.81 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fencing,split rail,3'high GI-1 $ 12.12 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fill&compact-common barrow GI-11 $ 22.57 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fill&compact-gravel base GI-1 $ 25.48 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fill&compact-screened topsoil GI-1 $ 37.85 CY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gabion,12"deep,stone filled mesh GI-1 $ 54.31 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gabion,18"deep,stone filled mesh GI-1 $ 74.85 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gabion,36"deep,stone filled mesh GI-1 $ 132.48 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading,fine,by hand GI-1 $ 2.02 SY 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00
Grading,fine,with grader GI-1 $ 0.95 SY 0.00 ' 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monuments,3'long GI-1 $ 135.13 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sensitive Areas Sign GI-2 $ 2.88 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sodding,1"deep,sloped ground GI-21 $ 7.46 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Surveying,Iine&grade GI-2 $ 788.26 Day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Surveying,lot location/lines GI-2 $1,556.64 Acre 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,
Tra�c control crew(2 flaggers) GI-2 $ 85.18 HR Q 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Trail,4"chipped wood GI-2 $ 7.59 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Trail,4"crushed cinder GI-2 $ 8.33 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 '
Trail,4"top course GI-2 $ 8.19 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Wall,retaining,concrete GI-2 $ 44.16 SF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Wall,rockery I-2 9.49 . 0.00 0.00
Page 2 of 7 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I
��� � ��I �� ��� ��
Unit prices updated:2/12/02
Version:4/22/02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xis Report Date: 1/19/2010
..---_.. ,-. . , i- - , . .-- �- --� - � - �-- � .
Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Existing Future Public Private Bond Reduction* ,
Right-of-way Road Improvements Improvements I
&Drainage Facilities Quant.
Unit rice Unit uant. ost uant. ost uant. ost Comptete Cost
ROADIMPROVEMENT Na
AC Grinding,4'wide machine<1000sy RI-1 $ 23.00 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.DO
AC Grinding,4'wide machine 1000-2000 RI-2 $ 5.75 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Grinding,4'wide machine>2000sy RI-3 $ 1.38 SY 00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Removal/Disposal/Repair RI-4 $ 41.14 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Barricade,type I RI-5 $ 30.03 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Barricade,type III(Permanent) RI-6 $ 45.05 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Curb&Gutter,rolled RI-7 $ 13.27 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Curb&Gutter,vertical RI-8 $ 9.69 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Curb and Gutter,demolition and disposal RI-9 $ 13.58 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Curb,extruded asphait RI-1 $ 2.44 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Curb,extruded concrete RI-11 $ 2.56 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sawcut,asphalt,3"depth RI-12 $ 1.85 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sawcut,concrete,per 1"depth RI-13 $ 1.69 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sealant,asphalt RI-1 $ 0.99 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Shoulder,AC, (see AC road unit price) RI-1 $ - SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Shoulder,gravel,4"thick RI-1 $ 7.53 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sidewalk,4"thick RI-1 $ 30.52 SY 0.00' .00 0.00 0.00
Sidewalk,4"thick,demolition and dispos RI-1 $ 27.73 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sidewalk,5"thick RI-1 $ 34.94 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sidewalk,5"thick,demolition and dispos RI-2 $ 34.65 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sign,handicap RI-21 $ 85.28 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Striping,per stall RI-22 $ 5.82 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Striping,thermoplastic,(for crosswalk) RI-2 $ 2.38 SF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
triping,4"re ectonzed ne - F 0.00 0.00 .00
Page 3 of 7 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
`�,��v ����
Unit prices updated:2112/02
Version:4/22/02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xIs Report Date: 1/19/2010
Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Exfsting Future Public Private Bond Reduction`
Right-of-way Road Improvements Improvements ,
&Drainage Facilities Quant. ',
Urnt rice nd uant. ost uant. ost uant. ost Complete Cost !,
- - r I
For KCRS'93,(additional 2.5"base)add:RS-1 $ 3.60 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Overlay,1.5"AC RS-2 $ 7.39 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Overlay,2"AC RS-3 $ 8.75 SY 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,2",4"rock,First 2500 SY RS-4 $ 17.24 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,2",4"rock,Qty.over 2500SY RS-5 $ 13.36 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,3",4"rock,First 2500 SY RS-6 $ 19.69 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,3",4"rock,Qty.over 2500 SY RS-7 $ 15.81 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,5",First 2500 SY RS-8 $ 14.57 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,5",Qty.Over 2500 SY RS-9 $ 13.94 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,6",First 2500 SY S-1 $ 16.76 SY O.DO 0.00 0.00 0.00
AC Road,6",Qty.Over 2500 SY S-1 $ 16.12 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Asphalt Treated Base,4"thick S-1 $ 9.21 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravel Road,4"rock,First 2500 SY S-1 $ 11.41 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gravel Road,4"rock,Qty.over 2500 SY S-1 $ 7.53 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PCC Road,5",no base,over 2500 SY S-1 $ 21.51 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PCC Road, 6",no base,over 2500 SY S-1 $ 21.87 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ic ene ge -1 .89 L 0. 0 0. 0 . 0
Page 4 of 7 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
�7��70 ��'���a��''
Unit prices updated:2/12/02
Version:4/22/02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xIs Report Date: 1/19/2010
Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet �'
Existing Future Public Private Bond Reduction'
Rlght-of-way Road Improvements Improvements
&Drainage Facilities Quant. I,
Unit Pnce nit uant. Cost uant. ost uant. ost Complete Cost I
- For Culvert prices, Average of 4'cover was assumed.Assume pertorated PVC is same price as solid pipe.
Access Road,R/D D-1 $ 16.74 SY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bollards-fixed D-2 $ 240.74 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bollards-removable D-3 $ 452.34 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 D.00
'(CBs include frame and lid)
CB Type I D-4 $1,257.64 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CB Type IL D-5 $1,433.59 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CB Type 11,48"diameter D-6 $2,033.57 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
for additional depth over 4' D-7 $ 436.52 FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CB Type II,54"diameter D-8 $2,192.54 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
for additional depth over 4' D-9 $ 486.53 FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CB Type II,60"diameter D-10 $2,351.52 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
for additional depth over 4' D-11 $ 536.54 FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CB Type II,72"diameter D-12 $3,212.64 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
for additional depth over 4' D-13 $ 692.21 FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Through-curb Inlet Framework(Add) D-14 $ 366.09 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cleanout,PVC,4" D-15 $ 130.55 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cleanout,PVC,6" D-16 $ 174.90 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cleanout,PVC,S" D-17 $ 224.19 Each 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,PVC,4" D-18 $ 8.64 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,PVC,6" D-19 $ 12.60 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,PVC, 8" D-20 $ 13.33 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,PVC,12" D-21 $ 21.77 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,8" D-22 $ 17.25 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,12" D-23 $ 26.45 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,15" D-24 $ 32.73 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP, 18" D-25 $ 37.74 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,24" D-26 $ 53.33 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,30" D-27 $ 71.45 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,36" D-28 $ 112.11 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,48" D-29 $ 140.83 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Culvert,CMP,60" D-30 $ 235.45 LF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
u vert, M ,72 D-3 30 .58 L 0.00 0.00 .
Page 5 of 7 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
����� ��j�� I 2�.P
Unit prices updated:2/12l02
Version:4/22/02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xIs Report Date: 1/19/2010
Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Existing Future Public Private Bond Reduction`
Right-of-way Road Improvements Improvements
DRAINAGE CONTINUED 8�Drainage Facilities Quant.
No. Urnt Pnce nit uant. ost uant. ost uant. ost Complete Cost
Culvert,Concrete,8" D-3 21.02 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,Concrete,12" D-33 $ 30.05 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,Concrete,15" D-34 $ 37.34 LF 0 0 0 0
CulveR,Concrete,18" D-35 $ 44.51 LF 0 0 0 0 I
Culvert,Concrete,24" D-36 $ 61.07 LF 0 0 0 0 I
Culvert,Concrete,30" D-37 $ 104.18 LF 0 0 0 0 I
Culvert,Concrete,38" D-38 $ 137.63 LF 0 0 0 0 ,
Culvert,Concrete,42" D-39 $ 158.42 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,Concrete,48" D-40 $ 175.94 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,6" D-41 $ 10.70 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,8" D-42 $ 16.10 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,12" D-43 $ 20.70 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,15" D-44 $ 23.00 LF 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,18" D-45 $ 27.60 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,24" D-46 $ 38.80 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,30" D-47 $ 48.30 LF 0 0 0 0
Culvert,CPP,36" D-48 $ 55.20 LF 0 0 0 0
Ditching D-49 $ 8.08 CY 0 0 0 0
Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+) D-50 $ 25.99 LF �
French Drain (3'depth) D-51 $ 22.60 LF 0 0 0 0
Geotextile,laid in trench,polypropylene D-52 $ 2.40 SY 0 0 0 0
Infiltration pond testing D-53 $ 74.75 HR 0 0 0 0
Mid-tank Access Riser,48"dia, 6'deep D-54 $1,605.40 Each 0 0 0 0
Pond Overfiow Spillway D-55 $ 14.01 SY 0 0 0 0
Restrictor/Oil Separator,12" D-56 $1,045.19 Each 0 0 0 0
Restrictor/Oil Separator,15" D-57 $1,095.58 Each 0 0 0 0
Restrictor/Oil Separator,18" D-58 $1,146.16 Each 0 0 0 0
Riprap,placed D-59 $ 39.08 CY 0 0 0 0
Tank End Reducer(36"diameter) D-60 $1,000.50 Each 0 0 0 0
Trash Rack,12" D-61 $ 211.97 Each 0 0 0 0
Trash Rack,15" D-62 $ 237.27 Each 0 0 0 0
Trash Rack,18" D-63 $ 268.89 Each 0 0 0 0
Trash Rack,2 D-64 3 .84 ac 0 0
Page 6 of 7 SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 0
c���-� ��,��—
Unit prices updated:2/12/02
Version:4/22/02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xIs Report Date: 1/19/2010 �I
Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
Existing Future Public Private Bond Reduction*
Right-of-way Road Improvements Improvements
8 Drainage Facilities Quant.
nit rice Unit uant. rice uant. ost Quant. ost Complete Cost
PARKING LOT SURFACING
No.
2"AC,2"top course rock&4"borrow PL-1 $ 15.84 SY 0 0 0 0
2"AC, 1.5" top course&2.5"base cour PL-2 $ 17.24 SY 0 0 0 0 I
4"select borrow PL-3 $ 4.55 SY 0 0 0 0
1.5"top course rock&2.5"base course PL-4 $ 11.41 SY 0 0 0 0
WRITE-IN-ITEMS
(Such as detention/water quality vaults.) No.
WI-1 Each 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
WI-2 SY 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
WI-3 CY 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
WI-4 LF 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
WI-5 FT 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
WI-6 /' (i �' 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
WI-7 0 0.00 0.00
WI-8 0 0 0.00 0.00
WI-9 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
wi-�0 0.00 0.00 0.00
SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SUBTOTAL(SUM ALL PAGES�: l� 0.00 `�� 0.00 � 1� '1��0.00 0.00
30%CONTINGENCY 8�MOBILIZATION: �(/ �/'L 0.00 � 0.00 �00 0.00
GRANDTOTAL: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
COLUMN: B C D E
Page 7 of 7 �`r� �Sl�� l�i�' /��L � C!�i ���
_ (
Unit prices updated:2/12/02
Version:4/22J02
REF 8-H BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET.xIs Report Date: 1/19/2010
�
N
�
�
�
a
z
Q
W
H
H
�
�
LL
0
I
W
/ ^
OFF-S1T� ANALYSIS DRAII�AGE SYSTEM TABLE
SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL, CORE REQUIREMENT#2 '
NELSON PLAT ,
Ju1vE 20, 2012 �
Basin: Lake Washington Subbasin Name: John's Creek Subbasin Number:
Symbol Drainage Drainage Slope Distance Existing Potential Observations of field
Component Type, Component from site Problems Problems inspector, resource
Name, and Size Description dischar e reviewer, or resident
see map Type:sheet flow,swale, drainage basin,vegetation, % '/4 ml=1,320 ft. constrictions, under capacity,ponding, tributary area, likelihood of problem,
stream,channel,pipe, cover,depth,type of sensitive overtopping,flooding,habitat or organism overtlow pathways,potential impacts
pond; Size:diameter, area,volume destruction,scouring,bank sloughing,
surface area sedimentation, incision,other erosion
A Sheet Flow Open grassed area from 6% Sta. 0 None None None observed
site sheet flows to CB at CB collects runoff
the S W corner of property from Street—no
on NE 12�'Street. blocka e roblem
g Pipe Flow 12"conveyance pipe from 6% Sta 0+00'- None None Adequate grade and size of pipe
NE12th to the west to 7+50' to handle flows.
Lincoln Place—before
entering pond on southerly
end of Jones Ave.
C Pond Overgrown flat Sta 7+50' None None None observed
j� Pipe Flow Flow continues >20% Sta 7+50'— Was not able to N/A Based upon slope and size of
Not observed downstream of the pond in 18+50' access structures downstream pipe,there appears to
large pipe flowing towards down slope. Pipe be plenty of capacity for existing
outlet area under NE Park system part of conditions.
Drive and Lake Wash. City of Renton
Blvd. � Storm Water
Utility inventory
ma s.
E Open Channel System Pipe from hill side Sta. 18+50— Channel being None Good conveyance channel
daylights into open channel 26+50 maintained
near railroad crossing/NE
Park Dr/Lake Wash Blvd
�
�
O
a
W
�
_
V
W
�
0
W
�
I
�
_. , �
1
�er����� .;� ���;����;�� ����������
� = � isf En �^ ineerin � Servi�es
�� � �
27207 8th Av�nue S P.O. Box 13309
Des Moines, Washington 98198 Des Moines, Washington 98198
Phone: 253.941 .9399, Fax; 253.941 .9499, e-maii: RBergqu510@aol.com
March 19, 2007
Mr. Dave Parry
Heritage Homes, lnc.
4325 SW 323`� Street
Federal Way, Washington 98023
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services
Preliminary Site Evaluation of 5.53-Acre Site
Lake Washington �ew Estates
Portion of Government Lot 1 , Section 32, Township 24N,
Range 5E, Willamette Meridian
Renton, Washington
King County Tax Parcel Number: 3224059081
BES Project Number: 200703, Report 1
Dear Mr. Parry:
This report presents the resulfis of our preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the
proposed residential development on approximately 5.53 acres of land in the northwest
quarter of Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E, of the Willamette Meridian as shown on the
Vicinify Map on page A1 of this report.
Mr. Parry authorized our work on this project by signing and returning a copy of BES
� Proposal Number 13720�6 on January 15, 2007. The preliminary geotechnical evaluation
was performed by Bergquist Engineering Services (BES) to provide information regarding:
• topographic features on the site,
• geologic setting of the site,
• readiiy identifiable geotechnical constraints to the project,
• preliminary foundation, and earthwork recommendations.
GEOTECHMCAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
il
RCflfVtl� YVUSIllfI(�.IV(1 IV1U1�.11 1 7� Gvv/
The scope of services incfuded: a reconnaissance of the project site and surrounding
area by Richard Bergquist, P.E., principal geotechnical engineer; a review of readily available
geologic and soif survey maps and literature; and review of a topographic survey prepared by
Hansen Surveying and dated November 20, 2006. During the field reconnaissance, probes
with a one-half-inch diameter steel T-probe were made to estimate the consistency and
relative density of the near-surface soils.
BES persannel gathered the information presented in this report for preliminary
geotechnical engineering purposes only. This site characterization was not intended to
provicfe final design recommendations nor was it to address the presence or likelihood of
contamination on or around the site. Specialized methods and procedures, which were not a
part of this scope of services, are required for adequate final geotechnical design
recommendations and environmental site assessment. Prior to final design, an adequate
subsurface exploration should be performed to determine the actua) soil conditions at the
site.
According to Mr. Jim Hanson of Hanson Consulting, the property wiil be divided into
13, individual, single-family, residential lots. As shown on the attached Site Plan, Lots 1
through 12 are located in the western third of the property and Lot 13 is loc4ted near the
southeast comer of the property. Access to #he contiguous lots, Lots 1 through 12, will be
provided from Lake Washington Boulevard N. Access to the Lot 13 will be from the comer of
Meadow Avenue N and N 40th Street.
Relafiively deep cuts will be required to provide access from Washington Boulevard.
Minimal cuts will be required fio access Lot 13. Where possible, it is anticipated that rock-
facings (rockeries) will be used to protect the required cuts. Design plans for the residential
structures were not available at the time this report was prepared, therefore, we assume that
I �, the buildings will be 1wo to three stories in height. The structures will be wood-framed and
supported on cast-in-place concrete foundations.
�
The properfy is bounded on the west by Lake Washington Bouievard N., May Creek to
the north, interstate 405 to the east, and residenfial properties to the south. Lots l through 5
will border a two-story condominium complex immediately to the south. Lots 5 through 7 will
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 2 of 7
Kenton, wasnington nnarcn i y, �vui ',
w' rder a 0- II
border a wetland bufFer along their eastern property line. Lots 7 through 9 ill bo 5
i ' foot stream buffer to the north. Lofis 10, 11 , and 12 wil) border a wetland bufFer to the north. ,
Lot 13 borders a steep slope to the east and north, a wetfands buffer to the northwest, and �,
new residential construction to the south and southwest.
Overall, the ground surface of the property slopes down from south to north towards ',
May Creek. !n the westem portion of the site, which will be developed into Lots 1 through
12, the high elevation of 62 feet MSL is along the south property line. The ground surface
declines initially at about 16 percent for a horizonta) distance of about 90 feet then fihe
gradient flattens slightly to about 1 1 percenfi for a horizontal distance of about 92 feet. The
ground surFace then steepens to about 24 percent for a distance of about 42 fee# beyond
which, the ground surFace nearly flattens to a slope of about 2 percent over a horizontal
distance of about 1 10 feet to the edge of May Creek. There are numerous south to north rills
and gulleys in this porfion of the site fihat indicate significant surface runoff#owards the creek.
The ground surf4ce at Lot 13 slopes down from a high elevation of about 100 feet
MSL at the south side of the buildable portion of the site to a low elevation of about 72 feet
MSL a#the north boundary of the site. The ground surface to the north, beyond the property
line steepens to about 54 percent down to May Creek.
The entire site is sparsely covered with primarily secand and third growth alder ond
maple trees with an occasional large cedar #ree. The ground cover consists primarily of
dense blackberry bushes.
According to S�eet Number 5 of tlze SoilSurvey ofKrnc� CounlyAr�a, Washinqfon, published
by the United Stai�es Department of Agriculture, i�e near-surface soils (upper 30 inches� a# the site
consis�F of the Alderwood series A�gC, which classify as "gravelly sandy loam"according to fihe USDA
Textural Classification System. AgC soiis classify as "'SAND-SILT (5M) with gravel" according to the
Unified Soil Classi$cation System (USCS) and have a r�eported 20 to 30 percent, respectively passing
1fie Number 200 sieve.
The Puget Sound region has been subjected to erosion and deposition by glacial
processes during the last one million year�. The most recenfi glaciation, referred to as the
Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation, ended about 11,500 years ago. Vashon glacial
Bergquisfi Engineering Services Page 3 of 7
Kenton, Washington March 19, 1007
I
processes formed area landforms. According to the 2002 Geo%ric Ma�n of KincLCounlv, �
Washington compiled by Der�k B. Boofh, Ra/ph A. Haugerud, and JiU B. Sacket, the soifs on '�
the upper elevations of the site are Quaternary recessional outwash (Qvr). Qvr soils are I,
characteristically described as "Stratified sand and gravel moderately to well sorted and well �',
bedded silty sand to silty clay." Based on observations at the site, the exposed soils on the
s(ope appear to be GRAVEL-SAND-SiLT (GM), occasional cobble according to the Unified ,
Soi{ Classification System. The upper one to three feet of soil on the site are relatively loose
based on probes with a one-half-inch diameter steel T-probe. The underlying soils are
medium dense to dense and they feel granular with the probe. The soils at the lower
elevations of the site along May Creek are alluvial deposits from the meandering of the
creek. The uppermost soils are medium dense based on probes. �
Since about 1853, coal has been mined in Washington. Prior to around 1970, nearly
all coal came from underground mines. Since the early 1900s, state law required mine
operators to submit detailed plans of all underground coal operations on an annual basis.
About 1,100 individual maps representing about 230 mines comprise the Washington State
coalrnine map collection. Obviously not mapped, are the locations of iltegal or unreported
mines and mines or explorations complefied prior to the requirements for mapping.
Hisbrically, based on review af the available coalmine maps at the Deparfment of Natural
Resources in Ofympia,Washington,there has been extensive mining fdr to the east of the project site.
There are; however, no mapped mines 6eneath the subject properfy according to the King Couniy
records.
The Puget Sound area is seismically active. Low magnitude earthquakes occur nearly
every year within a 50-mile radius af the site. On April 13, 1949, the Olympia area
experienced an earthquake having a Richter Magnitude 7.1 and, on February 28, 2001, a
Richter Magnitude 6.8 earthquake occurred near fihe same location. On April 29.1965, a
Richter Magni#ude 6.5 earthquake occurred between Seattle and Tacoma �Rogers, Walsh,
Kockelman and Priest, 1991). Recent stuclies by Brian Atwater (1987) conclude that much
larger (perhaps larger than magnitude 8� subduction-zone earthquakes occur periodically
along the Washington Coast; the (ast subduction-zone earthquake occurred approxima#ely 300
years ago. The site is in seismic design category D1 based on the probabilistic ground motion
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 4 of 7
ftenton, Washington March I y, Luu1
values predicted by the USGS Earfhquake Hazards Program and the 2003 Intema#ionai Residenfial
Code.
Based on this preliminary geotechnical evaluation of the property it appears that the site can
be de�eloped if the improvements are [cept out of or above the potential flood plc�in of May Creek.
According to the geologic review and visual observations at the site, it is our opinion that conventional
�� spread footing foundations will likely be sui#able for support of tE1e proposed structures if they are
I�i placecf on either the native, undisturbed, medivm dense to dense recessional soils or on suitable,
�I im rted, and ro r) com acted ranular filL T ical allowable bearin ca acities of fihese sals
P� P Pe Y p 9 YP �Y, A P
ar� at feast 2,000 �f with settfemenis estimated to be less than one-inch. All e�derior footings shall
be placed at least 18 inches below grcade for frost protedion. Minimum widths of 24 inches for
individual column footings and 18 inches for continuous wall foofiings are generally recommended.
Any SILT-rich,SM sal at the site may be moisture sensitive; lherefone, major earthwork af this
site would best be performed during the dry, summer months of the year. These soils may not be
suitable for use as structural fill or structural backfill. Any native, S1LT-lean (GP or SE� soiis are
probably not moistur�sensifive and may be used for structural fill or structural backfill.
Surface water runofF will need to be managed during construction and during the entire lifie of
the project. Drainage behind retaining walls and perimeter footing drains will need to be inst+alled
and they will need to be directed to suitable discharge points. No coHecUed wafier shall be allowed to
discharge on to any of the steep slopes at this site.
The site soils are clpssified as highly erodable, therefore, during the earfhwork and
construction phases, great care must be exercised to control the migrafion of soils off the site. This
can be accomplished wifih prnperty placed and installed silt fences, straw bales, and temporary
sediment ponds. All soil stockpiles will need to be covered with heavy plastic sheefing and placed far
from declining s{opes and foundation and utility excavafions.
According fio Chapter 296-155, Part N of the 5a#ety Standards for Construction Work
in the State of Washington, most of the site soils classify as Type C. Therefore, side slopes of
excavations deeper than four (4) feet should be no steeper than one and ane-half (1 .5)
horizonfai to one (1} vertical (1 .5H:1 V). If the dimensions of the site prevent #he use of
Bergquist Engineering Services Poge 5 of 7
tcenton, vvasnington iv�arcn i y, �uvi
maximum sfopes of 1 .5H:1 V, the slopes must be stabilized or shored to facilifiate safe
excavafiions.
A r�ughly 10-foot deep cut wil{ be required in the southwest comer of the site to provide
access from Lake Washington Boulevard and to provide relatively level building pads. The cut face
along the soulh boundary will need to be reiained with a rei�aining structure which may be either; a
cast in-place, concrete re#aining wall; a soldier pile and lagging wall; a sail-nailed wall; or other
proprietary system depending upon the geome#ry of the cut and the engineering properties of the
underlying soils. Rock facings (rockery walls) are being used to protect near-vertical cuts on the
adjacent properfy soufh of this project properiy; however,they are used on less critical slopes that are
relatively, easily accessible for repair and maintenance. The final ehoice of the system to retain or
protect the cu# slopes should be made after an appropriate subsurface e�loration and engineering
anafysis is completed.
The placement of a single-family residence on Lot i 3 in the southeast corner of the
properfy appears to be feasible even with a 25-foot buffer from the steep slope and a 15-foot
building setback. The 25-foot buffer may be reduced based on an appropriate subsurface '�,
exploration and slope stabilify analysis. If the building is snuggled into the slope on the south
side of the lot, the uphill portions of the foundation could be designed as a retaining wall to
maxirnum the c(earance between the foundation and the steep slope to the north and east.
The preliminary recommendations presented in this report are not based on
subsurface exploration at the project site and should be verified before final design antf
construction. Final geotechnicc�l engineering recommendations shal) be based on an
adequate subsurface exploration program, which may include borings and or test pits. lon
addition, any successful construction project relies on adequate observation and testing of
� construction materials and procedures by the geotechnical engineer or his qualified
representative. At a minimum, the testing program should include:
• Observation and review of site clearing and review of all foundation excavations to
evaluate whether actua) conditions are consistent with those encountered during
exploratian.
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 6 of 7
rcenton, vvasningron rv,Ur<<� � �, ��v�
• Full-time observation and testing of placement and compaction of a11 fill and
backfif) materials to evaluate compliance with specifications.
• Field inspection and laboratory testing of materials and field inspection of inethods
as required by the appropriate Building Code. Typically, this includes inspection of
placement of reinforcing steel; inspection and testing of portland cement concrete
to eva�uate compliance with specificatians regarding slump, temperature, air
contenfi, and strength.
If you have any questions, or if we moy be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely,
G��o�,,$�R�Ppf Bergquist Engineering Sen�ices
� �w �=�:, �'� `�a
��' �'o
� � •✓C
, �
�
�°.� ��c sT� ,2007
�SSI�NALti�G~ Richard A. Bergquist, P.E.
Principal
(EXPIRES: �uly 2048
Aitachmenis: A1 Vcini#y Map II
A2 S�te Plan ��
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 7 of 7
' �//j. ir i , % i —�-- - � � -f_ � _..e.::. -�L ., ' ' � d'�i'.
i� 1 �'f �/=' Y��} ��t%�t� � �/� �� �-j� j �7 ~ - � �,.
f � :1r� ` �:i���'<i�,�': p'u� �_ �} '"l���{�i lt t �f/�'i�/ '' � � ' � � "� �• .� .tf 5��
� � �iJ�� I �'- 1- � ���� l� ���'.�i ( _"� 1 i 5 ¢} :�,z . "t � _
' / � ��sx � ^� ���`�3 i if J?l�25� � �. � �� S-r , � I
%. � � � , 'j,���" �f� 1�/-/. r �P07 t( �❑L',r s � � � �_ � (�s: ���c :y
"-� � ,aesc �� �r � ' '`t t� 'L�7. ' t '" � G + ' ^ ��
�-�r� � r�� :��PdiY ��, � ��'�1� 1 �� �� t_ � _ 'dr � _ '� �1.� � _ ���
« ��� � - � ��� 4����l�� � � . i �� + �t � � ���,�..
( , ___ �.,— _ y � � 1 ,� f `! � `�'�j ��� :'i }
'��� +.` 'r _ a i. i t��� �:tti. 1i�1 --� �� } ',. i i��!f .-'� :� -.'`� Pk �. 1 /� c� �$'".
i �i I - ' � � ! 3 Ir � �,� �i 1 y I H WOOd� r-- I
� � � t', ly�: ��`, �` ` �'�I��{ � :' -.��� i�.�,.� q� - ,=y = r' �� �I� .i_ ; �_���-
,3 ( 4. f —`� n�:5 "r . .1 L :'�i\ :. r ^ � I�� ` _ .
�f r_� y�� �.- ` },` `. � ��/� '{I.t �+i � r " -_ - - ��
1 , :� r �P' i r�� r ' �' I�t�� t�,7 �C � ��� �� -�. i � � �
I f� f � � ` �.1r��_�',�}��� � `1�1��,1�- ; � .y � t F� r , ��j �;',�
�"� -�ior�e �:i s�cr ,. �� � }�r } � �.. � : , t � �I ����
S� � i {��r't �r �' /J`ii(4 � �. r � P'ines.� �', �_ �. {
�� �' \Tj.. ,,� � � ,! 3 I ��� �i i {
t / �1 i 7 C .C.�� �1�-.- '+4�� i: ) � �l ( / Bbt'7 ly �':, � '�r f f`;:
,� ,t� _- '--�.e �muo^ ���� /i ��. //�(t + `� � ' � 'J, �� �� id, � _�'�.
� s , 7 rl �; 4i ��%F��,�i` � ,' �f"` ` ]- s' _
� Cent[�r r J�tf � � � : I� ' �t { ��� oo _. } j r7s� � �_
1 �■ / J _
I �� ���f,� _ � ��T� � t f _:'�f (? �/1// .t%'�� , ///�i�1 ' .�i i -�\ ��:
s� �iio .�:� . �,�j30 c z" si�,y.i%J'�J�/����y�� � � j .�� zSyb��o - �_ ' ;r:
i �
�'` ' � � ' t � ic'�' '�i�.�j / �y' � 1 J ,! � { / g
y 1��+.� ('� '� 1i�i�� l j��F� �l_ ����`3` �' � S � � ,^; � � .,.
I + i � i�� � 1 f� !j /,� i.���1 � I' r f �' F{d2B �.1 ��� 1 T�YICt�
t I � /Jw -i �i-� � D PartC/ :
i � 1' ,I �,� I V,jr�-" _ i�i �- ♦ � i 3 �� j. � : � �
�� � � 1 t i . .a•`� ��/rt�� � ����� �� . �i �.:r �'\t y\i�'` f�.. � ����I •�••
�a �� r �., { ,�,,; .�:�1 � c l ' A . :\
�i ; ` �i� rc,t _ � . /i� ,,, � Crrxk :o� � � If � ..� ' i ti t�l�� i rs� ti � !t �
i_ '` :
\ � �1� ����-�� ��✓�. .1 / �� ��� �.� " � ��� �li = � _ � :� i�� � �� .�. �; K_.N
� '- �l � ��( � i �%1 ' _ ' �' � � � a s � �ti
� �'�. '� 1�,�i� r,� (r-� , x 3 � -� t , .
I � :�� ,�-}-� '` 'r 51��,�_' �!slt �� i:��� '' ,t � Y� , It, � ��� `;
�L � �
� - � , � T _
'�`�: � ;: �1 PRQJECT SITE ' � � �t �^ � � ,� , , s;y �,#3 �k
, ,� ,
I 1 ,� - .r , �. � _ \� : .�
(��� � s��-�`� ,t��s� ����„i'�[� � (�!� 1 ' t' ' �� �.4 L�� :
\ � > > �� 1 ` � {
\\ ♦ �� 11 � i � i� �s 5 \ -r \�� t
\ di . �r �� �ll !! / . i ''� �. �1 1 -t�-
�"� -�i . ��� � 1 �7��\ �:// t - - � �' \..� 3 =
� f-
' \�`��;- /;� ,�,'�I� 1 j -� t� ���! :� 'ti �� 1 _ � _ ��`v 1 fF
� �`�out��'�j��q,i�, � '�4�.� ��� i i � � '� ,� -- '• � _ � ��; s
�'>>� '�\ � -�� - '� / � i I ..�' _ `�. � ��
I S�,\-. �JZ ':`l ti.,� � i� �,1� "l l�/� a;' ��,�'•,.,,� �� r �f��1 i�4 � ,l yds S ki � .�J-,�.
- �, \\ �J �� r � I _ .. �� -
� J t'`��`i'�l '-� �� �,'�.--- r�,r�y,'-,j t7 ,��e �� r `r-� �, '" J �f r '� �..�-_
�- r- *`_.� :.l �!.f�"ti"� ��.5 � �'czp . �ST � . �,i �� -- . '--_v4 t "�' E_
I _" . / .. f , i_ � _�� _ ' ' I � _ � F - ; �_ -
��R.�tA�L_� �� /�f � � =y <---- _.` �� � v
t �i i � 1.``�� -�} . ^�\ ,�� ' �__ � �i .` ' . . .� . :j G avel�Piu y �s_'
' �'�� i\'. � \-�• �. - F � ' �n+
J ,`� �--��V j �'�1�p,����'- �� ' i.,�9?, � j .s� ki �J �
':i� __ �� -_ ' .� _ \;�a����� 23FN` '` � __ l 1.���!/ �s ��~- �".� � �� '�� �_
_/°. _4 '.�-� 'f �\ � - -.."',.� �� . �\�'� �'� � e •_ . 4 . ..K� �-aJe r.s:- 3-,� '�- -
I • ;�_ � �. ��\_ r- � = �,.. ��1\ �� � �. ' z . �' p _ Pd��M.��
��. ,� ��'�t.� } � � � . � � el��\,9'�� � t, t x.. � ark. �:� ��.-��l � ,l/ _
f y�;�.,`_ _ -_.�� � �� :e5.(If �� �� t �" � �• ,
Q� � i-,� T.`\�_ �C � � �� �: � Y,� �i...
���� Z \ �� �j {!�� � � -�;\1 `�� �• �� ti'- " G � � ":: t - _.`
I '� , : '_ � , _
�,. , ,\ \_ ,�` ; ���^�r , �,�� it B `r= �. �J:. Z / prc� a ,
� �
� ` �. -� � ; � � j � p
. 4:��. t_ � , t-� ^ ' /S�i� .'r y - r .-t ':� � : FS - t .�� .� _
� G� �ti.� � � ��( I` �'j /��/��7T� � � ��' 4` =rJ -� /$ Y.ri-I _ 8 i �j"�,v -
l -�ri- .! 5 4�' �.� 1 ��f� �, r.."- .
' C ���i ��� ` � �. �'� t Wdk � �= �I .,..,'�1: t•y
':� ♦ { i
� ��� t � �l � �� � // �; .� � � el .$ .�-Y -- t" *i n� � 1• �.
1 � rt .` ,./' j �:� � � �\f� Ne i errr 'I $ � . P�'k � �-z-1
J (/�[/ �kri 4c'i,
I 'b ��4�.�� "� �.�\a.-t�:.� / �� �(I /��1]l-. ���y� _��t `lt.` �•\ � 1�1-�� � ��� I25. �. `cy=
}_ �4 � \\� _� . � f� ) Ef'�s'� l4 � r� ,1 , .., J' .:� ,+�.
\ �. � .��.R���,�---- �p'2��`�^""� f����J}'t"Power c.' L` � _ /f.'_� � � rr[�� 7 t f `r �ti i�. �
— -�ti� - ��'".��1�� j. �?.� .�9 rti
7•N /MN 0 5 1 ArblE
�Jlg� �OOOEEEI 0 9U6 t090l6ETERS
� �«is�roro�0�oai x.a�t�xnta�(�-m�.�
VICINITY MAP
Project Name: Lake Washington View Esfiates For: Heritage Homes, Inc.
Location: Portion of Gov`t Lot 1, Sedion 32, Bergquist Engineering Services
Twp. 24 N, Rge. 5 E,WM BES Project Number: 200703-1
Date: March 2007
Al
.. ..n � �
��
•�a�l�
'�
� .�'�... • � H 2��'W ��i�)"m`
'$� ' •:� `a'• ' \�'�' . s
�� ry^• t•.\!y. 4� ��♦ ��lUNER : �
Q,� �• � . • ' .�,� �$
� Bll�i
$� 0.11 SQ.R. ,T
� 6/07.4 � 15 fCRES. � � ' �.
� 0.18 �
� � .� . Q
� 0.15 . 1 . S0.F�.
1 � •
. � • '�'Sy.
. 7 � ' �� ?O �6�.
I i
ap • � •. 8e � �4Y .� 7�BUwfF��2, � f QF MAY_qtEIX
� . � � ` (TYP�c�1L)
.IJ 50,Ff. 1. '6 �4' 51� Ff� }} . .�
$ •� S�: � S
eo � � 4 Qr 6 _ � ;•'•�•;•'�•.•: r�.
• S � i �� ' � '�f�� �� ��'•• '.' '�'•'•'' '��T?�f
�T p��.F 4QB.20' � •:�5 :I •.. .�. •�..•: . .,�.
. �.,�;.'. �.�
�� ,4.:•.:� �. e �nc�or�ox on
�, ' �•y`� �'. N OHRAl'Lit BfAPi
�0 T S 1 T H R 0 U G H 1 ��� �,oe �:�:� . .. ��������`� �:����`�- s�� x�-e..e�aJ
'• Y�,
.� 'ro\ '•, _'' `.'���'.�,. . �`l,6s. W
�
���� �""-'''' �
.S-�.1�\ \�,;T,%'":�:_,.�..� �, —` ,�\ .
s �\r?•�•;•::/:•:•:+,:�• �� �$4'` �m �`�•�
�'�� 1• :�• � '.
N ��s ��
� Z
,�Qs, \ o
nae�or�ox oa �
. ,f \ .
6RW'T�R BLOP! � V
ARfM 1.OB0 SP. � .
4 4d"
SITE PLAN �
,,_
L�0 13 ,� ���;� � �
Project Name: Lake Washington �
View Estates For: Heritage Homes, Inc. � �,
Location: Portion of Gov't Lot 1, ; "° _ =�Raa�'c�';�, 6� � !
Bergquist Engineering Services �� �����
Section 32, Twp. 24 N, Rge. 5 E, ,� � ; �II� '
WM BES Project No: 200703-1 � N ;,s �, •
s � � �
ri o .
N � F
Date: March 2007 0
• - a
,
���� �E- x !�� ���!�. 3����__ �E-�� ���� ��
� �.
Bergquist Engineering Services
27207 8th Avenue S P. O. Box 13309
Des Moines, Washington 98198 Des Moines, Washington 98198
Phone: 253.941 .9399 • Fax 253.941 .9499 • E-mail: soilsengineering@aol.com
January 21, 2013
Dr. Greg Fawcett
PO Box 1029
Fall City, Washington 98024
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services
Lot 13, Proposed Lake Washington
View Estates
Renion, Washington
BES Project Number: 201302; Report 1
Dear Greg:
We are pleased to provide this report of our subs�rface exploration ard geatechnica!
engineering properties of the subsurface soils for the planned in#iltration trenches for thF
refereneed project. This work was performed in accordance with our proposa! number 1042013
PROJECT DEStRIPTION: The referenced property will be developed with a single- _
residence. An infiltration system, as shown on the attached Test Pit Location map, will be used
to handle the stormwater. The on-site infi(tration system shatl be designed in accordance with
the Surf4ce Water Mana_qemen�Manua12009 promulgated by City of Renton.
SCOPE OF WOR1G Bergquist Engineering Services witnessed the excavation of two test
pits to a depth of seven (7) feet below the existing grade. The test pits were excavated in
locations se(ected by Mr. Darrell Offe, P.E. of Offe Engineers and Mr. Richard Bergquist, R.E. by
estimating distances from on-site features (see the attached Test Pit Location map.) Bufk
samples were obtained at changes in the soils type. The test pits were backfilled upon
comp{etion of the soil sampling.
TEST RESUtTS: The surface soils to a depth of about six (6} inches consisted forest duff
and topsoil. Underlying the topsoil, reddish-brown, loose Silty SAND (ASTM (SM}), (USDA
DOWN TO EARTH ENGINEERING S0IUTIONS
I
Dr. Greg Fawcett BES Project Number: 201302, Report 1
� burn W shin ton Janua 21 2013
Au , a g ry ,
(Loamy Sand to Sandy Loam)) to a depth of about two and a half feet (2�z) in TP1 and about two
(2) feet in TP2 was encountered. Below this layer, brown to gray-brown, loose to medium dense,
poorly —graded, medium-grained SAND (ASTM (SP)), (USDA (Sand)} was encountered to the
termination depth of seven (7) feet. This layer is suitable for the infiltration tren�h. Therefore,
according to the Surface Water Mona.gement Manuat 2D09. infiltration trenches located in
medium sands must be at least 30 feet in length per 1,000 square feet of impervious surface
served. The results of the field sampling and laboratory testing are attached to this report.
The slopes along the east and northeast property lines have a gradient of about 20
' percent, and the infiltration rate of the spoils is high, therefore, the stability of the
aforementioned slopes will not be affected by properly installed infiltration trenches in the
eastern portion of the site.
' If ou have an uestions lease contact me.
� ,
Y YG P
� Sincerel
j� A.Bp� y,
R G
A P
� � WA G
�, 04 s,� Sergquist Engineering Servrces
� �
�, -
���� ��� °,2
��� �� 1l 1/2 3 � D �j,_ ��
'/(—�n i�6.C�
' � � G����
��� �, 3d377 � q>
o F � i� 4�
� � -R Richard A. Ber uist P.E.
.� rs� ti� 9q �
� �� � � . .
s
s
r r�
o, t�
�A Pr�nci al
p
Attachments: Tes� Pit Location Drawing
; Log of Test Pit 1,with USDA Textural Classification Chart
` Log of Test Pit 2
Test Pit Log Notes
Unified Soil Classification System
Particle Size Distribution Graph
Co i
I to: Offe En neers
pY 9
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 2 of 2
i �
. __________ -. ., ;,. . . , . . ., � � � �
INSTALL FlLTER FABRIC FENCFNG � � -' j� --------- --------,��\�� . ��'�,�,'.� ����� '• ` � � \i 1` � �
I DOWN SLOPE TYP. �/ '- _ '� � --------- _- � • �� , � �' i•. i � i i I
�� r-- _\ � � �• `'� �'�� •\\.- �� '. � i i I
�/ � ��/"C/ •"f /�____.$�-_ ��. `� � �\`� \, .,�`����`�`� ` �� � \T�` `,` T. I � I
' �. �S.
-'�' �' ��C-/ ' /� _� \ ,`��, `�`� �� �`� ` `� `� `� I �-�• I I i
� � - ---------- `� • ��• � `��\``.�` � �'1•. I �1. I �
/ � � � ' \,•�• ' � • �`� � � 1 ` '.
( ' � ,' �, -- — �� '_-_--�-----_ ' �\`� � .\�\: .����\� ` �� 1 ` .,'� . � ��� �� `l I
� i �- '� _ -� i � �� `. � �\ �. `\ .,�� \���`�,��� �\ !` I � �`\� '1
/'. ./ - �_� //, __-- --�------ , \\� �\�.\ ``.;�\\i\� `.�` `�, �\ � �>\ ` i �, � �.
�` � � , ` ` `\� ,\' ``��.\ ,�`��� � ` � � � �\ f l � I`�1
�� '�'' _�� _ _'" ' \� � ` ��`� ` � � � ' � `� I \ { I I�.
I ,_ ' - ��__ - , --------- --1---�\ � ��5: '�1t7E CJTY OF�RE'N�O,N�� � . ` � ----� � i '.
% - - � ---- '. ��1���,'����a�'N`�'` ' � �.� � i �'.
- gg- ,,- ----- - '� �E�.� T,��.,�.�,Q.�`��Q.3��;'� . '•t', _
'" gp�' ----------- �1� � � P.��y' ryo.'`T,30�Q7a�7A,1 �,�, � � i i . �
�� ''' __ -----'" ,, .� � '� � �1 S , ,, , 1, . ., , ,;;�, '�,\ '. �,�_,`` � 1 � � �
I ' /' -- \ t '1' �, i _ , � �i�ti��`�.`, ,� ' � -� �� �,,_ __+- -i� _
CLEARING LIMITS ��� --- ' / �' ---� 1j �``�� '�'�� ��J� , � ~i-j1��'�,�`.\�\ -'�=<- - � -i �
TYPICAL l` - . '- r� '-s�-5-�;���-�'i�`����. l � y�--- �
� �;' � � ` � ��__
\ � �"� +i �`-�� �`r� 'r-',�','r;�'����� �����' ��'_`� � �t'�� ��F - -i- ---_-+- -_'
I _ ,i-_I1 i`'.\�,, , \,`�� �� �� � ,�.`� � � , 1 �` _i_� _ _ �
, ��-'Te` �- ' ` ;�``�� '.;�,��P .,�` �'� '�, � J �
., �, r---
�9108; �^ �--' �� � ;� '';;:,�,��. .;.\. `� . .
/ , \104—ro, � �-``T. ����� ��� ��\\�'` �.�`\, -__ J �J
I ry -r __ � ' �` ', `��•,:' � �,;�
,� � i ! ` '�� \�p. , `�'•� �� '
,` � ,` ` ` � �
" � � �t- � �'��' � '�� � ' � ��`� �'� ``�,� � �1 _
I .\ � .� � `,�` �.'. . � '
-i_ __ � `� ` ' . .` �;�' .` .�. ` `�-. `� � �J
I \. '` '\�\�`�Q�\`,,'\i�' `��.`` '�' ` � --- Qj
I -_�'--` \ \` , ` `` `;\-. .
' CL i �blhAl'T,�; :�• •�'.�,.,�•, ' �,
_1-,� . .� , ,�
i�--- ` '.` �P11�' �� .�`- �����'�`�"��'. �
.
1" SERVIC� , -- � . �' ���,�.'����';,'.
1 METER ,� _i-�_ �� � � �`�,".'. ,` � .�. ,�,
I �-�W/ TRAFFI BEARING LID i `�__--- �T ��.�..�'..�.. : ����'�� � � '� ;���.'���,' ,
�910i�NSTALL B CITY FORCES _� �\��,r,����'�=��.,�1��
` FJNDER SE ARATE PERMIT _- --��� � 1 1 1 i i � � '
- � ---�-��i�1 o I _ , . \'� � � ,
I �910Eti ' � Iw � .
y \ '�
� G�+Qo��' '>>' i L J a '.
�'aoo , i �n '� _' ' `
o�'~o~� � �u�n�''�i I - - - - 9443�
I _ ! „
��oo`O EXLST. i � ! � �
\ Qy�Q`� HOUSE � � � � i EXIST.
f9026����G, � i /i � t i-[OUSE
� _ 4.`v � � � -`,�' 0+0� '
I 2" FUTU 7' ; IE=115.0, i6
L1NE FROM HOUSE �
GRINDER PUMP I� � 5' � ,� -
/ 1 � - 15' CIF1' OF P,EN70N
6" PVC SID S �•' unurr EFSEMENT
a �S=2.OQR MIN. i � li 2'� WYE �Ec. rv�. �3o3o7os�o
M 1'ZO� ' . I � REC. Nc. 7303070371
� y-
-N E-4�0-T,}� -S�RE-ET- --- --- - - <, �
---�,------=�z���==— ��r p' -� ssnaH
� �
�iM=�22.os
�-- •�� -��--�� — � �n;v.=iog.s� (s)
— a T__f'_-, �
e� � , I- �� 'RV.=109.47 SW)
1 1 `�.�1 � I ,r IE=109.64, 6�(NEW)
I �`� � SQMH
� �� � RIM=122.78
-;1-�' ' � � INV=117.68 ;S)
t � INV=1 1 7.68 (1h')
� I !a
� �' G
V�P,TE.R MH �� � �
RIha=122.64
i � �� Di
� m�
I � Z
m
z
0
�
I �
_
� Ber uist En in rin Services
gq g ee g
Log of Test Pit 1
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Lot 13
Location: Renton, Washinqton Excavation Rig: Komatsu PC75, 24-inch Bucket
BES Prolect No.: 201302-1 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E.
Date Excavated: Januarv 18, 2013 Approxim ate Ground Surface Elevation: 85' Above Mean Sea Level
� -
a�
� a � � � �° � m a Descriptior� (Unified Soil Classification System)
L m a � cri T � � � USDA Soi/ Textural C/assification
o � ~ Z = � _
- ----------------For ------- d ToQsoil-----------------------_
1 BS1 SM 11 .3 R ish brown, loose, (Silty SAN , roots) -1-
_Z. _Z
-3- -3-
_ BS2 SP 7.2
-4- Brown to gray-brown, loose to mediurn dense, -4-
_5_ (poorly graded SAND) -
Sand _5_
_6_ _g_
- - ...
_7_
END OF TEST P�T. DRY AT COMPLETION. '
_8_ _g_
,:��:.:.
.�-;:�;.t
•r_� .:._'}.�
'� ��`t,• S,:
. .a-�+ •`, \
T!'J;�;s�`��--:..,'�.-'-`'E-�--�y�� _
. t w-!.;^-���--���4.v-`;��-� � �,
_ 'ti� r S �
., �:t--a�ir_F�_}{r._� _
it � a"i .-�'�:'':,{.F'iV:� ,�L�f ' � I
.�.`#...��`�� ��`��.y.�'/(.. `y I
�s / • ' t: '•L • ' I i\f l./ �• r ��I,
� �'.��.\ �. . ..��_._�►�..,�,_.,.{_•• F--' a I
,t w �
�� !� �V� !�• �j.i ` 1 '��.f R\ ��� Sy
�7 ( .'�, •�f f.•,�{....:�-_'' S
+�' i. .'t: \:.t 't f�'.'I'S'�� ',i�."y df
4 t � � ; -;y 'i
`p' ;., .tis:.h .
, �� ,.T `i.'\ '�II � •,i. , •�
V ���(il:% .� :\ `1-�ef}' ,.t 1�� ��.
+ h` ,1 'Ct.t•,)r�:C�;, ,r. � ',� •` �`+,`5` ;
_ y f i� �i::Y fl�i�:l',• ��
.�{ ♦.�t�A�� `<� t. �>. �>- �. `•�.
. .f'.-.-.-.i�ic �:It. � • ` ,�
`�� ,i't �.`J..i.>f`�� ,�(. � 5(..(f 41 I
r � �.��` f `4 ,
..` .f. .:,r.d•i.. `, r� . 'cs:n�. • :� '
1:; � ' t � � Y t : r f 1 ! s t t 'aa
.g.. t � � r � t
��aT1S �� tt.` .. ._ `�--+ _x �l E--s ,a ����1t�. 1, i
�a� s '} J '' "
. _ . _ . . _._i. ..._ .
'T �r ' t� �. : 1 } �
�}� . . . I
s S:�ncS�rpar�tc. ';r
' Bergquist Engineering Services
Log of Test Pit 2
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Lot 13
Location: Renton, Washinpton F�ccavation Rig: Komatsu PC75, 24-inch Bucket
BES Proiect No.: 201302-1 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E.
Date Excavated: Januarv 18. 2013 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 102' Above Mean Sea Level
Y. _ .: > ,
� a � .n � � � a�i � : _ '
' Description (Unified Soil Classification Systern)
L ro a � �n � 'o o a��i USDA Soi/ Textural Classification.
� �n � z. � cn g U a.
:
� , '_ ' ^'�--� . , . : __ _
_ _____Forest Duff and Topsoil____ _
---------- ---- -------------
1 --- SM --- R dish brown, loose, (Silty SAND, trace oots -1-
_� _____ Sap��,oam to L�am�v�Sand______ ____________2_
_3_ _3_
-4- Brown to gray-brown, loose to mediurn dense, -4-
_5_ SP (poorly graded SAND) _�_
Sand
_6_ _6_
_7_
END OF TEST PIT. DRY AT COMPLETION.
_8_ _8_
� TEST PIT LOG NOTES
These notes and test pit log are intended for use with this geotechnical report for the
purposes and project described therein. The test pit log depicts BES' s interpretation of
subsurface conditions at the location of the test pit on the date noted. Subsurface
conditions may vary, and groundwater levels may change because of seasonal or
numerous other factors. Accordin�ly, the test pit log should not be made a part of
construction plans or be used to define construction conditions.
The approximate location of the test pit is shown on the Site Plan. The test pit was
located in the field by Mr. Darrell Offe, P.E. and Mr. Richard Bergquist, P.E. by estimating
distances from existing site features. The ground surface elevation was interpolated from
. a topographic map supplied by Offe Engineers.
" Sample Type" refers to the sampling method and equipment used during exploration
' where:
• "BS#" indicates a bulk sample taken from the ground surface or from the excavator
bucket.
" Moisture Content" refers to the moisture content of the soil expressed in percent by
weight as determined in the laboratory.
" Description and Classification" refer to the materials encountered in #he test pit. The
descriptions and classifications are generally based on visual examination in the field and
laboratory. Where noted, laboratory tests were performed to determine the soil
classification. The terms and symbols used in the test pit log are in general accordance
with the Unified Soil Classification System. Laboratory tests are performed in �eneral
accordance with applicable procedures described by the American Society for Testing and
Materials.
" �" Indicates location of �roundwater at the time noticed.
� Indicates location of seepage of water and the time noticed.
TERMS for RELATIVE DENSITY of NON—COHESfVE SOIL
Term Standard Penetration Resistance " N"
Very Loose 4 or less
Loose 5 to 10
Medium Dense 11 to 30
Dense 31 to 50
Very Dense Over 50 blows/foot
�
TEST PIT LOG NOTES continued
TERMS for RELATIVE CONSISTENCY of COHESIVE SOIL
Term Unconfined Compressive Strength
Very Soft 0 to 0.25 tons/square—foot
Soft 0.25 to 0.50 tsf
Medium Stiff 0.50 to 1 .00 tsf
Stiff 1 .00 to 2.00 tsf
Very Stiff 2.00 to 4.00 tsf
Hard Over 4.00 tsf
DEFINITION of MATERIAL by DIAMETER of PARTICLE
Boulder 8—inches+
Cobble 3 to 8 inches
Gravel 3 inches to 5m m
Coarse Sand 5mm to 0.6mm
Medium Sand 0.6mm to 0.2mm
Fine Sand 0.2m m to 0.074m m
Silt 0.074 to 0.005mm
Clay less than 0.005m m
I . '
�_
I
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS}
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
(Less than 50°�fines. Fines are soils passing the#200 sieve.)
GROUP SYMBOL DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISIONS
G� Well-graded GRAVELS or GRAVELSAND
mixtures,less than 5%fines.
GP Poorly graded GRAVELS or GRAVEL-SAND
mixtures,less than 5%fines. GRAVELS
� Sitty GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND-SILT moctures, More than half of coarse fraction is larger
G� than No.4 sieve.
more than 12%fines.
GC Clayey GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY
mi�dures,more than 12%fines.
SW Well-graded SAtJDS or Gravelly SANDS mixtures,
less than 5%fines.
SP Poorly graded SANDS or Gravelly SANDS
mi�dures,less than 5%fines. SANDS
Silty SANDS, SAND-SILT mbctures,more than More than half Qf coarse fraction is smaller
SM 12%fines. than No.4 sieve.
SC Clayey SANDS, SAND-CIAY mixtures,more than
12%fines
Note: Coarse-grained soils receive dual symbols if they contain between 5 and 12 percent fines.
FINE-GRAINED SOILS
(More than 50%fines. Fines are materials passing the#200 sieve)
GROUP SYMBOL DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISIONS
ML Inorganic SILTS,very fine SANDS,ROCK
FLOUR,Silry or Clayey SANDS
Inorganic CLAYS of low to medium plasticity+, SILTS and CLAYS
CL Gravelty CLAYS,Sandy CLAYS,Silty CLAYS,
L�n CIAYS Liquid limit less than 50
OL i Organic SILTS,or organic Silty CLAYS of low
plasticity II
MH Inorganic SILTS,Micaceous or Diatomaceous fine I
SANDS or SILTS,Elastic SILTS i i
SILTS and CLAYS
CH Inorganic CLAYS of high plasticity,rat ctAYs Liquid limit greater than 50 ,
� QH I O�ganic C�YS of inedium to high�lasticity
pT PEAT,MUCK,and other highty organic soils Highly organic soils
Note: Fine-grained soils receive dual symbols if their limits p{ot left of the"A"Line and have a plasticity index(PI)of
4 to 7 percent.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Bergquist Engineering ,
Services I
'
� Bergquist Engineering Services
Grain Size Distribution
Test Pit 1 , 2.5' to 4.0'
U.S. Standard Sieve Opening in Inches U.S. Standard Sieve Numbeis Hydrometer Results
100% 2o a � � o o � 0%
90% -- -- ----- '------ ----_ _:--- --- --- - -_ _--------------- --- ------------_ 10%
_. __...-- ;---:-- ___- :__.. . -- - -------___ � .-- ----_
_ ; -- - _ _y _
80% -- -----;---` . - '------ -�----------=------�- ---- 20%
; ,
i
__---. �.-- - -_... __.__..__. -__. .___ ___- -- - -.__.. --- -- _
t
-- 70% ___ --- -- -- - � - ----- --� -- -- ------ y6
r � ;
� '
30
,.._.� � ;
pi .. . _. . .___ _. �, . _. _. .. .__. �....__. _. .._. . __ _.._. .�. ___ . � .._.._ . _ . __. . t
� 6096 - - '--- - �------ ,- . - ---- --' - --- ._. qp9(, �
� ' E ,___ ._
_-- __ _. _ ... - _ _ __ ___..
--- ._
� 50% � ------ -... --`�--_ ' T_ : 50%
_ -- --- ' ---- --- --
g' � ' -- ---_ __.__ _ a
_.. __ - .._ _ __ ---
__ , .. .
� 40% ---=--- � ---- �---- __ _____- -- - �-------_ - 60%
__._-- --
w -
a _ -- -__ i.. ._.__.._ _ _..�_ _--_ _,. . ___ _ , ---- __
__. •
ae 3096 ------- --:.---- �- _ _-- -- ---___-. --= -= ----.. 7096 �
_ _.__ ___ _ _ _. - -- ;_ , . __._ _--_
_ -- �
2096 _ '_ -------- --- -- ---- - '-- --_ --• --- , -�- : - -_ 80%
- '-- ,_ _ _.:..- - ,__. _ _i_ . -- �I
__. _ _- - - --- - --. _
1096 _ ----- ---._ .__ __ _----___- ;- ---- - - --- -- ; ---- --- -- gp9G i
_ _ .:_ __ ._ , _ . __ ; ... ._.. __ __ _ _ ___ :. _ _ __;.__
0% _ . 10096 I
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 I
Grain Size in Millimeters ',
Cobbles �vels Sands Sihs Clays
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Date: O1/18l13 to= 0.10 USCS C7assificaHon %Gravel °h Sand
Sample#: 2 D3o= 0.21 SP;Poorly graded Sand
Sample ID: TP 1,S 2 D�= 0.42 Specifications 0.7% 94.3°h
Source: C�= 1.06 Vo Specs
Projed: Ik.W A�ew Estates Ct�e 4.33 Sample Meets Specs °h Sih dt Clay
I,ocatioa: Retrton Liquid Limit= 0.0% n/a 4.9%
Test Pit 1,I.ot 13 Plastic Limit= 0.0% Fineness Modulus
Depth: 2.5'-4' P1asNcity Index= 0.0% 2.29
oarse ch�a tetpo ate mes . ctua teipo
Section Gtm�ulative Cumulative Section Cumulatice Glimulative
Sieve S�ze Percent Percent Specs 3pecs Sieve Sue Percent Percern Specs Specs
U5 Metric Fassing Passing Max Min US Metric Passing Passing Max Min
6.00" 150.00 100.0% #4 4.750 99.3% 99.3%
4,00" 100.00 100.0% ! #8 2.360 77.8°r6
3.00" 75.00 100.0°h #10 2.000 74.6°r6
2.50" 63.00 100.0°h #16 1.180 67.2°h
2.00" 50.00 100.0°h #20 0.850 64.2°h �
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 62.0%
1.50" I 37.50 I 100.0% I #40 j 0.425 60.4% 60.4°k I
1.25" 31.50 100.0°h #SO 0.300 42.8%
1.00" 25.00 100.0% 100.0% #60 0.250 35.8°h
7/8" 22.40 100.0°•6 100.0% #80 0.180 26.0%
3/4" 19.00 100.0°h 100.0% #100 0.150 21.7% 21.7°k
5/8" 16AU 100.0% tk140 0.106 11.9°h
1/2" 12.50 100.0% 100.0°k #170 0.090 8.3%
3!8" 9.50 99.7°k #200 0.075 4.9% 4.9%
1!4" 6.30 99.4% #270 0.053 I
#4 4.75 99.3% 99.3% I
�
I
l
���� E�c�—� ��� ���--��....��I�"����I� �. �� �I�'`�F -'�
.t � ��� � �•
� Bergq ���������� ist Engineering Services
� 27207 8th Avenue S P. O. Box 13309
Des Moines, Washington 98198 Des Moines, Washington 98198
Phone: 253,941 .9399 • Fax 253.941 .9499 • E-mail: soilsengineering@aol,com
{
� May 13, 2013
� Dr Fwctt
. Greg a e
Rob-Clarissa Partnership, LLC
� 33609 SE Redmond Fall Ci Rd.
�
r Fall City, Washington 98024
�
� Re: Subsurface Expioration and
Geotechnical Engineering Services
� Proposed Lake Washington View
Estates a Residential Subdivision
[ King Co. Parcel No.: 3224059081
Renton, Washington
[ BES Project No.: 2013,5 Report 1
I � Dear Gre :
9
, �
� Bergquist Engineering Services is pleased to provide this report of the
geotechnical exploration and engineering analysis for the referenced project. The
attached report summarizes project and site data, describes the services we
performed, and presents our recommendations regarding foundations, lateral earth
pressures, and earthwork. The appendix of the report presents site maps, boring and ,
_-. test pit fogs, explanatory aids, and the computer printouts for the slope stability
analyses. '
DOWN TO EARTH ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
� Rob-Clarissa Partnership, LLC BES Project Number: 201305, Report 1
Fall City, Washington Mat 13, 2013
I
CWe appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions
concerning this report, or if we may be of additional service, please contact us.
�
t
A�� A.BFRGP Sincerely,
j ��w°��_��SH'���ls,, Bergquist Engineering Services
l �e �
r � y�l� 2013
�� 30377 q, ��
� �io �£CISTE�ti� ��'
�SSI�NAL E�G�
L Richard A. Bergquist, P.E.
r Principal
i
L
Copies to: Addressee (7)
l
l
t ;
( I�
J ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS �I
1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 I
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTiON ............................................................................................................. 2 �
3. SCOPE OF SERVICES ..............................................................................................•--......----....... 3 �I
4. SITE CHARACTERIZATION.......................................................................................................... 3 �'
L4.1 Site Ciassification............................................................................................................. 4 �
( 4.2 Surface.............................................................................................................................. 5 '
l
4.3 Subsurface Soil and Groundwater.................................................................................. 5 �,
�
' 4.3.1 The Uppermost Region of the Project Site..................................................... 5
,
4.3.2 The Mid-elevation Region along the East-West Center of the Site............... 6
4.3.3 The Low-elevation Region along the North Side of the Site.......................... 6 '
S. DISCUSSION............................................................................................................................... 7
6. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 7
6.1 Slope Stability................................................................................................................... 7
�
6.1.1 Stability of Slope at the Time of Exploration ................................................... 9
6.1.2 Stability of the Proposed Cut-Face Rockeries................................................. 9
6.2 Earth Retention............................................................................................................... 10 '
6.3 Foundations ..............................................•-----...........................................----........----•--.. 11
6.3.1 Foundations for residential Structures.......................................................... 12
6.3.2 Foundations for the Stormwater vauits......................................................... 13
6.4 Slabs-on-Grade ............................................................................................................... 14
6.5 Earthwork...................................•---................................................................................. 14
6.5.1 Site Clearing..................................................................................................... 14
6.5.2 Excavations...................................................................................................... 15
6.5.3 Foundation Preparation.................................................................................. 15
6.6 Materials ......................................................................................................................... 15
6.6.1 Pfacement and Compaction ........................................................................... 16
6.7 Drainage.......................................................................................................................... 17
6.8 Groundwater................................................................................................................... 18
6.9 Erosion............................................................................................................................. 18
6.10 Construction Observation and Testing........................................................................ 18
7. REPORT LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................... 19
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
;
r APPENDIX
; Vicinity Map .............................. A1
...................................................................................................
, Site Plan ................................................................................................................................. A2
� Boring Logs and Test Pit Logs ......................................................................................................... A3
� Boring Log Notes............................................................................................................................ A11
Tes�Pit Log Notes........................................................................................................................... A14
� Unified Soil Classification System.........................................................................:........................ A16
GrainSize Distribution Test............................................................................................................ A17
� Atterberg Limit Test ....................................................................................................................... A19
` Schematic of Fill Face Rocke
ry....................................................................................................... A20
F Slope Stability Printouts...................................................
.............................................................. A21
�_ Notes ................................................................................................................................ A29
r
[
� SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION and
� GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
PROPOSED LAKE WASHINGTON VIEW ESTATES I
[ A SINGLE-FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT �
On a Portion of Government Lot 1, �
[ Section 32,Township 24 N, Range 5 E, W.M. �
Renton, Washington i
r King County Parcel Number. 3224059081 i
� ��
prepared for: I'�
�- ROB-CLARISSA PARTNERSHIP, LLC
DR. GREG FAWCETT, OWNER
t_
by:
[ Bergquist Engineering Services I
BES Project Number: 201305-Report 1
�.
CMay 13, 2013
;, 1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnicai engineering
evaluation for the proposed 12-lot, single-family, residential development on a 5.53-acre parcel
in Renton, Washington. The location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map on page A1 in the
` appendix of this report. 8ergquist Engineering Services (BES) performed this geotechnical
engineering report to provide information regarding:
• estimated stability of the slope as it exists, during construction, and after construction,
• seismic design considerations including liquefaction potential,
• allowable bearing capacity and depth of suitable foundation systems with estimated
settlements,
� design recommendations for cut-face and fill-face rockeries where appropriate,
i - _. ,
i ,
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
• lateral earth pressures and friction coefficients for design of foundations, short retaining
walls, and detention vault walls,
• influence of groundwater on the development,
. • suitability of site soils for use as fill, and
• site preparation, earthwork, and excavation-slope considerations.
�,
Dr. Greg Fawcett authorized our work on February 11, 2013 by signing and returning a copy of
r BES Proposal Number 1022013.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The property is bounded on the west by Lake Washington Boulevard N., May Creek to the north,
Interstate 405 to the east, and residential properties to the south. The proposed developed
_ portion of the property is situated in the westernmost portion of the property and is roughly 400
feet long in the east-west direction and 240 feet wide in the north-south direction.
The conceptual plan for the proposed project involves design and development of 12 residential
lots and an access drive as shown on the site plan on page A2 in the appendix of this report. The
planned, wood-framed homes are assumed be two stories in height without basements. Actual
foundation loads were not provided at the time this report was prepared, therefore, we have
- assumed that individual column loads will not exceed 80 kips and continuous wall loads will not
exceed three (3) kips per lineal foot. If the actual foundation loads are greater than those stated
_ herein; the geotechnical engineer must be notified to determine whether the recommendations
presented herein require revision.
Excavations (cuts) as deep as 20 feet will be required on the south side of the property to
accommodate the lots. The plan is to form these cuts with two, benched or terraced rockeries,
Some of the lots along the north side of the property will require structural fill to achieve the
design grade. Fill depths for these lots range from a few feet up to 17 feet.
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 2 of 19
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
Two, roughly 48-foot long by 20-foot wide by 18-feet deep stormwater detention vaults are �
( planned for the project. One of the vauits will be located beneath the proposed entrance road ,
� and the other will be located just beyond the east end of the entrance road. I�
i
�
� 3. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The scope of services included a reconnaissance of the site by the geotechnical engineer; review
� of geologic literature; review of our preliminary site evaluation dated March 19, 2007; drilling, '
logging, and sampling seven test borings and two test pits; installing groundwater monitoring �!
wells in three of the borings; developing cross sections of the slopes; engineering analysis; and
preparing this report. Soil samples from the borings and test pits were taken at the intervals
noted on the individual boring and test pit logs, which are presented in the appendix on pages
A3 and A10. The borings and test pits were backfilled in accordance with state of Washington
regulations prior to leaving the site. The groundwater monitoring wells were installed in
accordance with state of Washington Department of Environmental Quality procedures.
The soil samples were returned to our laboratory for analysis, which included visual classification
and determination of the moisture content tests, sieve analyses, and Atterberg Limit
determinations on selected samples. The field and laboratory data were then evaluated by the
geotechnical engineer relative to the proposed construction. The engineering recommendations �
and advice presented in this report have been made in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical-engineering practices in the area.
4. SITE CHARACTERIZATION
The information presented in this section was gathered by BES personnel for geotechnical
engineering purposes only. This site characterization was not intended to address the presence
or likelihood of contamination on or around the site. Specialized methods and procedures,
which were not a part of this scope of services, are required for an adequate environmental site '
assessment. I
3ergqurst Engineering Services Pa e 3 of 19 I
g
f Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
��,
4.1 Site Classification
[ The City of Renton has developed maps that delineate sensitive areas within the city limits.
Review of these maps indicated that the project site is within a "steep slope" area with slopes
[ between 40 percent and 90 percent. The site is within an area mapped as a "moderate landslide
hazard" and a "high erosion hazard." The City of Renton maps show no coal mining at the
� project site,
According to Sheet Number 5 of the Soil Survey of Kinq County Area, Washinqton, published by
the United States Department of Agriculture, the near-surface soils {upper 30 inches) at the site
consist of the Alderwood series AgC, which classify as "gravelly sandy loam" according to the
�- USDA Textural Classification System. AgC soils classify as "SAND-SILT (SMj with gravel" according
, to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS} and have a reported 20 to 30 percent,
�__ respectively passing the Number 200 sieve.
fThe Puget Sound region has been subjected to erosion and deposition by glacial processes
during the last one million years. The most recent glaciation, referred to as the Vashon stade of
�' the Fraser glaciation, ended about 11,500 years ago. Vashon glacial processes formed area
landforms. According to the 2002 Geoloqic Map of Kinq County, Washinqton compiled by Derek
� B. Booth, Ralph A. Hauqerud, and Jil1 B. Sacket, the soils on the upper elevations of the site are
�.
�- Quaternary recessional outwash (Qvr). Qvr soils are characteristically described as "Stratified
sand and gravel moderately to well sorted and well bedded silty sand to silty clay." Based on
' � observations at the site, the exposed soils on the slope appear to be GRAVEL-SAND-SlLT (GM),
� occasional cobble according to the Unified Soil Classification System.
' i
The Puget Sound area is seismically active. Low magnitude earthquakes occur nearly every year
within a 50-mife radius of the site. On April 13, 1949, the Olympia area experienced an
earthquake having a Richter Magnitude 7.1 and, on February 28, 2001, a Richter Magnitude 6.8
earthquake occurred near the same location. On April 29.1965, a Richter Magnitude 6.5
earthquake occurred between Seattle and Tacoma (Rogers, Walsh, Kockelman and Priest, 1991).
Recent studies by Brian Atwater (1987) conclude that much larger (perhaps larger than
- magnitude 8) subduction-zone earthquakes occur periodically along the Washington Coast; the
last subduction-zone earthquake occurred approximately 300 years ago. The site is in seismic
design category D1 based on the probabilistic ground motion values predicted by the USGS
Earthquake Hazards Program and the 2009 International Residential Code.
q,,, , . „cr F�o,, ._.,, --' � -
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
_ Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
• 4.2 Surface
Overall,the ground surface of the property slopes down from south to north towards May Creek. In the
western portion of the site,which will be developed into Lots 1 through 12,the high elevation of 66 feet
MSL is along the south property line. The ground surface declines initially at about 16 percent for a
horizontal distance of about 90 feet then the gradient flattens slightly, to about 11 percent for a
�
i horizontal distance of about 92 feet. The ground surface then steepens to about 24 percent for a
distance of about 42 feet beyond which,the ground surface nearly flattens to a slope of about 2 percent
� over a horizontal distance of about 110 feet to the edge of May Creek. There are numerous south to
north rills and gulleys in this portion of the site that indicate significant surface runoff towards the creek.
The entire site is sparsely covered with second and third growth alder and maple trees with an
occasional large cedar tree. The ground cover consists primarily of dense blackberry bushes.
4.3 Subsurface Soil and Groundwater
The subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at our boring and test pit locations are
described in the following paragraphs and are shown graphically on our boring and test pit logs,
which are presented in the appendix of this report. The stratification lines, indicated on the
exploration logs, represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries
may be gradual and the transitions may not be easily discernible during site excavation. The
following description of the subsurface soil conditions are divided into three regions; (1), the
uppermost region along the south side of the property; (2), the mid-elevation region along the
east-west center of the project site; and (3), the lowest region along the northern fringe of the
project site:
4.3.1 The Upper-most Region of the Project Site: The upper-most region of the project site is
represented by borings B1, B2, and B3 (see pages A3, A4, and A5 in the appendix of this report) and
is covered with roughly six-to twelve-inches layer of topsoil consisting of brown to dark brown, very
loose SILT (ML) with roots and other organic matter. Underlying the topsoil; alternating layers of
brown, loose Sandy SILT (ML) to SILT (ML) with fine sand seams were encountered to a depth of
three and a half to four and a half feet. Below a depth of roughly four and a half feet and extending
to the termination depth of the borings, alternating layers of brown stiff to very stiff lean CLAY (CL�
and brown dense to very dense Sandy SILT to Silty SAND (SP-SM) and brown, very dense GRAVEL-
SAND-SILT (GM) was encountered. A groundwater monitoring well was installed in boring B2 to
8ergquisc Engineering Services Page S of 19
i
L
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
� - Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Repor '
i
�
,- permit monitoring of the groundwater level over �ime. The ground��.�ater ;evel on March �5, 2013
v✓as �.3 �eei below the adiacent�-ound sur�ace. �
� 4.3.2 The Mid-elevation Region Along the East-West Center of the Project Site: The mid-elevation
region along the east-west center of the project site, represented by borings B4, B8, and B9 (see
� pages A6, A9 and A10), is covered with six to twelve inches of dark brown, very loose SILT (ML) with
organics. Underlying the topsoil and extending to a depth of seven feet in B8 and five feet in B9,
brown to brown mottled reddish brown or gray, medium dense SILT (ML) to medium stiff to stiff
� Lean CLAY CL was encountered. Underl in these fine- rained soils alternatin la ers of brown to
� ) Y g g , g Y
� gray, medium dense to very dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT(GM)to fine SAND (SP)to Silty SAND (SM) and
�- Sandy SILT (ML) as well as stiff to very stiff Lean CLAY (CL) were encountered to the termination
� depths of the borings. Groundwater monitoring wells were installed in borings 68 and B9 to permit
monitoring of the groundwater level over time. The groundwater level on March 25, 2013 in B8 was
12.4 feet below adjacent ground surface and in boring 69, the groundwater level was five (5) feet
�,: below the adjacent ground surface.
�; 4.3.3 The Low-elevation Region Along the North Side of the Project Site: The low-elevation region
:,
along the north side of the project site, represented by test pits TPS, TP6, and boring B5 (see pages
`� A7 and A8), is covered with six to twelve inches of dark brown, loose SAND-SILT (SM) to Sandy SILT
�I
tj {ML) with organics. The topsoil is absent in boring B5. In boring B5 brown, very loose, fine-grained
SAND (SP) was encountered to a depth of two feet, below which, brown, very dense coarse GRAVEL-
__ SAND (GP) was encountered to a depth of four feet. Below the GP soil, brown, medium dense SAND
(SP) with gravel was encountered to the termination depth of the boring. At test pit TP6, brown
_ loose SILT(M�) was encountered to a depth of two feet. From two feet to about four and a haff feet,
gray, mottled reddish-brown, loose SILT (ML) was encountered overlying reddish-brown, loose, fine-
I grained SAND (SP). In test pit TP7, brown to reddish-brown, loose SfLT (ML) was encountered to a
depth of two and a half feet. Below a depth of two and a half feet, and extending to a depth of four
and a half feet, brown to reddish-brown, loose, fine-grained SAND (SP) was encountered, Gray,
� loose, fine-grained SAND (SP), trace cobbles was then encountered to the termination depth of the
test pit. Boring B5 and test pits TP6 and TP7 were dry at completion.
8ergquist Engineering Services Pa e 6 of 19
g
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
- Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
I S. DISCUSSION
�' The recommendations presented in this report are based on our understanding of the project as
presented in the Project Description Section and on the assumption that the subsurface conditions
�', encountered in the borings and test pits adequately represent conditions near and between the
exploratory borings and test pits. Because project conditions regarding type and location of
structures and foundation loads can change and because subsurface conditions are not always
�� similar to those encountered in the borin s the eotechnical en ineer must be contacted for review
g , g g
and possible revision af the recommendations if discrepancies are noticed.
�`
�_ 6. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following sections present recommendations regarding slope stability, foundations, lateral
earth pressures, earthwork, excavations, drainage, and groundwater.
� 6.1 Slope Stability
' According to the grading plan prepared by Offee Engineers, significant cuts and fills are planned
for the site to shape the site for the proposed residential development. The deepest cuts wiil be
along the western 280 feet an the south side of the property. The existing ground surface along
- this portion of the property is at about elevation 66 feet MSL The proposed ground surface
elevation of the proposed lots in this area ranges from 44 feet MSL to 50 feet MSL, thus cuts will
range from about 14 to 20 feet. To maximize buildable space, these cuts will be as near vertical
as practical. The original plan was to use two, benched, rock-faced cuts ("rockery walls") to
facilitate the steep excavations along the reach of the deepest cuts. Single-height, rock-faced
cuts ranging from 4 to 7 feet tall were planned along the remaining 130 feet along the south side
of the property. The land south of the Lake Washington View Estates property is occupied by
single- and multi-family residential structures that have minimal setbacks from the property line
The subsurface soils along the sauth property line are predominantly non-cohesive: GRAVEL-
SAND-SILT (GM), Silty SAND (SM), Sandy SILT (ML) and fine SAND �SP), with a single layer of lean
�'� CLAY (CL) that is about five feet thick in boring B1 and about two feet thick in boring B2. The
, �
I
', Bergqurst Engineering Services Page 7 of 19
I
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
-- Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1 �,
i
groundwater is only about five feet below the ground surface along the south side of the
property, which results in non-cohesive soils below the water table. �,
The following sections present the estimated factors of safety of the existing slopes in their
condition at the time of our exploration, with and without earthquake loads, and after
construction, with and without earthquake loads. A horizontal acceleration of 0.1g was used in
the analyses. The engineering properties of the subsurface soils used in the stability analysis are ,
� presented in Table 6.1. These conservative values are based on the results of the Standard I�
Penetration Tests, visual classification, laboratory tests, the geotechnical engineer's experience,
and on the publication entitled Geotechnico! Properties of Geoloqic MateriaJs by Jon W. Koloski, ,
Sigmund D. Schwartz, and Donald W. Tubbs. I
The slo e stabilit anal ses for this stu wer rf rm in �
p y y dy e pe o ed us g XSTABL software developed by
Interactive Software Designs, lnc. XSTABL performs a two dimensional limit equilibrium analysis
to compute the factor of safety for a layered slope according to either: (1) General Limit
Equilibrium (GLE) Method, (2) Janbu's Generalized Procedure of Slices (GPS), (3) Simplified
Bishop, or (4J Simplified Janbu. XSTABL calculates a FOS (factor of safety), which is the result of
div.iding the total forces supporting the slope by the total forces that are tending to destabilize
the slope. If the FOS is greater than 1.00, the slope is considered stable; if the FOS is less than
1.00, the slope is considered to be unstable. A FOS of 1.00 indicates the slope is in perfect
equilibrium. Because of the uncertainty regarding pertinent soil parameters used in the analyses
- and the variability of soil, slope, and ground water conditions, a seismic FOS greater than 1.25 is
generally recommended for residential construction.
TABLE 6.1: ENGINEERING PROPERTIES USED IN STABILITYANALYSIS
CROSS SECTION THROUGH BORINGS B1 and B8
� SOIt UNIT- Moist Unit Angle of Internal
Cohesion(C)
_ Weight �P� Friction .
tP� ��degrees)
1 145 50 42
-" 2 138 10 38
3 130 0 40
4 1Z2 10 35
5 123 0 37
8ergquist Engineering Services Page 8 of 19
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
TABLE 6.1:ENGINEERING PROPERTIES USED IN STABILfTYANALYSIS
, CROSS SECTION THROUGH BORlNGS B1 and B8
SOIL UNIT Moist Unit Angle of Internal
Cohesion{C)
[ - Weight . Friction
: �P� �P� (�degrees)
�. 6 92 1000 0
7 90 0 27
r
1_
6.1.1 Stability of Slopes at the Time of Exploration: Stability analyses were performed on a cross
` section through borings B1 and 68 with an azimuth of about 192 degrees. The estimated
`- minimum factors of safety for the existing slope are summarized below in Table 6.2 and the
computer printouts are presented on pages A21 through A24 in the appendix of this report.
�_
TABLE 6.2: ESTIMATED MINIMUM FACTORS OF SAFE7YCURRENTCONDfTION
;: Cross Section Without Earthquake Loads With Earthquake Loads
Through B1 and B8,
` 3.141 1.9201
Azimuth 192 degrees
6.1.2 Stability of the Proposed Cut-Face Rockeries: The slope was modeled with uniform rockery
loads of 1,500 psf on two benches. The program was instructed to calculate the FOS for 1600
potential shear surfaces for each iteration using one of the described methods. The attached
- printouts and graphs (See pages A25 through A28) show the locations of the weakest surfaces
analyzed within the slope segment selected for anafysis, with the surface having the lowest FOS
- highlighted. The estimated factors of safety are summarized below in Table 6.3. '
TABLE 6.3:ESTIMATED MINIMUM FACTORS OF SAFEfYAFfER CONSTRUCTION
Cross Section V1�ithout Earthquake Loads With Earthquake Loads
Through B1 and B8,
0.430 0.350
Azimuth 192 degrees
These factors of safety indicate that the planned cut-face rockeries will be unstable and not
suitable for use along the south side of the property. Therefore, a permanent earth retention
system is recommended for the south side of the property.
Bergquist Engrneering Services Page 9 of 19
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
6.2 Earth Retention
Permanent soil retention systems for cut faces include soil nails, tangent and secant piles, and
soldier piles with lagging. Soil nails were ruled out because the nails would need to penetrate
beneath the adjacent property. Secant and tangent piles were ruled out due to higher cost.
SO�dl2f p1�25 Wlth �7aaltla ar�. thP_fefOf A. rPCOr?1m�nC��d �nr thP ��CutrPd arc�(�P Chan�a al�nc rh,�
��,�u� �, .��i�� �ci�� � �'���i ;�c ��cu ua�r. �� �c,;Liictici c�.]. ; iCu ;�a�r� �V��iiCf �iii��� wuiu :.iL �:��i5i i��,.
and constructed to form the grade change with one row; however, the ties would need tc
protrude beneath the adjacent property. Therefore, cantilevered soldier piles are recommendec
for this project. Two rows of soldier piles walls will be required where the slope height exceeds
the reasonable height of a single, cantilevered, soldier pile wall. The lagging between the pile�
may be treated timber, concrete, or other suitable material. The exposed faces of the wall could
be clad with any of a multitude of aesthetic materials. The allowable lateral earth pressures
presented in the fo!Ic��✓in� table mav be used for desian of snld�er �iles a!o�� the sa.�th boundar�,��
-,� �h� -- -,��._
Condition Soils Eq. Ff. Pressure
Active: Undisturbed subsoils above
elevation 57 ft. MSL 4G psf/ft.
Undisturbed subsoils below
elevation 57 ft. MSL 35 psf/ft.
Passive: Undisturbed soils below �
elevation 57 ft. MSL 380 psf/ft.
� Note: The earth pressures assume level ground surfaces behind and in front of the walls.
Piles will have and effective width of three (3) times their actual width. The bench width shall be
at equal to or greater than height of the earth retained by the wa11 above.
Structural fill will be required over much of the area to shape the site to design grade. The new
site elevations will necessitate steepened slopes along the east and north sides of the
_ development to transition down to the surrounding natural grades. The current plan is to use
rockeries to transition from the filled-surface elevations to the lower, natural, ground-surface
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 10 of 19 �
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
elevations. These rockeries will range from 1 to 17 feet in height. Rockeries may be used to
protect the filled-face slopes depending upon the materials used for structural fill. Rockeries
_ may be used if the structural fill soils are cohesive. The fill should be over-built a horizontal
distance equal to or greater than the height of the fill past the planned line of the toe of the
slope to ensure properly, compacted soils. The slope then can be cut and shaped to
accommodate the rock facing.
If the structural fill soils are non-cohesive, any rockery walls greater than four feet in height shall
be constructed against mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall. MSE walls are constructed by
placing the structural fill in layers separated by a geotextile or geogrid as shown on the
schematic on page A20 in the appendix of this report.
The rockeries shall be constructed using sound, angular rocks, and
• The long rock dimension shall be placed perpendicular to the slope.
• The rocks shall slope down towards (into) the slope at an inclination of at least S percent.
• At least 12 inches of crushed rock drainage material consisting of 4- to 6-inch, screened
crushed rock shall be placed behind the rockery.
• The drainage material shall be separated from the retained soil using geotextile filter
fabric and drained to a suitable outlet using a minimum 4-inch diameter, Schedule 40,
perforated, PVC drain pipe.
• Cap rocks shall weigh at least 200 Ibs. and shall not be moveable by hand.
• Finishing rocks less than 200 Ibs. shall be grouted in place.
• Voids greater than 6 inches shall be chinked, and chinking rocks shall not be moveable by
hand.
• The outermost point of contact between an upper and a lower rock shafl be within 6
inches of the face of the rockery.
6.3 Foundations
The foundation for the planned residential buildings will be placed at shallow depths below
adjacent grade whife the foundations for the planned stormwater vaults will be placed at
significant depths below the adjacent grade. The following sections present foundation
recommendations for the proposed single-family, residential structures and for the planned
stormwater detention vaults.
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 11 of 19
i
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013 Ii
- Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
. .1 Foundations fo�the Residential Structures Conventional s read footin foundations ma be I
63 p g y
used to support the proposed residential buildings. Spread footing (continuous wall and
individual column) foundations may be dimensioned using a net allowable bearing capacity of up
to 2,500 psf if they are placed in undisturbed stiff to very stiff lean CLAY (CL) soils or the medium
dense to dense SAND (SP), Silty SAND (SM), or Sandy SILT (ML) soils. The same design criteria
may be used for residential foundations placed on properly compacted structural fill that is
placed and compacted in accordance with Sections 6.6 and 6.6.1 of this report.
The recommended minimum dimension for continuous wall footings is 18 inches and for
' individual column footings, the recommended minimum dimension is 24 inches. All perimeter
footings must be placed at least 18 inches below finished grade for frost protection. The
allowable bearing capacities may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loads. If the
recommendations in this report are followed, total post construction settlement of the
foundation will be less than one inch (1 inch) with differential settlements of less than three-
quarters of an inch (%-inch).
Lateral earth pressures for design of foundations or short retaining walls (less than 12 feet in
height) with level backfill and without hydrostatic pressures or surcharge loads, may be
calculated using the equivalent fluid pressures presented below.
Condition Soils Eq. FI. Pressure
At Rest: Compacted granular soils 55 psf/ft.
Active: Undisturbed subsoils 35 psf/ft.
Compacted granular soils 40 psf/ft.
Passive: Continuous footings 300 psf/ft.
Column footings 300 psf/ft.
Note: Use at-rest pressures if the rotation of the wall is restricted to
0.002 times rts height or less. This condition will likely be imposed
on the basement walls of these structures.
Bergquist Engrneering Services Page 1Z of 19
i
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
�,
� A coefficient of friction between footings and bearing soils of 0.32 may be used to resist lateral ��
� foundation loads; however, ignore the uppermost two feet of passive soils when calculating !
� passive earth pressure. If passive earth pressures are used in conjunction with base�friction to ,
;
j resist lateral loads, reduce the ultimate coefficient of friction to 0.30. '
� Footings, stem wails, basement walis, and retaining wails must be reinforced to reduce the
potential for distress caused by differential foundation movements and to resist lateral earth
f pressures. A qualified engineer must determine the size, quantity, and location of
t
reinforcement. The geotechnical engineer shall inspect all footing excavations at this site prior
' to placernent of construction forms and reinforcement steel.
6.3.2 Foundations for the Stormwater Detention Vaults The foundations for the stormwater
. detention vaults will be placed at or below elevation 30 feet MSL, which places the foundation of
the west vault in very dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT (GM) and the east vault foundation in stiff to
, very stiff, lean CLAY (CL). Therefore, either conventional spread footing foundations or a mat
foundation with thickened bearing sections beneath point or line loads may be used to support
i the proposed stormwater detention vaults. A net allowable bearing capacity of up to 4,500 psf
i
may be used if they are placed in undisturbed very dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT (GM} or in stiff to
very stiff lean CLAY (CL}.
I Presented below are the recommended lateral earth pressures for design of the stormwater
E
detention vaults with level backfi{I and without hydrostatic pressures. Surcharge loads may be
accounted for by including an equivalent weight of backfill.
Condition Soils Eq. FI. Pressure
At Rest: Compacted granufar soils 55 psf/ft.
Active: Undisturbed subsoils 35 psf/ft.
Compacted granular soils 40 psf/ft.
Note: Use at-rest pressures if the rotation of the wall is restricted to
0.002 times its height or less. Thrs conditron will likely be imposed
on the basement walls of these structures.
BerGquist Engineering Services Page 13 of 19
i
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
� Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
f
�
r A coefficient of friction between footings and bearing soils of 0.32 may be used to resist lateral
� foundation loads; however, ignore the uppermost two feet of passive soils when calculating
� passive earth pressure. if passive earth pressures are used in conjunction with base friction to
resist (ateral loads, reduce the ultimate coefficient of friction to 0.30.
[ Footings, stem walis, and vault walis must be reinforced to reduce the potential for distress
caused by differential foundation movements. A qualified engineer must determine the size,
quantity, and location of reinforcement. The geotechnicai engineer shall inspect all footing
excavations at this site prior to placement of construction forms and reinforcement steel.
C� 6.4 Slabs-on-Grade
Slabs-on-grade for the residential structures should be supported on a minimum four-inch thick,
C- free-draining sand or gravel base that follows gradation and compaction recommendations
provided in Sections 6.6 and 6.61 of this report. All concrete, especially slabs-on-grade, should
�_ be placed at minimum water-cement ratios on moistened surfaces and properly cured to
minimize shrinkage, cracking, warping, and curling. Concrete slabs should be allowed to cure
[ adequately before subjecting them to full design loads. Any concrete that will be exposed to the
elements should be entrained with four to six percent air to minimize damage from freeze-tha��;�
r
���r�c
�- beneath interior, concrete slabs-on-g�ade. A two- to four-inch thick layer of sand maybe placed
� over the vapor barrier to improve concrete curing. If provided, floor coverings should not be
�
�� placed until the concrete floor has cured sufficiently.
6.5 Earthwork
The recommendations presented in this report are predicated on fulfillment of the following
earthwork recommendations.
6.5.1 Site Clearing: Site clearing should be kept to a minimum to accommodate the proposed
construction but not jeopardize the stability of the slopes. Within the construction area, remove
trees, tree stumps, shrubs, ground cover, and topsoil to a sufficient depth to remove roots in
excess of one-half inch in diameter. Shape the site to a flat, near-fevel surface with slight
8ergquist Engrneering Services Page 14 of 19
�
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
� Renton,Washington BE5 Project Number 201305,-Report 1
I r gradient to allow surface runoff. Excavate and remove any soft or loose areas and repiace with
� structural backfill approved by the geotechnical engineer.
I ( 6.5.2 Excavations: Conventional-excavating equipment should be suitab(e for the proposed
excavations. Shallow excavations (less than three feet in depth) will stand open with vertical side
� slopes for short durations: however, according to Chapter 296-155, Part N of the Sa et
Standards for Construction Work in the State of Washinpton, the site soils classify as Type C.
� Therefore, side slopes of excavations deeper than four (4) feet must be no steeper than one and
one-half (1.5) horizontal to one (1) vertical (1.5H:1V). If the dimensions of the site prevent the
i (� use of maximum slopes of 1.5H:1V, the slopes must be stabilized or shored to facilitate safe
� excavations. The geotechnical engineer must be contacted for additional recommendations if
such techniques are going to be employed.
t
6.5.3 Foundation Preparation: Specialized treatment of the foundation soils is not required if the
� �' footings are founded on the native soils or properly compacted structural fill. All foundation
excavations must be made carefully using a backhoe bucket without teeth so as not to disturb
the bearing soils. If unsuitable soils are encountered at the footing elevation, contact the
� �_
geotechnical engineer ror evaluation.
�
6.6 Materials:
' � The on-site soils within anticipated excavation depths are silt rich. Silt-rich soils are generally not
suitable for use as structural backfill and are difficult to compact at moisture contents even just
slightly above or below their optimum moisture content. Therefore, the Sandy SILT to SILT sci!s
shall only be used during dry weather and the moisture content must be carefully controlled.
Imported granular soils with less than five percent by weight passing the number 200 sieve
would be a better choice of materials for structural fill on this project. The organic-rich topsoil at
this site shall not be used for struc` " ' ' ' ' ' -'
landscape or non-structural areas
If additional soil is needed for structural fill or backfill to meet design grades, it must be imported
- and conform to the gradation presented in Table 6.4 and be approved by the geotechnical
engineer prior to use. Samples must be submitted to the geotechnical engineer at least 96 hours
-- before approval is required and before the materials are used.
, Bergquist Engrneering Services Page 15 of 19
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
Gravel base and select materials for pavement subgrade must conform to local governmental
�- standards, such as City of Renton, King County, State of Washington, or other suitable
� specifications approved by the geotechnical engineer.
TABLE 6.4 GRADATION REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURAL FILL
� ' U.S.Standard Sieve Percent Passing
,.
3-inch 100
3/4-i n c h 50-100
�
No. 4 25-65
No. 10 10-50
No. 40 0-20
No. 200 0-S*
� *Note: The percent passing the No. 200 sieve is based on the
weight of the material passing the 3/4-inch sieve.
L�
r
Earthwork on this project shall not be performed during the wet season. If building construction
� is performed during the wet season, a granular base or work blanket will be required at the
�.
entrance and egress areas of the site. Granular materials used as a work blanket should conform
to the gradation presented in Table 6.5, and be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to
use.
TABLE E.S GRADATION REQUIREMENTS FOR WORK BLANKET
-� U 5.Standard Sie�e _%.Percent Passing ,.y
- 6-inch 100
- 4-inch 20
� No. 200 5 maximum*
-, *Note: The percent passing the No. 200 sieve is based on the
� we�aht of the materiaf r�ass�n� the 3/a-inch sie�:���
....,.� , ,..��. ,�,.� .., .. .�.. ,r��� .,� . _ __; � �, t,�_ .; �._ _. �.� �_ � � .,_._.,_ „_,� _, _,� �_. �
structural fill and structural backfill materials shall be placed in relatively horizontal loose lifts no+
' exceeding 10 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Pror
J (ASTM D1557) maximum density at moisture contents within two (2} percent of optimum. ,
specified compacted density and moisture content of each lift must be verified by test, prior to
' Bergquist Engineering Services Page 16 of 19
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
� placement of subsequent lifts. Backfill around the stormwater vaults shoufd be compacted as �,
� described above to 90 percent of the maximurn dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. ��
i
� If fill or backfill is placed on sloped ground, the surface receiving the fiil shall be benched. The
benches shall be cut level, flat, and wide enough to accommodate the compaction equipment.
� The height of each bench shall not exceed three feet without the geotechnical engineer's
approval. The cut face of the bench shall be as near vertical as practical and the face of the fill
�
ishall not be steeper than 2H:1V.
, All structural fill/backfill must be placed under the full-time observation of a representative of
the geotechnica! engineer, and the specified compacted density and moisture content of each
f lift must be verified by test, prior to placement of subsequent lifts. Placement on frozen ground
l must not be attempted.
� 6.7 Drainage
Good drainage is critical to the performance of earth-supported structures such as foundations,
�
� rockeries, and retaining walls. Therefore, construction grades and final site grades must be
designed to prevent water from ponding in areas on or adjacent to foundations, slabs-on-grade,
and pavements. Infiltration of water into foundation and utility excavations shall be prevented
during construction and throughout the life of the project.
A perimeter footing drain-system consisting of Schedule 35, perforated pipe surrounded by at
least six inches of washed gravel shall be installed. The washed gravel must be separated from
the surrounding soil by a filter fabric such as Mirafi� 140N. The collected water must be tight-
lined away from the building to a suitable discharge point. Roof and surface drains must be
provided but they shall not be connected to the footing-drain system. Roof drains must also be
discharged into suitable discharge point. At no time either during or after construction should
water be discharged onto the slopes at this site.
Where pavement does not immediately abut structures, slopes, with an outfall of at least three
(3) percent for a minimum distance of five (5) feet from exterior footings, must be provided.
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 17 of 19
� I
Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13,Z013 ,
� Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1 '
� 6.8 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered in the observation wells placed in borings B2, B8, and B9.
Therefore, significant challenges due to groundwater at this site should be anticipated by the
� contractors in areas where deep excavations are required. Temporary dewatering will be
required for the deep excavations for the stormwater vaults. Permanent routing of the
Cgroundwater behind the soldier pile walls will likely be required.
6.9 Erosion
� The upper-most soils at this site are silt-rich. Silt-rich soils are moderately to highly erodible,
� therefore, water shall not be permitted to run unimpeded off the surface of the site. Properly
�- placed silt fences and straw bales shall be used to prevent surface water runoff and erosion.
L_ ' 6.10 Construction Observation and Testing
The recommendations presented in this report rely on adequate observation and testing of
�_ construction materials and procedures by the geotechnical engineer or his qualified
representative. At a minimum, the testing program must include:
L_
• Observation and review of site clearing and review of all deep excavations and
; �, foundation excavations to evaluate whether actual conditions are consistent with
those encountered during exp�oration.
'I € • Observation and testin of lacement and com action of all structural fill and
� g p p backfill
� materials to evaluate compliance with specifications.
� ``
• Field inspection and laboratory testing of materials and field inspection of inethods as
required by the appropriate Building Code. Typically, this includes inspection of
placement of reinforcing steel; inspection and testing of portland cement concrete to
evaluate compliance with specifications regarding slump, temperature, air content,
and strength.
Bergquist Engineering Services Page 18 of 19
� Proposed Lake Washington View Estates May 13, 2013
Renton,Washington BES Project Number 201305,-Report 1
7.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
�
The recommendations presented in this report are for the exclusive use of Rob-Clarissa
rPartnership, LLC for the proposed 12 lot Lake Washington View Estates project to be constructed
on King County tax parcel number 32z4059081 in Renton, Washington. The recommendations
� are based on subsurface information obtained by Bergquist Engineering Services (BES) and on
design and topographic details provided by Offee Engineers. If there are any revisions to the
� plans or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during
` construction, BES must be notified immediately to determine whether changes to the
-- foundation recommendations are required.
After the plans and specifications are more complete, the geotechnical engineer must be
provided the opportunity to review them to check that these engineering recommendations
have been interpreted properly.
000
I
,__�
i
-,
,
Zergquist Engineering Servrces Page 19 cf`_��a
.
I
r
�'
//-:� . � /..� ... -� . 3"-r-fT- - - ---y�-.�s� �...d r; tt�� -� .�: �L �_ �{
�. f -, ! ��.,� �,lV -.-^� j �� i i s �►tt �'��
5 i
I � �' � ` � � � f ( � � - ��1� w '� ' 4 il �. , � �S . �1'� �
� r •. _ i�\ �Se J� ��� � .' � I r/� l: � ��� j j1.-. 1 � { � � � ��r
i 1, ���� �• ' i .i�� -c'� ts _ �� y ` r.. /�/, �r. �3'_�`"y'J �n ,_ ,� .��� ,�. �^���.,•. ' ... � l�.
, -. 3 N � 1- � 3 � �� - '; /i Pr�asure !� k % ;--, � i� 1f ° i � i�l� ,
. L ��- � � �! �� � � �. + � , i,�' �, j,,�.��:
� � � r-- � - �or � f 1�„
\ � �r f 6� H t / � I��.
P �r� 5land�Cresl � � �J I �-
� f _�'{ � Patk � x i .; y c� ,7`.' �3 I it' I 'dr ���� i .r � E n 41"�,5 `,�
, � _ i , ; _�1, � 1'�,j� � „ , �� ` � , �:
� � �r ;�` � , � � 1 ��-�q/-'� �� �,�(�_� I', .}� ',�ood � � ST'� i' � , 4�.,
� } t `�
< _ �
�� . ` '- �� '�� � y -��;����.�� I� � � �II�i 3-J. _�._�� _� � � ��� r �� `�r1�,��'.
� � ;f {' � __> _ _. {' , � yj � 4��-��;f t . �� -_ � -� -- `�.
,� �� � � f
� �� -�� �3�� a �� ;�.�1 i�`y� �.� ,} � / . � � ' � .�-..,
�: i/ '\;� r� . i � � I s= � ' � I 1y
�) b r �ri y"
Y.: � , tiIPIONE��119�vi � '-t r"I}�l�e�f� «� _ j..-�� ;-' �" }- �y ' I r`i j._.�-.
� � � .IC � � -�, 1 � �� �.�1 1j � iI�]1 ( ��� � . � � Pines �� � -� f Ll�� �L
r ' 1 a � / .) � r BM�08. � ��Y.
4.� � � i I �� ai�onl� J � 3 ��tf I- -. j � f'(�� i �� �i. � � - .. i: � '-
� , .^- 7 t r � , .. �� 4`r ,Si �.w
� . f ' ��� � S3iOPw�i.� `,i..� � �..;7� (� ��}� 1 ~� 1 �.�. k_ �.Ha�Wwoo� � -IJ9 ���' '��.
- / � j� ��-�Center� �. � � 1 � � .{•• } _ s`h r �:
�3 �;r� � ; } 5A ,N/ /�� .. �'��J_ � , - 7 � • }��-.SVbstatrofi � � 1 � �
se . �m .sr C
. __ , ` ;� j �r q6t �' 4�%� , i � � - 1 ��� � - �,
� � , ���}
� y' ,.' 'f '. _ e /'. l Y,� �- i/:F�"'� / ��-- �J� f � J t7 �J� ::.' _ ,�(.'-.._ _
i. J � Yr� / � ' < i� .Haze
F� f �� r t ..� r � '� 1 �� ��. Trailer
- e� _ - � ' �j� .��� 3 - dail /� �� (�r�;-� -> :,� ParK�.. r �.. � � Dark
. �� F�+J ''� . ._
� - �:.- ��.�.� '�� } �� � �,rJ r 1� �"\ir '..` fC �I '.1 � c � � �� �MeW���'x�`, � �1 l {.
� e'�ac
, '�� at� ��� -F , J(;/�'r �.�'¢��p�f..;�/ �_ i-� �i C�Eek �i � � , _ i� 1�1 -_�\ � fl�'�.r_QF
. � ' � G �'�f_a`°fG � f ,^I e� �� � f N • �� _- \� 1�• m ,
L- s.�`' 1 : / �.� ,(r r ' �l ti'' �. '�Bgen�_ ,.l
� �L�' �a .r � � ,- � ' ;I ,�, �� � • � �.� J.. _ ���`�`�Jz�`_'�'` {'l. ,���:.
. ��t �J ,• r r�` /�—��6) •.� j� � %�� ..: F } � t�. ���: �.` } ��..� s } .� `
.. �4�.�� , ���� `' � �_.'t I( � � �.`� �.-� j ,�'� .
C :��� ,� i, �� ' PR�JECT� SITE ` � �=: s: D� l �� �`, l � ,� ;. t ��, ; ��
� �'` �- � � ` . ,� � � I t� ��I �C���-� ��,�--�
` �� !� �ti� �t 1'• t�g ;+� i i / � , � \ tF`L.
�\a\�� �'�Y�'�. '� ,�_ li f % } ! �, - �: �/ `'� - 1 ! � ' �l - 'r`'�_ r))� :�
, ' - '� �. ,�J� � 1 . I� �.1' i _ (I ,:J�
.�`�♦ � ��r.: r�r/ � ��.- ., }�. , . •,J,r �!I /�:9 /. i. _ l�\5 l. -�
- d\� - _ .. . ...� . . 1 . ....e t � �
.� . . . � . - ��� (
� /..- >
\ , J!
.\ - 7 , 1 - ����� . 4 4�
� ' 2 � ! — J/ . . � � _ �..
�i � J (i.
. � _/� .�-._� ..
�. �--� � - . �
- a �' . .
. �$R.tJtf7� -�- L9 ..i
� r � .
C � - _g- � /w 2e �jv .1 :( .
�
B�: �
. \,�\ ��.`R �_i ' 'r�xx� J� � ��J` �'v � r�l \ � r • -- � \7 - �
.l `{ �. ti�������'�� ,a. , �f� : . � � 1 �f ' r f t �r1 ^ .-� °1� /� ��\ :
`\ . `_. _ F�/ � , f,) ./; f c � � � .i -3 ..•`.� . '�`�� .Y, ��^�
\ ` 1 .:�,� yf` � �q � , � 1 , , . = ' ^ .�
}
�-�� l,\ �..;�..� , !,t, �� .:� f; ,$�e I:-. �� � . �. • � �f,- '� ,-
, ^'
`� � r=� � ' { r 1 s .s+n sri - 7` � •i� , . +` tL i'1�--`�
� _ �
:�-='��I ` s,..,,_ �-( � s� .� _ J`"'�9.I: .1 ��.
. i � �r�_� � �-�-r �' �, . — r,- --. �`� i���. L, • �:._ . _
i
� - � �. ``��� CeA7an� 1 �` E •t �i.�._G_�y �=_, :. -�j.� G avel Pns
� S _ \ � \tf1?7 ,. � • - "T G3 �� L�'tiF���� Y.
�` �\i --1 '��,,� � t r— `� �-% =�� ssTM
�T � -7` � . _ , '•..��.H\� � _ ��i '.9?'��~t�_y �.i` /... �... I�.,*.-
----�-" �`. T`.i'J 'Mf .l �.k.� r
I �;�� . _ ., ' s ..� - ��� � �� Sf�tr �"'1 k.} � ^,� � �� -
� `n�i �� �I ` ,�� ! . i !,`�t\4��� ,, , ? .~~�' ��Park�ale Li.nF �i',�st „ �- - �--
- :;`�� 1 ��` � �� . � ,S� � i `Partc�'
� �1 � ;r t'��.�l �.� �� �� �. z . � i ; J
- � z� ; J', � '� '`3s � ,'� \�;� �.l , �= � � �� b'� i ';" -
-^��_ :� _ `�Q �J f , , ' � �`Q�,� � � > ' � _��i �� � � .�
�. ��*, �.t}� � ��Y � �,i; .it l,l..�m[S i.� �'�� � 2• G ve7(i 45 � { r � _
Pit`,x'�.-.1 ''� �.
,�-...... _ . _ / i ' �-�C� �,t,.t'��4 ..1;- � / I'L _..
_ r 'Ya�\� �.�i- i' . � ,2� �.� ^,� f ti� �tyf�°�.� .i� E�� . . '�� - .} ���:��r ���. x - --
. ,,
� i {,� f , I� _ i � 1 , s _ ;. ! _ � * 'y� F ` �Y--�-
1 v�`_ }, ��- 't f,� J~ r .'/� ` I�` �`- •�a t F 4 -' , '8 8` t . +, �.,:
{ , � , �; _
��' ��i= � `� ! � �t�t � +v��jy � � � : - � � I �'1 - �. .
. 1`e��a�1 � � 1" `w�1 1;.` �l°� --.. . R l ' �dt` i� �.
�`.-.�- `���f�. 36 ,' :, f .� �,,/ �') tiry (j, . �_ . ,t � Ne' _ 's err+ l_� - Pdrk �="� Z�,.
� _ � Y' `�
o- � �� i .� 22 f �. !�'� ��r.$ � � t� � \�w _�,��.v�.
�'� � - ' . � � � ! TON � ' '�-�j'
a�� '�. --���j�, � Y/j : � &= F�i' a � t. l; _� { y-�•.� _�..`
������T�� `,�ab��r .,� ` '� ,��/� ii p� ifE 3 t ��
...e� �,�'j '^4��Y- �s� _j'E C?x 1 „t ..'�i �Power j. __ if�.ve 7 �tbt
� i 6
TN'�`JMN - -�:..•�� _.^• -5� �� t Aa:;E
Vlg° �0.i6 FtEI 0 57Q t:�)N.ETcAS
Printed fiom TOPO!m2001 Nationel Geogaphic-Ho}di�gs(a�nv_topo.cozra
VICINITY MAP
Project Name: Lake Washington View For: Rob-Ciarissa Partnership, LLC.
Estates
Location: Portion of Gov't Lot 1, Section Bergquist Engineering Services
32, Twp. 24 N, Rge. 5 E, WM BES Project Number: 201305-1
Date: Ma 2013
A1
� o c� °
� � v�.
� o � �
m � Z -., ��
.. � �;/ �� \
N 3 ,' iw��sr,,� :, ��
� j �D /�' , ,''(�,...�iRT.�o.o ::� �.
.-�
W � r � //, ��j `� \� SOUTH EDGE OF MAY CREEK
' ��„ /�l �/ � \
� /�3I ` �
� � / �� 7y�_.37.:5 S ��
uj � DIR7=}1.P � ��``
N �' �1` i 1059 CFS fL00�PLAIN t ��
� (n i e�� 8 � \ � ��
� S i '.'�1., .�'�i / (� ��� ' ,f ~`��. ���
Q � � � /'.�:4i� � ` 2' � � _, '�� :����`��♦
� y � S62 ��
7 /. x �• �rn-776 { i'� y'� �=�• \
0 �� / „`0�/'�� �.`DIR1-. �_� '�-�� 1��•'�II y N'hN � -. �� �---�� �\
7 , i (.��.jIy'.:�•..' `��� �
��i� �O" ; . �'O� �1w�3E\i.K ��� h Q�� ` \
< /M,-f,.:.' ti a°'o : � `
i i:�C3 . .r' � f1IRT�``�� -a9a'h ^I� �\ y41yM � � `\
C , !�, �.H �l 1 !.. ��• � `
G ��gs '�e� �/ h.r:. � � \�� 0�. O . ! �I�� � \ ?Q�\ �,� '0���\ ��\
SCALE � � �
� 1�� � � _ a^�
GRAPHIC 8 ' • , y�; �,,s�, �: �. � ; , a �
% i✓ /,'�w/;' , , �'';Iw�i��:`^;R� �.\� T I i� _ . ��, �•. ��� \
30 80 � .f.�':, • ��i / � \ yl.. �� •� � �. \ O O \
0 15 � �, � .��.-, k
� $ �:: ���a`12 �.� �� � `�'., I � �' n�M ♦ �`��
�r �y �•i�i� f." R�y �.I � 9� :\ �~ � ``K2�\
<p , ;'�/"�' � . 1 � 1`,. \ 1� � `.
� � /� `i'.','.�,' 'i���:�'\_- .� - -- ; ,\`
� � /;��;�J�.�'v' �i '7W� �6.�'4&�__ �'� � �``
� \ . � c / i / ng_V �\ \
= y r � � ,fz'��wsno.o � ;
. 0' f ;.� �^�`//„ r� . 4a 1 - , � , . �
� � .,- � i � \�'8� O � i i Qs 5i 11;_ � � �\
m ; o � , � .�1 ,_( � ;, _ ` � t,� c
y J ,{,, �� '/' � :, °�:o•=� •°ti ' �}� 3��, � � ',�' _�'-� 8 :�� a�• ��.. v,
� �l ,yQ � �,7;:.: "�' :;:,*;'r '�",�✓.- R"}'� 5� �;�,~�`�_� ,r ,_"`�___ �•�_____ .❑ .:.� � 2 ��`•� `i
R . ��,'',.� �_ i` ��_ , ) `a i ° �
rv cc rn T '= � `� ,
y� ,// .,c�,_ I _ s�`- '�,.
�• 4 -/ ;'�'�:::�:;; y ly '�,,' \ �
� � _ ,:. ��;� �� ='� r `i... _ Y�=- F_" �� `�,, _ _ � _ ,� _/`�, .
fp � s'S �'�:,'r' ..,�',"i�� -� _ - I �� � C'�-- - \��--- s'-:� � °•,',.\\ �`
_ r '� l'� `'�'�i;;�;,'"/,% ��'_,a _ — �� � `-._,, — � ___ i � ' ,��. pa;��'�. ,,
� �� � �� �, -�u� " ,�,
� Z �I.' ,* /'� � � '. J '�. ��-� - � �.� --- i � , i
� � � 's i� �s,. �, __ v crrt.-'-_ `, ��'--i_=�.rt- �,1 � k,� � �
� \ ���n �1/.''"�'�j u �ii;`a�.n' ` �C4'y�0 'n '..-��- r�_� ` � 1 `�%' � ` �` t` 'i.
�D �������g��� �,5�� ,-�% j( �`��� _`' _~ '�° �` __ ,� ���- �,,• � `` ��`•38,�� ,�
� L�< � ,'i 5��`� / �r,r""�a_'' '-- _ __ -- __ _ _ ` ► __ -- �-•�r � `� I � "''sy
ii � �'1�'=�; �i''L; , �� _,' ��-�_� -§¢- ----- - r �, ' ` r;---� �\ ~�:� � a ¢f
� ` �- - ---_- ^ �'F'"':`��i a eP�� .
� �� ':`� ':y , �� - i --�F�<-- i , ,
'�,.:'' ;�'.,,, �'� � +�_ --�---- 'J J` � � � �r,, i
� � .,;>� ,� ; �, ''��__� � --` � ---:�fi---1 i�::,-" ��� i� � �i; `J�I �� � �`l°ti
y // 4<.'•'r �>' /;..y�W�A4.Q� � � /``��, �` -Si__'.�.,.��'__�- �I� ` ` �l 1'i `�\` \�`J� �J .��
��.
� ;v,,�'i' i/�i.-+tr- � } `��'gg�' ,I� _ ��� �, '�\ � .•
W � , • ;nY -; j�i+=n�.o� �� ` > � L' � �.� �� � I I'�. �`�f \�` \ ��
l��• � �' L---- � �I� `50 .
m G � ��;r.' ,'% w��. ,o o� , saJ' � \3� -`_'�;� 4 r �^I", IJ ��\�'I j � �� \\ ) � �.
/� \J A.. ,
1 <. � ,/ !(���� /����A♦ 1'_',�/ � ``�� . i I ii � `i ��.($0 t� �'�.�i` � � // p V��
y ���i'/� r�F� �r-.�. . F-�.� A o�I ,y PU ��62_� �( �.5� , .� -- 1��1 �� �J'�' �� ,��. ry. I ~\�
s � � \ � .
� p >/ r •�_�,/�/�:`, �s - o � �s¢�� �"� ���\� l�'t�- -�5t -.�_11�, ` (`.) 1� y°�,� � �`�y°"'.�s � °
O � 1 1 i yr+��.y��� _YCU1 "a-'�{ yy�o�.� � � ,1"-. 1 �V. �;�` �'� 'c�Q1y s; � �\
�. i . �� W i� � ) ( �s'� l.., �ap. m�r �,�y�.y�`' _ \�\ ;I; =57.0`� � I � Q,�,`^..``` I I a � �)- �� -,�
� � h Ee � �� i r� , 5 /I ��"^ �__ o, I {I� oi i-5i.0� ) I o � J� ,, .. �
� � O\��6 � y�y o �'.�:�:�.�:,�,S ��J�a,Q i�. ` `�,�I �J;�. � SB_ _���'�� '4B.�
.I
�� 3
� �,� NOTE: ,�'`d�6 0' - - =' � �,�e �� �` ;�'- � 's* `'\, s�\ �
� �� 01'p . .. • �r ��/ \ `
"''�`wy'y�r:�� ^>
� � Test Pit TP1 replaced Boring B6 a��`,,��� � � . �� `, ��� r.- �
Test Pit TP2 replaced Boring B7 �
� � ��°s y,��-"`s_��? �� ` ,
ON �p �•bh R, �i-
�
Vl O�,y�9
O �
� �.
_. r
r
C�
� Bergquist Engineering Services '
Log of Boring B1
� Project: Lake Washington View Estates Drilling Rig: Track-mounted Auger
� Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safery Hammer '
BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
Date Drilled: March 15, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
�i � Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 66.0' I
Sample N-Value Water - ` �
Depth Description and USCS a a� '
r Number (Blows/ Content y � I
� (Feet) Classification � �
and Type Foot) (%) � W
,. . .., _ ,,
__ D�rk:tLrgwn ye�loose SILT(M L�with Qrganics ________ ' 65
C = 1SS 1.1.2(3) 20 5 `
Brown,loose Sandy SILT(ML),some gravel
. �
� ---------------------------------------�
- 2SS 2,4.5(9) 22.5 Brown,loose SILT(ML),some sand
------------------------------------------------ 61.5
5 _5_
_ 3SS 4,8,9(17) 21.1 Brown,stiff to very stiff lean CLAY(CL),trace gravel _ ,
(QP=2+tsf)
, 4SS 9.24.31(55) 22.3 ------------------------------------------------57.25 I
10 Gray-brown�v_ery dense Silty SAND jSM�tracegravel_____lb 565
- 5SS 10,17,18(35) 14.2 -
_ Brown dense,fine-to medium-grained SAND(SP)
_ 6SS 9,15,15(30) 13.2 �asiona/medium-to coarse-grained sand lenses -
i5 _15_
7SS 13.17.21(38) 13.1 -----------------------------------------------= 50
Brown,very dense,Sandy SILT(ML),trace gravel
8SS 23,50/4.5(50/4.5 10.3
20 ---------------------------------------------��- 465
Brown,medium dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT(GP)
- 9SS 8,9,8,(1 172 -
_ 44.5
_ END OF BORING. _
_25_ 25
- COMMENTS:
� _30_ !� Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_ �
_ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample. _
_35_ 35
P;.s
Bergquist Engineering Services
Log of Boring 62
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Drilling Rig: Track-mounted Auger
Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safety Hammer
BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
. Date Drilled: Feb. 26, & March 15, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 64.0'
i_
Sample N-Va1ue`' Water ; � �,
Depth Description and USCS � o o ,
� Number (Blows/ Content
(Feet) Classification c� m � u
and Type Foot) ,' (%) �' m Q
Dark-brown,very loose SILT(ML)with organics �'
r - 1SS 1,3,3(6) 19.9 '
'----------------------------------------- --'
Brown,loose Sandy SILT(ML),some gravel
; � `��--------- ' ,
� Brown mottled gray,loose Sandy SILT(ML)
- 2SS 2,3,7(10} 26.8 �. -
� some grave!
._ � .
- . �
� ------------------------------ -- - -
_5_ �__ Brownl loose SILT�ML�_with fine sand seams_ � 5 13
------------- , 'S8.7
_ 3SS 1.6,6(12) 26S �__Brotivnnwitled9�Y-stiffl�an�l-AY��L�-----.
__Brown,med.Stiff to stiff lean CLAY(CL)tr.gravel
- ------------------------------------ --- 570
4SS 4,13,20(33) 15.3 �
r, Gray-brown to brown,dense to very dense,Sandy
_10_ SILT to Silty SAND(SP-SM),some gravel _10_
- 5SS 21,50/4"(50/4") 12.8
------------------------------------------ --_ 52.0 i
, I
Brown,very dense,Clayey SILT(ML) i
6SS 18,19,43(62) 1Z.7 i
------------------------------------------ --- 495 I
15 _15_ �,
7SS 24,SO/5"(50/5") 16.2
Brown,very dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT(GM) -
I " 8SS 21.30,37(67) ------------------------------------------ --- 45.5
11.9
_20_ Gray,very dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT(GM) _2p_
9SS 13.23,27,(50) 11.8 K _
- �� 42.5
END OF BORING. _
_25_ 25
- COMMENTS:
� _30_ � Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_ �
_ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample_ _
_35_ 35
A4
Bergquist Engineering Services
�
Log of Boring B3
� Pro�ect: Lake Washin ton View Estates Drillin Ri : Track-mounted Au er �'
J 9 9 J 9
Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safety Hammer
� BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
Date Drilled: February 26, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
iApproximate Ground Surface Elevation: 47.0'
Sample N-Valus Water .
-Depth Description and USCS o ,
� Number (Blows/ Content y �
(Feet) Classification � W
and Type Foot) (%) , Q
�,_ Dark brown,ve loose SAND SP ,with or anics `f°
r = 1SS 1,1,1(2) 24.6
--ry - ----�--�------�- --------.
�
Brown to reddish-brown,very loose Sandy SILT(ML)
- 2SS 1,1,0(1) 30.8 -
.- to SILT(ML)
-5- _____Grave//y_at5.5feet ________________5_ 41.5
3SS 2,10,20(30) 16.4
�_, Brown,medium dense Sandy SILT(ML)some gravel
' _ -----------------------------------------------_
39 0
- 4S5 10,14,17(31) 18.3 Brown lightfy mottled reddish-brown,dense Silty -
� - SAND(SM)trace gravel -
10 _10_
� � -----y-------------y-y----�--�--g-------------- 36.5
5SS 10,14,24 38 10.9 Gra -brown,dense Cla e SILT ML ,tr. ravel
35.5
- END OF BORING.DRY AT COMPLETION. -
15 _15_
_20_ _20_
_25_ 25
- COMMENTS:
_30_ 0 Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_
� .
- _ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample. _
_35_ 35
A5
; Bergquist Engineering Services
� Log of Boring B4
� Project: Lake Washington View Estates Drilling Rig: Track-mounted Auger
Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safety Hammer
[ BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
Date Drilled: February 26, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
� Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 36.0'
� Sample N-Value Water
Depth Description and USCS o ,
r Number (Blows/ Content Q m
( (Feet) Classification Q ti
and Type Foot) '(%) Q
,_ Dark brown,very_loose SAND�SP�,with organics_____ _
- 1SS 1,1,2(3) 20.3 -- "�
� _ ____ Red-�rown to brown�v_ery loose SILT(�ML�____________
�,______Brown�v_erydense�coarseGRAVEL�GP, _______,. 33.5
- Zss is,22,30(52) iz s -------
� _ Light brown,very dense,Clayey SILT(ML)to SILT _
� _5 --- (ML)�trace gravel 5_
3SS 12,18,16(34) 25.3
---------- ------------------------- 305
Gray-brown,dense SAND(SP)
I - ------------------------------------------------ 285
l
- 4SS 6,18,31(49) 18.7 -
Brown,dense Sandy SILT(ML),occasionally gravelly
-10- ----------------------------------------------�Q- 26.0
� 5SS 24,31,49(80) 11.9 Brown,very dense SILT(ML),trace sand
24.�
C = END OF BORING.DRY AT COMPLETION. -
� 15 _15_ i
� - -
l
: 20 20
25 25
COMMENTS:
_30_ 0 Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_
� .
_ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample. _
- 35 35
A6
Bergquist Engineering Services
Log of Boring B5
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Drilling Rig: Track-mounted Auger
Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safety Hammer
BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
.. Date Drilled: February 26, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 33.0'
Sample; N-Value Water
. Depth Description and USCS o ;
Number (Blows/ Content � �,
(Feet) Classification o. W
.;.
and Type Foot) {%) � ,; -, .., Q
Brown,very loose,fine SAND(SP) _
- 1SS 1,1,1(3) 11.9
----------------------------------------- - 31.0
- 2SS 14,33,29(62) 32 Brown,very dense,coarse GRAVEL-SAND(GP} -
_ ------------------------------------------------ 290
-5- Brown,medium dense,SAND(5P)with gravel 5
3SS 3,7,9(16) 3.6
26 5
_ ENO OF BORING. _
10 _10_
15 _15_
_20_ 20
_25_ 25
- COMMENTS:
_30_ 0 Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_
� .
_ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample. _
_35_ 35
A7
_ Log of Test Pit TP6
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Excavation Rig: JCB 808 Super Backhoe
Location: Renton, Washington Excavated By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drtilling, Inc.
BES Project No.: 201305-1 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E.
Date Excavated: March 18, 2013 Ground Surface Elevation: 32.5'
� s- _
.�. , Q � - _ . _ .
(r �•- � � v .s Moisture : _
_ � � Description
Q � z � >, Content(%) _ .. , _ ':
�,,, � � � cn _
� o � � � �
, _ .. _ . .;_ _,,: ,
L - BSI SM 24.0 Dk.Br.,loose,SAND-SILT,some gravel(Topsoil) -
-1- ------ ----------------------1-
-------------------------------
� Brown,loose SILT,trace cobbles
- BS2 ML -
_2_
-----------------------------------------------------------�-
3 3
BS3 ML 20.6 Gray mottled reddish-brown,loose SILT
_4_ 4
- _5_ BS4 SP Reddish brown,loose,fine SAND _5_
END OF TEST PIT,DRY AT COMPLETION. ,
6_ g '�
Log of Test Pit TP7
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Excavation Rig: JCB 808 Super Backhoe
Location: Renton, Washington Excavated By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drtilling, Inc.
BES Project No.: 201305-1 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E.
Date Excavated: March 18, 2013 Ground Surface Elevation" 40.0'
�
� ` ~ � � o Moisture _ _
�
� � � v � Content(%) Description
Q a z cn :
a�.: � -� � cn
0 - � �
- BS1 ML 19.5 Dark brown,loose,Sandy SILT,some gravel&roots(Topsoil) - '
1_ ,Y
_2_ BS2 ML 23.4 Brown to reddish-brown,loose SiLT 2
- --------------------------------------------------------------
_3_ 3
- SP Brown to reddish-brown,loose,fine SAND -
' -4- 4 .
- --------------------------------------------------------------
_5_ _S_
SP Gray,loose,fine SAND,trace cobbles
_6_ END OF TEST PIT. DRY AT COMPLETION. 6
A8
Bergquist Engineering Services
` Log of Boring B8
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Drilling Rig: Track-mounted Auger
Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safety Hammer
BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
_ Date Drilled: March 15, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 53.5 '
` Sample N-Value Water � �,
Depth Description and USCS � o o ,
� Number (Blows/ Content ; m � ,
(Feet) Classification � m Q w
I and TYpe �oot) (%) , �.
Dark-brown ve loose SILT ML with or anics_ �`" �'
- zss i.i.i�z� 27.0 - -�--ry- - ---�--�-----9-- --�:;�=,'�.:;�: '
r Brown,loose SILT(ML)with sand 51.5
�----------------------------------------- �
- 2SS 1,2,4(6) 27.7 Brown,medium dense SILT(ML)
' - - 49 0
5 Srowri mo�tied�eddsfi brown,-medum dense;Lean-- =5=
3SS 2,5,10(15) 1g_2 CLAY(CL)
r �----------------------------------------- --" 475
4SS 13,17,30(47) 12.7
_10_ Gray-brown,dense to very dense,Sandy SILT(SM) 10_
` trace to with gravel
- 5SS 18,39,5Q/5(89/11) 9.3 3/25/13
41.1
6SS 20,28,50(78} 9.3
� ------------------------------------------ ---
39.0
_15_ Dark gray,very dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT(GM) 15_
7SS 25,40,50/5(90/11) g.g
------------------------------------------ --- 370
Gray-brown,medium-dense GRAVEL-SAND-SILT(GM)
� _ 8SS 8.12,15(27) 12.1
_2�_ 20
- 9SS 4,18,36(54) 14.7 -
????????????????????????????????????
25 10SS 50/6"(50/6") NR �� 25_
- - '� 28.0
END OF BORING.
- COMMENTS:
� _30_ Q Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_ �
_ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample. _ I
_35_ 35
A9
Bergquist Engineering Services
Log of Boring B9
Project: Lake Washington View Estates Drilling Rig: Track-mounted Auger
Location: Renton, Washington Boring Size: 8"/HSA. Manual Safety Hammer
BES Project No.: 201305, Report 1 Drilled By: Jeffery Davies, Davies Drilling, Inc.
Date Drilled: February 26, 2013 Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, PE
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 38.0'
Sample N-Value Water- ` � ,� v
Depth Description and USCS a o o a�
Number (Blowsl Content , m Q �-
(Feet) ' Classification � � � �
and Type Foot) (%) '� m Q W
. __12ar�-hromu�.ve�lDase�lLt(ML�YvittLorganirs__ _ ���:-= 3�.0
- 1SS 1,1,1(2) 42.5
Brown mottled gray and reddish-brown,medium _
dense,fine Silty SAND to Sandy SILT(SM), I
- 2SS 3,5,12(17) 39.0 - I
trace gravel
I ^ -------3/25/1 _ 33.0
�I 5_ ---------------------------------- - -
_ 3SS 10,36,44(80) 8 4 Gray-brown,very dense,fine Silty SAND(SM), I
- some gravel - I
--------------------------- - hr. 31.0
_ 4SS 25,35.49(84) 17.1 I
Light brown,dense to very dense,lean CLAY(CL) i
_10_ some gravel -10- �,
- SSS 10,17,25(42) 22.30 - '
_ ------------------------------------------ ---- 26-0
6SS 14,25,20(45) 26.0
15 _15_
- - Brown dense,fine SAND(SP)
7SS 15,25,26(51) Z4.g
8SS 17,35,50(85) 20.9 _ ------------------------------------------ ---- 19.5
20 ______ Brown,very dense,Sandy SILTSML�________ �
-- I8.5
Gray,very dense,poorly graded SAND(SP-SM),with
- 9SS 16,29,38,(67) 19.7� -
-------------------silt --
------------------ --�- 16.0
lOSS 9,15,21(36) 20.0 Gray,very stiff to hard,CLAY,(CL)
_25_ 25
iiss io,2o,as�ss� 2o.s ------------------------------------------..----- �z.s
Brown,very dense,fine-grained SAND(SP) r� -
11.5
_ END OF BORING. _
COMMENTS:
� _30_ Q Atterberg Limit Test on this sample. _30_ �
_ � Grain Size Distribution Test on this sample. _
_35_ 35
[_
� BORING LOG NOTES
� These notes and boring logs are intended for use with this geotechnical report for the purposes
and project described therein. The boring logs depict BES's interpretation of subsurface
� conditions at the location of the boring on the date noted. Subsurface conditions may vary, and
groundwater levels may change because of seasonal or numerous other factors. Accordingly,
the boring logs should not be made a part of construction plans or be used to define
� construction condrtions.
The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site Plan. The borings were located
� in the field by measuring from existing site features.
' � "Boring Size/Type" refers the diameter and type of auger used. "HSA" denotes hollow-stem
auger. "SSA" denotes solid-stem auger. "BA" denotes bucket auger.
�' � "Sample Type" refers to the sampling method and equipment used during exploration where:
�
"SS" indicates split-spoon sampler with 1-3/8" inside diameter and 2" outside diameter.
� "N-Value Blows Foot " refers to the number of biows from a 140- aund hammer fallin 30
� / ) p g
� inches required to advance a standard sampler one-foot or a specified distance. Refusal is 50
blows for less than six inches or 25 blows without advancing the sampler.
f "Moisture Content" refers to the moisture content of the soil expressed in percent by weight as
( determined in the laboratory.
[ "Description and Classification" refer to the materials encountered in the boring. The
r descriptions and classifications are generally based on visual examination in the field and
laboratory. Where noted, laboratory tests were performed to determine the soil ciassification.
� The terms and symbols used in the baring logs are in general accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System. Laboratory tests are performed in general accordance with applicable
procedures described by the American Society for Testing and Materials.
"�" Indicates location of groundwater and the date noted.
A11
f
(
r BORING LOG NOTES continued
I
( Solid PVC Pipe
�
� Slotted PVC Pipe
� r��.
r;r.
r.f.
r f�f� Bentonite Chips
I :�r.
itif�
� :1f�
f•l•
� Sand
l
TERMS for RELATIVE DENSITY of NON-COHESIVE SOIL
[ Term Standard Penetration Resistance "N"
Very Loose 4 or less
Loose 5 to 10
Medium Dense 11 to 30
Dense 31 to 50
CVery Dense Over 50 blows/foot
� TERMS for RELATIVE CONSISTENCY of COHESIVE SOIL
Term Unconfined Compressive Stren�th . ,
_ Very Soft 0 to 0.25 tons/square-foot (tsf) �
Soft 0.25 to 0.50 tsf
Medium Stiff 0.50 to 1.00 tsf '
Stiff 1.00 to 2.00 tsf
Very Stiff 2.00 to 4.00 tsf
Hard Over 4.00 tsf
Al2
f
�
BORING LOG NOTES continued
�
I
DEFINITION of MATERIAL by DIAMETER of PARTICLE
CBoulder 8-inches+
Cobble 3 to 8 inches
( Gravei 3 inches to 5mm
� Coarse Sand 5mm to 0.6mm
� Medium Sand 0.6mm to 0.2mm
Fine Sand 0.2mm to 0.074mm
Silt 0.074mm to 0.005mm
� Clay less than 0.005mm
�
E
A13
i
rTEST PIT LOG NOTES
1
These notes and test pit logs are intended for use with this geotechnical report for
[ the purposes and project described therein. The test pit logs depict BES's
interpretation of subsurface conditions at the location of the test pit on the date
( noted. Subsurface conditions may vary, and groundwater levels may change
l
because of seasonal or numerous other factors. Accordingly, the test pit logs
should not be made a part of construction plans or be used to define construction
` conditions.
l_ T ,
he approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the Site Plan. The test pits
were located in the field by estimating distances from the staked outline of the
� proposed pole barn.
� "Sample Type" refers to the sampling method and equipment used during
exploration where:
�
• "BS" indicates a bulk sample taken from the ground surface or from the
['� backhoe bucket.
� "Moisture Content" refers to the moisture content of the soil expressed in percent
by weight as determined in the laboratory.
(
� '
"Description and Classification" refer to the materials encountered in the test pit. '
' The descriptions and classifications are generally based on visual examination in !,
� the field and laboratory. Where noted, laboratory tests were performed to '�,
I determine the soil classification. The terms and symbols used in the test pit logs �
- are in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Laboratory
tests are performed in general accordance with applicable procedures described
= by the American Society for Testing and Materials.
"�" Indicates location of groundwater at the time noticed.
- a1�
(
` TEST PIT LOG NOTES continued
( � Indicates location of seepage of water and the time noticed.
l
[ TERMS for RELATIVE DENSITY of NON-COHESIVE SOIL
!
( Term Standard Penetration Resistance "N"
f Very Loose 4 or less
� Loose 5 to 10
Medium Dense 11 to 30
� Dense 31 to 50
�
� Very Dense Over 50 blows/foot
�
'; TERMS for RELATIVE CONSISTENCY of COHESIVE SOIL
�
� Term Unconfined Compressive Stren_qth
Very Soft 0 to 0.25 tons/square-foot
'�, �� S oft 0.25 to 0.50 tsf
Medium Stiff 0.50 to 1.00 tsf
j '� Stiff 1.00 to 2.00 tsf
�I f Very Stiff 2.00 to 4.00 tsf
Hard Over 4.00 tsf
- DEFINITION of MATERIAL by DIAMETER of PARTfCLE
Boulder 8-inches=
Cobble 3 to 8 inches '�
Gravel 3 inches to 5mm
Coarse Sand 5mm to 0.6mm
Medium Sand 0.6mm to 0.2mm �
Fine Sand 0.2mm to 0.074mm
Silt 0.074 to 0.005mm
Clay less than 0.005mm
A15
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
(Less than 50%fines. Fines are soils passing the#200 sieve_)
GROUP SYMBOL DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISIONS
GW Well-graded GRAVELS or GRAVEL-SAND
mixtures, less than 5%fines.
GP I Poorly graded GRAVELS or GRAVEL-SAND I
, mixtures, less than 5%fines. GRAVELS
! More than half of coarse fraction is larger
• GM Silty GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT mixtures,
� than No.4 sieve.
, more than 12%fines.
GC Clayey GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY
mixtures,more than 12%fines.
. SW Wel{�raded SANDS or Gravelty SANDS
mixtures,less than 5%fines.
SP Poorly graded SANDS or Gravelty SANDS
mixtures, less than 5%fines. SANDS
Silty SANDS, SAND-SILT mixtures,more than More than half of coarse fraction is
SM 12%fines. smaller than No.4 sieve.
SC ; Clayey SANDS, SAN0.CLAY mixtures,more �
than 12%fines
Note: Coarse-grained soils receive dual symbols if they contain between 5 and 12 percent fines.
FINE-GRAINED SOILS
(More than 50%fines. Fines are materials passing the#200 sieve)
GROUP SYMBOL DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISIONS
ML Inorganic SILTS,very fine SANDS, ROCK
FLOUR,Silty or Clayey SANDS
I Inorganic CLAYS of low to medium plasticity, i SILTS and CLAYS
CL Gravelly CLAYS,Sandy CLAYS,Silty CLAYS, '�
Lean CLAYS Liquid limit less than 50
OL i Organic SILTS,or organic Silty CLAYS of low
� plasticity
MH Inorganic SILTS,Micaceous or Diatomaceous
fine SANDS or SILTS,Elastic SILTS
i SILTS and CLAYS
CH Inorganic CLAYS of high plasticity,fat CLAYS '. Liquid limit greater than 50
i
OH Organic CLAYS of inedium to high plasticity
PT PEAT,MUCK,and other highly organic soils Highly organic soils
Note: Fine-grained soils receive dual symbols if their limits plot left of the"A"Line and have a plasticity index(PI) of
4 to 7 percent.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Bergquist Engineering
' Services
A16
l
Bergquist Engineering Services
1
Grain Size Distribution
t Borin B9 17.5' to 19.0'
9 �
�
� U.S.Standard Sieve Opening in Inches U.S.Standazd Sieve Numbers Hydrometer Results i
100% 20 0 0 � 0 0%
90% - 10%
[ 80% - - 20% I',
L
70% 30% �
II � � � I
°' 60% 40% � 'I
�
� 50°k - 50% Q �
c -a
� ui 40% - _ 60% c
i m 'm i
` �
0 30% 70% �
20% 80%
0
` 10% 90%
0% 100%
� 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size in Millimeters
Gravels Sands '
Cobbles Silts Clays
' Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
` Date: 02/26/13 D�o=0.01 L;SCS Classification %Gravel %Sand
Sample#: D30=0.04 '�iL,Sandy Silt
Sample ID: B9,S8 D�=0.07 Specifications 0.0% 39.8°/a
Source: C�= 1.50 No Specs
Project: Lk.WA View Estates C�_6.00 Sample Meets Specs %Silt&Clay
Location: Renton Liquid Limit=0.0% n/a 602%
Test Pit B9 Plastic Limit=0.0% Fineness Modulus
Depth: 17.5'-19' Plasticity Index=U.0% 032
oarse .4ctua i terpo at ines . ctu j terpo ate
Section Cumulative�Cumulative Section Cumulative Cumulative
Sieve Size Percent Percent ' Specs Specs Sieve Size Percent Percent Specs � Specs
US Metric Passing �I Passing ' Max Min US Metric Passing ; Passing Max Min
6.00" ' 150.00 100.0% #4 i 4.750 100.0% 100.0% I
4.00" 100.00 100.0°/u i�8 ! 2360 99.4%
3.00" 75.00 � 100.0% i�10 i 2.000 99.3%
2.50" 63.00 j 100.0% #16 � 1.180 99.1% I
2.00" 50.00 ' 100.0% #20 j 0.850 � 99.0°/n
1.75" 45.00 100.0% #30 0.600 ; 98.9%
1.50" 37.50 , 100.0% ; #40 0.425 98.9% 98.9%
1.25" 31.50 100.0% �' #50 0300 , 90.3%
1.00" � 25.00 100.0% 100.0% i #60 0.250 j 86.8%
7/8" 22.40 100.0% 100.0% #80 0.180 82.0%
3/4" 19.00 100.0% 100.0% i #100 0.150 79.9% 79.9%
5/8" 16.00 100.0% �t 140 I 0.106 68.4%
1/2" 12.50 ' 100.0% 100.0% I #170 ! 0.090 64.2% I
3/8" 9.50 100.0% #200 ' 0.075 I 602% 602% '
1/4" 630 I 100.0% #270 � 0.053 i
#4 4.75 i 100.0% ' 100.0% i
�
A17
_ Bergquist Engineering Services
Grain Size Distribution
Boring B9, 20.0' to 21 .5'
U.S.Standazd Sieve Opening in Inches U.S.Standard Sieve Numbers Hydrometer Results
. 100% zo s o o � 0%
90% - -- 10%
� 80°/a 20%
� 70% 30%
r � L
� so�io - - ao�io ��
, T - �
� 50% - 50% �
c �
f uyi 4O% - ' _ 6O°/D c
� �m
d
0 30% - - 70% �
�
. 20% 80% '
10% - 90%
0% 100%
�, 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size in Millimeters
Gravels Sands
Cobbles Silu Clays
. Coazse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
Date: 02/26/13 Dlo= 0.08 IISCS Classitication %Gravel %Sand
� Sample#: D3o= 0.17 SP-SM,Poorly gaded Sand�vith Silt
Sample ID: B9,S9 D�=031 Specifications 4.1% 87.6%
Source: C�= 1.13 No Specs
Project: Lk.WA View Estates CU=3.80 Sample Meets Specs %Silt&Clay
Location: Renton Liquid Limit=0.0% n/a 83°/a
Test Pit B9 Plastic Limit=0.0% Fineness Modulus
Depth: 20-21.5' Plasticity Index= 0.0% 1.63
oarse ctua I terpo at H mes . ctua terpo ate
Section CumulativeiCumulative Section CumulativelCumulative
Sieve Size �, Percent Percent Specs I Specs Sieve Size ' Percent Percent Specs Specs
US Metric Passing Passing Max � Min US Metric Passin� Passing Max Min I
6.00" I50.00 ' 100.0% #4 i 4J50 95.9% 95.9% j '
4.00" 1U0.00 100.0% #8 2.360 89.2% !
3.00" 75.00 100.0% #10 2.000 88.2% �
2.50" 63.00 100.0% #16 1.180 85.9%
2.00" 50.00 100.0% ; #20 0.850 85.0%
- 1.75" � 45.00 100.0% ' #30 0.600 � I; 843%
1.50" 37.50 ! 100.0% #40 0.425 83.8% ' 83.8%
1.25" 31.50 i 100.0% #50 0300 57.4%
1.00" 25.00 I 100.0% 100.0% #60 0.250 46.9%
7/8" 22.40 ' 100.0% 100.0% #80 � 0.180 32.1%
3/4" 19.00 100.0% 100.0% #100 j 0.150 25.8% 25.8% I
5/8" 16.00 100.0°/u #140 0.106 15.5% '
1/2" ; 12.50 100.0% 100.0% #170 0.090 11.8%
3/8" 9.50 98.4% � #240 0.075 8.3% 8.3%
114" 630 i 96.7% #270 0.053 � � '
#4 4.75 95.9% 95.9% ''i i �'
I
A18
Atterberg Limits
Date Received: 2/26/2013 Projecc: Lk.WA View Estates
Sample#: [,ocanon: Renton
- Sample ID: B9,SS Boring►t: B9
Source: Depth: 10'- 11.5'
` ASTM D-2487,Unified Soi1s Classification System
No Data Provided
' Liquid Limit Determination
�:
ai �2 a3 aa �s #6 Liquid Limit
Weight of Wet Soils+pao: 29.00 21.50 29.80
� VVeight of Dry Soils+Pan: 24.10 18.10 24.80 40% T
Weight of Pan: 8.10 8.10 8.10 L
' R'eight of Dry Soils: 16.00 ]0.00 16.70 35%
Weight of Moisture: 4.90 3.40 5.00 �
r %Moisture: 30.6% 34.0% 29.9% � 30%
� N: 30 21 29
25%
m
� L
Liquid Limit @ 25 Blows: 32.2% � .
w 20p�
Plastic Limit: 23.0% � �
Plasticity Index,Ip: 92% o �
� 15% '-
Ptastic Limit Determivatioo
� #1 !k2 #3 #4 #5 #6 ��%
R'eight ot Wet Soils+Pan: 17.20 20.90
Weight of Dry Soils+Pao: 1530 18.80 5%
� Weight of Pao: 8.10 8.10
Weight of Dry Soi1s: 7.20 10.70 �%
� R'eight of Moisture: 1.90 2.10 10 1 DO
%Moisture: 26.4% 19.6 0�o Number of Blows,"N"
L.
Plasticity Chart
aa.o�io
�o.o�io
s0.o% "U"Line
.�A„
X 50.0°k
d
�
�+ 40.0% CH or OH
- �
:�
N
16
a 30.0%
MH or OH
20.0°�
CL or OL
10.0%
CL-ML
' 0.0°k '
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.Q% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 110.0%
Liquid Limit
A19
� i �.---__.J ( - __'. � �' r----+, r^---� r�—^+ r.�.+ r^'^.� �,..."^^A ��1 �^�'+1 r�� ^�'1 . �--i �—�1
� O � �
� � �J �.
� �
� O �' �
� � Z
^' 3 Min. 12 " Wide
o m
W � � 4" to 6" Screened
- � Crushed Rock (Typ.)
�' � PermaTex 4080 or MIRAFI 180N
� � or equal for the soil reinfor�ement 15 deg.�_
°= o and to separate topsoil from �^� min.
c � gravel backfill
� = Finished Filled Grade Finished Grade l
R1 �____S I o e M i n u s 3 � '
D . � —�6--
W �.: - ��. ,. .,.
:�:
m '""� �,;�.:-- �::.:
� n ::���:2,�' ,' I =
� Recompacted Native or ':�.�r�+��' �:' I�'
O ., 1:. N ���.�.�.:.
� �t Im ported Non-Cohesive Soils =�.� �"��.��
m u:. .�.,
D ='1'� "�Yp•
� , ,
N � to Minimum of 95 Percent of .. . . ��
o � r � pprox. . �- A ;:.; min. Gracle
�• ,.._...,.:t:�.c:::.a
�, r- ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor� Minimum ��v�r�:�=�.�_,:r��
�. D in Maximum 10" Loose Lifts. 4" dia. Sch. 40 peforated Crushed Stone Base
� m Use vibratory compactor. PVC Drain Pipe Min. 12" Thick Below
� � Water settling not permiited. Basal Course of Rock
� O
�
C� ROCK SIZE DESIGNATION ROCK SIZE
00 -n T� ROCK WEIGHT AVERAGE DIMENSION
WALL HEIGHT A B C D E F ROCK SIZE
� ,�-+, m Pounds Feet
� o � <or= 3 feet 3 2 -- -- -- -- 1 Man 44 to 200 1 to 1.5
C a� <or= 6 feet 4 3 2 -- --- -- 2 Man 200 to 660 1.5 to 2.5
� C� <or=9 feet 4 4 3 2 -- -- 3 Man 660 to 2000 2.5 to 3
Z � <or= 12 feet 5 4 3 3 2 2 4 Man 2000 to 4000 3 to 4
c c�'i� 5 Man 4000 to 6000 4 to 4.5
3 �
� � 6 Man G000 to 8000 4.5 to 5
� �
N �
O �
� �
O �
� �.
� r
r
n
�
20FIL FILE : LAKEWA2 5-b7-13 13 :28 ft
�ke Washington View Estates
25 9
�- .0 50 . 0 22 .5 52 . 0 7
� 22 . 5 52 . 0 42 .5 54 .0 7 I
; 42 .5 54 . 0 46 .0 56 . 0 7 ,
� � 46 . 0 56 . 0 61.0 58 . 0 7 �,
! 61 . 0 58 .0 72 .0 60 . 0 7
72 . 0 60 . 0 85 . 0 62 . 0 7
85 .0 62 . 0 100 . 0 64 . 0 7
( 100 . 0 64 . 0 114 . 0 66 . 0 7
l 114 . 0 66 . 0 140 . 0 66 .0 7
. 0 45 . 0 23 . 0 48 . 5 6
� 23 . 0 48 . 5 114 . 0 61 . 5 6
114 . 0 61 . 5 140 . 0 61 .5 6
. 0 42 .5 23 . 0 47 . 5 4
23 . 0 47 . 5 67 . 5 50 .5 4
67 . 5 50 . 5 114 . 0 56 .5 5
�_ 114 . 0 56 . 5 140 . 0 56 .5 5
67 . 5 50 . 5 140 . 0 50 .5 4
r . 0 36 .0 23 .0 39 . 0 3
` 23 .0 39 . 0 50 . 0 39 .0 3
i_
50 . 0 39 . 0 114 . 0 46 .5 2
� 114 . 0 46 .5 140 .0 46 .5 2
.0 34 . 0 23 . 0 37 . 0 2
' � 23 . 0 37 . 0 50 . 0 39 . 0 2
. 0 33 . 0 23 . 0 33 .5 1
r ?_3 . 0 33 . 5 140 . 0 33 . 5 1
OIL
, 7
,� - 14s . a 1�E . o �o . o �2 . 00 . coo . o �
138 . 0 138 .4 10 .0 38 . 00 . 000 . 0
130 .0 140 . 0 .0 40 .00 .000 . 0
122 . 0 130 . 0 10 . 0 35 . 00 . 000 . 0
123 . 0 130 . 0 . 0 37 . 00 .000 . 0
92 . 0 110 . 0 1000 . 0 . 00 . 000 . 0
90 . 0 100 . 0 . 0 �7 . O�J . 000 . 0
ATER
1 62 . �0
4
5 . 0 40 . 0
22 . 5 41. 5
- 113 . 0 61 . 2
140 . 0 61 .2
IRCL2
_ 40 40
10 . 0 100 . 0 100 . 0 130 . 0
. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0
A21
� � � ,, � �, _ C � _._ � �, .---� ,._.---� r-------, r--� ------, r--- -,
� � - - � ,
r __ , ,
LAKEWA2 5-07-13 13:28
Lake Washington View Estates
100 10 most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = 3. 141
so
�
a so W ,
�, _—
�- _—
_—
D � _�r
N �'
N (J'� �,�
_ ��
x �� �
Q 40 x�-----�"`��
I
>-
I
�
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
X—AXIS (feet}
i
�
f ROFIL FILE: LAKEW2E 5-07-13 13 : 29 ft
I ake Washington View Estates
25 9
� .0 50 . 0 22 .5 52 .0 7
22 . 5 52 . 0 42 .5 54 .0 7
42 .5 54 .0 46 .0 56 .0 7
r 46 .0 56 . 0 61 .0 58 .0 7
I 61 .0 58 . 0 72 .0 60 .0 7
72 . 0 60 . 0 85 . 0 62 . 0 7
85 . 0 62 . 0 100 .0 64 .0 7
� 104 .0 64 . 0 114 .0 66 .0 7
114 .0 66 . 0 140 .0 66 . 0 7
.0 45 . 0 23 . 0 48 . 5 6
` 23 . 0 48 . 5 114 . 0 61 . 5 6
� 114 .0 61 . 5 140 .0 61 . 5 6
.� 42 .5 23 .0 47 .5 4
� 23 .0 47 .5 67 .5 50 .5 4
; 67 .5 50 .5 114 .0 56 .5 5
� 114 .0 56 .5 140 .0 56 .5 5
67 .5 50 .5 140 .0 50 .5 4
� .0 36 . 0 23 .0 39 .0 3
'' 23 . 0 39 . 0 50 . 0 39 .0 3
50 .0 39 . 0 114 . 0 46 .5 2
� 114 .0 46 . 5 140 .0 46 .5 2
.0 34 . 0 23 . 0 37 .0 2
23 .0 37 . 0 50 . 0 39 . 0 2
. 0 33 . 0 23 .0 33 .5 1
� 23 .0 33 . 5 Z40 . 0 33 .5 1
i _ _�OIL
7
� 145 . 0 146 . 0 50 .0 42 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
138 . 0 138 .4 10 . 0 38 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
� 130 . 0 140 . 0 .0 40 .OQ . 000 .0 1
122 . 0 130 .0 10 .0 35 .00 . 000 . 0 l
123 .Q 130 . 0 .0 37 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
� 92 . 0 110 . 0 1000 . 0 .00 . 000 .0 1
90 . 0 100 . 0 . 0 27 . 00 .000 . 0 1
7ATER
1 62 .40
4
5 . 0 40 . 0
22 .5 41 .5
113 . 0 61 .2
140 . 0 61 .2
'sQUAKE
.100 . 000 '
CIRCL2
40 40
10 . 0 100 . 0 100 . 0 130 .0
. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0
A23
� � c--- � s. .__a , � �--..� ._� � _ ...._� �
� , � e
LAKEW2E 5-07-13 13:29
Lake Washington View Estates
� o0 1 � most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = 1 .920
so
,-.
a 60 w 1
� ��
-
� ��
.�-
D `� r...��
N �'
�A � �
��
X —�'
�c 40 �._--_�'—_
i
�
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 1 20 140 160
X—AXIS (feet)
�
�OFIL FILE: LAKEWNE 5-I1-13 12 :55 ft
�ke Washington View Estates
12 7
47 _ 0 48 .0 102 . 0 48 .0 4
i 102 .0 48 . 0 102 . 2 49 .5 4
� 102 .2 49 .5 104 .5 59 .0 5
, I04 .5 59 . 0 112 .5 59 . 0 5
' 112 . 5 59 . 0 113 . 0 61 .2 6
113 . 0 6I .2 116 .0 68 . 8 7
116 . 0 68 . 8 140 . 0 68 . 8 7
� 113 . 0 61 .2 140 . 0 61 . 2 6
� 112 .5 59 . 0 140 . 0 59 .0 5
47 .0 48 .0 102 . 0 48 .0 4
102 . 0 48 . 0 102 . 1 49 .5 4
102 . 1 49 .5 140 .0 49 . 5 4
' �OIL
7
145 . 0 146 . 0 50 .0 42 .00 . 000 .0 1
138 . 0 138 .4 10 . 0 38 .00 . 000 .0 1
130 . 0 140 . � .0 40 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
122 . 0 130 . 0 10 . 0 35 .00 . 000 .0 1
123 . 0 130 . 0 .0 37 .00 .000 .0 1
92 . 0 110 . 0 1000 .0 .00 . 000 .0 1
90 . 0 100 . 0 .0 27 . 00 . 000 .0 1
ATER
1 62 .40
5
22 .5 41 .5
142 . 0 48 .0
112 . 0 56 .5
113 . 0 60 . 0 i
140 . 0 60 . 0
LOADS
2
98 . 0 102 . 0 1500 . 0 . 0
108 . 0 112 . 0 15Q0 . 0 . 0
CIRCL2
4Q 40
60 . 0 116 . 0 100 .0 130 .0
.0 . 0 .0 . 0
�
._,_ �
; ;
A25
, , � r� r----, r-� r-�t --� �-,, - -___ ---
LAKEWNE 5-1 1 -13 12:56
Lake Washington View Estates
� o0 10 most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP F�S = .43�
80
.-� �a 60 --- -- �
a� �
``- ,
N �� �
� v , �_,,_,�-__,_"-
a40 �.-------------- ----_
i
�
20
o _-�--- ---�---�
0 20 40 60 80 10� 120 140 160
X —AXIS (feet)
w
tOFIL FILE : LAKEWFE 5-11-13 12 :53 ft
ike Washington View Estates
12 7
� 47 . 0 48 . 0 102 . 0 48 .0 4
� i 102 . 0 48 .0 102 .2 49 .5 4
102 . 2 49 .5 104 .5 59 .0 5
104 . 5 59 . 0 112 .5 59 . 0 5
� 112 . 5 59 . 0 113 . 0 61 .2 6
� 113 . 0 61 . 2 116 . 0 68 . 8 7
116 . 0 68 .8 140 . 0 68 .8 7
113 . 0 61 .2 140 . 0 61 .2 6 I
[ 112 .5 59 . 0 140 .0 59 . 0 5 '�
47 . 0 48 . 0 102 . 0 48 . 0 4
� 102 .0 48 .0 102 . 1 49 . 5 4
( 102 . 1 49 . 5 140 .0 49 .5 4
..JIL
7
145 . 0 146 . 0 50 .0 42 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
138 . 0 138 .4 10 . 0 38 . 00 . 000 .0 1
130 . 0 140 . 0 .Q 40 . 00 .000 . 0 1
122 . 0 130 . 0 10 . 0 35 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
123 . 0 130 . 0 . 0 37 . 00 .000 . 0 1
` 92 . 0 110 . 0 1000 . 0 . 00 . 000 . 0 1
r; 90 . 0 100 . 0 . Q 27 . 00 . 00Q . 0 1
' � ATER
1 62 .40
5
22 . 5 41 . 5
102 . 0 48 . 0
112 . 0 56 .5
113 . 0 60 . 0
140 . 0 50 . 0
aQUAKE
OAL ._
2
98 . 0 102 . G 1500 . 0 . ,.
108 .0 112 . 0 1500 . 0 .
IRCL2
40 40
60 . 0 116 . 0 100 . 0 130 . �
. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0
A27
_ � � ^�
LAKEWEE 5-1 1 -13 12:53
Lake Washington View Estates
� o0 10 most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = .350
$o
�
a 6� � ------ �
� /�
N �� /
� �
Q40 ���l����_��,_ ,.__...,....
I
�
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
X—AXIS (f eet)
I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I t I I I
I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I � 1
I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I
I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I I
I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I � 1 I 1 I i I I 1 I I I
I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I
I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I
1 � I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1
I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1
I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I I I
I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I
I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I
I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I
I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I i
I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I
I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I
I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1
I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I
I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1
1 I 1 1 � 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 t 1 I I I 1 I I 1
1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 �
I 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I � 1 I I 1 I
I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1
I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I . 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1
I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1
I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I � I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I
1 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I i I I I I � I 1 I I I
1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I
1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I '.
I I i I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 �'
I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I 1
I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1
I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 �.
I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I �I I I I I �'
1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 I '�
1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I
� I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I
I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I
I 1 I I 1 t 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I t
W � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I
� 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I
1 I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I �
I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I N
O I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I �
I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I �
I I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I
I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I
Z 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I
1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I� I I I I I I I
I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I
I I 1 � I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I � I 1 1 I 1 I I
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 t I 1 I 1 I 1 I
1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I I
1 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I
1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I i I I I 1 I
1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 1
I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1
I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1
I 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I
1 I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I
I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I
1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1
� I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 �
1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I
I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I
I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I I I
I I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I
I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I
I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I
I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I �
1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I i I
I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I i I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I
1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I i
I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1
1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1
I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I � I 1 1 I I I I I
I I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 t I I
I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I
I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I t I
I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I � I I 1 I I I I
I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I
I 1 I I I t I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I �
I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1
I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 1
I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I
I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I � I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I I I
I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I t 1 I I I I
I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I
I � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I
I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I
�
Z
�
a
0
0
0
�
�
�
V
a1
LA
O
�
�
t�
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012
- -- May Creek May Creek — --- - -�
40 Legend
----------------
EG PF 1
,_.............
Crit PF 1
38 WS PF 1
—�—
* Ground
.
�
36 �
� � -
_ ;_,.:-� ,
_.....__.........................._..... ....._. *.
34 ..........:.....�--
.-. _--�
� _._ ,.. ,, : „ • � ,
_, : .:
c . ..:.:
o ...,--- a
•�
W �32 � � � � '
� - r
� `�� ��
� -
so - . , . ... . ;., m , _ —•- �b
.�
za
zs �- --� �_ _ ,- �---,-
—r-_ ,__�- _ _� , _�-
� 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Main Channel Distance(ft)
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012
�"f DT t � �t�
_ _ _ .. .025 _ _---�----- --.025 --- __---�--.025 �
33
�egend
EG PF 1
�-----------•------ ----- - --- ----------------�---�------- --- - ---------------�--------- - - ---- ---------------�----------------- �-----------------------�------�--- �
............ ..
Crit PF 1
g2 WS PF 1
-t—
Ground
Bank Sta
_ __ _ _ , _ _ ;
31 ��
�
�
��v //
30
�
c
0
.�
a�i
W
29 /� „_,•.�•r1
���110 l r� ��
�t�� ��
S�
28
z�
--,-- ,_ _ , � ___, � -,
-�- , r-- �
D 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station(ft)
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012
Section B-B
— -- .025 - ----��-----.025 —�.�—.025- `�
34 Legend
-----�-�-------------------------------------------------------•----- .._..------------------------------�---------------------�----•--�-�----�-----.....-------------------------•------- -....---�---------•-------�- __ _
--------------
EG PF 1
,.. _. ..
Crit PF 1
WS PF 1
33 �
_ Ground
__ _......_. _.__ _. _............_................�
1� �j � Bank Sta
32
�
c
•�«-°� 31
d
w
-�- �o�-
30 �� �(1� 5��-
29
28 -T---r , , � , T
0 50 100 150 200
Station(ft)
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012 ,
Section C-C I
_ _--.025 � _. _ — .025 - _ �—.025---�
36 Legend ��
EG PF 1
�.........�.......
Crit PF 1
35 WS PF 1
�-- - -_ _ _ .. __ ._ . ------- -----�.................... ... -_ -_ _ - ----- . ...----- ��---- - ---- —�
Ground
�
Bank Sta
34
..... _ � _ _ . _ ........... ........ _
�� Q
� ,i`
33 �� '
�
c
0
.�
a}i
w
32
3, �-.� �1 DE
�
v�
�� ��
30
29 _ , _-r ----r— , , _�-_T _ , T -T�
0 20 40 60 80 100
Station(ft)
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012
Section D-D
�- — - .025 _ __--- � _ . —.025 � - .025—�
36
Legend
EG PF 1
--... ._...__..._-----------------------------------�---------------------------- -------- - - --------------------------------------------- -�--- ��------�
---...------------------------------------------- -.,__......_.__.
WSPF1
_.._...._.�........._......
35 � /� Crit PF 1
�6c �%`�� Gr nd
_ • _ ^ _ _ �_... Bank Sta
�
r �
34 � • _ ____ ___ _ —�
33
�
c
0
.m
a�i
w
32 �� ���
� l
�1�� Sl �
31
30
----�- -� , , .
_ , _ _�- ---,
�. ..�_ .__r___-.r_ r_�- r-_
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station(ft)
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012
Section E-E
-- .025 --- _.__ �� .025 —�.025-�
40 Legend--
-------------
EG PF 1
..�............
Crit PF 1
WS PF 1
■
Ground
38 �
Bank Sta
36
�
c
0
.�
>
m
w _ . _. .... _ __+.. .. .._........ �
34 ��/ � �
`�c�� °��
32 S � 1f'�/ y� �U-
30 �--�- , , - ,— �--,— , -� ,___r T—�--, ,- __,�—T—�
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station(ft)
May Creek Analysis Plan: Plan 01 6/25/2012
Section F-F
—.025 �_ __ --.025 _ ---�--- __- A25 __ _--�
42 Legend
- --------------
EG PF 1
_......�.................
Crit PF 1
WS PF 1
■
Ground
40 Bank Sta
__- � - ........ - - _ . -- ... .-��- --. _ .._.... - ------� -..__. - ----- - - __ __ -- --
38 ,�^
,-, t—��
� __ ;_ _ _ ��v _ _.. _ __ _..,
c �0
> ,. !
a� �
w __■
�,;. ,,_ , -
_ . , .,. . ,a, , _
36 -
�Y�
/ �_'j�
34
5��� st X��
32 �- �--- -_, T --r �-- --- -i --T--�� - _ �-�
0 20 40 60 80
Station(ft)
V..
._ /
`
�/I
I � ���/ , ... ...
1���:�iitN'.F_.., '
��,�
+�/ , tO3Y FLOODPWN
���� / 4
��� ' � .
� � ���.tJ
/.�f"
� • �
' �l
/ �/ / � /
�V� ��' ��� , � ��'`\ �
�,y, �f
"i, �,�
� ,:�
,� ,;:: .
/, ; � .
,; , � ,
„%' i ,s;./� � �
i �
�. \ _ � '' ' �
,��//�`,;, � � � �o�rtnoorwn
. -
� ' .� � .y -� �`- _ � � ���..
�,
� /�f / di i "'�,. \`�... ., f � ' • � ,
b i � �
� ..._ . . .� .
%�,'/r`��� � �,r �,t 4r,��
� �'�.
r, ,�, __.. -�� : � �, (',a;�, ..
� , , , _ �. � . ,
, _-. , l
,
�; ;,�f,.� . , � .� . . '°/� � ��' `�>�.o�' ,u
%// - – . . \b�\
.�/ � � y � � \ r
f I` ��;a ��• r •1 Sl
� � -.� I � S �C
� � /. '
/ ;��� , �: '. .
�
/ �;w F� ��"'a "yi�' L. � �� <
�'`�•j(s)v��'�8�{• � :-„y� �,r�z' .xt�$s., ��� �
� ;,` ,
Y \ ti p' f �yn,�
!'r�-ll�\ qI � eGC:v\- ��'� ` ��
, ��`�1�4�SL � [ �t`.J�I 4 1. '�'i � . ��... �
�,.. � .��� Y -;' . .771 +
��s .ta�2.n_..�+i✓� '{��! xl�.. .� __�__ % . . '.�
�� _ ul t�y 4�. ?�.�:. �,. . ' -- 1\`,�` A
�• `�,�._ . '�, °°` � . t�n
�'`� .,e-.s".= �����_en� `�� �. . . .
/
�•
�•/
, �
i
, �1
Y� ���J
`j��l', �/ ���
� q� / /, r., \
/
�.
/� �
� fi ,
i � , �
�
n �
�.
' • , � f v .. �
� v ,. '',. � �,,� : ..
� , �, � �?�, �-�
��� �� 4'�.� �r„��`��� � ' 1059 FLOODPLAIN
�� �� �'�
i ✓ ;��Q�.� �/� ` ' I
<
� � ,�,� � �
F �( <v ,v. %
. . �� . � � � �,µ�j^k/ �� '� `
i�.. ��✓;.���'��( ��
, ��y , ���(� X��
� `� � /� V / X � %�
� �� � � r �V\ ;%\N/\.� � �
� � �i �''�,�" ,�Oh'�y. �� �� �x� `.A
,�,,'� . . `.:. .`� `j'�, n ��F ' ;�.
�1 � ti,�� ' F r h�
�� � � /� ... . `" ' �� ��O� ����/�/ _/�' /k �• �^ � ..�
/ .. . . . . . � Q?h, i /`_ "`��/ /
, F . �/` ,� .� ,; �
/ � / . ,.`:.� �+,. ' . ,! K� �` � rX;'..�(�, �� / ' � .���'
/ .� ' - '. / \ /
: I'_i � \l
�� / `
' /
}
. . . � C/�r�` ���'` � ��!
� , � �, �k ` �, v .
, (
,, `
- ' � � n !�'\
/ - • � \/ �'•' �
/ •, , „ . .
� v , �.
y � <'�� �;� ` � �Z
,
�
,
. . , ,:
, ����\ � \
, ,
wr _ , \
/ \:�,
�-�_. ' ., � S,�'�"
I '%'�
� � A � x�?� `���'�`"`
,-
o �^� � �
., � ,� c ,,
, I , , x�
I `� �.�k�,, � �
� � ��� . �
� � � �'��
�'; .
, ♦ '��.: , � .j , '`�.�.�. , . � , ., � /�,n �.i
=,
��!`'y:; 1059 FLOODPLAIN
�Y
/ / \.
,� �� .
�
,'. ��/
� i ��/� \/l� � ;I
;���� .y H
o/`y�}/�(, , `{�,'/\
� �i(h\^�� \//\�\
\� l
/!� �
\\� /T����\`�u�)'y^;� `�
�� \ / �
�� ,�C� / � / �
� � >,
� �,• r,!��/" •, ��' / \.
`.� � ,/�
.�h�� �' \���,/"�`"'\ ���i�/n i
, �. 'C � �i�� ��
—�������\�`� �
�`1�;� ��' `/��2��� �,
\ � '\ /� r. � .� /\,
��'� �� ''�� .\i � /.
C���� � ��� ����� �� \ � l� � �'��/�� �`\
I� � \ '������ ��X �! y �.
,, \� i �/ j
� °�;�,���, �� .��� %<;�.
>%„ ���, � ^� ,
I � � �� ,.,�� ,�.
x � ,
�'�\ ��' ."`�� '��� �
� '"�;r y " ��S� `�� � I
_ �� ��� ' ,����,C ��� , i' �i � �,�� �
` ��,� / � �.�/`� � \,,
�;` �� �►��'��'�;�� . '�� ;'; ��,�� �
• � �
� �,`�� .l��4 ,� � �� �
�
`� / .' �,'� �� . /�' � ,�
\ ,..':\ ��./�K � �/ ?� / /� ' ��'
� �'',l� i�7-Y � %'`�
� �;
� � '� :� � ?�;� , , �
_ � �. // ��k��\�� � /. ' ,���.,
/�l C/
.� �_-. � ` � �� �\'�,��%����/ �/,.1 \y`\
� �
/~ `� � n\
� � ���� / � ������.I ��-��•�� \��� � ,:
,
�
, . � �
� O � '
� --... `�. ''.� .�'� � /'���j� � �� /`� �
.
�,. y � ��� � A, >L�`�:� . i �V�� // ` �'� '
,
.
^ / t, � ,�, ; ;!xl,��q�F o� .;. � � cl�, \ �`'.
xo / � �•,� ����,; ?�� � ��, �� �
... � I u � `/ � / '�Y\ ' M/✓� \ �
\ \y � ��
. � i�\ ��.� k� � ���^ �
�
�,' �.
. � .�.. . W �� � �� �� � \,
40 `� ,�, ,.`.W. ". ``�^� ;�.� \�'-K�
�_ � �� � x � �
�,�,, ,� ., ,��
� _ w � .-. �..-. � �. ��. ����- � ��. � _� , ��-,
� �< � .�, /
\�'� �c
';�� �,�\�
� /� \ �
,.�
�� � � ��
� �' � .,,
,� - ;
, � �;, ,
.
�
� i
,�
, �� ��
�
v
, .,� �
. ,
�\/� �x ,� ' �� , :f;-��� �
',;N���p; ;Y% I
,��:� � ; I
�';�,,�� � �i! ;" �' �
�� �� \��v/ '` 1059 FLOODPLAIN
�� >� I � f
�.� r
� K� � � ��_� x 1" I j' I
1�. � �`�„; � � ��;�
, ��� ;.:,, ,l, I , �<, >C . ;
. '� �, �,,��x % %'C � <,�� � �
��� �;; ;K,�i,. �Y� /; �
�� �� ����� �`� ��� i�� ��v � ���
.��;�, ,�,�o�w�� _ �o� 'x'� ' ,
, , �, � I � , � ;l'
,�,�, ��' � tio� ' ,`� � "�' ;< ��; , �>
,
�', ��I ��X�"'� � ` ��v�I���' � ` � I
�� ;�, �
;� � , , �°'`'', ,� X �
, �I� �O \�� �`�' � <v" „� �
��� `,� �. �''�' I
�'jv� �C��'�,� � ���� ;� �� y � �j`, I
� �. � � � ,
+ I' . .
�' , k'
v
/� �
/ �'�
_ . . � c
�
� '�r� t . `.. • � <. ,�'�,> �v� ' ��
! �`�� � . . � . �,� . , � '� �
�� . � y.� `. ' .� - .. ��0��„��i. .�C , , � I
. ,. . � . � '�� h- �"/ � �i
\� � � �,„. . �.4.�.� .. . � � � �' f � ^��l/,'� � .''�k �i
)� \
� � �`� .� , � I . � � ��"���� � � �
a, \ I . . , �,�"�\<j�, '
-_ - , �
__ - �� ° I . .`. ��., `, ,�'.,,��;�����<;�.
_. �,
� . W .
. . , � �� _ � � I � . '. .' . ' , �. � ����. � �
-- •. ` �.� : I . . f �
r , �1 , , \�
;.;
, . , . .. \
\� �/'7�' �
.. ' / .. -.� J�
. . �., W. .. . .. . � . i.. .�i `l.'>;/ '� .'�� '/�\ \.
... \ ... � • \
„ �� . � 4� � � . . �����.
- , ..
- ^
_j_ . ` ��>
.--•���J.�� \ , � `,. � .. . . � � � .. ` ��k � ,
. ' :,. .. ....,; ���.i ,
_ �, 1 .'. . .�.� � �_. " �, 40I \\
-_ . ._ �j� �\ ' . _ .. 4.. s� �,��' . / , � i
: �� _-- �^ — - — �� ; � - - - —�\ � �
' �c� v .. �� � i