The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApproved - RS_Technical Information Report.pdf FINAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT FOR KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON Prepared by: Gina R. Brooks, P.E. Date: December 23, 2019 Revised: February 26, 2020 Core No.: 18227 2/26/2019 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING jchavez 04/08/2020 SURFACE WATER UTILITY JFarah 04/08/2020 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER i KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Table of Contents 1. PROJECT OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................... 1-1 2. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Core Requirements .......................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.1.1 Core Requirement #1: Discharge at the Natural Location ...................................................... 2-2 2.1.2 Core Requirement #2: Offsite Analysis .................................................................................... 2-2 2.1.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control......................................................................................... 2-2 2.1.4 Core Requirement #4: Conveyance System ............................................................................. 2-2 2.1.5 Core Requirements #5: Erosion and Sediment Control ........................................................... 2-2 2.1.6 Core Requirement #6: Maintenance and Operations .............................................................. 2-2 2.1.7 Core Requirement #7: Financial Guarantees and Liability ....................................................... 2-2 2.1.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality ...................................................................................... 2-4 2.1.9 Core Requirement #9: On-Site BMPs ....................................................................................... 2-5 2.2 Special Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 2-5 2.2.1 Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area Specific Requirements .................................... 2-5 2.2.2 Special Requirement #2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation ........................................................ 2-5 2.2.3 Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities ................................................................ 2-5 2.2.4 Special Requirement #4: Source Control ................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.5 Special Requirement #5: Oil Control ........................................................................................ 2-5 2.2.6 Special Requirement #6: Aquifer Protection Area ................................................................... 2-5 3. OFFSITE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Resource Review .............................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.1 Sensitive Areas ......................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Field Investigation ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 4. FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY DESIGN ............................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Hydraulic Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.1.2 Developed Conditions .............................................................................................................. 4-7 4.2 Water Quality Treatment Analysis and Design .............................................................................. 4-12 5. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ................................................................................. 5-1 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER ii 6. SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES ....................................................................................................... 6-4 7. OTHER PERMITS ................................................................................................................................ 7-1 8. ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ............................................................................................................... 8-1 9. BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT ............................. 9-1 10. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE .................................................................................................. 10-1 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 1-1 1. PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Kiddie Research Daycare Center project is located at 3123 NE Sunset Blvd. Renton, Washington within Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. See Vicinity Map below. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 1-2 The site is composed of one parcel (#0423059155) with an area of approximately 0.39 acre. The site is bordered by NE Sunset Blvd. (which is a major arterial) to the west, NE 12th Street (collector) to the south and commercial developed parcels to the east and north. The site was previously developed as a car wash facility. According to City of Renton Soil Map and NRSC Soils Resource Report, site soil type is AmC. Slopes on the site vary from about 3% up to approximately 15%. Topography is generally downhill from east to west. Proposed development of the property will include the construction of a building and parking which will accommodate and house a daycare center. Utilities to support the development will be installed. All existing structures and hard surfaces have been previously demolished and removed based on the field investigation that took place on March 18, 2019. The subject project’s drainage facilities were designed using the guidelines and requirements established in the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (RSWDM). Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions) and Basic Water Quality Treatment are required for this project. No flow control or water quality treatment facilities are proposed as the project is exempt from both flow control and water quality treatment. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner ___________________________ Phone _________________________________ Address _______________________________ _______________________________________ Project Engineer _________________________ Company ______________________________ Phone _________________________________ Project Name _________________________ DPER Permit # ________________________ Location Township ______________ Range ________________ Section ________________ Site Address __________________________ _____________________________________ Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS  Landuse (e.g.,Subdivision / Short Subd. / UPD)  Building (e.g.,M/F / Commercial / SFR)  Clearing and Grading  Right-of-Way Use  Other _______________________  DFW HPA  COE 404  DOE Dam Safety  FEMA Floodplain  COE Wetlands  Other ________  Shoreline Management  Structural Rockery/Vault/_____  ESA Section 7 Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type of Drainage Review (check one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final:  Full  Targeted  Simplified  Large Project  Directed __________________ __________________ __________________ Plan Type (check one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final:  Full  Modified  Simplified __________________ __________________ __________________ Part 6 SWDM ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): Standard / Experimental / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Approved Adjustment No. ______________________ Date of Approval: ______________________ 2016 Surface Water Design Manual 4/24/2016 1 Kiddie Research LLC 206-430-9827 1025 N 36th St, Renton, WA 98056 Gina R. Brooks Core Design, Inc. 425-885-7877 Kiddie Research Daycare Center 23N 5E 4 3123 NE Sunset Blvd., Renton N/A KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes / No Start Date: _______________________ Completion Date: _______________________ Describe: _________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ Re: KCSWDM Adjustment No. ________________ Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan : ____________________________________________________________________ Special District Overlays: ______________________________________________________________ Drainage Basin: _____________________________________________________________________ Stormwater Requirements: ____________________________________________________________ Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS  River/Stream ________________________  Lake ______________________________  Wetlands ____________________________  Closed Depression ____________________  Floodplain ___________________________  Other _______________________________ _______________________________  Steep Slope __________________________  Erosion Hazard _______________________  Landslide Hazard ______________________  Coal Mine Hazard ______________________  Seismic Hazard _______________________  Habitat Protection ______________________  _____________________________________ Part 10 SOILS Soil Type _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ Slopes _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ Erosion Potential _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________  High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet)  Other ________________________________  Sole Source Aquifer  Seeps/Springs  Additional Sheets Attached 2016 Surface Water Design Manual 4/24/2016 2 Newcastle East Lake Washington Alderwood (AmC) KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE Core 2 – Offsite Analysis_________________ Sensitive/Critical Areas__________________ SEPA________________________________ LID Infeasibility________________________ Other________________________________ _____________________________________ LIMITATION / SITE CONSTRAINT _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Threshold Discharge Area: (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply): Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharge Locations: Offsite Analysis Level: 1 / 2 / 3 dated:__________________ Flow Control (include facility summary sheet) Level: 1 / 2 / 3 or Exemption Number ____________ Flow Control BMPs _______________________________ Conveyance System Spill containment located at: _________________________ Erosion and Sediment Control / Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention CSWPP/CESCL/ESC Site Supervisor: _____________________ Contact Phone: _________________________ After Hours Phone: _________________________ Maintenance and Operation Responsibility (circle one): Private / Public If Private, Maintenance Log Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Liability Provided: Yes / No Water Quality (include facility summary sheet) Type (circle one): Basic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basic / Bog or Exemption No. ______________________ Landscape Management Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements (as applicable): Area Specific Drainage Requirements Type: CDA / SDO / MDP / BP / LMP / Shared Fac. / None Name: ________________________ Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type (circle one): Major / Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): ______________ Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: 2016 Surface Water Design Manual 4/24/2016 3 1 RSWDM 1.2.3.1.A Limited Infiltration Drywell RSWDM 1.2.8 Surface Area Exemption KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Source Control (comm ercial / industrial land use) Describe land use: Describe any structural controls: Oil Control High-use Site: Yes / No Treatment BMP: ________________________________ Maintenance Agreement: Yes / No with whom? ____________________________________ Other Drainage Structures Describe: Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION  Clearing Limits  Cover Measures  Perimeter Protection  Traffic Area Stabilization  Sediment Retention  Surface Water Collection  Dewatering Control  Dust Control  Flow Control  Protection of Flow Control BMP Facilities (existing and proposed)  Maintain BMPs / Manage Project MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION  Stabilize exposed surfaces  Remove and restore Temporary ESC Facilities  Clean and remove all silt and debris, ensure operation of Permanent Facilities, restore operation of Flow Control BMP Facilities as necessary  Flag limits of SAO and open space preservation areas  Other ______________________ Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facility Summary and Sketch) Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description  Detention  Infiltration  Regional Facility  Shared Facility  Flow Control BMPs  Other ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________  Vegetated Flowpath  Wetpool  Filtration  Oil Control  Spill Control  Flow Control BMPs  Other ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ 2016 Surface Water Design Manual 4/24/2016 4 Drywell KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Drainage Easement Covenant Native Growth Protection Covenant Tract Other ___________________________ Cast in Place Vault Retaining Wall Rockery > 4’ High Structural on Steep Slope Other ______________________________ Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. Signed/Date 2016 Surface Water Design Manual 4/24/2016 5 12-23-2019 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 2-1 2. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The proposed project is classified as requiring “Full Drainage Review” per the 2017 RSWDM. Therefore, all nine core requirements and six special requirements will be addressed per Section 1.2 and 1.3 of the 2017 RSWDM. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 2-2 2.1 Core Requirements 2.1.1 Core Requirement #1: Discharge at the Natural Location The project discharges its drainage at the natural location which is to the City’s conveyance system located within the intersection of NE Sunset Blvd. and NE 12th Street. 2.1.2 Core Requirement #2: Offsite Analysis See Section 3 of this Report for the downstream analysis. 2.1.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control The site falls within the City’s Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions). See City’s Flow Control Application Map on the following pages. This flow control standard requires matching existing conditions for the 2, 10, and 100-year peak rate runoffs. Existing conditions is defined as those that existed prior to May 1979 as determined from aerial photographs and, if necessary, knowledge of individuals familiar with the area, unless a drainage plan for land cover changes has been approved by the City of Renton since May 1979 as part of a City permit or approval (or County-approved permit if in an area that has been annexed by the City). If so, existing site conditions are those created by the site improvements and drainage facilities constructed per the approved drainage plan. Per the preapplication notes for the subject project, there is no existing detention facility on the project site that would provide prior mitigation of currently developed flows. The existing conditions are therefore, those flows generated from the site as it sits today. As demonstrated within Section 4 of this Report, the subject project is exempt from flow control as the developed condition 100-year, 15-minute peak flow does not generate an increase of 0.15 cfs above the existing condition 100-year, 15-minute peak flow. 2.1.4 Core Requirement #4: Conveyance System See Section 5 of this Report for the conveyance calculations. 2.1.5 Core Requirements #5: Erosion and Sediment Control See Section 8 of this Report for the ESC design. 2.1.6 Core Requirement #6: Maintenance and Operations See Section 10 of this report for the Operations and Maintenance Manual 2.1.7 Core Requirement #7: Financial Guarantees and Liability This core requirement will be addressed at the time the permit is issued. Lake Desire Shady Lake (Mud Lake) Panther Lake Lake Youngs Lake Washington B l a c k Ri ve r Gr een Ri v e r Ce darRi verUV900 UV167 UV515 UV169 UV900 UV169 UV167BN IncBN IncBBNNIInnccSSEE RReennttoonn IIssss aa qquuaahh RR dd RReennttoonn MMaappllee VVaalllleeyyRRdd MMaapplleeVVaalllleeyyHHwwyy 110088tthhAAvveeSSEESSWW SSuunnsseettBBllvv dd RRaaiinnii eerrAAvveeNNNE 3rd S t NE 3rd S t SW 43rd StSW 43rd St SS EE CCaarrrrRR dd NE 4th StNE 4th St SSEE RReennttoonn MMaappllee VVaalllleeyy RRddLLooggaannAAvveeNN SR 515SR 515PPaarrkkAAvveeNNOOaakkeessddaalleeAAvveeSSWWSSuunnsseettBBllvvddNN EE DDuuvvaallllAAvveeNNEEI-405 FWYI-405 FWY II--440055FFWWYYSR 167SR 1671144 00tthh WWaayy SS EENNEE 2277tthh SStt 115566tthhAAvveeSSEEUUnniioonnAAvveeNNEE111166tthhAAvveeSSEESW 7th StSW 7th St N 8th StN 8th St PP uuggeettDDrrSSEE RR ee nnttoonnAAvvee SS SSWW 2277tthh SStt BBeennssoonnRRddSSWWiilllliiaammssAAvveeSSMMoonnrrooeeAAvveeNNEESE 128th StSE 128th St II nntt eerr uurr bbaannAA vvee SS HHooqquuiiaammAAvveeNNEE8844tthhAAvveeSSSSEEPPeett rr oovvii tt sskkyyRRddEEVVaalllleeyyHHwwyySE 192nd StSE 192nd St SE 60th StSE 60th St TTaallbboottRRddSSRRee nn tt oo nn AAvveeSS116644tthhAAvveeSSEESE 208th StSE 208th St SE 72nd StSE 72nd St RR aaiinniieerr AA vvee SS 111166tthhAAvveeSSEES 128th StS 128th St NNeewwccaassttllee WWaayy SS 221122tthh SStt SS 118800tthh SStt CCooaall CCrreeeekkPPkkwwyySSEESW 41st StSW 41st St 114400tthhAAvveeSSEE112288tthhAAvveeSSEE6688tthhAAvveeSSSSEE 116688tthh SStt NE 12th StNE 12th St BBeeaaccoonn AA vv ee SS FFoorreesstt DDrr SSEE SSEE 116644tthh SStt 114488tthhAAvveeSSEESSEE MMaayy VVaalllleeyy RRdd SS EE JJ oo nn ee ss RR dd SS EE 22 00 44 tthh WW aayySW 34th StSW 34th St SE 144th StSE 144th St 114488tthhAAvveeSSEE115544tthhPPllSSEELL aa kk ee WWaa sshhii nnggtt oonnBBll vvddNNEEddmmoonnddssAAvveeNNEEAAbbeerrddeeeennAAvveeNNEEEEMM eerrcceerrWWaayyWWeessttVVaalllleeyyHHwwyyEast Valley RdEast Valley Rd,§-405 ,§-405 ,§-405 μ 012 Miles Flow Control Application Map Reference 1-A Date: 01/09/2014 Flow Control Standards Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions) Flow Control Duration Standard (Existing Site Conditions) Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions) Flood Problem Flow Unincorporated King County Flow Control Standards Renton City Limits Potential Annexation Area Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 2-4 2.1.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality As the City of Renton does not have Sensitive Lake or Sphagnum Bog Water Quality Treatment Areas, Basic Water Quality Treatment is the only other option available. As the proposed project is a commercial development, Enhanced Basic Water Quality Treatment is typically required. However, per RSWDM Section 1.2.8.1.A.Exceptions.3., the required treatment can be reduced to Basic as the downstream conveyance is all tight-lined conveyance with discharge to Lake Washington. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 2-5 As demonstrated within Section 4 of this Report, the subject project is exempt from water quality treatment as site conditions don’t exceed the “Surface Area Exemption” thresholds. 2.1.9 Core Requirement #9: On-Site BMPs See Section 4.1.2 of this Report for discussion on how this Core Requirement is addressed. 2.2 Special Requirements 2.2.1 Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area Specific Requirements There are no known additional requirements for the subject project. 2.2.2 Special Requirement #2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation Not applicable since the project does not contain nor is adjacent to a flood hazard area. 2.2.3 Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities Not applicable since the project does not rely on an existing flood protection facility or plans to modify or construct a new flood protection facility. 2.2.4 Special Requirement #4: Source Control Though the subject project is a commercial development, it will house a daycare and will not be storing any type of chemicals requiring source control. A refuse area will be located on the site but, will be sheltered from rainfall with a roof. Typical stormwater mitigation is addressed within this Report. 2.2.5 Special Requirement #5: Oil Control Not applicable since the project is not a high use site. The expected average daily traffic is less than 100 vehicles per 1,000 square feet of gross building area. 2.2.6 Special Requirement #6: Aquifer Protection Area Not applicable since the project is not in an Aquifer Protection Area. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 3-1 3. OFFSITE ANALYSIS 3.1 Resource Review The proposed project is located within the Lake Washington Cedar River Watershed. 3.1.1 Sensitive Areas Renton GIS was reviewed for sensitive areas. The proposed project site does not fall within the following sensitive area; coal mines, erosion hazard, flood hazard, floodway, channel migration zone, landslide, seismic hazard, regulated stream, wetland, or wellhead protection. According to the Renton GIS Map, there is a small portion on northeast corner of the site which falls within 15%-25% regulated slope. See picture below. Regulated Slope: 15% to 25% slope area (Per Renton GIS Data) 3.2 Field Investigation A field investigation was completed on March 18, 2019. Upstream Tributary Analysis Based on the field walk and the taken photos, both properties uphill of the proposed project site (one to the north and one to the east) have their own storm drainage facilities. Within their parking lots, active catch basins were found. Therefore, no upstream runoff is considered to enter the project site. See pictures below. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 3-2 Drainage system for the property east of the subject site Drainage system for the property north of the subject site Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 3-3 Downstream Drainage Complaints Drainage complaints were researched within a quarter mile of the project site. City of Renton does not list any current complaints along the project’s downstream route. Onsite Drainage System Description Upon the site visit, all existing catch basins on the site, noted per the topographic boundary survey, were removed except one catch basin which is located on the southwest corner of the project site. Based on field observation, the downstream route for this onsite catch basin could not be determined. Same was true for the catch basin located along the flowline of the curb return of NE Sunset Blvd. and NE 12th Street beyond the southwest corner. As this property previously housed a car wash facility, the onsite catch basins likely discharged to the sanitary sewer though this could not be verified. It was determined though, all of the site’s drainage would ultimately discharge to the City’s conveyance system located within NE Sunset Blvd. Downstream Drainage System Description This downstream route description begins at the catch basin located at the northeast corner of NE Sunset Blvd. and NE 12th Street. This catch basin is located between two islands within the existing crosswalk. As catch basins within the roads were not accessible due to heavy traffic, City resources were utilized to trace the downstream route. Based on City utility maps, the runoff flows through a series of 12”, 24”, and 36” pipes connecting a series of Type I and Type II catch basins until drainage discharges to Lake Washington via the outfall next to the Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park about 1.1 miles away from the site. See picture below. Downstream Reach Description to a quarter mile Pipe Material Pipe Diameter (in) Overall Pipe Length (ft) Cumulative Length (ft) Concrete 12 104 104 Unknown 12 255 359 Corrugate Metal 24 14 373 Corrugate Metal 36 257 630 Concrete 36 145 775 Corrugated Metal 36 541 1316 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 3-4 Outfall location next to the Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park 4,652 388 WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere City of Renton Print map Template This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Notes None Legend 264 0 132 264 Feet Information Technology - GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa.gov 03/19/2019 City and County Boundary Parcels Network Structures Inlet Manhole Utility Vault Unknown Structure Control Structures Pump Stations Discharge Points Water Quality Detention Facilities Pond Tank Vault Wetland Stormwater Mains Culverts Open Drains Facility Outlines Fences Streets Points of Interest Parks Waterbodies Map Extent2010 1/4 mile SITE 104ft359ft373ft630ft775ft DOWNSTREAM ROUTE EXHIBIT Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-1 4. FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY DESIGN A flow control facility is not proposed as the project is exempt from flow control as delineated below. A water quality treatment facility is not proposed as the project is exempt from water quality treatment as delineated in Section 4.2 of this Report. PEAK RATE FLOW CONTROL EXEMPTION Per the RSWDM Section 1.2.3.1.A. Exceptions, The facility requirement in Peak Rate Flow Control Standard Areas is waived for any threshold discharge area in which the target surfaces subject to this requirement will generate no more than a 0.15-cfs increase (when modeled using 15 minute time steps) in the existing site conditions 100-year peak flow (modeled using same time step unit (e.g., 15-minute) used to calculate the developed flow). Note: for the purposes of this calculation, target surfaces served by on-site BMPs per Appendix C may be modeled in accordance with the on-site BMP sizing credits in Core Requirement #9, Table 1.2.9.A. As shown below, the existing site will produce a 100-year, 15-minute peak flow of 0.353 cfs. The developed site will produce a 100-year, 15-minute peak flow of 0.383 cfs. The difference is these two peak flows is 0.030 cfs which does not exceed the 0.15 cfs requiring flow control. The project therefore, is exempt from flow control. See calculations below. 4.1 Hydraulic Analysis The drainage analysis was modeled using MGSFlood software. Per the City of Renton Soil Survey, the site soil is Alderwood (AmC), hydrologic soil group “C”, Till for modeling. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-2 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-3 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-4 4.1.1 Existing Conditions See Existing Conditions exhibit on the following page. The existing basin boundary area, 0.38 acre, is defined as that area that will be improved through development of the subject project. The existing basin boundary area will include the property area, 0.39 acre, less the right-of-way dedications, 0.09 acre, plus frontage improvements/existing impervious removal extending from the dedicated right-of-way to back of existing curb, 0.08 acre. Existing impervious covers approximately 0.30 acre. The following information was used for generating flow frequencies. See MGS Flood printout below. EXISTING CONDITIONS Total Area = 0.38 acres GROUND COVER AREA (acres) Till-Grass 0.07 Impervious 0.30 ————————————————————————————————— MGS FLOOD PROJECT REPORT Program Version: MGSFlood 4.50 Program License Number: 200210008 Project Simulation Performed on: 12/13/2019 9:11 AM Report Generation Date: 02/07/2020 9:40 AM ————————————————————————————————— Input File Name: 18227MGSF.fld Project Name: Kiddie Research Daycare Center Analysis Title: Comments: ————————————————————————————————— ———————————————— PRECIPITATION INPUT ———————————————— Computational Time Step (Minutes): 15 Extended Precipitation Time Series Selected Climatic Region Number: 15 Full Period of Record Available used for Routing Precipitation Station : 96004005 Puget East 40 in_5min 10/01/1939-10/01/2097 Evaporation Station : 961040 Puget East 40 in MAP Evaporation Scale Factor : 0.750 HSPF Parameter Region Number: 1 HSPF Parameter Region Name : USGS Default Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-5 ----------------------SCENARIO: PREDEVELOPED Number of Subbasins: 1 ---------- Subbasin : Existing Site ---------- -------Area (Acres) -------- Till Grass 0.070 Impervious 0.300 ---------------------------------------------- Subbasin Total 0.370 Predevelopment Runoff Tr (Years) Discharge (cfs) ------------------------------------------- 2-Year 0.121 5-Year 0.155 10-Year 0.184 25-Year 0.243 50-Year 0.288 100-Year 0.353 200-Year 0.361 500-Year 0.370 NE SUNSET BLVDNE 12TH STREETDESIGNE N G I N E E R I N G P L A N N I N G S U R V E Y I N G14711 NE 29th Place, #101Bellevue, Washington 98007425.885.7877 Fax 425.885.7963KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER18227EXISTING CONDITIONS Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-7 4.1.2 Developed Conditions See Developed Conditions exhibit on the following pages. The developed basin boundary area is equal to the existing basin boundary area, 0.38 acre. For simplicity to demonstrate exemption from flow control, the developed condition was conservatively assumed to be 100% impervious. The following information was used for generating flow frequencies. See MGS Flood printout below. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS Total Area = 0.38 acre GROUND COVER AREA(acres) Till-Grass 0.00 Impervious 0.38 ----------------------SCENARIO: POSTDEVELOPED Number of Subbasins: 1 ---------- Subbasin : Developed Site ---------- -------Area (Acres) -------- Impervious 0.380 ---------------------------------------------- Subbasin Total 0.380 Postdevelopment Runoff Tr (Years) Discharge (cfs) ----------------------------------------- 2-Year 0.142 5-Year 0.184 10-Year 0.207 25-Year 0.260 50-Year 0.332 100-Year 0.383 200-Year 0.397 500-Year 0.416 NE SUNSET BLVDNE 12TH STREETDESIGNE N G I N E E R I N G P L A N N I N G S U R V E Y I N G14711 NE 29th Place, #101Bellevue, Washington 98007425.885.7877 Fax 425.885.7963KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER18227DEVELOPED CONDITIONS Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-9 ON-SITE BMPs Per Section 1.2.9.1 in the RSWDM, projects subject to Core Requirement #9 must apply flow control BMPs to either supplement the flow mitigation provided by required flow control facilities or provide flow mitigation where flow control facilities are not required. Flow control BMPs must be implemented per the requirements and approach detailed in Sections 1.2.9.2 and 1.2.9.3 for individual lots and subdivisions or road improvement projects, respectively. The Section applicable to this project is Section 1.2.9.2. Per Section 1.2.9.2, projects on individual sites/lots, flow control BMPs must be selected and applied according to the individual lot BMP requirements. The category of requirements applicable to the subject project is the Small Lot BMP Requirements (for sites/lots <22,000 square feet). 1. The feasibility and applicability of full dispersion as detailed in Appendix C, Section C.2.1 must be evaluated for all target impervious surfaces. If feasible and applicable, full dispersion must be implemented as part of the proposed project. Typically, small lot full dispersion will be applicable only in subdivisions where enough forest was preserved by tract, easement, or covenant to meet the minimum requirements for full dispersion in Appendix C, Section C.2.1.1 Full dispersion is not feasible due to non-existent native forested area. 2. Where full dispersion of target impervious roof areas is not feasible or applicable, or will cause flooding or erosion impacts, the feasibility and applicability of full infiltration as detailed in Appendix C, Section C.2.2 must be evaluated (note, this will require a soils report for the site/lot). If feasible and applicable, full infiltration of roof runoff must be implemented as part of the proposed project. Full infiltration is not feasible due to existing onsite non-infiltrating till soils. 3. All target impervious surfaces not mitigated by Requirements 1 and 2 above, must be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible using one or more BMPs from the following list. Use of a given BMP is subject to evaluation of its feasibility and applicability as detailed in Appendix C. Feasible BMPs are required to be implemented. The BMPs listed below may be located anywhere on the site/lot subject to the limitations and design specifications for each BMP. These BMPs must be implemented as part of the proposed project. • Full Infiltration per Appendix C, Section C.2.2, or per Section 5.2, whichever is applicable Full infiltration is not feasible due to existing onsite non-infiltrating till soils • Limited Infiltration per Appendix C, Section C.2.3, Limited infiltration will be installed to mitigate for the building and refuse roof areas along with the exposed parking area located east of the building roof. The dry well will contain 360 cubic feet of gravel per 1,000 square feet of impervious surface served since the soils are sandy loam (RSWDM Section C.2.3.4). See copyclip of email below from the project’s geotechnical engineer. indicating the Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-10 soils are “sandy loam”. The dry well will be a maximum depth of 5 feet with a surface area as sized below. Dry Well Sizing Roof Area = 7,739 square feet Parking Area = 856 square feet Volume of Gravel Required = 8,595 SF/1,000 SF * 360 CF = 3,094 cubic feet Surface Area Required = 3,094 CF/5 FT = 619 square feet Surface Area Provided = 14 FT * 47 FT = 658 square feet ˃ 619 square feet • Rain Gardens per Appendix C, Section C.2.12, sized as follows: o Rain gardens have a maximum contributing area of 5,000 square feet. o Rain gardens must have a minimum horizontal projected surface area below the overflow that is at least 5% of the area draining to it. The remaining impervious surfaces on the site discharge to the catch basin located within the covered parking area. Due to the parking being located under cover, all drainage is required to be directed to the sanitary sewer system. Therefore, no additional impervious area requires treatment via BMPs. • Bioretention per Appendix C, Section C.2.6, sized as follows: o SeaTac regional scale factor equals 1.0: In till soils, provide bioretention volume based on 0.6 inches of equivalent storage depth; in outwash soils provide bioretention volume based on 0.1 inches of equivalent storage depth, o SeaTac regional scale factor greater than 1.0: In till soils, provide bioretention volume based on 0.8 inches of equivalent storage depth; in outwash soils, provide bioretention volume based on 0.4 inches of equivalent storage depth, See response to Rain Gardens above. • Permeable Pavement per Appendix C, Section C.2.7 See response to Rain Gardens above. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-11 4. All target impervious surfaces not mitigated by Requirements 1, 2 and 3 above, must be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible using the Basic Dispersion BMP described below. Use of Basic Dispersion is subject to evaluation of its feasibility and applicability as detailed in Appendix C. Feasible BMPs are required to be implemented. Basic Dispersion BMPs may be located anywhere on the site/lot subject to the limitations and design specifications cited in Appendix C. The BMP must be implemented as part of the proposed project. • Basic Dispersion per Appendix C, Section C.2.4, See response to Rain Gardens above. 5. BMPs must be implemented, at minimum, for an impervious area equal to at least 10% of the site/lot for site/lot sizes up to 11,000 square feet and at least 20% of the site/lot for site/lot sizes between 11,000 and 22,000 square feet. For projects located in Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area, these impervious area amounts must be doubled. Doubling of the minimum impervious area required for BMP implementation in Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area is not required for projects located within 200 feet of a steep slope hazard area, landslide hazard, or erosion hazard area. If these minimum areas are not mitigated using feasible BMPs from Requirements 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, one or more BMPs from the following list are required to be implemented to achieve compliance. These BMPs must be implemented as part of the proposed project. • Reduced Impervious Surface Credit per Appendix C, Section C.2.9, • Native Growth Retention Credit per Appendix C, Section C.2.10. • Tree Retention Credit per Appendix C, Section C.2.14 See response to Rain Gardens above. 6. The soil moisture holding capacity of new pervious surfaces (target pervious surfaces) must be protected in accordance with the soil amendment BMP as detailed in Appendix C, Section C.2.13. Soil amendment will be incorporated for disturbed areas not covered with hard surfaces. 7. Any proposed connection of roof downspouts to the local drainage system must be via a perforated pipe connection as detailed in Appendix C, Section C.2.11. As the drainage from the roof is passing through a BMP, this requirement is no longer applicable. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 4-12 4.2 Water Quality Treatment Analysis and Design The subject project is exempt from water quality treatment per the “Surface Area Exemption”; a) Less than 5,000 square feet of new plus replaced PGIS that is not fully dispersed will be created, New PGIS is approximately 1,507 square feet which is well below the 5,000 square foot threshold. b) Less than ¾ acre of new PGPS that is not fully dispersed will be added. The area of development is 0.39 acre which is well below the ¾ acre threshold. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 5-1 5. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN CONVEYANCE SYSTEM SIZING The site is small and is not tributary to a detention facility creating backwater effects. A rational method for the entire site assuming 100% impervious coverage is calculated below demonstrating the proposed 12” tight-lined conveyance system is adequately sized for the project. 𝑄𝑄𝑅𝑅=𝐶𝐶𝐼𝐼𝑅𝑅𝐴𝐴 where QR = peak flow (cfs) for a storm of return frequency R C = estimated runoff coefficient (ratio of rainfall that becomes runoff) IR = peak rainfall intensity (inches/hour) for a storm of return frequency R A = drainage subbasin area (acres) C can be found using Table 3.2.1.A Runoff Coefficients – “C” of the 2016 KCSWDM. Assuming the site is 100% impervious, C is equal to “0.90”. The subbasin area is 0.39 acres. 𝐼𝐼𝑅𝑅=𝑃𝑃𝑅𝑅𝑖𝑖𝑅𝑅 where PR = total precipitation at the site, use 100 year isopluvial map found below iR = unit peak rainfall intensity factor The 24-hour 100 year precipitation is 3.9 inches. See Isolpluvuials map on the following pages. 𝑖𝑖𝑅𝑅=(𝑎𝑎𝑅𝑅)(𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐)−𝑏𝑏𝑅𝑅 where Tc = time of concentration (minutes), use min 6.3 minutes aR, bR = coefficients from table 3.2.1.B Using Table 3.2.1.B and assuming a design storm return frequency of 100 years, ar = 2.61 and bR = 0.63. 𝑖𝑖𝑅𝑅=(2.61)(6.3)−0.63 =0.82 𝐼𝐼𝑅𝑅=(3.9)(0.82)=3.19 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖/ℎ𝑟𝑟 𝑄𝑄𝑅𝑅=(0.9)�3.19𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖ℎ𝑟𝑟�(0.39𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎)=1.12 𝑎𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 The conveyance system is a 12” pipe at the shallowest slope of 0.5%. A 12” pipe at 0.5% slope can convey 2.74 cfs as calculated below, which is more than the 1.12 cfs the site will generate. The proposed 12” conveyance system is therefore, adequately sized. 𝑄𝑄𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚=(1.49𝑖𝑖)(𝐴𝐴)(𝑅𝑅23)(𝑆𝑆12 ) where n = manning’s coefficient A = area of pipe cross section R = hydraulic radius Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 5-2 S = slope of pipe 𝑄𝑄𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚=�1.490.012��𝜋𝜋4 ��14�23 (0.005)12 =2.74 𝑎𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 3.2.1 RATIONAL METHOD FIGURE 3.2.1.D 100-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS 2016 Surface Water Design Manual 6/15/2016 3-19 SITE Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 6-4 6. SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES The following reports and assessments are provided for reference and informational purposes only. Core Design takes no responsibility or liability for these reports, assessments or designs as they were not completed under the direct supervision of Core Design. • Geotechnical Engineering Design Report by Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC, dated 3/18/2019 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN REPORT 3123 Sunset Blvd NE Renton, WA 98056 Prepared for: Carson AuYeung Livia Chen Job No: 1054-KIN Chris J. Heathman, P.E. Principle Geotechnical Engineer Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC J o b N o : 1 0 54-K I N Table of Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. General ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2. Location and Description.............................................................................................. 1 2. Site Conditions .................................................................................................................. 1 2.1. Site Soils and Geology ................................................................................................. 1 2.2. Subsurface and Groundwater Conditions ..................................................................... 1 2.2.1. On-Site Soils ......................................................................................................... 1 2.2.2. Surface Water and Groundwater........................................................................... 2 3. Geologic Hazards .............................................................................................................. 2 3.1. Liquefaction Potential ................................................................................................... 2 3.2. Fault Rupture Hazard ................................................................................................... 2 4. Geotechnical Recommendations ..................................................................................... 3 4.1. Seismic Design ............................................................................................................ 3 4.2. Shallow Foundation Design and Construction .............................................................. 3 4.2.1. Shallow Foundation Support ................................................................................. 3 4.2.2 Lateral Earth Pressures ............................................................................................ 4 4.2.3. Slab-On-Grade Support ............................................................................................ 4 4.2.4. Foundation Drainage Considerations ........................................................................ 5 4.3. Utilities ......................................................................................................................... 5 4.4. Earthwork Considerations ............................................................................................ 5 4.4.1. Structural Fill ......................................................................................................... 5 4.4.2. Site Grading .......................................................................................................... 6 4.5. Temporary Slopes and Structural Shoring ................................................................... 6 5. Recommended Additional Services ................................................................................ 6 6. Intended Use and Limitations .......................................................................................... 6 7. References ........................................................................................................................ 7 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Field Exploration Program LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Site Map Figure 2 – Site Plan Figure 3 – USDA Soil Map Figure 4 – Geologic Map Figure 5 – Site Exploration Map J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Seismic Design Parameters ......................................................................................... 3 Table 2: Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters ............................................................... ………….4 J o b N o : 1 0 54-K I N P a g e | 1 1. Introduction 1.1. General This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation and contains geotechnical recommendations for the project taking place at 3123 Sunset Blvd NE, Renton WA 98056. The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations in this report are based on one boring (designated as BH-1-19) completed specifically for this project, published geologic information for the site and vicinity and our experience with similar geologic materials. The conditions observed in the bore hole are assumed to be representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the project area. If during construction, subsurface conditions differ from those described in the explorations, we should be advised immediately so we may reevaluate the recommendations. 1.2. Location and Description The parcel is located at 3123 Sunset Blvd NE in Renton, WA. The site location and vicinity for the property are presented in Figure 1. The site has a history of previous development, which included a commercial building structure and pavement surface surrounding the building. The building was recently demolished, and the entire building and pavement was removed and cleared down to bare earth. The perimeter of the site facing Sunset Blvd NE and NE 12th St are landscaped with small bushes and shrubs interrupted by driveway access points. The scope of the project is to develop the site with an 8,000 to 10,000 SF, 2 to 3-story structure with ground floor to be used for commercial use as a daycare facility. It’s anticipated the structure will be supported on shallow strip footing foundations. The lowermost story may be a below ground basement level for additional parking. The existing property is graded at a relatively flat slope angle. An on-site treatment may be necessary, if infiltration testing and recommendations are required then it will be addressed in a separate report and is not within the scope of this report. 2. Site Conditions 2.1. Site Soils and Geology As part of this project, we reviewed available geologic data from the USDA Soil Conservation Survey and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and prepared site-specific geology and soils maps, which are attached as Figures 3 and 4, respectively. The USDA Soil Conservation Survey map indicates the surface soils at the site consist of Arents, Alderwood Material, 6 to 15 percent slope. It should be noted the percent slope in these descriptions is an approximation. The project vicinity geologic map indicates the project site is underlain by Pleistocene Continental Glacial Till. The conditions in the explorations are generally consistent with the mapped soils and geology at the site. 2.2. Subsurface and Groundwater Conditions 2.2.1. On-Site Soils A single hand auger boring, designated BH-1-19, was performed to explore the subsurface conditions at the site location. The approximate location of the boring is shown on Figure 5. Based on the conditions observed in the boring, the soils at the site generally consist of moist, brownish J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N gray, gravelly sand. The upper 18 inches of soil is relatively loose due to the recent disturbance from demolition activities. The material below 18 inches deep is very dense based on the difficulty of advancing the hole. More detailed information regarding site soil conditions and a description of our field exploration and procedures is included in Appendix A. 2.2.2. Surface Water and Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in boring BH-1-19. It’s not anticipated significant groundwater is present within the limits of the excavation to be performed as part of the construction of the project. However, based on the heterogeneous nature of the native glacial till, it is possible small pockets of perched groundwater will be encountered. Localized seepage is common within lenses of coarser grained sand and gravel contained in Pleistocene continental glacial till deposits mapped at the site. Localized seepage typically occurs in areas where coarser soils such as sands and gravels are trapped within finer grained silts and clays. The groundwater seepage within these trapped zones generally will not result in surface water seepage until exposed either through excavation cuts during construction or through natural erosion processes. There are no notable natural surface water bodies within the site vicinity. The site is in an urban environment with a significant amount of impervious surface. Surface water runoff from storm events directly falling onto the ground in this type of environment is generally collected and directed to detention or infiltration facilities such as swales and ponds, or to catch basins and conveyed through underground stormwater sewer facilities to an appropriate discharge location. A small amount of surface water will infiltrate into the ground within landscaped areas and green space. 3. Geologic Hazards 3.1. Liquefaction Potential Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon whereby saturated soil deposits temporarily lose strength and behave as a viscous fluid in response to cyclic loading. Soil types considered at the highest risk of liquefaction during a seismic event are loose sandy soils. Gravel material can be susceptible to liquefaction if it contains a significant fraction of sand-sized particles and is capped by less permeable material. Groundwater was not encountered in boring BH-1-19 to a depth of 7 feet. Furthermore, the site soils are not considered susceptible to liquefaction based on their high relative density and limited potential for groundwater at shallow depths, and therefore liquefaction is not a design consideration for this project. 3.2. Fault Rupture Hazard The potential impacts of fault rupture include abrupt, large, differential ground movement and associated damage to structures that might straddle the fault. The nearest active crustal fault is the Seattle Fault system. The closest mapped fault splay associated with the Seattle Fault system is located approximately 1.5 to 2.0 miles away from the project site. In our opinion, the risk of fault rupture at the site is low. J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N 4. Geotechnical Recommendations 4.1. Seismic Design Seismic design should be performed based on the design criteria and hazard maps in the 2015 International Building Code (IBC, 2015) for peak ground acceleration (PGA) at the site location based on the United States Geological Survey hazard maps for the 2,475 year recurrence interval at the site location (Peterson et. al, 2014). Adjustment factors should be applied to account for amplification as ground motions transmit from the bedrock surface up through the soil column to the ground surface. For design purposes, we recommend assuming Site Class D soils. Seismic design parameters for the site location are provided in Table 1. Table 1: Seismic Design Parameter s Site Class based on soil conditions Site Class = D Peak Horizontal ground acceleration coefficient on Class B rock PGA = 0.61 Site coefficient for the peak ground acceleration coefficient FPGA = 1.1 Effective peak ground acceleration coefficient (g) As=FPGA(PGA)= 0.67 4.2. Shallow Foundation Design and Construction 4.2.1. Shallow Foundation Support The site development of the parcel includes an 8,000 to 10,000 SF, 2 to 3-story structure with ground floor to be used for commercial use as a daycare facility. We anticipate that the structure will be supported on shallow strip footing foundations. In addition, the lowermost story may be a below ground basement level for parking. Shallow strip footings will be used to support the structure loads. We anticipate the footings will be supported on native glacial till soils. Prior to construction of the footings, the subgrade should be cleared and grubbed and the exposed native subgrade soils should be compacted in place. The subgrade should be inspected for any pockets of loose material. Loose material should be removed and replaced with a minimum of 6-inches of Crushed Surfacing Base Course (CSBC) meeting the requirements of Section 9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2018) or an equivalent material. The CSBC should be placed in layers no greater than 6-inches and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density. Footings bearing on a subgrade prepared as described above can be designed using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,500 psf. The maximum allowable bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for short-term transient loading conditions such as wind and seismic loading. We anticipate the total settlement will not exceed one inch, and differential settlement along a 50-foot length will not exceed half of the total settlement. The settlement is expected to be elastic and will occur as the footings are loaded. We recommend footing subgrade preparation be evaluated by Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC prior to placement of concrete. Foundation subgrade preparation should not be performed during periods of wet weather. We recommend staging the foundation subgrade excavation, compaction of native subgrade soils, and placement of CSBC to limit the time the foundation subgrade is exposed to weather. J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N 4.2.2 Lateral Earth Pressures Retaining walls or stem walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures of the backfill placed behind the walls. For lateral load analysis, we recommend the geotechnical parameters in Table 2 be used for lateral design and analysis. Backfill behind the walls should be placed in horizontal layers no more than 6 inches thick with each layer compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density. The backfill material should be comprised of Gravel Backfill for Walls material meeting the requirements of Section 9-03.12(2) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2018), or an equivalent free-draining material. Table 2: Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters Parameter Design Value Backfill Unit Weight (γ) 135 pcf Wall Backfill Soil Friction Angle (φf) 37° Coefficient of Sliding (tan φf) 0.55 Active Earth Pressure (Ka) 0.23 (EFP 31.1 psf) At Rest Earth Pressure (K0) 0.40 (EFP 54.0 psf) Passive Earth Pressure (Kp) 8.78 (EFP 1,185 psf) The passive earth pressure coefficient and coefficient of sliding presented in Table 2 are ultimate values and should be reduced by a factor of safety equal to 1.5 for final design. The lateral earth pressure coefficients provided in Table 2 are based on the use of Gravel Backfill for Walls. Active earth pressures can be assumed for design, provided that the walls can yield laterally at least 0.001H (where H is the exposed wall height in feet). If the wall is not capable of yielding that amount, then at-rest earth pressures should be used. Seismic loading represented as a rectangular shaped dynamic uniform lateral surcharge equal to 8H psf should be applied, with the resultant acting at a height of 0.5H, where H is the height of the wall. This value, which was calculated using the Mononobe-Okabe method, is appropriate for yielding walls designed in accordance with the 2015 IBC (IBC, 2015). 4.2.3. Slab-On-Grade Support All interior slabs-on-grade should be underlain by a capillary break at least 6 inches thick consisting of free-draining, clean, course sand and fine gravel with a maximum particle size of ¾- inch, no more than 50 percent passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve, and less than 5 percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. Prior to placement of the capillary break layer, topsoil, mud, debris, and rootmass should be cleared and grubbed and the native subgrade soils should be compacted in-place to a dense and relatively unyielding condition. The six-inch capillary break layer should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density of the material. We recommend considering placement of a suitable vapor barrier to further retard moisture at the slab-on-grade. Similar to footing construction, it will be helpful to stage the excavation and subgrade preparation of slab-on-grade areas to limit the exposure to wet weather placement of the capillary break layer. J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N Once in place and compacted, the low-fines-content capillary break layer will reduce the likelihood that the subgrade is disturbed. We recommend using a vertical modulus (Kv1) of 85 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for slab-on- grade bearing on a subgrade prepared as described above. Note that Kv1 is appropriate for a 1-foot by 1-foot surface and the initial subgrade modulus used for design (Ks) will need to be adjusted based on the width of the footing or slab considered using the following equation: Ks = Kv1(B+1)2/(4B2) where B = foundation or slab width in feet. 4.2.4. Foundation Drainage Considerations It’s recommended including a perimeter footing drain system, consisting of a 4-inch diameter, perforated or slotted, rigid plastic pipe placed at the base of the wall footings. The drain should be embedded in a clean, free-draining sand and gravel meeting the requirements of Section 9- 03.12(4) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications for Gravel Backfill for Drains. The drains should be sloped slightly to drain to an appropriate discharge area. Appropriate water and weather proofing measures should be used in order to reduce the potential for leaks through the basement walls. 4.3. Utilities We anticipate that buried utilities will need to be constructed as part of the project. The utility subgrade (base of trench excavation) should be relatively firm prior to placing bedding materials. Subgrade observed to be soft, pumping, or containing abundant organics or refuse should be sub-excavated to firm subgrade soil or a maximum depth of 2 feet. Sub-excavated areas should be backfilled with structural fill. Material placed directly below, around, and above utility pipes should consist of Gravel Backfill for Pipe Zone Bedding as described in Section 9-03.12(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2018). The pipe bedding materials should be placed and compacted to a relatively firm condition in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. Bedding and cover should be a minimum of 6-inches thick. 4.4. Earthwork Considerations 4.4.1. Structural Fill Soils placed as fill beyond the limits of foundation subgrade, wall backfill, and pipe zone areas described previously should be considered structural fill. Structural fill should consist of material meeting the requirements of Common Borrow as described in Section 9-03.14(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2018). Based on the conditions observed in boring BH-1-19, the onsite material to be removed for construction meets the requirements for Common Borrow. Structural fill should be placed and compacted in lifts no greater than 8 inches when using relatively large compaction equipment, such as a vibrating compaction equipment attached to an excavator or a drum roller. If small, hand-operated compaction equipment is used to compact the J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N structural fill, fill lifts should not exceed 6 inches. Based on the small size of the project and difficult access, most likely relatively large compaction equipment will be used. Structural fill should be placed and compacted to between 90 and 92 percent of the maximum dry density. All other fill material should be placed and compacted as described previously. Fill placed in softscape, landscape, or common areas that can accommodate some settlement should be compacted to a relatively firm and unyielding condition. 4.4.2. Site Grading We recommend grading all permanent cuts and fills to a maximum slope angle of 2H:1V. Until a layer of vegetation is established, the upper 1 to 2 feet below the surface of the slope may be only marginally stable. To reduce the potential for short term erosion, coir, jute, or turf reinforcement mat should be placed on the surface of the slope until vegetation is established. 4.5. Temporary Slopes and Structural Shoring Stability for all other temporary excavation slopes, structural shoring, and temporary works necessary to complete the project not shown in the plans for the project remain the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor will determine the appropriate measures to ensure all excavation is in compliance with local, state and federal safety codes. Washington Administrative Code 296-155 (WAC, 2009) contains specific requirements for trenches and temporary slopes. For planning and cost estimating purposes, we recommend assuming 1H:1V temporary slopes are feasible. 5. Recommended Additional Services Before construction begins, we recommend a copy of the draft plans and specifications prepared for the project be made available for review so we can ensure the geotechnical recommendations in this report are included in the Contract. Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and construction monitoring services throughout the remainder of the design and construction of t he project. The integrity of the geotechnical elements of a project depend on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may need to be made in the field if conditions are encountered differ from those described in this report. During the construction phase of the project, we recommend Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC be retained to review construction submittals, observe and evaluate subgrade for all slabs- on-grade and footings, and provide recommendations for any other geotechnical considerations that may arise during construction. 6. Intended Use and Limitations This report has been prepared to assist the client and their consultants in the engineering design and construction of the subject project. It should not be used, in part or in whole for other purposes without contacting Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC for a review of the applicability of such reuse. This report should be made available to prospective contractors for their information only and not as a warranty of ground conditions. J o b N o : 1 0 5 4 -K I N The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC understanding of the project at the time the report was written and on-site conditions existing at time of the field exploration. If significant changes to the nature, configuration, or scope of the project occur during the design process, we should be consulted to determine the impact of such changes on the recommendations and conclusions presented in this report. Site exploration and testing describes subsurface conditions only at the sites of subsurface exploration and at the intervals where samples are collected. These data are interpreted by Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC rendering an opinion regarding the general subsurface conditions. Actual subsurface conditions can be discovered only during earthwork and construction operations. The distribution, continuity, thickness, and characteristics of identified (and unidentified) subsurface materials may vary considerably from that indicated by the subsurface data. While nothing can be done to prevent such variability, Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC is prepared to work with the project team to reduce the impacts of variability on project design, construction, and performance. We appreciate the opportunity to serve your geotechnical needs on this project, and look forward to working with you in the future. Please contact us at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or would like to discuss the contents of this report. 7. References International Building Code (IBC), 2015, International Building Code, prepared by International Code Council. Petersen, M.D., et al., 2014, Documentation for the 2014 update of the United States national seismic hazard maps: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1091, 243 p., https://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141091. Washington Administrative Code (WAC), 2009, April 1, 2009. Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources (DNR), 2016, https://geologyportal.dnr.wa.gov, accessed 8/26/2018 06:05 PM. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2015, Geotechnical Design Manual, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia WA. (www.wsdot.wa.gov/ Publications/Manuals/M46-03.htm) Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2018, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia WA. (www.wsdot.wa.gov/Publications/Manuals/M41-10.htm) Site Location Figure 1: Site Map 3123 NE Sunset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 Site Development Geotechnical Report JOB #: 1054-KIN Date: March, 2019 Figure 2: Site Plan 3123 NE Sunset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 Site Development Geotechnical Report JOB #: 1054-KIN Date: March, 2019 LEGEND Site Location Figure 2: Geology Map 216 9th Ave SE Olympia, WA 98501 Seismic Retrofit Geotechnical Report JOB #: 1040-THU Date: February, 2018 Figure 3: Geologic Map 3123 NE Sunset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 Site Development Geotechnical Report JOB #: 1054-KIN Date: March, 2019 Sources: City of Olympia, Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS | Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Sources: City of Renton, County of King, Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS | Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources N Legend Site location AmC Arents, Alderwood material, 6 to 15 percent slopes Ur Urban land Figure 4: USDA Soil Map 3123 NE Sunset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 Site Development Geotechnical Report JOB #: 1054-KIN Date: March, 2019 Sample Collection Location BH-1-19 N JOB #: 1054-KIN Date: March, 2019 Figure 5: Site Exploration Map 3123 NE Sunset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 Site Development Geotechnical Report APPENDIX A – FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM To characterize the surface and subsurface conditions for the project, Mud Bay Geotechnical Services, LLC performed a single boring, designated BH-1-19. The boring was completed from the existing ground surface at the approximate location shown on Figure 5. The boring was completed using a Humboldt Manufacturing model H-4206.6A hand auger with a 3 ¼ inch diameter bucket tube sampler. A prybar was used at selected locations to break up some of the gravel particles in order to facilitate advancing the hole. The soil samples were classified visually in the field in general accordance with ASTM D2488, the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure). Once transported back to the office, the samples were re-examined and the field classifications were modified accordingly. A summary log of the boring is included in Appendix A. Note the soil descriptions and interfaces shown on the log are interpretive, and actual changes may be gradual. Upon completion, the hole was backfilled to the original ground surface using excavated material from the spoil pile. Completed:Hammer Type: Backfilled:Hammer Weight:Hammer Drop: Groundwater Depth:Total Depth of Boring: Lithology Note: the upper 18" was made up of construction overburden Moist, brownish gray, gravelly sand, with med grain gravels, (SW) Moist, brownish gray, gravelly sand, with med grain gravels, (SW) Standard Penetration Slit Spoon Sampler (SPT) Blows/3/4"Density 0-4 Very Loose 5-10 Loose 11-24 Medium Dense 25-50 Dense >50 Vey Dense REF Refusal Moisture Content (%)Additional TestSoil Group Name: modifier, color, moisture, density/consistency, grain size, other descriptors Rock Description: modifierm color, hardness/degree of concentration, bedding and joint characteristics, solutions, void conditions.Graphic LogDateSite Development 3/1/2019 Address:Started: Logan Krehbiel 3123 Sunset Blvd, Renton WA 98056 Project Number: 1054-KIN Gravel, Sand, Non-Plastic Silt Elastic Silts and Clays Bailly & Bailly LLC BH-1-19 3/1/2019 3/1/2019 n/a Hand Auger n/a Dry Density (pcf)Client:Boring No. 1 of 2: Drilling Contractor:Drill Rig Type: 3.25 inches Steel n/a Soil Density Modifiers Bit Type:Diameter: Fluid: none Elevation: Existing Surface 84" n/a n/a Bore Log Symbols Logged By: Samantha Denham Drill Crew: Project:Depth (feet)Sample TypeSample NumberBlow Counts (blows/3/4")California Sampler Shelby Tube CPP Sampler StabIlized Ground water Groundwater At time of Drilling Bulk/ Bag Sample Blows/3/4" 0-1 2-4 5-8 9-15 16-30 31-61 Very Stiff 31-60 Consistency Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Hard Very Hard 3 6 S-1 S-2 n/a n/a Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 7-1 7. OTHER PERMITS No other permits relevant to this Final TIR are known to be required at this time. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 8-1 8. ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Per Section 1.2.5.1, Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (CSWPP) measures include Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) measures and Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Spill (SWPPS) measures. ESC PLAN ANALYSIS AND DESIGN (PART A) Design of the ESC plan was completed in conformance with Core Requirement #5 and Appendix D of the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Compliance with the 13 ESC measures is summarized below. 1. Clearing Limits: Clearing limits have been delineated on sheet C2.01 of the construction plans. The clearing limits extend only to those areas that will be disturbed during construction of the subject project. 2. Cover Measures: Temporary Cover and Permanent Cover measures are specified as notes on sheet C2.31 of the construction plans. 3. Perimeter Protection: Silt fence will be used for perimeter protection. Silt fence will be installed along the perimeters of those areas that will be receiving silt-laden runoff. See sheets C2.01 and C2.32 of the construction plans for locations and detail. 4. Traffic Area Stabilization: A temporary construction access will be installed at the entrance to the project site. See sheets C2.01 and C2.32 of the construction plans for location and detail. 5. Sediment Retention: Silt fence is utilized for sediment retention for the entire site. As the portions of the site tributary to the silt fence have average slopes less than 10%, per the 2016 KCSWDM Section D.2.1.3, silt fence can be utilized as primary treatment for a sheet flow distance of 250 feet. There is a portion of the site along the northeast boundary where slopes are between 15-20%. This area still meets the requirement of primary treatment at 25% or less slope with a sheet flow distance of 150 feet. 6. Surface Water Collection: Surface water collection is not necessary due to the site being small enough to be solely treated with perimeter protection. 7. Dewatering Control: A note on sheet C2.31 of the construction plans addresses dewatering control. 8. Dust Control: A note on sheet C2.31 of the construction plans addresses the procedure for dust control should soils become too dry. 9. Flow Control: This measure is not applicable as the site is exempt from any permanent flow control facilities. The discharged drainage during construction is not expected to be higher than existing site conditions 2-year and 10-year runoff peaks. 10. Control Pollutants: See SWPPS Plan Design (Part B) below. 11. Protect Existing and Proposed Flow Control BMPs: The proposed drywell is the only BMP that requires protection. Once the drywell has been installed, the inlet pipe will be plugged to prevent any drainage from entering the facility. Per the construction sequence, no drainage will be allowed to discharge into the drywell until the site is stabilized. 12. Maintain BMPs: Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plans addressing maintenance requirements. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 8-2 13. Manage the Project: The project will be managed based on seasonal work limitations and continual inspection and monitoring throughout the project. SWPPS PLAN DESIGN (PART B) Design of the SWPPS plan was completed in conformance with Section 2.3.1.4 of the 2016 KCSWDM. The CSWPPS plan contains notes establishing what materials and activities will not be allowed on the site along with notes describing BMPs for treatment of materials and activities that will be allowed on the site. The contractor shall designate a person as the responsible representative in charge of erosion control and maintenance of all erosion control and stormwater pollution prevention facilities, see CSWPPS plan. Pollution-generating activities associated with construction and mitigation are tabulated below. 1. Storage and Handling of Liquids: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plan set addressing storage and handling of liquids. 2. Storage and Stockpiling of Construction Materials and Wastes: Storage of construction materials and wastes will be stored within a designated stockpile area. Stockpile areas shall be covered with plastic when not in use. Stockpile height shall not exceed 8 feet. 3. Fueling: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plan set addressing fueling. 4. Maintenance, Repairs, and Storage of Vehicles and Equipment: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plan set addressing maintenance, repairs, and storage of vehicles and equipment. 5. Concrete Saw Cutting, Slurry, and Washwater Disposal: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plan set addressing concrete saw cutting, slurry, and washwater disposal. 6. Handling of pH Elevated Water: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plan set addressing pH elevated water. 7. Application of Chemicals including Pesticides and Fertilizers: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Notes have been added to sheet C2.31 of the construction plan set addressing application of chemicals. Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 9-1 9. BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT See bond quantities on the following pages. The facility summary and declaration of covenant will be addressed upon project approval. Planning Division |1055 South Grady Way – 6 th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7200 Date Prepared: Name: PE Registration No: Firm Name: Firm Address: Phone No. Email Address: Project Name: Project Owner: CED Plan # (LUA):Phone: CED Permit # (U):Address: Site Address: Street Intersection:Addt'l Project Owner: Parcel #(s):Phone: Address: Clearing and grading greater than or equal to 5,000 board feet of timber? Yes/No:NO Water Service Provided by: If Yes, Provide Forest Practice Permit #:Sewer Service Provided by: Abbreviated Legal Description: SE 1/4 SW 1/4 SECTION 4 TOWNSHIP 23N RANGE 5E 3123 NE Sunset BLVD. 1025 N 36th St. Sunset BLVD. & NE 12th C19006760 206-430-9827 12/23/2019 Prepared by: FOR CONSTRUCTIONProject Phase 1 Gina Brooks 36478 Core Design 12100 NE 195th Street, Suite 300 425-885-7877 SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET PROJECT INFORMATION CITY OF RENTON CITY OF RENTON 1 Select the current project status/phase from the following options: For Approval - Preliminary Data Enclosed, pending approval from the City; For Construction - Estimated Data Enclosed, Plans have been approved for contruction by the City; Project Closeout - Final Costs and Quantities Enclosed for Project Close-out Submittal Engineer Stamp Required (all cost estimates must have original wet stamp and signature) Clearing and Grading Utility Providers N/A Project Location and Description Project Owner Information KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Renton, WA 98056 042305-9155 Kiddie Research, LLC LUA 19-000129 Page 1 of 1 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION I PROJECT INFORMATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Unit Reference #Price Unit Quantity Cost Backfill & compaction-embankment ESC-1 6.50$ CY Check dams, 4" minus rock ESC-2 SWDM 5.4.6.3 80.00$ Each Catch Basin Protection ESC-3 35.50$ Each 7 248.50 Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus ESC-4 WSDOT 9-03.9(3)95.00$ CY Ditching ESC-5 9.00$ CY Excavation-bulk ESC-6 2.00$ CY Fence, silt ESC-7 SWDM 5.4.3.1 1.50$ LF 249 373.50 Fence, Temporary (NGPE)ESC-8 1.50$ LF Geotextile Fabric ESC-9 2.50$ SY Hay Bale Silt Trap ESC-10 0.50$ Each Hydroseeding ESC-11 SWDM 5.4.2.4 0.80$ SY Interceptor Swale / Dike ESC-12 1.00$ LF Jute Mesh ESC-13 SWDM 5.4.2.2 3.50$ SY Level Spreader ESC-14 1.75$ LF Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep ESC-15 SWDM 5.4.2.1 2.50$ SY Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep ESC-16 SWDM 5.4.2.1 2.00$ SY Piping, temporary, CPP, 6"ESC-17 12.00$ LF Piping, temporary, CPP, 8"ESC-18 14.00$ LF Piping, temporary, CPP, 12"ESC-19 18.00$ LF Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged ESC-20 SWDM 5.4.2.3 4.00$ SY Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes ESC-21 WSDOT 9-13.1(2)45.00$ CY Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1'ESC-22 SWDM 5.4.4.1 1,800.00$ Each Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'x1'ESC-23 SWDM 5.4.4.1 3,200.00$ Each 1 3,200.00 Sediment pond riser assembly ESC-24 SWDM 5.4.5.2 2,200.00$ Each Sediment trap, 5' high berm ESC-25 SWDM 5.4.5.1 19.00$ LF Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section ESC-26 SWDM 5.4.5.1 70.00$ LF Seeding, by hand ESC-27 SWDM 5.4.2.4 1.00$ SY Sodding, 1" deep, level ground ESC-28 SWDM 5.4.2.5 8.00$ SY Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground ESC-29 SWDM 5.4.2.5 10.00$ SY TESC Supervisor ESC-30 110.00$ HR Water truck, dust control ESC-31 SWDM 5.4.7 140.00$ HR Unit Reference #Price Unit Quantity Cost EROSION/SEDIMENT SUBTOTAL:3,822.00 SALES TAX @ 10%382.20 EROSION/SEDIMENT TOTAL:4,204.20 (A) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL Description No. (A) WRITE-IN-ITEMS Page 1 of 1 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.a EROSION_CONTROL Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost GENERAL ITEMS Backfill & Compaction- embankment GI-1 6.00$ CY Backfill & Compaction- trench GI-2 9.00$ CY Clear/Remove Brush, by hand (SY)GI-3 1.00$ SY Bollards - fixed GI-4 240.74$ Each 5 1,203.70 Bollards - removable GI-5 452.34$ Each Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal GI-6 10,000.00$ Acre Excavation - bulk GI-7 2.00$ CY 31 62.00 Excavation - Trench GI-8 5.00$ CY Fencing, cedar, 6' high GI-9 20.00$ LF Fencing, chain link, 4'GI-10 38.31$ LF Fencing, chain link, vinyl coated, 6' high GI-11 20.00$ LF Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 20' GI-12 1,400.00$ Each Fill & compact - common barrow GI-13 25.00$ CY 540 13,500.00 Fill & compact - gravel base GI-14 27.00$ CY Fill & compact - screened topsoil GI-15 39.00$ CY Gabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh GI-16 65.00$ SY Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh GI-17 90.00$ SY Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh GI-18 150.00$ SY Grading, fine, by hand GI-19 2.50$ SY Grading, fine, with grader GI-20 2.00$ SY Monuments, 3' Long GI-21 250.00$ Each Sensitive Areas Sign GI-22 7.00$ Each Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground GI-23 8.00$ SY Surveying, line & grade GI-24 850.00$ Day Surveying, lot location/lines GI-25 1,800.00$ Acre Topsoil Type A (imported)GI-26 28.50$ CY Traffic control crew ( 2 flaggers )GI-27 120.00$ HR Trail, 4" chipped wood GI-28 8.00$ SY Trail, 4" crushed cinder GI-29 9.00$ SY Trail, 4" top course GI-30 12.00$ SY Conduit, 2"GI-31 5.00$ LF Wall, retaining, concrete GI-32 55.00$ SF Wall, rockery GI-33 15.00$ SF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:14,765.70 (B)(C)(D)(E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 1 of 3 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.b TRANSPORTATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) ROAD IMPROVEMENT/PAVEMENT/SURFACING AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy RI-1 30.00$ SY AC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000sy RI-2 16.00$ SY AC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy RI-3 10.00$ SY AC Removal/Disposal RI-4 35.00$ SY Barricade, Type III ( Permanent )RI-5 56.00$ LF Guard Rail RI-6 30.00$ LF Curb & Gutter, rolled RI-7 17.00$ LF Curb & Gutter, vertical RI-8 12.50$ LF 160 2,000.00 Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposal RI-9 18.00$ LF 160 2,880.00 Curb, extruded asphalt RI-10 5.50$ LF Curb, extruded concrete RI-11 7.00$ LF Sawcut, asphalt, 3" depth RI-12 1.85$ LF Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth RI-13 3.00$ LF Sealant, asphalt RI-14 2.00$ LF Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick RI-15 15.00$ SY Sidewalk, 4" thick RI-16 38.00$ SY 93 3,534.00 105 3,990.00 Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and disposal RI-17 32.00$ SY 128 4,096.00 Sidewalk, 5" thick RI-18 41.00$ SY 24 984.00 18 738.00 Sidewalk, 5" thick, demolition and disposal RI-19 40.00$ SY Sign, Handicap RI-20 85.00$ Each 2 170.00 Striping, per stall RI-21 7.00$ Each 14 98.00 Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk )RI-22 3.00$ SF Striping, 4" reflectorized line RI-23 0.50$ LF Additional 2.5" Crushed Surfacing RI-24 3.60$ SY HMA 1/2" Overlay 1.5" RI-25 14.00$ SY HMA 1/2" Overlay 2"RI-26 18.00$ SY 491 8,838.00 HMA Road, 2", 4" rock, First 2500 SY RI-27 28.00$ SY HMA Road, 2", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500SY RI-28 21.00$ SY HMA Road, 4", 6" rock, First 2500 SY RI-29 45.00$ SY 491 22,095.00 HMA Road, 4", 6" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY RI-30 37.00$ SY HMA Road, 4", 4.5" ATB RI-31 38.00$ SY Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY RI-32 15.00$ SY 33 495.00 Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY RI-33 10.00$ SY Thickened Edge RI-34 8.60$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:9,960.00 4,272.00 35,686.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 2 of 3 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.b TRANSPORTATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E) Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) PARKING LOT SURFACING No. 2" AC, 2" top course rock & 4" borrow PL-1 21.00$ SY 2" AC, 1.5" top course & 2.5" base course PL-2 28.00$ SY 4" select borrow PL-3 5.00$ SY 1.5" top course rock & 2.5" base course PL-4 14.00$ SY SUBTOTAL PARKING LOT SURFACING: (B)(C)(D)(E) LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION No. Street Trees LA-1 250.00$ EA Median Landscaping LA-2 Right-of-Way Landscaping LA-3 Wetland Landscaping LA-4 SUBTOTAL LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION: (B)(C)(D)(E) TRAFFIC & LIGHTING No. Signs TR-1 Street Light System ( # of Poles)TR-2 10,000.00$ EA 3 30,000.00 Traffic Signal TR-3 Traffic Signal Modification TR-4 SUBTOTAL TRAFFIC & LIGHTING:30,000.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) WRITE-IN-ITEMS SUBTOTAL WRITE-IN ITEMS: STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL:39,960.00 4,272.00 50,451.70 SALES TAX @ 10%3,996.00 427.20 5,045.17 STREET AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL:43,956.00 4,699.20 55,496.87 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 3 of 3 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.b TRANSPORTATION Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public PrivateRight-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost DRAINAGE (CPE = Corrugated Polyethylene Pipe, N12 or Equivalent) For Culvert prices, Average of 4' cover was assumed. Assume perforated PVC is same price as solid pipe.) Access Road, R/D D-1 26.00$ SY * (CBs include frame and lid) Beehive D-2 90.00$ Each Through-curb Inlet Framework D-3 400.00$ Each CB Type I D-4 1,500.00$ Each 1 1,500.00 2 3,000.00 CB Type IL D-5 1,750.00$ Each 1 1,750.00 CB Type II, 48" diameter D-6 2,300.00$ Each 1 2,300.00 1 2,300.00 for additional depth over 4' D-7 480.00$ FT CB Type II, 54" diameter D-8 2,500.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-9 495.00$ FT CB Type II, 60" diameter D-10 2,800.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-11 600.00$ FT CB Type II, 72" diameter D-12 6,000.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-13 850.00$ FT CB Type II, 96" diameter D-14 14,000.00$ Each for additional depth over 4'D-15 925.00$ FT Trash Rack, 12"D-16 350.00$ Each Trash Rack, 15"D-17 410.00$ Each Trash Rack, 18"D-18 480.00$ Each Trash Rack, 21"D-19 550.00$ Each Cleanout, PVC, 4"D-20 150.00$ Each Cleanout, PVC, 6"D-21 170.00$ Each 1 170.00 Cleanout, PVC, 8"D-22 200.00$ Each 1 200.00 Culvert, PVC, 4" D-23 10.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 6" D-24 13.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 8" D-25 15.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 12" D-26 23.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 15" D-27 35.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 18" D-28 41.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 24"D-29 56.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 30" D-30 78.00$ LF Culvert, PVC, 36" D-31 130.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 8"D-32 19.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 12"D-33 29.00$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:5,550.00 5,670.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Page 1 of 5 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public PrivateRight-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES DRAINAGE (Continued)Culvert, CMP, 15"D-34 35.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 18"D-35 41.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 24"D-36 56.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 30"D-37 78.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 36"D-38 130.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 48"D-39 190.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 60"D-40 270.00$ LF Culvert, CMP, 72"D-41 350.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 8"D-42 42.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 12"D-43 48.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 15"D-44 78.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 18"D-45 48.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 24"D-46 78.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 30"D-47 125.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 36"D-48 150.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 42"D-49 175.00$ LF Culvert, Concrete, 48"D-50 205.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 6" D-51 14.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 8" D-52 16.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 12" D-53 24.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 15" D-54 35.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 18" D-55 41.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 24" D-56 56.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 30" D-57 78.00$ LF Culvert, CPE Triple Wall, 36" D-58 130.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 6"D-59 60.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 8"D-60 72.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 12"D-61 84.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 15"D-62 96.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 18"D-63 108.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 24"D-64 120.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 30"D-65 132.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 36"D-66 144.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 48"D-67 156.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 54"D-68 168.00$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE: (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 2 of 5 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public PrivateRight-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES DRAINAGE (Continued)Culvert, LCPE, 60"D-69 180.00$ LF Culvert, LCPE, 72"D-70 192.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 6"D-71 42.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 8"D-72 42.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 12"D-73 74.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 15"D-74 106.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 18"D-75 138.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 24"D-76 221.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 30"D-77 276.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 36"D-78 331.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 48"D-79 386.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 54"D-80 441.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 60"D-81 496.00$ LF Culvert, HDPE, 72"D-82 551.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 6"D-83 84.00$ LF 10 840.00 10 840.00 13 1,092.00 Pipe, Polypropylene, 8"D-84 89.00$ LF 5 445.00 Pipe, Polypropylene, 12"D-85 95.00$ LF 170 16,150.00 10 950.00 35 3,325.00 Pipe, Polypropylene, 15"D-86 100.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 18"D-87 106.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 24"D-88 111.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 30"D-89 119.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 36"D-90 154.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 48"D-91 226.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 54"D-92 332.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 60"D-93 439.00$ LF Pipe, Polypropylene, 72"D-94 545.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 6"D-95 61.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 8"D-96 84.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 12"D-97 106.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 15"D-98 129.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 18"D-99 152.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 24"D-100 175.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 30"D-101 198.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 36"D-102 220.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 48"D-103 243.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 54"D-104 266.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 60"D-105 289.00$ LF Culvert, DI, 72"D-106 311.00$ LF SUBTOTAL THIS PAGE:16,990.00 1,790.00 4,862.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 3 of 5 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public PrivateRight-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES Specialty Drainage ItemsDitching SD-1 9.50$ CY Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+)SD-3 28.00$ LF French Drain (3' depth)SD-4 26.00$ LF Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene SD-5 3.00$ SY Mid-tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep SD-6 2,000.00$ Each Pond Overflow Spillway SD-7 16.00$ SY Restrictor/Oil Separator, 12"SD-8 1,150.00$ Each 1 1,150.00 Restrictor/Oil Separator, 15"SD-9 1,350.00$ Each Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18"SD-10 1,700.00$ Each Riprap, placed SD-11 42.00$ CY Tank End Reducer (36" diameter)SD-12 1,200.00$ Each Infiltration pond testing SD-13 125.00$ HR Permeable Pavement SD-14 Permeable Concrete Sidewalk SD-15 Culvert, Box __ ft x __ ft SD-16 SUBTOTAL SPECIALTY DRAINAGE ITEMS:1,150.00 (B)(C)(D)(E)STORMWATER FACILITIES (Include Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch) Detention Pond SF-1 Each Detention Tank SF-2 Each Detention Vault SF-3 Each Infiltration Pond SF-4 Each Infiltration Tank SF-5 Each Infiltration Vault SF-6 Each Infiltration Trenches SF-7 Each Basic Biofiltration Swale SF-8 Each Wet Biofiltration Swale SF-9 Each Wetpond SF-10 Each Wetvault SF-11 Each Sand Filter SF-12 Each Sand Filter Vault SF-13 Each Linear Sand Filter SF-14 Each Proprietary Facility SF-15 Each Bioretention Facility SF-16 Each SUBTOTAL STORMWATER FACILITIES: (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 4 of 5 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public PrivateRight-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES WRITE-IN-ITEMS (INCLUDE ON-SITE BMPs) WI-1 WI-2 WI-3 WI-4 WI-5 WI-6 WI-7 WI-8 WI-9 WI-10 WI-11 WI-12 WI-13 WI-14 WI-15 SUBTOTAL WRITE-IN ITEMS: DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES SUBTOTAL:16,990.00 7,340.00 11,682.00 SALES TAX @ 10%1,699.00 734.00 1,168.20 DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER FACILITIES TOTAL:18,689.00 8,074.00 12,850.20 (B)(C)(D)(E) Page 5 of 5 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.c DRAINAGE Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public Private Right-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Connection to Existing Watermain W-1 2,000.00$ Each 1 2,000.00 Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 4 Inch Diameter W-2 50.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 6 Inch Diameter W-3 56.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 8 Inch Diameter W-4 60.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 10 Inch Diameter W-5 70.00$ LF Ductile Iron Watermain, CL 52, 12 Inch Diameter W-6 80.00$ LF Gate Valve, 4 inch Diameter W-7 500.00$ Each Gate Valve, 6 inch Diameter W-8 700.00$ Each 1 700.00 Gate Valve, 8 Inch Diameter W-9 800.00$ Each Gate Valve, 10 Inch Diameter W-10 1,000.00$ Each Gate Valve, 12 Inch Diameter W-11 1,200.00$ Each Fire Hydrant Assembly W-12 4,000.00$ Each 1 4,000.00 Permanent Blow-Off Assembly W-13 1,800.00$ Each Air-Vac Assembly, 2-Inch Diameter W-14 2,000.00$ Each Air-Vac Assembly, 1-Inch Diameter W-15 1,500.00$ Each Compound Meter Assembly 3-inch Diameter W-16 8,000.00$ Each Compound Meter Assembly 4-inch Diameter W-17 9,000.00$ Each Compound Meter Assembly 6-inch Diameter W-18 10,000.00$ Each Pressure Reducing Valve Station 8-inch to 10-inch W-19 20,000.00$ Each WATER SUBTOTAL:6,700.00 SALES TAX @ 10%670.00 WATER TOTAL:7,370.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR WATER Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 1 of 1 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.d WATER Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 CED Permit #:C19006760 Existing Future Public PrivateRight-of-Way Improvements Improvements (D) (E)Description No. Unit Price Unit Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Quant.Cost Clean Outs SS-1 1,000.00$ Each 2 2,000.00 Grease Interceptor, 500 gallon SS-2 8,000.00$ Each Grease Interceptor, 1000 gallon SS-3 10,000.00$ Each Grease Interceptor, 1500 gallon SS-4 15,000.00$ Each Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 4 Inch Diameter SS-5 80.00$ LF Side Sewer Pipe, PVC. 6 Inch Diameter SS-6 95.00$ LF 142 13,490.00 Sewer Pipe, PVC, 8 inch Diameter SS-7 105.00$ LF Sewer Pipe, PVC, 12 Inch Diameter SS-8 120.00$ LF Sewer Pipe, DI, 8 inch Diameter SS-9 115.00$ LF Sewer Pipe, DI, 12 Inch Diameter SS-10 130.00$ LF Manhole, 48 Inch Diameter SS-11 6,000.00$ Each Manhole, 54 Inch Diameter SS-13 6,500.00$ Each Manhole, 60 Inch Diameter SS-15 7,500.00$ Each Manhole, 72 Inch Diameter SS-17 8,500.00$ Each Manhole, 96 Inch Diameter SS-19 14,000.00$ Each Pipe, C-900, 12 Inch Diameter SS-21 180.00$ LF Outside Drop SS-24 1,500.00$ LS Inside Drop SS-25 1,000.00$ LS Sewer Pipe, PVC, ____ Inch Diameter SS-26 Lift Station (Entire System)SS-27 LS SANITARY SEWER SUBTOTAL:15,490.00 SALES TAX @ 10%1,549.00 SANITARY SEWER TOTAL:17,039.00 (B)(C)(D)(E) SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FOR SANITARY SEWER Quantity Remaining (Bond Reduction) (B)(C) Page 1 of 1 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION II.e SANITARY SEWER Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 Planning Division |1055 South Grady Way – 6 th Floor | Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7200 Date: Name:Project Name: PE Registration No:CED Plan # (LUA): Firm Name:CED Permit # (U): Firm Address:Site Address: Phone No.Parcel #(s): Email Address:Project Phase: Site Restoration/Erosion Sediment Control Subtotal (a) Existing Right-of-Way Improvements Subtotal (b)(b)51,326.00$ Future Public Improvements Subtotal (c)4,699.20$ Stormwater & Drainage Facilities (Public & Private) Subtotal (d)(d)39,613.20$ (e) (f) Site Restoration Civil Construction Permit Maintenance Bond 19,127.68$ Bond Reduction 2 Construction Permit Bond Amount 3 Minimum Bond Amount is $10,000.00 1 Estimate Only - May involve multiple and variable components, which will be established on an individual basis by Development Engineering. 2 The City of Renton allows one request only for bond reduction prior to the maintenance period. Reduction of not more than 70% of the original bond amount, provided that the remaining 30% will cover all remaining items to be constructed. 3 Required Bond Amounts are subject to review and modification by Development Engineering. * Note: The word BOND as used in this document means any financial guarantee acceptable to the City of Renton. ** Note: All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit. EST1 ((b) + (c) + (d)) x 20% -$ MAINTENANCE BOND */** (after final acceptance of construction) 4,204.20$ 51,326.00$ 116,602.20$ 4,204.20$ -$ 39,613.20$ -$ 120,806.40$ P (a) x 100% SITE IMPROVEMENT BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET BOND CALCULATIONS 12/23/2019 Gina Brooks 36478 Core Design R ((b x 150%) + (d x 100%)) S (e) x 150% + (f) x 100% Bond Reduction: Existing Right-of-Way Improvements (Quantity Remaining)2 Bond Reduction: Stormwater & Drainage Facilities (Quantity Remaining)2 T (P +R - S) Prepared by:Project Information CONSTRUCTION BOND AMOUNT */** (prior to permit issuance) 425-885-7877 KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER LUA 19-000129 3123 NE Sunset BLVD. 042305-9155 FOR CONSTRUCTION C19006760 12100 NE 195th Street, Suite 300 Page 1 of 1 Ref 8-H Bond Quantity Worksheet SECTION III. BOND WORKSHEET Unit Prices Updated: 06/14/2016 Version: 04/26/2017 Printed 2/21/2020 Core Design, Inc. KIDDIE RESEARCH DAYCARE CENTER Page 10-1 10. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE See Operations and Maintenance Manual on the following pages. CITY OF RENTON SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 A-1 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS This appendix contains the maintenance requirements for the following typical stormwater flow control and water quality facilities and on-site BMPs (ctrl/click the title to follow the link): No. 1 – Detention Ponds No. 2 – Infiltration Facilities No. 3 – Detention Tanks and Vaults No. 4 – Control Structure/Flow Restrictor No. 5 – Catch Basins and Manholes No. 6 – Conveyance Pipes and Ditches No. 7 – Debris Barriers (e.g., trash racks) No. 8 – Energy Dissipaters No. 9 – Fencing No. 10 – Gates/Bollards/Access Barriers No. 11 – Grounds (landscaping) No. 12 – Access Roads No. 13 – Basic Bioswale (grass) No. 14 – Wet Bioswale No. 15 – Filter Strip No. 16 – Wetpond No. 17 – Wetvault No. 18 – Stormwater Wetland No. 19 – Sand Filter Pond No. 20 – Sand Filter Vault No. 21 – Proprietary Facility Cartridge Filter Systems No. 22 – Baffle Oil/Water Separator No. 23 – Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separator APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual A-2 No. 24 – Catch Basin Insert (not allowed in the city for oil control) No. 25 – Drywell BMP No. 26 – Gravel Filled Infiltration Trench BMP No. 27 – Gravel Filled Dispersion Trench BMP No. 28 – Native Vegetated Surface/Native Vegetated Landscape BMP No. 29 – Perforated Pipe Connections BMP No. 30 – Permeable Pavement BMP No. 31 – Bioretention BMP No. 32 – RainWater Harvesting BMP No. 33 – Rock Pad BMP No. 34 – Sheet Flow BMP No. 35 – Splash Block BMP No. 36 – Vegetated Roof BMP No. 37 – Rain Garden BMP No. 38 – Soil Amendment BMP No. 39 – Retained Trees No. 40 – Filterra System No. 41 – Compost Amended Vegetated Filter Strip (CAVFS) No. 42 – Media Filter Drain (MFD) No. 43 – Compost-Amended Biofiltration Swale APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual A-10 NO. 5 – CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITION WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Structure Sediment accumulation Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin. Sump of catch basin contains no sediment. Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than ½ cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the catch basin by more than 10%. No Trash or debris blocking or potentially blocking entrance to catch basin. Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). No dead animals or vegetation present within catch basin. Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Damage to frame and/or top slab Corner of frame extends more than ¾ inch past curb face into the street (If applicable). Frame is even with curb. Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than ¼ inch. Top slab is free of holes and cracks. Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than ¾ inch of the frame from the top slab. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Cracks in walls or bottom Cracks wider than ½ inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that catch basin is unsound. Catch basin is sealed and is structurally sound. Cracks wider than ½ inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. Settlement/ misalignment Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than ½-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the catch basin at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than ¼-inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipes. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Inlet/Outlet Pipe Sediment accumulation Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe. Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). No trash or debris in pipes. APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 A-11 NO. 5 – CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITION WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Inlet/Outlet Pipe (cont.) Damaged inlet/outlet pipe Cracks wider than ½-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than ¼-inch wide at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. Metal Grates (Catch Basins) Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Grate opening meets design standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% of grate surface. Grate free of trash and debris. footnote to guidelines for disposal Damaged or missing grate Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Any open structure requires urgent maintenance. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Manhole Cover/Lid Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place. Any open structure requires urgent maintenance. Cover/lid protects opening to structure. Locking mechanism not working Mechanism cannot be opened by one maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not work. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover/lid difficult to remove One maintenance person cannot remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift. Cover/lid can be removed and reinstalled by one maintenance person. APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual A-12 NO. 6 – CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITIONS WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Pipes Sediment & debris accumulation Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Water flows freely through pipes. Vegetation/root growth in pipe Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of water through pipes. Water flows freely through pipes. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Damage to protective coating or corrosion Protective coating is damaged; rust or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of pipe. Pipe repaired or replaced. Damaged pipes Any dent that decreases the cross section area of pipe by more than 20% or is determined to have weakened structural integrity of the pipe. Pipe repaired or replaced. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Sediment accumulation Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the design depth. Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to City personnel or the public. Noxious and nuisance vegetation removed according to applicable regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where City personnel or the public might normally be. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Excessive vegetation growth Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through ditches. Water flows freely through ditches. Erosion damage to slopes Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding. Rock lining out of place or missing (If applicable) One layer or less of rock exists above native soil area 5 square feet or more, any exposed native soil. Replace rocks to design standards. APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual A-38 NO. 25 – DRYWELL BMP MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITIONS WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Preventive Plugging, obstructions Any cause limiting flow into drywell. Drywell able to receive full flow prior to and during wet season. Site Trash and debris Trash or debris that could end up in the drywell is evident. No trash or debris that could get into the drywell can be found. Pipes Plugged inlet The entrance to the pipe is restricted due to sediment, trash, or debris. The entrance to the pipe is not restricted. Vegetation/root growth in pipes Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of water through pipes. Water flows freely through pipes. Plugged pipe Sediment or other material prevents free flow of water through the pipe. Water flows freely through pipes. Broken pipe or joint leaks Damage to the pipe or pipe joints allowing water to seep out. Pipe does not allow water to exit other than at the outlet. Structure Basin leaks Holes or breaks in the basin allow water to leave the basin at locations other than per design. Basin is sealed and allows water to exit only where designed. Filter Media Plugged filter media Filter media plugged. Flow through filter media is normal. NO. 26 – GRAVEL FILLED INFILTRATION TRENCH BMP MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITIONS WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Preventive Blocking, obstructions Debris or trash limiting flow to infiltration trench. Infiltration trench able to receive full flow prior to and during wet season. Site Trash and debris Trash or debris that could end up in the infiltration trench is evident. No trash or debris that could get into the infiltration trench can be found. Pipes Plugged inlet The entrance to the pipe is restricted due to sediment, trash, or debris. The entrance to the pipe is not restricted. Vegetation/root growth in pipes Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of water through pipes. Water flows freely through pipes. Plugged pipes Sediment or other material prevents free flow of water through the pipe. Water flows freely through pipes. Broken pipe or joint leaks Damage to the pipe or pipe joints allowing water to seep out. Pipe does not allow water to exit other than at the outlet to the trench. Structure Flow not reaching trench Flows are not getting into the trench as designed. Water enters and exits trench as designed. Cleanout/inspection access does not allow cleaning or inspection of trench The cleanout/inspection access is not available. Cleanout/inspection access is available. Filter Media Plugged filter media Filter media plugged. Flow through filter media is normal. APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual 12/12/2016 A-47 NO. 38 – SOIL AMENDMENT BMP MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITIONS WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Soil Media Unhealthy vegetation Vegetation not fully covering ground surface or vegetation health is poor. Yellowing: possible Nitrogen (N) deficiency. Poor growth: possible Phosphorous (P) deficiency. Poor flowering, spotting or curled leaves, or weak roots or stems: possible Potassium (K) deficiency. Plants are healthy and appropriate for site conditions Inadequate soil nutrients and structure In the fall, return leaf fall and shredded woody materials from the landscape to the site when possible Soil providing plant nutrients and structure Excessive vegetation growth Grass becomes excessively tall (greater than 10 inches); nuisance weeds and other vegetation start to take over. Healthy turf- “grasscycle” (mulch-mow or leave the clippings) to build turf health Weeds Preventive maintenance Avoid use of pesticides (bug and weed killers), like “weed & feed,” which damage the soil Fertilizer needed Where fertilization is needed (mainly turf and annual flower beds), a moderate fertilization program should be used which relies on compost, natural fertilizers or slow-release synthetic balanced fertilizers Integrated Pest Management (IPM) protocols for fertilization followed Bare spots Bare spots on soil No bare spots, area covered with vegetation or mulch mixed into the underlying soil. Compaction Poor infiltration due to soil compaction • To remediate compaction, aerate soil, till to at least 8-inch depth, or further amend soil with compost and re-till • If areas are turf, aerate compacted areas and top dress them with 1/4 to 1/2 inch of compost to renovate them • If drainage is still slow, consider investigating alternative causes (e.g., high wet season groundwater levels, low permeability soils) • Also consider site use and protection from compacting activities No soil compaction Poor infiltration Soils become waterlogged, do not appear to be infiltrating. Facility infiltrating properly Erosion/Scouring Erosion Areas of potential erosion are visible Causes of erosion (e.g., concentrate flow entering area, channelization of runoff) identified and damaged area stabilized (regrade, rock, vegetation, erosion control matting).For deep channels or cuts (over 3 inches in ponding depth), temporary erosion control measures in place until permanent repairs can be made Grass/Vegetation Unhealthy vegetation Less than 75% of planted vegetation is healthy with a generally good appearance. Healthy vegetation. Unhealthy plants removed/replaced. Appropriate vegetation planted in terms of exposure, soil and soil moisture. Noxious Weeds Noxious weeds Listed noxious vegetation is present (refer to current County noxious weed list). No noxious weeds present. APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES AND ON-SITE BMPS 12/12/2016 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual A-48 NO. 39 – RETAINED TREES MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITIONS WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED Tree Dead or declining Dead, damaged, or declining Tree replaced per planting plan or acceptable substitute NO. 40 – FILTERRA SYSTEM MAINTENANCE COMPONENT DEFECT OR PROBLEM CONDITION WHEN MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED RESULTS EXPECTED WHEN MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED In addition to the specific maintenance criteria provided below, all manufacturer’s requirements shall be followed. Facility – General Requirements Life cycle Once per year, except mulch and trash removal twice per year Facility is re-inspected and any needed maintenance performed Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries, or paint Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Inlet Excessive sediment or trash accumulation Accumulated sediments or trash impair free flow of water into system Inlet should be free of obstructions allowing free distributed flow of water into system Mulch Cover Trash and floatable debris accumulation Excessive trash and/or debris accumulation Minimal trash or other debris on mulch cover. Mulch cover raked level. “Ponding” of water on mulch cover “Ponding” in unit could be indicative of clogging due to excessive fine sediment accumulation or spill of petroleum oils Stormwater should drain freely and evenly through mulch cover Proprietary Filter Media/ Vegetation Substrate “Ponding” of water on mulch cover after mulch cover has been maintained Excessive fine sediment passes the mulch cover and clogs the filter media/vegetative substrate Stormwater should drain freely and evenly through mulch cover. Replace substrate and vegetation when needed Vegetation Plants not growing or in poor condition Soil/mulch too wet, evidence of spill, incorrect plant selection, pest infestation, and/or vandalism to plants Plants should be healthy and pest free Media/mulch too dry Irrigation is required Plants absent Plants absent Appropriate plants are present Excessive plant growth Excessive plant growth inhibits facility function or becomes a hazard for pedestrian and vehicular circulation and safety Pruning and/or thinning vegetation maintains proper plant density. Appropriate plants are present. Structure Structure has visible cracks Cracks wider than ½ inch Evidence of soil particles entering the structure through the cracks Structure is sealed and structurally sound